Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Have you ever been in a 500v500 fight? 1000v1000? It is impossible to kill every single thing with a web if there are enough of them on grid and all it needs is one or two webs to stay on one command ship and you have to stop moving your fleet to stay in range of it. The max web range before these nerfs was just under 108km. I haven't calculated how much it will go down with the nerfs but I suspect it will still be over 80km for the longest range ships. Luckily they are not used as often since shield doctrines are pretty much dead in these big fights and armor fleets use lower range Lokis instead but the whole thing still is such a massive limitation on fleet movements that it just isn't good for the game PvP tactics wise. But there are also many doctrines that don't even have an 80km engagement range. Are you suggesting that all those should get ****** and fly something that can shoot farther away?

If your wing commanders are on grid and even just one of them gets webbed you are pretty much 100% committed. You can't reposition if it costs you a wing commander because the bonuses are too important. If they get webbed, they will most likely eventually get neuted too. So now you are not even running links. Sure it's great for the more aggressive fleet doctrines or those that don't move at all but I feel it will take too much away from the actual tactics used in these fights. So in the end we are stuck with the most obvious question, why would you put wing commanders on grid when you can use off grid boosters?

I am not understanding your second point. Logistic ships are good targets in smaller scale fights. They are horrible targets in big fights because you have enough DPS to kill most things that are not pre-locked by the logis. Killing logistics generally won't speed up your killing rate that much because most of the time stuff is not catching reps anyway especially if they are armor. Killing boosters would increase your killing rate much more. Or killing DPS would decrease the rate of your own ships dying.




There is no reason to white knight me here. It's not like my identity was secret anyway when the post and my name was broadcasted in jabber to a few thousand CFC members. Fozzie simply thought I was someone else. Now why did I post on an alt in the first place? Because I didn't want to get dragged in to a posting campaign as someone would call this. I just wanted to get my opinion heard and GTFO of this thread.

Is it a typo that the Eos and AStarte not getting information Warfare Links?

Who cares if the Minmatar damage isn't perfectly distributed? They can still overwhelmingly hit resistance holes with full damage bonuses. Honestly, I'd rather hit a spread of multiple damage types, anyway. EMP ammo is the only ammo that can cover the unusual spread of EM/Explosive, and projectiles are the only turret whose LONG RANGE ammo gets INCREASED tracking. Let's not forget that Minmatar have 3 tiers of ammo range with damage type selection within each, while hybrids and lasers are forced on a useless 7-tier continuum of inversely proportional range and damage (you only want short range and T2 long range. Period).

Minmatar missile ships all have omni-damage bonuses, while the comparable Caldari ship only has kinetic, with the caveat of an extra hardpoint, sometimes. Same goes for Amarr missile ships.

If you don't want to compare projectiles to missiles, then AT LEAST give amarr missile ships bonuses to only EM missiles and Minmatar ships bonuses to only explosive missiles.

I mean, hitting every resistance hole is unrealistic, right?

Explain how bonused damage to any damage type (which is what you're suggesting, removing the kinetic damage bonus) and loading the launcher with missiles that fire 100% of one damage type WOULDN'T hit a resist hole perfectly??? Maybe you don't understand what hitting a resist hole perfectly means, so here goes: if, for example, I am weakest to EM--my resist hole--and you can lob bonused-damage-EM missiles into that hole, then, wowie-zowie! you're hitting into that resist hole perfectly, since none of your damage is being mitigated by my higher resistances in therm/kin/explosive. Minmatar, for example, fire EM-biased EMP rounds that have some kinetic and explosive damage as well. So, although I may be weakest to EM, some of the damage from that round is being mitigated by my higher kinetic and explosive resistances.

As far as the other point, I'm sorry if you didn't realize this was a command ship thread about command ships that use medium weapons and get bonuses to medium weapons, so obviously, any comments made in this command ship thread about command ships that get bonuses to medium weapons would apply to medium weapons. Obviously, I never suggested that you'd have bonuses on a MEDIUM hull to ALL LAUNCHERS (although, I could argue that the Caracal does, in fact, get bonuses to light missiles as well with RLMLs). "Any missile" requires some ability to comprehend the overall topic, which in this case is Command ships, which incidentally use Medium-sized launchers.

