Player Features and Ideas Discussion

There's this minor fact that easy missions without a salvage alt are a fairly small segment of the game, so even if the Raven is somehow 'as good' as the CNR there, it proves very little.


An equivalently fitted Raven, set up for WH fleet ops (so a 70% resist omni buffer tank) has 27% less tank than a CNR, and it's low enough that it's soft for a battleship - a Drake has a noticeably stronger tank while being smaller and faster, and that means the Raven makes for more work for the logis than it should. It also has less DPS, and considerably less applied DPS (especially on small ships), a liability in PvP and some PvE as well.

Is the CNR worth the extra 400-500M? That's a question that's up to each individual to answer. I think it is, because I'd expect to lose Ravens too fast to make them worthwhile, let alone fun to fly.

Again you put words in my mouth that I never said. I never said you mwd in range of every target, I never said you have a constant 916 dps and I never claimed you had a 40k optimal with conflag.

Fact is, the NApoc is very well capable of running Missions, and can still use conflag at ranges where the Abaddon and Navy geddon already have to rely on Long Range Ammo.

But it's obvious that arguing with you is useless, you always twist the words others wrote and claim something without even being capable of understanding what the new Apoc can do :)

Or i just know how to fit and fly the ships properly. And actually test them in game while you just call bull**** in here.

How ignorant can you be?

Amazing. you use a ship wrong (ie "slow boating to wrecks", the New CNR is a blitz ship), get mad because it's suppsoedly not as good as it's lesser version (which is not as good a blitz boat) and think everyone else is wrong.

That's incredible lol. I guess everyone else is just crazy except you and are buying 700 mil ships like hotcakes (the ones I hoarded are already gone) because they are dumb.....

OR it's just that everyone else has adapted to the changes (the cruise buff + the cnr changes are pure gold) and are getting on with having fun with a fun ship while you're crying in your soup. Either way it sounds like a personal problem.

Don't worry, you can always buy a noctis. i'll contract some bookmarks to you and you can gather up all the junk I leave on the field because blitzing is way better isk/hr than using 1 tractor beam.....

Do show me the part where I said anything about FoFing CRUISE missiles in empire solo. I meantioned FoFs for tight situations in guristas space when scrammed AND jammed (a Golem's FoFs are more susceptible to Defenders) and needing to gtfo because neuts enter. I assure you, the 4 accounts I plex every month+ all my other assets I've gotten from shooting red Xs for the last 6 years speak to my ability and efficency.

It's not surprising anymore that you don't understand what's being said, I've noticed you tend to do that when people disagree with you.

As I've said before, i'm sorry you two or 3 posters don't like the new CNR. Most of us think it's very cool combined with the cCruise missle buff and many are preferring it over the ships you were just SURE were superior. That either means everyone is stupid and not on your level of superior EVE playing, or everyone isn't stupid and you simply refuse to understand why (most) others like a ship you don't. Either way, like I told the other guy, that's a personal problem.

Confirming that I have Gallentean slaves in my Armageddon.

More drones available perhaps, but Gallante get more combat capability out of the flight they do carry.

When flying Gallante using damage drones are usually your most sensible option.

Flying Amarr you may often find you are better served switching between other types of drones (particularly EW).

I'm confused as to why people are saying the CNR is bad for missions? I've found it to be very competent especially when compared to gunboats like the hyperion.

Whether it is the best mission runner I don't know but calling it *bad* isn't really true.