These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123
 

Battleship Tiericide Proposal
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hakan MacTrew
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#41 - 2013-01-16 15:24:31 UTC
I think everyone agree that a 4th BS for each race is in order and that they should fill the Attack gap for the Caldari and the EWAR gaps for the other three.

The question then becomes How to present them. Personally, I think the current 3 'Attack' BS's could easily be tweeked to fill the role of EWAR boats:
The Typhoon is already being made into a trop boat, (+1 the Torp-phoon!) so give it a TP bonus and your good to spew torps at everything with a cockpit.
If you dropped the Domi's hybrid bonus in favour of a sensor damping bonus, you would have a pretty tasty range dictation drone boat right there.
The Armagedon is a tough one. I love my missiles but its obvious that CCP are moving away from T1 Amarr missile bonused ships. So what about it becoming the Arbitrators big brother? TD's and Drones? Even if it was limited to 100mb of bandwidth, 4 bonused Ogre II's could do serious harm to an opposing ship thats been TD'd into the ground. Give it the same options as the Arby and the new Proph so it can chhose turrets or launchers and your all set.

That then leaves the Attack roles wide open for a fresh line of ships across the board.

Friends
TheFace Asano
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#42 - 2013-01-16 15:27:53 UTC
Sigras wrote:
well i understand that it takes time to train for and afford the better ships, but until one reaches that point they should just use the next best ship available for their purposes. They should not, however review any other ship being inferior because it doesnt PvE as well because the ship they currently fly is also inferior.

Also my second point stands, ships have never been balanced around PvE and never should be unless they make PvE too easy; that would be like balancing units in starcraft around the single player campaign . . .

Lastly, the tengu is amazing, but not for its raw DPS but for the fact that it can apply that DPS to every target on the field. Heavys hit ships small and big alike (or they used to) for close to full damage, and they fire very far away (even after the nerf)

Your tengu pilots should try HAMs with an AB and the fuel catalyst; theyre amazing


Ok so only people with a certain amount of sp are allowed to speak about ships? I don't care how much sp I ever maintain, there needs to be balance at multiple levels of training, especialy level 4 because that is where most skills are left while training other things. The ship needs to work on the whole in concept and practice, and tiericede will pull both the Tempest and Typhoon up to par with the Maelstrom. They have done this with frigs and cruisers and will with BC's (to a lesser extent) and Battleships.

Lots of people pve, lots of people pvp, there should be balance for both, not one or the other.

Even at level 5 in all skills the advantages of the Tempest are only going to be acceptable in a buffer shield fit and possibly at dual XL ASB fit. If you go armor you lose most of the mobility advantage it has over the Mael. It also will not have the range because of lack of tracking enhancers and will go only marginally faster. Fleets are going to say just bring a Mael.

Sure Tengu HAM fits are great, the HML ones are still good, too. Personally just haven't seen one perform as well as our battleships. It is close sometimes, but usually less.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#43 - 2013-01-16 17:42:54 UTC
I have my BS skills at 5 and I still do pve in my Raven because I like the badass hull so much.

The damage is sad compared to what my Dominix can do but anyhow. Am I bad now?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
TheFace Asano
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#44 - 2013-01-16 18:04:29 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
I have my BS skills at 5 and I still do pve in my Raven because I like the badass hull so much.

The damage is sad compared to what my Dominix can do but anyhow. Am I bad now?


I don't think so
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#45 - 2013-01-16 19:26:14 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
I think everyone agree that a 4th BS for each race is in order and that they should fill the Attack gap for the Caldari and the EWAR gaps for the other three.

To be honest, you could simply shunt the currently underperforming hulls into an Attack role and be done with it. The problem with saying 'let's just make more ships' is the time it takes to get them into finished released game items - even with the playerbase doing much of the art design work for them, it was over a year before the 'design a ship' competition became the tier 3 BCs we see today.

