Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Why not just remove the Drake, already? You seem to be whittling away at it each stupid patch. How can you think it's still OP with the missile changes?

Or looking at the ships another way, will be a screwed view due to not taking the weapon systems themselves into account.

Extradamage, Capacitor, 6 bonused + non-hardpoint high. <-- The only one with such
Passivetank, SecondaryDamage, +4 unbonused high "+1 more" unbonused.
Damage, PassiveTank, 7 "bonused" highs.
SecondaryRange, PassiveTank, 7 "bonused" highs.
Damage, Activetank, 7 bonused highs.
SecondaryDamage, AcitveTank, + 5 hardpoint highs.
PrimaryDamage, PrimaryDamage, 6 double-bonused highs +hardpoint high.
SecondaryDamage, ActiveTank, 5 bonused highs, +2 hardpoint highs. <- The only one with two


Racial Primary damage system ships summary:
Damage: 6 double bonused +off-hardpoint> 6 extra bonused > 7 bonused > 7 limited bonused.
Secondary: PassiveTank > ActiveTank > Cap Usage (why keping those still), 4th ship included a line above.

Racial Secondary weapon-type Ships:
Secondary: PassiveTank = PassiveTank > ActiveShield > ActiveArmor. 4 tank-bonused ships
Damage: 5*Bonused+2hardpoint > 100*Drone+ 5 hardpoints > 7*RangeBonused > 75*Drone+4/1 hardpoints


Primary lineup:
Two tank-bonused, one Cap, one Double damage.
If the secondary-line is the tankier, why not make all of these non-tanked?
Would justify the Drake getting a proper damage bonus, always found "missiles = selectable damage, Caldari = Kinetic" silly. And the Harbringer with it's cap bonus... Still the most lackluster bonus, even with me hating active armor tanking ones.

Second lineup:
Tanky ones, hopefully there's a trick in the bag for armor rep.
Balance between drones and hardpoint weapons too much hassle to find, so leaving these somewhat alone.
Keeping the Myrm as the only armor tanker with 5 mids is an interesting choice though, why
One ship having bonused hardpoints and yet two unbonused is unusual after tiericide (Cyclone, even the Rupture lost the second).
And the Ferox, medium railguns with range bonus but nothing else... the only thing it offers over a Naga is staying power, in return for 1 size smaller, 1 less turret, with no damage bonus (on the same size it would be 10 against 7 turret's dps, by the virtue of using larger ones Naga is already more-or-less where the Ferox gets with the bonus). Worth it?

Your nerfing the harby when it needed a buffing? Why in gods name?

One less weapon, less powergrid less cpu...?? Are you outa your freaking mind Fozzie???

I want whatever your drinking.

Misha.

CCP logic: "We've fixed the cruisers by making them almost as good as battlecruisers.
Now, lets fix battlecruisers by making the good ones just as bad as the rarely used ones."

I have a lot of problems with these proposed changes, lets roll through each ship one by one.

Prophecy: Continuing this push to make drones the secondary weapon system of the Amarr just doesn't make much sense. Drone boats don't see much use in fleet actions (when was the last time the myrm had a starring role in a fleet op aside from bait?), and even solo, a drone bandwidth of 75 is insufficient. If you want this ship to see increased use, and are determined to make it a non-laser boat, give it missiles. An armor tanked BC with missile options would be a hell of a lot more useful.

Harbinger: While the ship gets a small damage boost from the higher damage bonus, and having fewer guns means less danger to capacitor, but the ship already had significant fitting problems, and while this reduction is supposed to be commiserate with the loss of a turret fitting, a smaller reduction would give the ship a little more heart. Then comes the agility nerf. This ship is already (theoretically) supposed to be an armor tank, and starting with the maneuverability of a pig is not helpful. This ship is already not all that popular, and these changes won't help things, at least remove the agility nerf to keep it somewhat competitive.

Ferox: I don't fly these ships, so I don't have a lot to say about this one, others have mentioned wanting a damage bonus instead of an optimal range, but I am glad to see some other buffs for it.

Drake: This ship is almost unchanged. More of a pig with maneuverability, but the much-vaunted tank is essentially the same. Weren't there supposed to be some nerfs coming to get this ship in line with the now-nerfed Cane?

Brutix: I like the slot changes, fitting boosts, and agility increase, but the bonuses are still odd. Both the Gallante combat BCes have bonuses to active armor tanking, which is basically useless outside of very small-scale fights. You want to see this ship used some more? Give it a different second bonus, if you want to support the damage angle, a falloff or tracking bonus is a great idea, if you want something more ganky, maybe an agility boost. Either way, this needs a change.

Myrmidon: Turrets were never this ship's strong point, and the additional bandwidth and size are amazingly helpful to this ship. Given the focus of the ship, losing some armor while gaining hull is a bit of an odd choice, but overall, it fills much the same roll as it used to, even if an active tank is harder to support with a smaller powergrid.

Cyclone: While another missile launcher hardpoint would be great, having two utility highs isn't necessarily a bad thing, and the across the board boosts get it a lot more in line. I like most of that.

Hurricane: This ship already got hit pretty hard with the nerf bat, hurting it more seems unnecessary. Others have been more vehement than I in this regard, so I'll leave it at that.

What the **** is this ****? The hurricane is getting hit more? Man, that ship is going from awesome to ****!

And why do both the Gal BCes have active rep bonuses? Why? The brutix is bullshit right now, even with these changes.

Why is the Prophecy a droneboat? **** that noise!

Riiight!
As it is now, only the Harbringer has a spare high with no hardpoint, making it "ideal" (before fitting issues) for a link.
Both Minmatar and the Prophecy can use a utility High for it.
The Myrm has a choice of not using one of the 5 turrets, which may be magstabbed/gyroed for a lesser bonus.
The Brutix and the Caldari ships make a choice between dropping a bonused hardpoint, or the link.

Anyone seeing a racial pattern here?

PS:
The rest of what it got debatable.

That is it in the shell of a nut.

You have been great about listening to feedback, so I will add my voice to the chorus saying please don't give the Brutix an active tank bonus.

If you keep the bonus on the Myrm, then DO give it a 10% bonus like the Incursus.

hi fozzie,

i think there is an innate problem with the armor rep bonuses in that that resist bonuses are just as effective for active tanking, while also allowing you to buffer / passive if you want (and even providing some buffer if you decide to active)

i think this puts too much disparity between the active bonused and the resist bonused ships, which i imagine are intended to be similar power level just geared towards active or passive

perhaps look at tweaking the potency of the active bonus, or reworking it all together?

Only with all skills at 5 brotatoe, and as has been pointed out if all of your skills are at 5 theres not much chance that you're flying a harbinger so for just about everybody who WILL fly a harbinger it will be slower, do less dps and even if you look at the 1 removed gun they're removing MORE cpu than that one gun used so less overall CPU fitting space.

Its mass is higher, its probable baseline dps will be lower considering the average pilot skill in the craft, and generally ALL of the other BC's will be in some way shape or form significantly better.

What did the Harby ever do that should merit a nerf? Are people roaring around somewhere in vast fleets of Harbies raping and pillaging?