Player Features and Ideas Discussion

No mention of the Eagle or Cerberus in that address at all.

I'm losing hope here for being able to fly Caldari T2 ships and not feel a massive sense of shame, between this and the Command Ships thread. At least they're trying with Gallente.

(Seriously just drop the kinetic damage bonus and turn it into a generic missile damage bonus or RoF or SOMETHING stop trying to take away one of the biggest advantages missiles have over guns, for Caldari only, while giving Amarr and Minmatar to basically have what Caldari, the 'missile specialist' faction, don't have.)

Also on Deimos i think the armour rep bonus makes sense but more as a kiter like the ASB Vaga so a stronger falloff bonus would make sense and please don't remove shield HP for armour it could do with more of each not less.
Please focus the Deimos on blasters like a blaster Vaga.

Where do you address the Eagle - it is crap - you admit it is the worst HAC but you've had so little to say about how you intend to fix it.. Here's everything you've had to say about the poor bird https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3417222#post3417222


Nobody flies an Eagle - thus nobody really defends it because you are not taking anything away that they would miss.

Just admit you haven't a clue what to do with it and remove it from the game... or say why it should remain.. either will do.

Also if you want deimos to use armour reps than besides improving cap of deimos you might want to talk to fozzie about improving armour reps in general there have been many threads on just how bad it is ranging from long cycle time, huge cap consumption particularly as a single rep even AAR's aren't good enough.

on AAR's things like
- reduce reload time/ change mechanics to inject based so 75% reps and 15-20secs until nanite paste is reloaded/injected .. its nanites not massive cap boosters come on!!
- reduce cycle time .. maybe reps often but reps less so its more of a continuous repping rather than massive chunks every now and again which isn't very useful if you're a small buffer ship
- reduce powergrid

That would make it worse. Range bonuses are really great.

RISE

Please talk to us about price and why with T2 prices rising would we want to spend 200mil quickly rising on ships that are worse in most ways to ABC's or even T1 cruisers?

sure range is always nice, but given that rails will have their tracking nerfed, are you sure that it won't need it?

Sorry I didn't say anything about the Caldari HACs, it's because I think they are probably both in really good shape.

We are seriously concerned that the Cerb will be too strong. The biggest issue is probably Rapid Light Missile Launchers which have incredibly damage application and projection for such a tiny fitting investment. I think its a good dynamic to be choosing between raw damage potential and application, but a rlml Cerb will be kind of insane. And in general the ship is shedding a lot of its past handicaps such as terrible speed and fitting difficulty.

The Eagle is a little harder to judge, but I think it's probably more towards the side of being too strong than being too weak. The Eagle is definitely more of a fleet ship than a small scale skirmisher, but it got much much better for that role in this pass. Added sensor stats, lower sig, added fitting, and most importantly the trade of a utility high for an extra mid means that we are expecting ahac style eagle fleets to be very strong, especially when you consider the rail buff. We'll have to see how it goes but we are not worried about the Eagle.

About the price question - I would say if its rising in price but you don't think its worth it that you shouldn't buy it, but clearly someone thinks it will be worth it. I don't think the price of HACs necessarily would be required for their power level, but I also don't think it needs to be lowered. With these changes they will more than justify the price for lots of players (me included).

Gal will never get optimal range bonus. Ane tracking is more useful then falloff for rails as rails have terrible base falloff

Oh it's pretty simple really.

The Vagabond was crap before the HAC change (compared to everything else. Tier 3s mainly, Cynabal obviously, and any kind of kiting platforms tbh).

Now what changed ? It's capstable (It's great, sure, but considering all other HACs got the same treatment, well...).

It has a shield boost bonus, which brings you to two possibilities. LASB, which is pretty bad and forces you to drop the very useful medium neut. XLASB, which is good, but heavely gimps your ship.

If you don't use the shield boost bonus, which you seem to talk a lot about, then you're back with the old Vagabond + capstability. Which isn't REALLY all that better.

Did I mention you can't fit it with T2 LSEs with 425mms ? It won't fit even with 220mms and the neutralizer. It needs implants or meta 4 LSEs.

What most of us are asking for is a PWG increase. That will increase damage projection (Because we'll be able to fit 425mms), damage itself (Same thing, because of 425mms), and it might even open up the fitting possibilities for arties, full buffer (2x LSE T2s) or XLASB (with 220mms) setups.

It's not about changing bonuses, it's not about adding bonuses, it's not about switching everything around. It's about adding some PWG to make it fittable without a massive amount of implants/rigs and whatnot.

Also, the Vagabond is probably the most "advanced", most "powerful" medium autocannon user, except maybe for the Sleipnir. It's also a HEAVY ASSAULT Cruiser. I believe it being able to fit 425mms without much issues wouldn't be a massive balancing problem. Especially if you consider the LR weapons rebalancing and the Deimos/Cerberus rebalancing.