EVE Information Portal

First, thanks for a response and reading our thoughts!!!

To respond directly to your response though...

Tech 2 changes are nice (across the board), even if they will shake up the LP Store markets some as a few faction ammo types will become second rate. Those aren't really a hybrid fix though, as has already been pointed out, as much as a general "T2 Ammo kinda sucks" fix for many of the non-used ammo types.

Regarding specific ship setups and how they can be fixed, these are directly related to the core philosophy behind the use of blasters, and this is exactly what people are complaining about. Blasters need a reason to be used, as their lack of weapon damage types combined with range, capacitor usage, and targeted hulls (slow, fat, armor tanked, and lacking the slots to make for a manageable tank/buffer while increasing damage via magstabs to the levels necessary) just do not make a compelling reason to use them over something else. You can fix armor rigs, nudge gallente ships faster, etc... but there needs to be a compelling reason to use a weapon system for it to actually be used.,,, else you end up nudging and nudging until the system just becomes overpowered and invalidates other weapon systems.

The nuclear option COMBINED with enough tracking to fight at 500m with traversal seems like the one niche where Blasters can excel. Crank up the damage to where Gallente ships can really excel in ONE area better than all others, and a real use will exist (even if it isn't what many are looking for). Today I have real reasons to fly Amarr, Minmatar, and Caldari hulls in a variety of combat situations. For those of us who love Gallente, all we ask is that Gallente get given a real reason to fly their hulls (beyond running missions in drone boats). Preferably, whatever it is that is provided, some of us would ask that it doesn't invalidate the existing paradigms that are in place for other races' ships and their corresponding weapon systems.

I approve of getting it to SISSI to start testing it. With regards to specifics for the Deimos:

It's too large. 160m signature radius as it slowly charges it's enemies means not much will fail to hit it.
It's too slow. It goes half the speed of a Vagabond and has 25% of the range. Comparing ships and even the Eagle goes faster then it - before you add plates or anything else.
It's bonuses should be looked at. With less cap going to the guns is the MWD bonus all that neccesary? I would suggest either the much maligned web bonus OR an overheat bonus OR a warp core stab point ala blockade runners for leaving when the stars don't line up.

The best deimos fix is already on tranquility. it is called adrestia. perfect blaster boat, perfect hybrid fix

now compare adrestia with deimos and it will be clear why it is perfect.

as a taranis pilot

+20% tracking

-30% cap use

-12% power grid on light neutron blasters (what most people use)

+3 CPU

-5% inertia

sounds a bit good


also could you please add some speed to some/one of the proteus subsystems most commonly used with blasters? and please remove the tracking penalty on void, it's still not better than faction antimatter in most cases for that reason

As a follow-up to some ship buffing for Gallente...

Proteus - Give them a setup that allows 125m3 drone bandwidth
Hyperion - Increase drone bandwidth to 125m3
Myrmidon - Increase drone bandwidth to 100m3 (or 125m3)
Eos - Increase drone bandwidth to 100m3 (or 125m3)

All blaster boats - Either increase speed to match their desired prey (before modules come into play), or keep their speed as is and increase base armor hitpoints. Their mixed slot layout provides some real versatility in PvP, but they don't have the survivability to be anything but glass cannons unless they gimp their DPS for a half-assed tank, and neither option lets them compete in a foot race when nano'd setups come into play.

Drones - A few nudges in the direction of making drones faster and more survivable on the battlefield will increase Gallente desirability in a range of engagements. Give Heavy Drones the speed of Medium drones, and medium drones half way between where they are now and light drones. Bump up the usefullness of combat utility drones, and possibly consider introducing smaller web drones into the game. This change, while affecting everyone, will have the most benefit towards Gallente hulls.

For Hybrids - Ask yourself on any blaster boat why I should fit blasters instead of Projectiles. If you find yourself still wanting to fit Autocannons (so your tank is cap stable, so your range is extended, so you can switch damage types, etc.) than something is still wrong with blasters. The ship I think about the most for this is the Myrmidon. I can put a nice tank on this and use my drone DPS as the primary weapon system, but Projectiles are just gravy on top while Hybrids complicate the setup. I am not saying blasters should be projectiles (far from it), but I would never trade 500 DPS at under 10km range for a 180 DPS at 10km and the ability to do some damage at 25km unless I was goofing around. Blasters should be UBER on blaster ships, and moderate to good on non-blaster ships if being used in their target engagement range. Lasers and Projectiles already satisfy this for their uses and targeted range, lets give Hybrids some use here as well!