Much of the appeal of the tiericide/rebalancing efforts is bang for the buck - a team of three people (is Tallest still on board? Haven't heard from him recently) is arguably doing more to make the game interesting again than half of the other teams put together. Waiting around for more art assets is something they probably don't need to rely on too often.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
TheFace Asano
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#46 - 2013-01-16 19:29:22 UTC
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
I think everyone agree that a 4th BS for each race is in order and that they should fill the Attack gap for the Caldari and the EWAR gaps for the other three.

To be honest, you could simply shunt the currently underperforming hulls into an Attack role and be done with it. The problem with saying 'let's just make more ships' is the time it takes to get them into finished released game items - even with the playerbase doing much of the art design work for them, it was over a year before the 'design a ship' competition became the tier 3 BCs we see today.

Much of the appeal of the tiericide/rebalancing efforts is bang for the buck - a team of three people (is Tallest still on board? Haven't heard from him recently) is arguably doing more to make the game interesting again than half of the other teams put together. Waiting around for more art assets is something they probably don't need to rely on too often.


Agreed,

Make 1 combat, 1 ewar, and 1 attack BS per race. Make them 1 damage/defense bonus and 1 ewar bonus so as to have flavor over the cruisers/frigates below them.
Hakan MacTrew
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#47 - 2013-01-16 20:45:44 UTC
TheFace Asano wrote:
Scatim Helicon wrote:
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
I think everyone agree that a 4th BS for each race is in order and that they should fill the Attack gap for the Caldari and the EWAR gaps for the other three.

To be honest, you could simply shunt the currently underperforming hulls into an Attack role and be done with it. The problem with saying 'let's just make more ships' is the time it takes to get them into finished released game items - even with the playerbase doing much of the art design work for them, it was over a year before the 'design a ship' competition became the tier 3 BCs we see today.

Much of the appeal of the tiericide/rebalancing efforts is bang for the buck - a team of three people (is Tallest still on board? Haven't heard from him recently) is arguably doing more to make the game interesting again than half of the other teams put together. Waiting around for more art assets is something they probably don't need to rely on too often.


Agreed,

Make 1 combat, 1 ewar, and 1 attack BS per race. Make them 1 damage/defense bonus and 1 ewar bonus so as to have flavor over the cruisers/frigates below them.

I wouldn't even bother with defense. I think the Ewar ships should focus on attack, like the other T1 ewar ships.

A 4th hull could be brought in at a later date to fill either a combat of attack role.

Friends
Sigras
Conglomo
#48 - 2013-01-19 09:43:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigras
Sigras wrote:
well i understand that it takes time to train for and afford the better ships, but until one reaches that point they should just use the next best ship available for their purposes. They should not, however review any other ship being inferior because it doesnt PvE as well because the ship they currently fly is also inferior.

Also my second point stands, ships have never been balanced around PvE and never should be unless they make PvE too easy; that would be like balancing units in starcraft around the single player campaign . . .

Lastly, the tengu is amazing, but not for its raw DPS but for the fact that it can apply that DPS to every target on the field. Heavys hit ships small and big alike (or they used to) for close to full damage, and they fire very far away (even after the nerf)

Your tengu pilots should try HAMs with an AB and the fuel catalyst; theyre amazing


TheFace Asano wrote:
Ok so only people with a certain amount of sp are allowed to speak about ships? I don't care how much sp I ever maintain, there needs to be balance at multiple levels of training, especialy level 4 because that is where most skills are left while training other things. The ship needs to work on the whole in concept and practice, and tiericede will pull both the Tempest and Typhoon up to par with the Maelstrom. They have done this with frigs and cruisers and will with BC's (to a lesser extent) and Battleships.

This is only true if balance can be maintained at the top level, CCP should always sacrifice balance at lower levels for balance at higher levels, because if one thing is clearly better than another at level 4, but perfectly balanced at level 5 the problem is with the amount of SP you put into the ship not the ship itself.

TheFace Asano wrote:
Lots of people pve, lots of people pvp, there should be balance for both, not one or the other.

This is true, but you should not require EVERY SHIP to do both . . . The point is that ships have roles, and just because the typhoon/tempest arent as good as the maelstrom for what YOU want to do, doesnt mean theyre not as good a ship in general.

