These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Tech 1 Battleships - Amarr

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kane Makanen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#281 - 2013-04-08 23:59:30 UTC
you still haven't pay attention that none amarr BS can fit a rack of tachs without sacrificing tank or damage so either get rid of that weapons or pay attention to them cause its the only weapon tan can compete with DPS against other races and side that, you know amarr is the more consuming cap race and that its difficult to keep it stable and this also forces the pilot to invest a LOT of fitting solving this problem to get something useful in PVE mostly so please pay attention to the details or this changes will go to oblivion
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#282 - 2013-04-09 00:03:18 UTC
Wow, we went from 25 pages down to 15... lmao, thank you, iSD!
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#283 - 2013-04-09 00:04:49 UTC
Evil Incarn8 wrote:
Was there any thought put into these changes beyond fleet PvP?

I have looked through the thread for all 4 races and the reasoning listed in the dev posts only referances fleet PvP.

I suggest you look at your statistics / graphs and take a little look at where the majority of battleships get used, small hint for you, it is in highsec used for PvE.

Abaddon, you nerfed the tank, this was the main function of an Abaddon, huge active armour tank (yes active shock horror). The abaddon was slow but deliberate, the very living essance of Amarrian ship design.

Apocalypse, Since the release of the Abaddon sure this ship has seen its usefulness wane, who needs to target enemies beyond 50km anyway?

Armaggeddon, RIP, seriously wtf? I am going to rant at not only the murder of an iconic ship, but the apparent joy with which you are spreading the filth that is drone/cap warfare through the Amarrian ship docterine. I will spell this out for you, neut/vamp have precisely ZERO use for any PvE activity what-so-ever, so you have immediately reduced the geddon to a single bonused ship. Drones, ever since you applied the sleeper AI to missions drones are become their favourite food. You have added 5 missile hardpoints, why? this is an Amarrian ship Amarrians dont do missiles.
So you end up with a 5/2 split (unbonused) weapon system ship autocannons and torps on a geddon, just no.

So in summary,
Active armour tanks do get used,
Fleet PvP is a small part of your game for a small percentage of your playerbase,

Try to remember these things.


Khanid is part of amarr and uses missiles. I'm going to say that's why they've added missile systems to some of the tech I hull is so khanids can fly amarr ships before they get to tech II ships.

But onto your PvE point all 3 ships don't need to be balanced around PvE. As it currently stands most battleships are only used in niche PvP roles, as people use navy and pirate battleships for PvE. So lets balance out PvP ships around PvP, and worry about PvE performance on the pretty faction and tech II ships. The normal battleships still look good enough to be used in PvE on your way to blingy ships.
Grant Smith
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#284 - 2013-04-09 00:08:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Grant Smith
As perhaps a bitter older player, whos arguably stuck in their ways after nine years of playing, I do completely agree with some of the other posts with regards to destroying the very nature of eve. It may be far too late to recover, but the tier system was perfect, its what we've all grown up with and loved.

Getting back to the core of eve, gallente were the primary drone race, caldari were all about missiles that actually worked and shields that served their purpose (because the long lost and forgotten nosferatus actually worked properly), the amarr were all about decent range compensated with reasonable dps and the apoc had the tank of a king, while the minmatar boasted a decent all round versatility that was rewarded by putting the time into training. What was wrong with this?

Get back to Exodus standards, where there was a distinct frigate < cruiser < bc < bs hierarchy.

Neuting geddons? Whats the point in the bhaalgorn? at 1/10th the price, noone will fly bhallgorns and instead now field 10 geddons instead, resulting in a collapse of logistical support across the board.

Change is good in most cases, but this seemingly over-complicated change in ships is just baffling and unneeded. Battleships work fine the way they are. Yes there is the odd anomaly, that being the baddon thats over powered (easy fix, remove some dps to ive the geddon an advantage) and the maelstrom too to give room for the pest and phoon. gallente and caldari are fine.

Applying recon style bonuses to battleships is just senseless, and should be kept for solely for the recon ships. CCP is trying to hard to balance all within Eve and it just doesn't happen that way.

