These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Command Ships - Obsolete?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#1 - 2011-12-09 04:23:37 UTC
I have no idea why anyone would bother with a Fleet Command Ship these days. It is outclassed in its bonuses by T3's (3% vs 5%), unable to do any DPS (especially the Vulture and Damnation), unable to fit 3 links and be unprobeable (except to those who really, really spend big). Plus, well, its no news to anyone the Eos is utterly fail anyway.

The biggest issue I have is the difference in T3 gang links bonuses vs the Command Ship bonuses, when you can jam 3 gang links on a Loki. The command subs are a great idea, but in my humble opinion, if you restrict a Sleipnir to one gang link, why does the T3 get a free ride on them. Yes, FYI, i am aware that this "gimps" the fit of the Loki if it ever somehow gets into combat (ha!).

There's no longer a role or a point in Fleet Command Ships. Just stick your Loki boosting alt in a safe spot, minimise his window or alt-tab out, and be done with it.

Now, over to the trolls.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Shivus Tao
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2011-12-09 04:26:28 UTC
Pointing out that T3's are no longer unprobable.

There should also be a change that any boosting ship has to be on grid to boost its constituent fleet.
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2011-12-09 04:50:24 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
Now, over to the trolls.


because some people have known spies/awoxers in fleet and a single AF could brawl down a link T3 before help arrived
Griznatch
Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#4 - 2011-12-09 04:56:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Griznatch
Mfume Apocal wrote:
Trinkets friend wrote:
Now, over to the trolls.


because some people have known spies/awoxers in fleet and a single AF could brawl down a link T3 before help arrived



Confirming my boosty tengu has like 10k ehp with the suitcase turned on.

I used to have a clever sig but I lost it.
Spineker
#5 - 2011-12-09 04:59:29 UTC
Still not worth much so many skills so much wasted time.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#6 - 2011-12-09 05:06:40 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
I have no idea why anyone would bother with a Fleet Command Ship these days.
Because it can do its job without any fitting sacrifices, unlike a T3, or, if you do want to make similar sacrifices, because they can fit far more links than a T3 can.

As others have mentioned, sticking your T3 in a safe spot and relying on unprobeability is no longer entirely feasible.
Spineker wrote:
Still not worth much so many skills so much wasted time.
The only real difference is the CS skill itself. Everything else is stuff you want to train regardless.
Spineker
#7 - 2011-12-09 05:11:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Spineker
Ummm yeah like skirmish etc... Right not even allowed into broken waterfall of isk Incursions...

Do you really understand Leadership skills... didn't think so. Cause I really use all those command modules all the time go alt your likes more really.
ElCholo
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2011-12-09 05:16:08 UTC
I don't believe that the fleet CS are dead. They are still viable for some fleets. I see the Damnation constantly used in current fleet setups that NC. and Rooks and Kings use. Both very active and very well skilled alliances. The T3 boosters are severly gimped in order to provide the multiple links that the CSs can use and are put in a bad position if they must jump into a battle on a gate or at a cyno where their tanks will be put to the test before they can setup in a safe spot.

One of the changes I would like to see is for command links to only work on grid. This would make the fleet command ships much more viable and desired due to their ability to field three links and still maintain a significant tank that can withstand the heat of battle. I'm stoned on pain pills right now so I'm going to stop here before I start rambling. Bye.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#9 - 2011-12-09 05:29:13 UTC
Spineker wrote:
Ummm yeah like skirmish etc...
…a skill that makes no difference between T3 and CS.
Quote:
Do you really understand Leadership skills.
…you mean those skills that make no difference between T3 and CS?

So yes. The only real difference is the CS skill itself.
Spineker
#10 - 2011-12-09 05:32:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Spineker
No they don't

They are useless did you not read the topic?
Griznatch
Distinguished Gentleman's Boating Club
Domain Research and Mining Inst.
#11 - 2011-12-09 05:38:09 UTC
Spineker wrote:
Ummm yeah like skirmish etc... Right not even allowed into broken waterfall of isk Incursions...

Do you really understand Leadership skills... didn't think so. Cause I really use all those command modules all the time go alt your likes more really.



Incursions? Get out

I used to have a clever sig but I lost it.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#12 - 2011-12-09 05:40:26 UTC
Spineker wrote:
No they don't
Quite right: they don't make any difference for the skill reqs for T3 and CS.
Quote:
They are useless did you not read the topic?
Did you? The topic is that the OP wonders if T3s make fleet CS obsolete. People are disagreeing, because there are numerous reasons why fleet CS are quite useful.
Spineker
#13 - 2011-12-09 05:55:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Spineker
You just don't understand the point do you? CS are stupid to aim for unless you are going to run Nighthawk in missions but who is that dumb to train a nighthawk when they can train Tengu in 1/3rd the time? Most CS ships are dumb to even skill for. What part of stupid do you not understand? Train up loki or tengu it is endless Isk, skill up 20+ days of BC with command ships and you find your job means nothing compared to a noob in a T3. What part is escaping you?

Balance is not hard to understand. T3's should never be command ships period. T3 vs CS in base skills really? Are you serious?
Spineker
#14 - 2011-12-09 06:06:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Spineker
Yes Command ships are basically at their core obsolete.\

That is CCP balance.

Because they took a specialized skill and made it obsolete period. Something fanboy's will never understand.