This is akin to me complaining that the vargur is a poor PvP ship because it has low sensor strength . . . this would only be a legitimate complaint if it didnt do anything else well either.
or it would be like buying a heavy interdictor and complaining that it doesnt run level 4s very well because its damage is too low . . . not every ship has to be able to PvE just like not every ship has to be able to PvP.

TheFace Asano wrote:
Even at level 5 in all skills the advantages of the Tempest are only going to be acceptable in a buffer shield fit and possibly at dual XL ASB fit. If you go armor you lose most of the mobility advantage it has over the Mael. It also will not have the range because of lack of tracking enhancers and will go only marginally faster. Fleets are going to say just bring a Mael.

You realize that nobody active tanks in PvP right? except for carriers, frigates and dreads in siege, basically nobody runs active tanks, especially not on battleships . . . Most fleets ive seen prefer the tempest over the maelstrom because:
1. mobility
2. utility highs
TheFace Asano
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#49 - 2013-01-19 20:54:39 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Sigras wrote:
well i understand that it takes time to train for and afford the better ships, but until one reaches that point they should just use the next best ship available for their purposes. They should not, however review any other ship being inferior because it doesnt PvE as well because the ship they currently fly is also inferior.

Also my second point stands, ships have never been balanced around PvE and never should be unless they make PvE too easy; that would be like balancing units in starcraft around the single player campaign . . .

Lastly, the tengu is amazing, but not for its raw DPS but for the fact that it can apply that DPS to every target on the field. Heavys hit ships small and big alike (or they used to) for close to full damage, and they fire very far away (even after the nerf)

Your tengu pilots should try HAMs with an AB and the fuel catalyst; theyre amazing


TheFace Asano wrote:
Ok so only people with a certain amount of sp are allowed to speak about ships? I don't care how much sp I ever maintain, there needs to be balance at multiple levels of training, especialy level 4 because that is where most skills are left while training other things. The ship needs to work on the whole in concept and practice, and tiericede will pull both the Tempest and Typhoon up to par with the Maelstrom. They have done this with frigs and cruisers and will with BC's (to a lesser extent) and Battleships.

This is only true if balance can be maintained at the top level, CCP should always sacrifice balance at lower levels for balance at higher levels, because if one thing is clearly better than another at level 4, but perfectly balanced at level 5 the problem is with the amount of SP you put into the ship not the ship itself.

TheFace Asano wrote:
Lots of people pve, lots of people pvp, there should be balance for both, not one or the other.

This is true, but you should not require EVERY SHIP to do both . . . The point is that ships have roles, and just because the typhoon/tempest arent as good as the maelstrom for what YOU want to do, doesnt mean theyre not as good a ship in general.

This is akin to me complaining that the vargur is a poor PvP ship because it has low sensor strength . . . this would only be a legitimate complaint if it didnt do anything else well either.
or it would be like buying a heavy interdictor and complaining that it doesnt run level 4s very well because its damage is too low . . . not every ship has to be able to PvE just like not every ship has to be able to PvP.

TheFace Asano wrote:
Even at level 5 in all skills the advantages of the Tempest are only going to be acceptable in a buffer shield fit and possibly at dual XL ASB fit. If you go armor you lose most of the mobility advantage it has over the Mael. It also will not have the range because of lack of tracking enhancers and will go only marginally faster. Fleets are going to say just bring a Mael.

You realize that nobody active tanks in PvP right? except for carriers, frigates and dreads in siege, basically nobody runs active tanks, especially not on battleships . . . Most fleets ive seen prefer the tempest over the maelstrom because:
1. mobility
2. utility highs


agree to disagree. If a ship is really difficult to balance at lower skill levels then CCP should be rethinking it's entire design. Just look to the typhoon for the prime example of this. At low skill levels it is pretty much useless, and at high skill levels it can be incredible. They have said it will change and lose the dual weapon bonus. The dual weapon bonus ships get more performance per level, but that doesn't mean that they should be underperforming at lower levels.