The massive increase in frigate usage over the last year has showed just how the changes have affected the game, the lesson needs to be learnt. its as simple as this:

Frigate < Cruiser < Battlecruiser < Battleship < etc = hierarchy as it should be with out restriction and bulls**t complications

hierarchy as it should be with out restriction and bulls**t complications = Customizable unbalanced play style

Customizable unbalanced play style = Adventure

Adventure = Eve

Eve = fun.

Fun = Happy custom base.

And after all, aren't CCP banging on about adventure with the release of the June expansion Odyssey?


Peace.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#285 - 2013-04-09 00:11:28 UTC
Kane Makanen wrote:
you still haven't pay attention that none amarr BS can fit a rack of tachs without sacrificing tank or damage so either get rid of that weapons or pay attention to them cause its the only weapon tan can compete with DPS against other races and side that, you know amarr is the more consuming cap race and that its difficult to keep it stable and this also forces the pilot to invest a LOT of fitting solving this problem to get something useful in PVE mostly so please pay attention to the details or this changes will go to oblivion

Ok, to clean this up abit, and throw in my own 2 cents....
no current amarr BS (and as far as I can see, none of the 'after proposed changes ones' either) can effectively fit a full rack of Tachs and still fit for any sort of tank or speed or etc...
On top of which, Tach's also have the worst cap draw of any of the lasers provided for us, and with all these changes, the ships are overall going to be worse for cap usage then they are now...

Everyone complains that amarr pilots over abuse their scorch crystals and that they are too powerful...

I tend to consistently get told when I discuss fitting beams to a ship with range boosts on the hull that I'm wasting my time and go and use pulse with scorch...

Quite honestly, Beam lasers need to be reworked so that they are, once again, something worth making use of!
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#286 - 2013-04-09 00:16:44 UTC
Grant Smith wrote:
As perhaps a bitter older player, whos arguably stuck in their ways after nine years of playing, I do completely agree with some of the other posts with regards to destroying the very nature of eve. It may be far too late to recover, but the tier system was perfect, its what we've all grown up with and loved.

Getting back to the core of eve, gallente were the primary drone race, caldari were all about missiles that actually worked and shields that served their purpose (because the long lost and forgotten nosferatus actually worked properly), the amarr were all about decent range compensated with reasonable dps and the apoc had the tank of a king, while the minmatar boasted a decent all round versatility that was rewarded by putting the time into training. What was wrong with this?

Get back to Exodus standards, where there was a distinct frigate < cruiser < bc < bs hierarchy.

Neuting geddons? Whats the point in the bhaalgorn? at 1/10th the price, noone will fly bhallgorns and instead now field 10 geddons instead, resulting in a collapse of logistical support across the board.

Change is good in most cases, but this seemingly over-complicated change in ships is just baffling and unneeded. Battleships work fine the way they are. Yes there is the odd anomaly, that being the baddon thats over powered (easy fix, remove some dps to ive the geddon an advantage) and the maelstrom too to give room for the pest and phoon. gallente and caldari are fine.

Applying recon style bonuses to battleships is just senseless, and should be kept for solely for the recon ships. CCP is trying to hard to balance all within Eve and it just doesn't happen that way.

The massive increase in frigate usage over the last year has showed just how the changes have affected the game, the lesson needs to be learnt. its as simple as this:

Frigate < Cruiser < Battlecruiser < Battleship < etc = hierarchy as it should be with out restriction and bulls**t complications

hierarchy as it should be with out restriction and bulls**t complications = Customizable unbalanced play style

Customizable unbalanced play style = Adventure

Adventure = Eve

Eve = fun.

Fun = Happy custom base.

And after all, aren't CCP banging on about adventure with the release of the June expansion Odyssey?


Peace.

