Player Features and Ideas Discussion

no cause even a cnr with an invuln and a em hardners still dosent pull the resists above 70% i.e bad and a raven has to be mission specific tanked with causes problem in other missions were you encounter all dmg.

theres a few things the raven but especialy the cnr needs the cnr need its mid that is taken up by a cap recharger to go to tank witch means it needs an increase in cap. and it would also be nice to get a low that generaly have to house a cap flux to change to a mid so we can mount a tp on it or perhaps an ab. so really the ravens need some work before there considerd mission worthy again.

You won't see a removal of the EM hole on caldari ships. What would then the hisec gankers do?

OMG this thread So many posts by folks who are either too new to the game to understand how it developed or too uncaring to try to figure out the design paradigms and backstory that go into the game.

Look, Caldari shields aren't going to totally lose their em hole. I already posted this, but I guess it hasn't sunk in to Serras and the last couple posters. The tech II resists are focused on two damage types as determined based on the preferred primary and secondary damage infliction by the opposing faction, Thus:

Amarr tech II resists - pirmary bonus explo, secondary bonus kinetic (btw this leaves the base em and therm holes on shield and no help for the low thermal on armor);

Caldari tech II resists - primary bonus to thermal, secondary to kinetic (Gallente used to have more thermal bonuses, and the highest drone damage comes from thermal drones, then of course there is high kentic resists against gallnete hybrids);

Gallente tech II resists - primary bonus to kinetic, secondary to thermal (Caldari have had a fair number of kinetic missile bonused ships, which appears to be getting quickly reduced and may disappear, and of course the kinetic resists are useful against Caldari hybrid damage);

Minmatar tech II resists - primary bonus to em, secondary to thermal (Amarr lasers are em heavy with a thermal component secondary. This results in the on first glance anomalous Minmatar tech II em shield resists, while for tech II armor leaving the base large kinetic and explo holes).

Odd looking but entirely consistent things thus happen with the tech II resists. A minmatar tech II trying to construct an armor tanbk is left with two huge holes to fill (10% explo and 20% kinetic), ditto a tech II AMarr ship that might want to shield tank (e.g. Curse). Concurrently both races have rather much more advantageous resists in their preferred tanking modality, Minmatar shields left with a 40% kinetic hole and Amarr armor left with a 35% thermal hole.

Caldari tech II shields gain a huge thermal resist and the kinetic resist gets even better. They are left with explo at 50% and em at 0%. This is no big deal ffs. All it takes is one em hardener to even that picture out and start slapping on invulns to your heart's content. Anyone whining about tech II resists is simply not getting how they are constructed and needs to adjust to the fact that noone is going to get a wonderful exactly even and very high base resist on their tech II ships. Everyone is going to have a hole somewhere and conversely a joke damage that they can sluff off with a laugh. For Caldari tech II that is thermal. So don't fear the ogres, heh.

Turning to the level 4 discussion:

Level 4s should not be about being lazy, warping into a room, sitting like a lump, not caring about triggers, and just target, press f1, and wait for the target to slowly die to HMs. Risk aversion is all well and good, but it has gone overboard with the Drake level 4 phenomenon. Prepare uranus for the eventual BC shield regen nerf anyway. Learn that damage application is a tank. A much more thrilling and rewarding tank as well. That is what the raven-kind (yes even the base raven) are about. That is why prior to the Drake they were on top of the pve food chain. Stop expecting cruise missiles to kill frigates and cruisers even in missions. You have a drone bay. Train some drone skills for tech II medium and light drones and have those doing most of the damage against the small stuff. Cruises are still very good weapons against BC and BS mission rats.

Command ships are divided between a 3 booster class or a combat focused class. The combat focused ones are all currently underwhelming (yes, it is not just the Nighthawk) except for the Sleipnir. If you have been reading all the dev blogs and other threads in F&ID there are big changes coming to command ships. I can't be arsed atm to provide a link, find it for yourself. Suffice to say "soon" (probably a year or a little more) they will be more uniform in role. That is both classes with have the native ability to fit multiple links it's just that their combat focus will remain different. And I would bet they may all gain in beefiness except for the Damnation which is already true beast in ehp and the ability to bask in logistic love.