Again maybe you should realize i am talking the Tempest Fleet vs. the Maelstrom. The Tempest loses a low slot and quite a bit of fit and other stats. They have also said it needs a boost. My minnie toon has bs 5 now, and it (tempest fleet, not tempest) still under-performs without using missiles. I bet the normal tempest loses a high just like the rupture and hurricane below it have.
Sigras
Conglomo
#50 - 2013-01-19 21:04:31 UTC
once again im going to say that just because the ship doesnt do what YOU want it to do doesnt make it a bad ship.

ive solo a maelstrom in a nos neut domi before because i neuted off its tank; a buffer tempest would rip me in two because there is no tank to neut off and my 450 DPS drones would take forever to eat through that shield buffer ... it all depends on how you use it.

complaining that the tempest doesnt PvE well is like complaining that the drake doesnt mine very well . . .
TheFace Asano
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#51 - 2013-01-19 22:53:01 UTC
Sigras wrote:
once again im going to say that just because the ship doesnt do what YOU want it to do doesnt make it a bad ship.

ive solo a maelstrom in a nos neut domi before because i neuted off its tank; a buffer tempest would rip me in two because there is no tank to neut off and my 450 DPS drones would take forever to eat through that shield buffer ... it all depends on how you use it.

complaining that the tempest doesnt PvE well is like complaining that the drake doesnt mine very well . . .


I never said it was BAD, just that it needed a buff, CCP is actually saying that as well. With a buffer it flies more like a BC and has advantages over quite a few BS for small gang, and that is where it shines. Larger PVP fleets are more likely going to ask you to bring a Maelstrom or whatever ship type their doctrine is that you can fly. The Maelstroms weak point of small fleets and lack of utility are the Tempest strong points.

Again look to CCP's ship tiericide and one can guess that the Tempest will no longer have 2 utility highs. That means that most likely we will not be able to fit 2 extra missile launchers if you want more dps. I would rather the Tempest gain a turret, be more dps than the maelstrom, with less tank potential while active tanked especially. The Hurricane will have more dps potential from it's main weapon system than the Cyclone, but the cyclone will have similar dps with the extra drone bandwidth. Give the Maelstrom an additional 25 bandwith so you can field 5x sentry or 5x heavy if you desire, or a larger compliment of medium / light drones.

The devblog states that they are no massive changes planned for the tempest, almost exactly what they said about the hurricane and the rupture.


Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#52 - 2013-01-20 01:38:52 UTC
TheFace Asano wrote:


I never said it was BAD, just that it needed a buff, CCP is actually saying that as well.

Again look to CCP's ship tiericide and one can guess that the Tempest will no longer have 2 utility highs. That means that most likely we will not be able to fit 2 extra missile launchers if you want more dps. I would rather the Tempest gain a turret, be more dps than the maelstrom, with less tank potential while active tanked especially. The Hurricane will have more dps potential from it's main weapon system than the Cyclone, but the cyclone will have similar dps with the extra drone bandwidth. Give the Maelstrom an additional 25 bandwith so you can field 5x sentry or 5x heavy if you desire, or a larger compliment of medium / light drones.

The devblog states that they are no massive changes planned for the tempest, almost exactly what they said about the hurricane and the rupture.




where did CCP say the tempest needed a Buff? i missed that. then u say that the dev blog says there are no massive changes for the tempest...so its not getting a buff? im confused.

also, the cane lost its high slot because tier 2 BC's were too good with their current slot count, and u couldnt really remove a low slot without spitting on armour canes (its originally intended tank style) or remove a mid slot without ***** slapping shield canes (the favored tank style). in the end the removal of the high slot was the most logical. it still remains to be said that BS's are being nerfed at all and need ANY slots removed. so why would the Tempests utility highs be under threat?

i dnt think the tempest needs more dps than the mael. it already has better speed, agility, sig radius and more utility slots (especially armour pests)

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#53 - 2013-01-20 01:39:04 UTC
double post

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
Sigras
Conglomo
#54 - 2013-01-20 07:38:28 UTC
TheFace Asano wrote:
I never said it was BAD, just that it needed a buff,

if its not bad then why does it need a buff?