Just wanted to say, you start making a point, then follow up by directly contradicting it, confusingly stop arguing that and start on something else, just to again contradict that as well. I recommend you find a friend to discuss what your trying to say with before you post again please.
Nolove Trader
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#287 - 2013-04-09 00:17:42 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
Kane Makanen wrote:
you still haven't pay attention that none amarr BS can fit a rack of tachs without sacrificing tank or damage so either get rid of that weapons or pay attention to them cause its the only weapon tan can compete with DPS against other races and side that, you know amarr is the more consuming cap race and that its difficult to keep it stable and this also forces the pilot to invest a LOT of fitting solving this problem to get something useful in PVE mostly so please pay attention to the details or this changes will go to oblivion

Ok, to clean this up abit, and throw in my own 2 cents....
no current amarr BS (and as far as I can see, none of the 'after proposed changes ones' either) can effectively fit a full rack of Tachs and still fit for any sort of tank or speed or etc...
On top of which, Tach's also have the worst cap draw of any of the lasers provided for us, and with all these changes, the ships are overall going to be worse for cap usage then they are now...

Everyone complains that amarr pilots over abuse their scorch crystals and that they are too powerful...

I tend to consistently get told when I discuss fitting beams to a ship with range boosts on the hull that I'm wasting my time and go and use pulse with scorch...

Quite honestly, Beam lasers need to be reworked so that they are, once again, something worth making use of!


Paladin and Nightmare (and Bhaal) can fit a full rack of Tachs, but for one reason or another this ships aren't that much used in PvP (especially the Mare doesn't offer that much of a tradeoff compared to other BS-sized laser-platforms to justify it's pricetag).

However, it must be said that Tachs currently rule as the mightiest of kings in mission-pve (at least against EM-weak rats), although they are clearly nothing for the new pilot.
Grant Smith
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#288 - 2013-04-09 00:21:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Grant Smith
Pelea Ming wrote:
Grant Smith wrote:
As perhaps a bitter older player, whos arguably stuck in their ways after nine years of playing, I do completely agree with some of the other posts with regards to destroying the very nature of eve. It may be far too late to recover, but the tier system was perfect, its what we've all grown up with and loved.

Getting back to the core of eve, gallente were the primary drone race, caldari were all about missiles that actually worked and shields that served their purpose (because the long lost and forgotten nosferatus actually worked properly), the amarr were all about decent range compensated with reasonable dps and the apoc had the tank of a king, while the minmatar boasted a decent all round versatility that was rewarded by putting the time into training. What was wrong with this?

Get back to Exodus standards, where there was a distinct frigate < cruiser < bc < bs hierarchy.

Neuting geddons? Whats the point in the bhaalgorn? at 1/10th the price, noone will fly bhallgorns and instead now field 10 geddons instead, resulting in a collapse of logistical support across the board.

Change is good in most cases, but this seemingly over-complicated change in ships is just baffling and unneeded. Battleships work fine the way they are. Yes there is the odd anomaly, that being the baddon thats over powered (easy fix, remove some dps to ive the geddon an advantage) and the maelstrom too to give room for the pest and phoon. gallente and caldari are fine.

Applying recon style bonuses to battleships is just senseless, and should be kept for solely for the recon ships. CCP is trying to hard to balance all within Eve and it just doesn't happen that way.

The massive increase in frigate usage over the last year has showed just how the changes have affected the game, the lesson needs to be learnt. its as simple as this:

Frigate < Cruiser < Battlecruiser < Battleship < etc = hierarchy as it should be with out restriction and bulls**t complications

hierarchy as it should be with out restriction and bulls**t complications = Customizable unbalanced play style

Customizable unbalanced play style = Adventure

Adventure = Eve

Eve = fun.

Fun = Happy custom base.

And after all, aren't CCP banging on about adventure with the release of the June expansion Odyssey?


Peace.

Just wanted to say, you start making a point, then follow up by directly contradicting it, confusingly stop arguing that and start on something else, just to again contradict that as well. I recommend you find a friend to discuss what your trying to say with before you post again please.

Without going off topic, please iterate mr forum whore so i can get a better understanding of your fail trolling antics.

P.s BBC. (in your mouth)
Frank Horrigan
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#289 - 2013-04-09 00:22:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Frank Horrigan
I beilive removing 2 weapon slots and removing a dps bonus is the wrong idea.

With drones the DPS stays somewhat sustainable, but drones are cumbersome and you lose a lot of dps while they switch targets / travel between targets. Also i'm not too fond of missiles either.

I think this is going to cripple the ship for my type of game play.

Please don't break my sexy armageddon. at least add a missle/laser bonus or keep the 7 weapon slots.

