Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Count me as another person that really appreciates the Dominix's ability to do obscene DPS with blasters and drones together on a webbed (or double webbed) target.

At the moment, the Dominix runs on the basis of "Great drone damage; halfway decent blaster damage; solid active armor tank; solid buffer armor tank: Choose two". After the overhaul it loses option 2.

To anyone suggesting that the Hyperion should lose hi-slots or turret hardpoints: no. It can't be done, currently, because art assets constain them from doing that. The Hyperion very, very clearly has eight turret hardpoints on the base model. Unless the ship was actively remodelled at the same time as the stats change, they can't get rid of guns or hardpoints.

THE DOMINIX
I don't see what the complaints are about. I've been playing this game since 2006, and I can probably count on one hand, the number of times I've seen a Dominix (other than my own) sporting a full rack of large guns. One or two may be a bit more common, but for the vast majority of players, medium guns and/or neutralizers are used. The proposed changes will not change how most players use this ship. They will improve upon the ships drone-use abilities, at the cost of losing a potential (and awful) high dps setup. It's a good change.

THE HYPERION
To me, this is the only *bad* change. That's not to say the ship is bad with these changes, but more that is loses its character. The Hyp is known for two things; its damage output and its huge active tank. The proposed changes remove one or the other, unless you wish to lose mobility. What being done here is they have given you the option to add the amount of ehp that you potentially could have gained from a second rep. This isn't terrible, but it goes against what the Hyperion has always been known for (active tanking).

The Hyperion is best when using multiple reps. That simply isn't feasible without 2 cap injectors, and dropping tackle (or propulsion) seriously limits the ships own ability to apply damage without assistance. The Rokh & Maelstrom do not have this issue, and the Abaddon is different style of ship entirely.

To me, the best solution for the Hyperion is also the simplest.
- First, give back the 5th mid slot
- Second, remove a high slot
- Third, allow it to field 5 heavy drones
- Reduce the base armor from 8000 (base) down to ~5500
- *maybe* increase tank bonus to 10%

This would result in a 7/5/7 + 125/125 situation, which would be ideal. The 7th low allows players to either regain that extra bit of armor now lost, OR field damage/resists/rep to take advantage of the ships bonuses. The difference between flying a Hyperion over a new Mega is that the Mega becomes the guerilla fighter, and the Hyperion remains the front-line brawler.

THE MEGATHRON
The level of complaining here is perplexing. Players have been begging for a way to make BS more viable ships for roaming around, yet when they're given what want they don't recognize it. The new Megathron (and Tempest by association) is a boss.

I understand that MANY of you (if not the majority) use the Mega as a fully plated low-sec gatecamping machine, and you *could* still do that. But why would you? The Hyperion would now be the same price and does the job better (even in the Megas current state). Like the Tempest, the new Megathron is one step closer to becoming a roamers DREAM battleship.

For both the Tempest/Mega that get fit with shields, you now have a mobile battleship capable of countering Tornados/Megathrons, while possessing far greater defenses.

For both the Mega/Tempest that get fit with armor, you now have a durable ship with good hp that can abuse AARs & MJDs. Get in a fight, kill/neut out ships with scramblers, then MJD away when things get hairy (MJD are unaffected by LR points & bubbles). There is quite literally nothing wrong with this thing, and I think the negative light it's getting is mostly caused by a narrow field of vision.

Think about how a ship with 50% bonus to rate of fire would shoot twice as often, doing double damage. That would be the same as a 100% turret damage bonus). The result is that more of your damage can capitalize on the tracking bonus, at a small penalty to cap need.

I hate to break it to you but a 50% rate of fire bonus does not mean you are shooting twice as fast, you will be shooting 1.5x as fast.

So you saying that a rate of fire bonus is superior to a damage bonus is incorrect because rate of fire bonus will suck more cap.

I hate to break it to you but a 50% rate of fire bonus does not mean you are shooting twice as fast, you will be shooting 1.5x as fast.

So you saying that a rate of fire bonus is superior to a damage bonus is incorrect because rate of fire bonus will suck more cap.

If your rate of fire is 10 and you reduce that by 50% what does that become??
A rate of fire of 5

Question remains why would anyone fly a neut Domi in the summer, when the Geddon gets a bonus to neut range, can fit more heavy neuts with better tank and same drone dps?

However issues with drones are not optimal or tracking, they are UI, sig radius, EHP, chase/orbit mechanism, AI and sentry scoop range. These were the things that were supposed to be fixed.

These roaming battleships have a massive sig, no means of holding range and are still much slower, worse scan res and with increased cap consumption of the blasters, Mega needs the 5th mid for a cap booster, leaving the shield fit with ~73K EHP. For a ship that gets scrammed and close orbited to death by T1 cruisers with TDs, that's not a lot of tank.

Suggested Mega has **** all tank in either shield or armor fit, both base values are massively lower than what the Tempest sports. And it's still slow.

A lot happier? Checked minamtar thread? Basically not a single post of approvement.