Ships & Modules

You should never ever fly a rupture, the cynabal obsoletes it completely.

-Diesel

This thread is over now

Wow, idiots exist...

You really have no idea what you are talking about. The Slicer is the best high dps / high speed kiting frigate in game. The Malediction is the best tackling interceptor. The Vengance is the frigate with the best tank in the game. What else do you need?

Welcome to EVE online in 2012 where we give out ship recommendations based on "engageability" and claim proper use of strong ships that enable you to take on more challenging targets get you spoonfed. Since a real challenge is myth!

The fact that some people are reluctant to fight you usually have very little to do with the ship you fly and the fitting you use, or the concept you fly in a gang and how that gang is composed. The reason people are reluctant to fight you is a percieved level of competence. Most reservations and smack you see drifting around (wether it's ships, ship-roles or ship-use) are usually just poorly masked scape-bleats.

I know i've said it before: try making a new character and see how eager people are to shoot you when your dob says 2012, your corp history is blank and no one knows your name. Even in a "strong" ship. It's why our behaviour involve creating disposable alts as well, or why many nomadic groups are nomadic (they aim to tap into the first few days of unfamiliarity when a region still underestimate you, and take fights). It works, but is such a modus operandi healthy?

It's really an absurd reverse culture (born and bred in the age of dwindling up-engagement, where players and corps seek to make themselves look worse than they are to appeal to an inferior target pool - because they can't or won't up-engage and take on proper challenges, challenges suitable for their actual level of gameplay) and while "engageability" is amusing in itself (amusing yet not invalid), it becomes absurd when that is the approach taught to newer players.

If we don't teach our new players to take risks and challenges, what behaviour do we breed long term?

Gone are the days when we suggest pilots make themselves as good as possible; since if they are new, they will get fights anyway and will extend their target pool to take on tougher challenges. No, we preach "aim small, miss small" and try to goad weaker opponents into fights and keeping a moral high. Then us older players pat ourselves on the back, they didn't fight our Ferox or Brutix despite their awesome Myrms and Drakes, nevermind the 80m SP difference and 8 years of experience. We won despite the fact that they had EW while we honourably refused it. Call them homosexuals and blobs when you lose. You don't dabble in risk-adversity like those ... others.

If people don't want to get spoon-fed they should go for a real challenge and try to up-engage more - not settle for the small fry that are too pansy to fight a Myrm.

Spoonfed, backwards...

Your post is incoherent to the point of street raving lunacy, and your utter ignorance of tactics in eve is so blantantly obvious as to be blinding.

Welcome to EVE 2012, where people are so risk averse as to require heavily stacked odds in order to commit to a fight, and anyone who wishes to engage such people must consider engageability in order to prevent the addition of force multipliers.

Of course if you do not think of this as HONORUBRU INTERNET SPACESAMURAI behaviour then you are most welcome to bring your best and wait half an hour for your opponent to bring the force multipliers he considers necessary to gank you easily.

If I was in, say, a HAC, and I had to pick between fighting a vet in another HAC or a neut domi flown by a 4 month old character, I would take the HAC every time. I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, but there is absolutely a factor about engageability when it comes to pvp and flying a ship that shouldn't be ignored. Regardless of age, you WILL get more fights in a rupture than you will in a cyn, and that should count for something.

This is the best troll I've seen in weeks.

OP says amarr sucks *except* for the growing list of ships acknowledged not to, and then proceeds to list, as best ships, only gallente ships?

amarr subcaps 2/10
gal 10/10

please mail me some of what you smoke!

Actually, no one cares for the pve part. If a ship is balanced for pvp, there is nothing more to be done. Aside from that, you fail to tank a 5/10 in an absolution? What the Hell. Also please refrain from posting your solution, cause it's a pointless cause CCP doesn't give a **** what we want to do to tackle the issues (acknowledge that we are all biased in some direction). Or talk to my Blood-sanctum-active-armor-tanked-oracle. That one was armorfitted and still made me 16-18 mil a tic. Armortanking bad? Don't think so.

Edit: Most wormholians I know use a absolution as a nobrainer for L4-standing grindings.
No matter what OP has smoked, I started flying winmatar because of the looks, soon after I started crosstraining to amarr because they got all those excellent ships, mostly Guardians and Curses and Legions. Yes, the Legion is purely awesome.

Amarr have the best T2 lineup of any race by a long shot.
Their T1 ships are very good, their caps are very good.
yes, legion sucks but at least it's fittable now with the laser changes.

so basically, no, amarr ships definitely do not suck.