Edit, i would like to add I love drones for my ishtar, but only because its good at staying out of the optimal of enemies.. in this new armageddon i think i would have to do a lot more work at tanking without the ability to quickly lock and kill incoming targets .. could be a disaster.
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#290 - 2013-04-09 00:32:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Nyancat Audeles
As a newer player that is Amarr oriented, and as a player that can't afford to use battleships in PvP often (more affordable for use in PvE), I don't see how these changes help me... how are we going to use a neut bonus in missions if neuts are ineffective in missions? I don't think everyone uses battleships in PVP only, CCP, please think about the nonvocal majority instead of the vocal minority of nullsec whiners.
Nolove Trader
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#291 - 2013-04-09 00:39:57 UTC
Nyancat Audeles wrote:
As a newer player that is Amarr oriented, and as a player that can't afford to use battleships in PvP often (more affordable for use in PvE), I don't see how these changes help me... how are we going to use a neut bonus in missions if neuts are ineffective in missions? I don't think everyone uses battleships in PVP only, CCP, please think about the nonvocal majority instead of the vocal minority of nullsec whiners.


As a highsec-missionrunner, I can assure you that the Armageddon wasn't a very good mission-ship to begin with.

Additionally, as an highsec-missionrunner, I fully support that ships in EvE should be balanced for their PvP performance.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#292 - 2013-04-09 00:43:55 UTC
Love live Amarr!

Certainly the winners today, the Amarr lineup by far outclasses the rest.

You've created a super-neuting-Legion in the Armageddon. It'll have BS strength tank, bonused sentry/heavy drones for massive dps AND large neuts!! Holy cow!!

For those saying RIP Bhaal: I think that concern is very real. Not because of the increased neut range (the Bhaalgorn is gonna have way more neuting POWER), but because the cost of an Armageddon vs Bhaal is so utterly disproportionate that Geddons will be a dime a dozen, combined with ridiculous dps and you're looking at a Bhaal killer, both literally and figuratively.

Abaddon is going to be laser/tank beast it always was, and Apoc gets better at its role.

Win, Win, Win across the board!

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Altoric Letoides
The Sundered Guard
#293 - 2013-04-09 00:49:02 UTC
As a newer player I take the Geddon changes with some dismay. I've only recently come into mine and I'll hardly know it as the Laser Packing Speed Geddon I had built before this changes all that.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#294 - 2013-04-09 01:03:12 UTC
Nolove Trader wrote:
Pelea Ming wrote:
Kane Makanen wrote:
you still haven't pay attention that none amarr BS can fit a rack of tachs without sacrificing tank or damage so either get rid of that weapons or pay attention to them cause its the only weapon tan can compete with DPS against other races and side that, you know amarr is the more consuming cap race and that its difficult to keep it stable and this also forces the pilot to invest a LOT of fitting solving this problem to get something useful in PVE mostly so please pay attention to the details or this changes will go to oblivion

Ok, to clean this up abit, and throw in my own 2 cents....
no current amarr BS (and as far as I can see, none of the 'after proposed changes ones' either) can effectively fit a full rack of Tachs and still fit for any sort of tank or speed or etc...
On top of which, Tach's also have the worst cap draw of any of the lasers provided for us, and with all these changes, the ships are overall going to be worse for cap usage then they are now...

Everyone complains that amarr pilots over abuse their scorch crystals and that they are too powerful...

I tend to consistently get told when I discuss fitting beams to a ship with range boosts on the hull that I'm wasting my time and go and use pulse with scorch...

Quite honestly, Beam lasers need to be reworked so that they are, once again, something worth making use of!


Paladin and Nightmare (and Bhaal) can fit a full rack of Tachs, but for one reason or another this ships aren't that much used in PvP (especially the Mare doesn't offer that much of a tradeoff compared to other BS-sized laser-platforms to justify it's pricetag).

However, it must be said that Tachs currently rule as the mightiest of kings in mission-pve (at least against EM-weak rats), although they are clearly nothing for the new pilot.