TheFace Asano wrote:
With a buffer it flies more like a BC and has advantages over quite a few BS for small gang, and that is where it shines. Larger PVP fleets are more likely going to ask you to bring a Maelstrom or whatever ship type their doctrine is that you can fly. The Maelstroms weak point of small fleets and lack of utility are the Tempest strong points.

ummmm . . . i think you got that backwards . . . active tank is for small gang, buffer is for large fleet . . .

this analysis is just . . . . facepalm

The tempest is fine, if anything the tempest needs to stay where it is and the maelstrom needs to lose a low slot.
TheFace Asano
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#55 - 2013-01-20 09:35:23 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
TheFace Asano wrote:


I never said it was BAD, just that it needed a buff, CCP is actually saying that as well.

Again look to CCP's ship tiericide and one can guess that the Tempest will no longer have 2 utility highs. That means that most likely we will not be able to fit 2 extra missile launchers if you want more dps. I would rather the Tempest gain a turret, be more dps than the maelstrom, with less tank potential while active tanked especially. The Hurricane will have more dps potential from it's main weapon system than the Cyclone, but the cyclone will have similar dps with the extra drone bandwidth. Give the Maelstrom an additional 25 bandwith so you can field 5x sentry or 5x heavy if you desire, or a larger compliment of medium / light drones.

The devblog states that they are no massive changes planned for the tempest, almost exactly what they said about the hurricane and the rupture.




where did CCP say the tempest needed a Buff? i missed that. then u say that the dev blog says there are no massive changes for the tempest...so its not getting a buff? im confused.

also, the cane lost its high slot because tier 2 BC's were too good with their current slot count, and u couldnt really remove a low slot without spitting on armour canes (its originally intended tank style) or remove a mid slot without ***** slapping shield canes (the favored tank style). in the end the removal of the high slot was the most logical. it still remains to be said that BS's are being nerfed at all and need ANY slots removed. so why would the Tempests utility highs be under threat?

i dnt think the tempest needs more dps than the mael. it already has better speed, agility, sig radius and more utility slots (especially armour pests)


the whole point of tiericide is for tier 1 and 2 to be brought in line with tier 3 in given ship lines, it has been the case with those before. BC's are the exception, but they have been stated to be too good.

It is CCP's goal. My proposal was to start the dialogue of what changes should be made. Opinion, end of story. I don't feel the Tempest, even though it has strengths, is on an even balance with the Mael. I don't think CCP most likely feels this as well. Just look to the rupture, a ship that didn't need -1 high that recieved -1 high because they didn't like the dual nuets it could run. Same with the cane. I don't FEEL that they will leave the tempest with 2 utility highs. Maybe they will maybe they won't as that is a decision neither you or I are paid to make.

The double dps bonus ship, in my mind, should do more dps with it's BONUSED weapons than the single damage bonus + tank bonused ship who gets more tank. The Mael has quite a bit more raw shield hp, more armor hp, more drone bandwith. Fitting aside the Maelstrom is given more raw stat because of its HIGHER TIER. This is where the balance needs to be made in my opinion, and I would rather see more dps potential from it's turrets, less or none from the missiles, and less tank potential from the Tempest whilst retaining its speed and agility.
TheFace Asano
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#56 - 2013-01-20 10:04:39 UTC
Sigras wrote:
TheFace Asano wrote:
I never said it was BAD, just that it needed a buff,

if its not bad then why does it need a buff?

TheFace Asano wrote:
With a buffer it flies more like a BC and has advantages over quite a few BS for small gang, and that is where it shines. Larger PVP fleets are more likely going to ask you to bring a Maelstrom or whatever ship type their doctrine is that you can fly. The Maelstroms weak point of small fleets and lack of utility are the Tempest strong points.

ummmm . . . i think you got that backwards . . . active tank is for small gang, buffer is for large fleet . . .

this analysis is just . . . . facepalm

The tempest is fine, if anything the tempest needs to stay where it is and the maelstrom needs to lose a low slot.


