Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I must be one of the few people who like the Sac as it is. Its great for exploration combat sites - utility high for a probe launcher and enough cap to run a dual rep tank while leaving a rig slot open for a gravity capacitor. Oh and not to mention it can still fit a web and painter.

Yeah its admittedly a niche use but I'll miss the cap bonus and would definitely miss the utility high if it went.

well they actually built most of that cap and more into the ship now ... although it makes no sense as sac's don't need cap ... not like the zealot who needs the most but again skewed approach towards lasers but nothing new there then.

couldn't be any worse than the flight time bonus

If you want people to keep using the Vagabond as a skirmisher, why don't you give it another falloff bonus to help it in that role? We actually can't keep flying the old vaga, because the old vaga used the old TEs. With your new vaga we'll still have to use barrage for everything, ignoring projectile weapons advantage of picking damage types. We'll still be doing **** poor damage at point range because we don't have the pg to fit 425s(or arties, like that one crazy guy here wants). We'll still be flying the knife edge against cruisers that do 2ks or better and faction cruisers going 3ks. I'd much rather be doing that with more damage from a falloff bonus while they haven't caught me than with more tank when they do.
Embrace specialization for the Vagabond. Give it another role bonus designed to make it a better skirmisher. Don't give it a bonus that takes advantage of one module , two fits, and which can be heavily abused by links.

I like the direction with the increases sensor strength and lock range.

To be honest I also like the IDEA of the mwd sig reduction bonus but it's not strong enough. I've seen the graph, it's not compelling. The post-bonus sig bloom should be lower than BS gun resolution, perhaps somewhere between BC/CS and BS sigs.

Rise, what are your thoughts on a 75% MWD Sig Radius penalty instead of 50%?

Some questions/impressions:

Sacrilege
Overall, positive. I think she still hurts from the % resistance nerf a while back but the reduced sig is welcome.

Question: Why not bring the entire capacitor bonus into the base stats? It was a very useful feature of the Sac despite not using cap for weapons (perma MWD, Neut, some level of resilience against cap warfare)

Cerberus

More speed and fitting is welcome but I'm still a bit unsure of its place among the other Caldari cruiser missile platforms.

Question: Has a double missile velocity bonus been considered and if so, thoughts?

Eagle

Great changes, should be what it needs.

Deimos

Speed is welcome, however I still strongly strongly feel the tank reduction is both unnecessary and counter productive. A flat 2000 armor would be just right.

Question: Why is the balance team reducing the tank on an already frail close range ship?

Ishtar

Replacing the drone bay bonus wasn't a bad idea. I dont even have a problem with what it was replaced with. HOWEVER reducing the proposed range/tracking bonus from 10% to 7.5% puts the Ishtar in a weird spot. At 10% it could synergize well with its Dominix big brother in sentry drone concept fleets.

Question: Why deciding to split out the Ishtar drone bonus, what was the intent behind weakening it? Is the balance team not concerned with its fleet role?

Vaga

The Cynabal isnt *just* the problem with the Vaga, it's that the Cynabal is doing what the Vaga used to be able to do and what everyone wants them to be able to do again. Nerfs to speed, nerfs to tracking enhancers, and buffs to the speed of other ships have edged the Vaga out of it's kiting damage role.

Question: Rather than a shield boost bonus, have you considered a second falloff bonus?

Muninn

It's...ok I guess?

I still am disappointed that the zealot doesn't carry over the Omen's drone bay. While I am pleased that the sacrilege gets one, the zealot remains incredibly vulnerable to frigates; it has no tracking bonuses, and anybody with a fast frig fit with a TD and a decent amount of testicular fortitude can solo it.
But I suppose you COULD make the argument that since the zealot is designed to be in large fleets with plenty of logistics to back it up, it doesn't fall into the 'lone star' category that some of these vessels like the deimos or cerb tend to find themselves in with solo or small gang pirates. GJ on the cerb btw; going to see if I can't turn that baby into a replacement for the lvl 5 mission running tengu. 8D

EDIT: Any problems I have with the Zealot would be overlooked if it got a color swap and was manufactured by Carthum. Then it would be so obscenely sexy that I would plant myself in front of it for the privilege of getting blow to bits by such a wondrous vision of beauty. Q_Q

Right now it just looks like an angry leprechaun...

Zealot should be nerfed if anything.

Zealot should not be nerfed, it should be used as the baseline for what the DPS projection HAC lineup should look like. The reason that the Zealot is currently used in fleet and small gang, and the others aren't is that the Zealot hits all the right points for a small, "fast" DPS ship that holds up well under reps. The fact that the only widely used HAC doctrine right now *IS NOT* MWD fit should speak volumes with respect to what people want these ships to do.

Two roles:
Tank: Sac, Eagle, Deimos, Munin (though with the shield boost bonus, maybe Vagabond) - give a bonus to resistances, HP or TSB
Projection: Zealot, Cerberus, Ishtar, Vagabond (or Munin, see above) - give a bonus to weapon range, tracking or mobility

1. If we're supposed to wait until the ships are flown before giving our opinion, then why is anybody posting in this thread?

2. The cost structure already fits well with the "diminishing returns" philosophy of Eve.

3. The additional benefit of HACs is survivability - which is clearly defined: Better resists. More tank. Lower sig radius when in motion. Better Ewar stats. Better capacitor. These ships will perform extremely well in any gang with logi support.

agreed