Train a T3 no need to train for a CS, which once upon a time were masters of the battlefield.

Train T3 end all of end all trust me I run missions with T3's dual box and it is stupid easy.
ElCholo
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#15 - 2011-12-09 06:09:15 UTC
Spineker wrote:
You just don't understand the point do you? CS are stupid to aim for unless you are going to run Nighthawk in missions but who is that dumb to train a nighthawk when they can train Tengu in 1/3rd the time? Most CS ships are dumb to even skill for. What part of stupid do you not understand? Train up loki or tengu it is endless Isk, skill up 20+ days of BC with command ships and you find your job means nothing compared to a noob in a T3. What part is escaping you?

Balance is not hard to understand. T3's should never be command ships period. T3 vs CS in base skills really? Are you serious?


The Sleipnir is an amazing PvP ship. It has speed, great tank, and awesome dps. If you don't know this then you really need to take another look at it. The Nighthawk can also do amazing things in PvP. Watch VonHolts pvp video Rocket Witchery or some such ****. He does some crazy things with it. The Absolution is complete rapeface in PvP. The Gallente one... needs some help.

Their brethren, the fleet boosting CSs aren't nearly as impressive. However, the Damnation is stell used on a VERY regular basis in armor fleets deployed throught Eve. The Claymore is also used in nano-fleets that need a ship that can stay on grid to fight with them and still maintain survivability, which it does in aces. The Vulture, I can't speak to. I don't see it very often, however, I do see it. This leads me to believe that it is still used in fleets that have a doctrine oriented towards its bonuses. The Gallente one.... well... it needs work.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#16 - 2011-12-09 06:10:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Spineker wrote:
You just don't understand the point do you?
Sure I do. I just disagree with it because it's a pretty silly point.

Quote:
CS are stupid to aim for unless you are going to run Nighthawk in missions but who is that dumb to train a nighthawk when they can train Tengu in 1/3rd the time? Most CS ships are dumb to even skill for.
…except that the fleet CS can do things the T3s simply can't and that they can do the same things a command-T3 only the CS will do it with far less drawbacks and/or concessions, and that the difference in skill reqs isn't all that big in the end.
Quote:
What part of stupid do you not understand?
The part where you have failed to explain why it's stupid; the part where you haven't addressed any of the points people have made; and the part where you are quite obviously unfamiliar with both ship classes, and are just looking at a select part of the EFT stats without understanding the bigger picture or the options available to you..
Quote:
Balance is not hard to understand.
Indeed it isn't. Fleet CS can do things T3 can't, so the existence of command-T3s doesn't mean fleet CS are obsolete. Each has their own set of benefits and costs. Even you should be able to understand this, and the only conceivable reason that you don't is that you don't have any idea how the two classes work. Hell, you don't even understand how skill requirements work. Ugh
Spineker
#17 - 2011-12-09 06:10:51 UTC
ElCholo wrote:
Spineker wrote:
You just don't understand the point do you? CS are stupid to aim for unless you are going to run Nighthawk in missions but who is that dumb to train a nighthawk when they can train Tengu in 1/3rd the time? Most CS ships are dumb to even skill for. What part of stupid do you not understand? Train up loki or tengu it is endless Isk, skill up 20+ days of BC with command ships and you find your job means nothing compared to a noob in a T3. What part is escaping you?

Balance is not hard to understand. T3's should never be command ships period. T3 vs CS in base skills really? Are you serious?


The Sleipnir is an amazing PvP ship. It has speed, great tank, and awesome dps. If you don't know this then you really need to take another look at it. The Nighthawk can also do amazing things in PvP. Watch VonHolts pvp video Rocket Witchery or some such ****. He does some crazy things with it. The Absolution is complete rapeface in PvP. The Gallente one... needs some help.

Their brethren, the fleet boosting CSs aren't nearly as impressive. However, the Damnation is stell used on a VERY regular basis in armor fleets deployed throught Eve. The Claymore is also used in nano-fleets that need a ship that can stay on grid to fight with them and still maintain survivability, which it does in aces. The Vulture, I can't speak to. I don't see it very often, however, I do see it. This leads me to believe that it is still used in fleets that have a doctrine oriented towards its bonuses. The Gallente one.... well... it needs work.



Yawn.... and a T3 will do it much the same without work.
Spineker
#18 - 2011-12-09 06:11:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Spineker
Tippa,

Obvious is obvious much like stupid is just damn stupid.

I work for a living so I will be leaving now.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#19 - 2011-12-09 06:16:18 UTC
Spineker wrote:
Obvious is obvious much like stupid is just damn stupid.
And you certainly qualify for the latter. For anyone who has to actually make the things work, the usefulness of fleet CS is indeed blindingly obvious.
Quote:
I work for a living I can't prove my point so I will be leaving now.
Fixed. Roll
Just as an exercise, while “at work”, see if you can come up with a working 7-link T3 fit to use in your unsafe-spot…
ElCholo
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#20 - 2011-12-09 06:18:26 UTC
Spineker wrote:


Yawn.... and a T3 will do it much the same without work.


Oh, I thought we were having a discussion. I see that it's not an actual discussion of facts and more a fool QQing and getting mad at anyone who doesn't support him regardless of the fact that nothing he says is correct or based on fact.

So, in honor of your style of discussion....

NO YOU!
123Next page