Oh, the Nightmare offers ALOT of trade off for it's price tag... it's got the highest DPS of any current hull for lasers, and it also gets the best tracking speed of any current laser boat to go with that (though the new Apoc takes that badge away from it). The thing with the nightmare is, especially for PvE, you can not fit it with tachs, put a worthy tank on it, and get it to be cap stable. In PvP, and Incursion fleets, that's not a big deal, you can use a utlity slot to cap partner with someone if you need more cap. I see this same option as being available for the New Apoc, the flip side, though, is that because it would be fitting a full rack of 8 Tachs to stay comparable, it not only won't have any PG left over, but your going to be fitting PG mods and rigs to it to be able to fit all 8, where as the nightmare, you can still fit some sort of tank to it, since it's only fitting a rack of 4 tachs, just hull boosts take that (at max skills) up to an effective of 9 turrets.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#295 - 2013-04-09 01:05:41 UTC
Grant Smith wrote:
Pelea Ming wrote:
Grant Smith wrote:
As perhaps a bitter older player, whos arguably stuck in their ways after nine years of playing, I do completely agree with some of the other posts with regards to destroying the very nature of eve. It may be far too late to recover, but the tier system was perfect, its what we've all grown up with and loved.

Getting back to the core of eve, gallente were the primary drone race, caldari were all about missiles that actually worked and shields that served their purpose (because the long lost and forgotten nosferatus actually worked properly), the amarr were all about decent range compensated with reasonable dps and the apoc had the tank of a king, while the minmatar boasted a decent all round versatility that was rewarded by putting the time into training. What was wrong with this?

Get back to Exodus standards, where there was a distinct frigate < cruiser < bc < bs hierarchy.

Neuting geddons? Whats the point in the bhaalgorn? at 1/10th the price, noone will fly bhallgorns and instead now field 10 geddons instead, resulting in a collapse of logistical support across the board.

Change is good in most cases, but this seemingly over-complicated change in ships is just baffling and unneeded. Battleships work fine the way they are. Yes there is the odd anomaly, that being the baddon thats over powered (easy fix, remove some dps to ive the geddon an advantage) and the maelstrom too to give room for the pest and phoon. gallente and caldari are fine.

Applying recon style bonuses to battleships is just senseless, and should be kept for solely for the recon ships. CCP is trying to hard to balance all within Eve and it just doesn't happen that way.

The massive increase in frigate usage over the last year has showed just how the changes have affected the game, the lesson needs to be learnt. its as simple as this:

Frigate < Cruiser < Battlecruiser < Battleship < etc = hierarchy as it should be with out restriction and bulls**t complications

hierarchy as it should be with out restriction and bulls**t complications = Customizable unbalanced play style

Customizable unbalanced play style = Adventure

Adventure = Eve

Eve = fun.

Fun = Happy custom base.

And after all, aren't CCP banging on about adventure with the release of the June expansion Odyssey?


Peace.

Just wanted to say, you start making a point, then follow up by directly contradicting it, confusingly stop arguing that and start on something else, just to again contradict that as well. I recommend you find a friend to discuss what your trying to say with before you post again please.

Without going off topic, please iterate mr forum ***** so i can get a better understanding of your fail trolling antics.

P.s BBC. (in your mouth)

Not trolling, stating a simple fact. Take a few minutes, read back over your post, and you should see what I'm saying.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#296 - 2013-04-09 01:07:57 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:

Oh, the Nightmare offers ALOT of trade off for it's price tag... it's got the highest DPS of any current hull for lasers, and it also gets the best tracking speed of any current laser boat to go with that (though the new Apoc takes that badge away from it). The thing with the nightmare is, especially for PvE, you can not fit it with tachs, put a worthy tank on it, and get it to be cap stable. In PvP, and Incursion fleets, that's not a big deal, you can use a utlity slot to cap partner with someone if you need more cap. I see this same option as being available for the New Apoc, the flip side, though, is that because it would be fitting a full rack of 8 Tachs to stay comparable, it not only won't have any PG left over, but your going to be fitting PG mods and rigs to it to be able to fit all 8, where as the nightmare, you can still fit some sort of tank to it, since it's only fitting a rack of 4 tachs, just hull boosts take that (at max skills) up to an effective of 9 turrets.