And for the good things, as most of our energy has been focused on what we think can be done better...
* Hybrid ammo size reduction is good!
* Hybrid capacitor reduction needed is good!
* Hybrid tracking increases are good, however I question whether they will make fighting between 500-2500m any better than it is today, and/or fix the issues when under 10km when the target is unwebbed...
* Gallente ship speed increases - maybe, though seems superficial unless they can really break speed against their desired targets (assuming those targets aren't nanoed as the Gallente doesn't have the slots to increase his speed without some serious tradeoffs - tradeoffs being good but forcing those tradeoffs to be effective is bad). I still think keeping them where they are and increasing base armor would be better with a nuclear option for blasters, but I'm a little biased towards that solution as I think its a really good idea

If you want to bring Projectiles down to earth, you could take the nerfing idea of making all their ammo types Explosive/Kinetic only. If you don't go the nuclear option for blasters, it might help level the playing field - especially in the very close range bracket where blasters operate!

huh, the adrestia is the perfect fix, it has the nuclear, the snatch and grab, the speed, and the tracking to use the guns.... + some range bonus to actually have reach. i mean THAT is a blaster platform :)

I'd like an extra mid slot instead of utility high "power core multiplier" sub: +1 low +1 mid (instead of high and not being hard point)

So I could fit mwd+scram+web+cap inj instead of having to choose between either web either scram, the point on pvp with this little babe is to have the long range scram so no way I change the sub ! -but you can add an extra mid.

I'm sure that someone already noted it here (did not read whole thread).
My vision of blaster boats: they are agile (definitely need boost), high dps (maybe current dps is ok) and tracking ships (definitely need boost).

Agility, not speed, is important for blaster ships. if you can gain speed faster than other that mean you can faster get it scramble/web range or leave disruptor range. Leave speed for minmatar. Agility is for gallente.
5% better agility is not enough.

Your speed gain should be like dash, and you should have change moving vector fast. Much quicker that other ships, because it's "all or nothing" type.

Important tactical range is from 0 up to 24km. Taking in mind scramble and web range it becomes 10-24km that blaster boats has troubles in. Using agility and acceleration blaster boat should cover ~8-10km of that range faster than minmatar or amar ships.

That way minmatar pilot knows that he has ~4 km safe range if he gets to close, agile ship could burs towards him and scram/web him. In other side galente pilots know that if minmatar are to far for burst (minmatar would get his speed before galente could reach him) he always could use his agility, turn fast and burst in opposite direction and get out of disruptor range.

The diemos needs an extra midslot too, for the same reason.

Seconded. The Eos is very hard to justify in a fleet because of the hull issue, compared to it's command ship counterparts which add real value:

1. Given that the Information Warfare bonuses are mainly beneficial to enhance ECM boats and help counter ECCM - it is best used in Shield Gangs
2. Sadly - It isn't a shield based ship, although it can fit one, it won't win any 'Prettiest Pig at the Faire' awards.
3. It's excellent drone capability was nerfed badly so that the ship no longer had any real advantages to offer. Should allowed to run 5 large drones like before.

My suggestion is give the Eos +1 medium slot to allow for hull type changes, and a more shield HP, and an increase in drone bandwidth to make it attractive to fly once more.

In the same way, the Claymore also needs armor tank balancing in the same way Eos needs shield balancing as both of these command ships sort of awkwardly sit in the twilight zone.

Indeed, you could argue that bumping the Claymore low slots by +1 and increasing it's armor HP would go some way to offering some of the speed boost that Blaster pilots are asking for in this thread, while making the Claymore tactically relevant in an armor gang. The only way to fly a Claymore at present in Armor gangs is to stay well away from the fight, typically with the logistics and the tank requirements removes any real DPS from the fit. It isn't exactly... 'fun'.

I don't want to digress from the hybrid thread here, but see the Eos and Claymore suffering from the same sort of issue, with the Claymore offering some of the features blaster pilots are asking for - AKA speed.