As for the fellow that posted the Sacrilege and Damnation mission fits, kudos. That is creativity. That is what this game seems to sorely lack atm. And it is what I did years ago in missions. I started out flying Amarr (and Minmatar). I encountered the porblem of how to survive the level 4 AE bonus room. My solution at the time was to use a Sacrilege because at that time HAMs had much more range. Then HAM range was heavily ner uh rebalanced to be in line with other short range medium weapons. So I then constructed a Damantion for it (range bonus ftw). Of course not too long after I said I'm going to use that Damnation in pvp instead, soz . . .

The game is not predicated on providing you with a perfect ship that can do everything. To the extent the Drake was almost able to do everything it was a sad mistake. One that is being rectified partially with this nerf to HMs. Pray it is not rectified further Although, I think, it will be when the rebalancing hits BCs. Enjoy discovering the new ship possibilities of this whole rebalancing project, and adapt.

@Lili Lu
I acknowledge that the T2 resists are based on countering the damage of the racial enemy/opposing faction and that the closing of the em hole in the shields is very unlikely to happen. This was stated in my previous post.

Although this is fully in line with game mechanics / development, I personally just do not think that it is fully logical that a shield based race has not closed the hole in the defense it relies upon most – especially when shield em resist does exist – though granted this is T2 resist. This is just my personal opinion, and it is not likely to change anything.

However, as with everything in eve we just have to live with it and adapt to it if you want to play the game.

CNR no needs to fit specific damage resistance if you're flying it T2 (+ Caldari BCS)
It has 9 Virtual Cruise Launchers + 1 large turret
This is overkill with cruise fury.
My missiles does 510 damage each on TQ, and 580 on Retribution. (no resistance)
Precision Cruise will come handy as they're much better than skilled Fury Heavy on drake.

It's also much more expensive than T2 drake. but... it's still the king of close/snipe, excluding pirate ships.

What are you thinking?!?! We MUST stay races specific in our training! The Idea of someone spending a couple of months train all the racial cruisers to 3 than Battle Cruisers to 5, that is just unheard of, what is next people training missiles, guns and drones?!?!?

***
This wants to be irony, or simple lack of understanding of what i mean?

Since you refuse to listen to the people who CAN fly it, go one and experience the wonders of this bad boy for yourself.

Once again...

I don't have 6 months to lose only to prove something to uncreative caldari pilots... And I don't have a fleet at disposal to prove that a Raven fleet do work.

My point stand : the Raven do have clear advantages for 70km+ ranges, which are usefull ranges, and damage delay is not a problem, or it would be one too with Drake and Tengu. CML dps is NOT BAD. In fact, it's the BEST at 70km and beyond. Tank is NOT BAD. In fact, you need triple plated BS to have something better (6% better with the Armageddon, not that much), or resist bonus.

And still, nobody was able to tell me why so much hate on the Raven. Of course it don't deserve cheering, but, by far, it's not a bad ship.

So why is it not used ? IMO, because of reputation about damage delay (old time concern, but habits take time to change,a lot of time) ; because of the Tengu being better (same dps, better application, enough range, better resists, same or better ehp, more speed or a lot less signature ; there's no reason to fly a CML Raven when you can fly a Tengu, and people already have HML skills because of the omnipotence of the Drake) ; because FC are pissed off with HML Drake doing everything (I saw it) ; because alliances have too many isks ; because caldari pilots are bad and uncreative ; because of blob warfare emphasizing resistance ; because as much as shield can be OP compared to armor, that trend reverse with BS which don't have any mobility to start with (though ASB solve this, but habits take time to change,a lot of time) ; oh, and I forgot torp damage application.

Best point yet, as we can all train any skills we like and fly anything we would want in time what's the point of the balancing? As previously mentioned I have no problem with OP ship designs, they make the game interesting and as far as I can tell every ship has a unique set of weaknesses that a skilled opponent can exploit. Intuitively missiles should be the highest alpha but they are not, lasers should be the longest ranged weapons but they are not. Most pvp these days revolves around blasters and autocannons as these weapon systems are overpowered. We need buffs in Rails and Missiles to counter this not silly nerfs designed to turn missiles into lasers/hybrids. There is no point to balance if every weapon and ship performs the same and has no meaningful advantage over another weapon system.