And this just further proves my point that A) the Apoc needs Cap love to be proper, as not all PvP fleets will be able to support it's Cap needs (even at max skills, it doesn't have enough cap to be anything like stable), and that Tach's need some love if we are seriously going to see them being used on T1 hulls.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#297 - 2013-04-09 01:21:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Quote:
Cruiser rebalance and the first Amarr 'drone ship':

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=96354

Ok, ancient history, but I still intensely dislike the recent grouping of Amarr/Gallente (Drones) vs Caldari/Minmatar (missiles) and would rather see 4 distinct weapons groupings (you must recall, that even further back, Blasters and Rails were completely seperate, the former being Gallente, the latter being Caldari).

Thanks for checking that out... but do you remember why that particular bonus was proposed, and the laser cap use bonus was considered superfluous?

Because the Arbi could only mount 2 lasers (and a missile launcher), and it's drone bay was nice and large and could hold (at that time) several drones. Drones were the main source of damage the ship dealt.

It was defacto a drone boat, it simply lacked any bonuses to that role prior to 2004. Drone use was the main role of the ship.

Not casting stones here, this is ancient history and I realize details get fuzzy (for me as well).

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#298 - 2013-04-09 01:38:00 UTC
Evil Incarn8 wrote:
Was there any thought put into these changes beyond fleet PvP?

I have looked through the thread for all 4 races and the reasoning listed in the dev posts only referances fleet PvP.

I suggest you look at your statistics / graphs and take a little look at where the majority of battleships get used, small hint for you, it is in highsec used for PvE.

Abaddon, you nerfed the tank, this was the main function of an Abaddon, huge active armour tank (yes active shock horror). The abaddon was slow but deliberate, the very living essance of Amarrian ship design.

Apocalypse, Since the release of the Abaddon sure this ship has seen its usefulness wane, who needs to target enemies beyond 50km anyway?

Armaggeddon, RIP, seriously wtf? I am going to rant at not only the murder of an iconic ship, but the apparent joy with which you are spreading the filth that is drone/cap warfare through the Amarrian ship docterine. I will spell this out for you, neut/vamp have precisely ZERO use for any PvE activity what-so-ever, so you have immediately reduced the geddon to a single bonused ship. Drones, ever since you applied the sleeper AI to missions drones are become their favourite food. You have added 5 missile hardpoints, why? this is an Amarrian ship Amarrians dont do missiles.
So you end up with a 5/2 split (unbonused) weapon system ship autocannons and torps on a geddon, just no.

So in summary,
Active armour tanks do get used,
Fleet PvP is a small part of your game for a small percentage of your playerbase,
A few points:

Try to remember these things.

1: PVE is fairly predictable and many BS can be easily adapted through their fittings to do them. It isn't going to be the basis for most balancing efforts.
2: The Abaddon took a 1% per level hit to it's resistance bonus. it will do your missions just as it always has.
3: There are many fits for both PVE and PVP that prefer to operate at ranges of over 50km, and the Apoc has always centered around range.
4: As this thread has pointed out repeatedly drone use and cap warfare have always been part of the Amarr doctrine... and since the Khanid ships are considered part of the Amarr ship lines missile use has been as well.
5: As a mission runner you should know that NOS draws cap even from NPC's, and Neuts reduce NPC tanks noticeably, making them much easier to kill.
6: There are numerous threads dedicated to tactics which easily keep NPC's from eating your drones.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#299 - 2013-04-09 01:41:27 UTC
Kane Makanen wrote:
you still haven't pay attention that none amarr BS can fit a rack of tachs without sacrificing tank or damage so either get rid of that weapons or pay attention to them cause its the only weapon tan can compete with DPS against other races and side that, you know amarr is the more consuming cap race and that its difficult to keep it stable and this also forces the pilot to invest a LOT of fitting solving this problem to get something useful in PVE mostly so please pay attention to the details or this changes will go to oblivion

I believe they mentioned that they were going to also be looking into beams (which hopefully will include fittings and cap useage). That may bring things into a better place.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#300 - 2013-04-09 02:04:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
A range bonus for neuts? Baffled as to how that would be useful.

24km to 36km?

If it were a 15-25% bonus I might be more impressed.

Maybe for stopping a cynabal/ vaga cold but that is still a really niche bonus that does not make the geddon worth using over the domi.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.