Player Features and Ideas Discussion

And to the people crying about the new changes did you even tried already the new changes in EFT ? The Munin, Ishtar, Deimos, Cerberus and Sacrilege are damn good. Still didn't have the time to check them all but from what I've seen they are now very (well) balanced.

I would prefer something like reducing the range of warp disruptors used against HACs by 50%. It's a buff to the preferred engagement envelope without breaking the ship. I just want to know if such a bonus is technically viable, because if they can't viably code it for relase then there is no point asking for it.

It hasn't been made clear why no move has been made towards giving HACs a real specialisation. I'm assuming that rather than lack of imagination it's lack of resources that has lead us here, because I'm sure that those involved could easily manage something better than "let's make them more resiliant".

Large asb's are too bad? What? An unloaded LASB gives you twice the raw shield HP as a LSE with that bonus.....

This. I've been a fan of this idea since it was first raised in the last thread. Resilient damage dealers with exceptional strike capability.

This will be only my second post on a forum concerning EVE online in my 5 consecutive, and faithful years of playing. With that said please allow this post to be interpreted in two ways.

1. I Generally enjoy playing your game an I am happy to continue to pay to do so.

2. The importance of making yet another voice heard to the upcoming T2 changes has driven me to add my voice to the masses

I have to say that over all I am happy with and even look forward to the new and upcoming changes. Although, I wasnt happy to see the vagabond change, i do understand the changes and as long as the cap recharge is sufficient I'm sure with a little micro management I can see myself flying one with a shield booster equiped. It is one of my favorite ships second only to the Talos as I am partial to speed tanked ships.

The biggest bone I have to pick is with the Deimos.....

I'd have to agree with other previous posts the signature radius my be perhaps too large and not in line with other galente ships.

The removal of the utility slot to be placed in a mid slot leaves much to be desired. It does open up the possibility to shield tank or speed tank the ship but I think both those options arent viable as other T2 HACs do the job better with more EHP. I wouldnt suggest giving it a low slot as it could give an ungair advantage in most cases. But leaving the high slot but allowing an extra gun placement coupled with the lowering of dmg bonuses might fix the issue. I say this because although this ship has no issue with damage projection; it does do some of the most easily defended damage in the game (kenetic/thermal)

Why nerf the armor and hull hp only to add a paltry 139 shield hp to a ship that most would agree is going to be normally armor fit?

Lastly, I really would like to reiterate that I like most the upcoming changes to the HACs. However, I do think the Deimos needs to be looked at again or if you could be so kind as to explain why these changes took place that would better help to understand them also.

Am I going to pay 200 milion for a cruiser sized ship with 70- 90k ehp

OR

Am I going to pay 500 million for a cruiser sized ship with at least double the tank, more damage, more Ewar resistance, more options, more slots, more speed, more capacitor, lower sig, and a much higher likelyhood to survive and/or kill targets faster.

Investment always pays off in the end. Every competent pvp'er knows' this is true.

So given two stupidly overlapping roles, why are people going to choose HACS? What role or benefit do they offer?

How are they not just cheaper, weaker, duller, less adaptable versions of Tech 3 that nobody will fly other than space poor people?

Let me let you in secret that helps when planning:

RICE

Relevant
Challenging
Innovative
Exploratory

It's what teachers are supposed to do to make content interesting and useful to kids.... maybe you guys should try it at CCP.

How are these HACs any of those?

Almost 0 flexibility on most of their gear builds. Almost 0 utility that doesn't get outclassed by at least 5-6 other ship class options. Not new, not thought provoking at all. Not challenging, just the same bonuses on another set of ships.... not like we don't already have 5 sentry drone platforms in game. Not exploratory at all... no new ideas allowing players to explore new content or philosophies.

Welcome to the forums!

I havnt read though the entire thread. But the Ishtar split drone bonus sucks IMO. I would suggest something along the lines of combining the bonuses into Drone Optimal, tracking, and speed all in one and adding mabe something like increased drone control range for the 4th bonus.

That's more information than CCP Rise has seen fit to disseminate - I did say I was quoting everything that CCP Rise has had to say about the Eagle.

So we are left with "because of the rails" that, unless you've got access to their internal test servers you've not seen yet.

So I still think you'd not notice is they forgot to put them into the game with the 1.1 patch.

You do realize that those same T3's are in CCP's sights for the nerf bat right?