Really? The Maelstrom for small gang? And pull a low? The Maelstrom will be one of the ships least likely to have a single change IMO. It is a tier 3 ship with a larger stat pool end of story. Personally I would add some drone bandwidth and a little more shield hp, but I doubt they do anything to it.

The Tempest's stat pool needs adjustment from tier 2 to be even with tier 3. That is an HP buff, a slot buff, or a dps buff with an additional turret. Or a total mix up like with what is happening to the Cyclone. The Typhoon is getting that treatment.

What I think we will see with the Tempest is this:

-1 high slot
+armor hp (or +shield hp)
+low slot (or +mid slot)

What I would like to see is:

+1 turret -1 launcher
+1 mid
+slight amount of shield hp and + small amount of armor hp
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#57 - 2013-01-20 10:22:49 UTC
Sigras wrote:
TheFace Asano wrote:
I never said it was BAD, just that it needed a buff,

if its not bad then why does it need a buff?

TheFace Asano wrote:
With a buffer it flies more like a BC and has advantages over quite a few BS for small gang, and that is where it shines. Larger PVP fleets are more likely going to ask you to bring a Maelstrom or whatever ship type their doctrine is that you can fly. The Maelstroms weak point of small fleets and lack of utility are the Tempest strong points.

ummmm . . . i think you got that backwards . . . active tank is for small gang, buffer is for large fleet . . .

this analysis is just . . . . facepalm

The tempest is fine, if anything the tempest needs to stay where it is and the maelstrom needs to lose a low slot.


all the T1 battleships have the same slot count. i dnt think any slots will be taken away or added, and for the vast majority of them i dnt think they'll even be moved.

Active tanked maelstroms do get used in small gangs for their amazing tank, but because of their high alpha and decent buffers they are extremely useful in blobs.

there is a big difference between the maels HP's and the tempest's, but theres a big difference between the speed and versatility of the two ships. the dual damage bonus of the tempest allows it to do almost the same dps as the mael whilst still able to fit for neuts or torps to do MORE dps than the mael. i dnt think it will need anymore. there may be HP tweaks here and there, but nothing of the magnitude Asano is hoping. current drone bays are also fine.

when it comes to minmatar, i'd just like to see the phoon get a TP bonus and a bit more fittings.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
TheFace Asano
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#58 - 2013-01-20 17:00:55 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Sigras wrote:
TheFace Asano wrote:
I never said it was BAD, just that it needed a buff,

if its not bad then why does it need a buff?

TheFace Asano wrote:
With a buffer it flies more like a BC and has advantages over quite a few BS for small gang, and that is where it shines. Larger PVP fleets are more likely going to ask you to bring a Maelstrom or whatever ship type their doctrine is that you can fly. The Maelstroms weak point of small fleets and lack of utility are the Tempest strong points.

ummmm . . . i think you got that backwards . . . active tank is for small gang, buffer is for large fleet . . .

this analysis is just . . . . facepalm

The tempest is fine, if anything the tempest needs to stay where it is and the maelstrom needs to lose a low slot.


all the T1 battleships have the same slot count. i dnt think any slots will be taken away or added, and for the vast majority of them i dnt think they'll even be moved.

Active tanked maelstroms do get used in small gangs for their amazing tank, but because of their high alpha and decent buffers they are extremely useful in blobs.

there is a big difference between the maels HP's and the tempest's, but theres a big difference between the speed and versatility of the two ships. the dual damage bonus of the tempest allows it to do almost the same dps as the mael whilst still able to fit for neuts or torps to do MORE dps than the mael. i dnt think it will need anymore. there may be HP tweaks here and there, but nothing of the magnitude Asano is hoping. current drone bays are also fine.

when it comes to minmatar, i'd just like to see the phoon get a TP bonus and a bit more fittings.



probably not on the pest and It is what I want over losing a high since the 2 ships below in the same line lost a high, it just seems that will be the direction they will take. I would love the phoon to get the tp bonus.

maybe your definition of small gang is different than mine.
Previous page123