Your argument about the Raven not "being broken" falls short, considering that it is one of the least used Battleships in large operations. The fact is that the issue isn't the kinetic damage bonus or lack thereof--the Raven's woes stem from the missile system itself. In fact, these woes and drawbacks caused by the Battleship hull are why the Raven "isn't broken." Adding to that, Battleships are slow and any damage that you could potentially receive from them can be mitigated by leaving the field before the missiles arrive and cause damage. Not counting issues like firewalls, missile tracking, target painting, tracking disruption-immune, etc., a Raven comparison is wholly dissimilar to a Command Ship that is faster, smaller sig, fires faster missiles, closer range, etc. You're asking for volleys and volleys of 100% damage-type missiles to shoot into a resist hole that can't be mitigated by tracking disruption or similar. No matter how badly you want it, it'd be broken in this class.

Also, comparing class ships similarly, a Minmatari ship will compensate its raw damage via drones. A Caldari ship vs a Minmatar ship, all things being equal with no drones taken into account, the Caldari ship is going to do more damage, despite the fact that it'd be kinetic-bonused. Just look at the Drake with its 6 launchers vs the Cyclone with 5. This same sort of comparison plays out whether we're talking about frigs (Breacher vs Condor/Kestrel), Cruisers (Bellicose (which actually is a disruption cruiser) vs Caracal or the aforementioned Drake and Cyclone comparison for Battlecruisers. The Battleships are in a different class (using large weapons) and have other drawbacks that smaller ships--medium-sized ships--simply don't share.

Sometimes it looks like the Alpha and the Logis are the Problem not the Command Ships.

just want to say, Multitasking V is relevant for logi with a signal amplifier.

Good pilots know how to select their damage type long before they ever even start the fight... saying it's not valid in 99% of pvp fights is not a statement of truth, it's a statement of your lack of PvP abilities and only demonstrates your shortcomings.

Nighthawk is horrid as it stands. There is absolutely no reason any sound mind PvP'er would ever select it over the claymore.

now that the hype is over, i have read through most of the complaints and have to agree with a lot of the peeps here.

since i fly amarr, i was only looking at the hamnation and drooling over its hp and ham speed bonus.
something i noted months ago in our "command ship" chatter was that ALL command ships will need ehp since they will be forced on grid. that expensive of a ship WILL be primaried. that powerful of a ship WILL be primaried.

as a role bonus to ALL cmd ships, drop the damnation 10% armor per level and give them ALL 10% to either shield or armor.
the nighthawk needs some serious lovin. its so low on pg its not funny. as noted several times, the claymore dominates it in everything.

and why is it that the minmatar ships have a huge resist profile to begin with?
they are known for speed, not resists. amarr and caldari have to get to command ship rank 5 to compete with the claymore, sleipnir, muninn, vaggy eyc, etc. caldari is known for shield resists. they should not come second to a ragtag bunch of duct-taped fleets and neither should amarr. our resist profile should be unmatched as winmatar speed should be unmatched.
gallente dps should be unmatched. its tradition...blaster boats..nuff said.
now bring in the sleipnir. thats thing is a beast. it already has a resist profile from hell and its fast and dishes out damage like that? what happened to the astarte? that thing needs to be a beast too.

winmatar needs ALL of their t2 shield resists lowered as a rule. who ever originally made them favored minmatar and its been followed through the same for years. either boost all the rest on their profiles so we have em shield resistances from the factory or drop minmatar down some.

now, for command ships, drop the kinetic only. give more mid slots on the nighthawk. its a shield based critter. the claymore has always been about balance between shield and armor..typical minmatar. give more pg to the nighthawk.

drop the tracking bonus on the eos. i mean really? bonuses for 4 blasters when its a drone boat? give it another drone bonus, like range/tracking on the domi. drop the active rep bonus. these are for fleet support, not solo. one cannot run links in solo play. they CAN be used for solo play, but their intent is fleet use. small fleet, large fleet doesnt matter. one cannot be a commander of yourself.

and why do command ships have less slots than their parent ships? thats kinda weird. 1 more slot in a favorable spot would make these better.

Some nice points here i would like to pickup on the minmatar insane resists especially when you're talking 90% EM granted that's armour to which i come to the next point is the sleipnir is going to get the hurricane hull so i would think making it the armour based hull with the cane flexibility for shield tanking and perhaps could have armoured warfare instead of siege there's no reason why both CS should be limited to the same links.

There is too much homogenization in Eve now there is no need for it .. i also hate that the stats for most of these ships are the same within their own class and the cap regen is the same across the board ignoring the fact that amarr and gallente need better cap regen.