Test Server Feedback

A massive part of the problem with triage tanking on shield is that the CPR IIs (which are vital to your cap) nerf shield boost amount.

This is staggeringly unfair, and this penalty needs to be removed.

Remove the penalty, reduce the CPU need of CSTs by about 25%, reduce the CPU need of CSB by 60% (I'm not even kidding, that's how unbalanced they are) and you're getting close to making a useful shield for for chimeras and nids.

As I understand it, the tengu is the only t3 that gets a double DPS bonus. So in that sense, yes it would unbalance the tengu if it also had a tank in a similar range to the legion or proteus.

While that maybe true the dps output overall is still fairly even among the T3's.. well expect when it comes to long range setups but thats a different story...

I think it is good, that we have differnet Types of T3's and not every T3 is the same except the colour.
And I also dont have a problem if the Archon can tank 20 or 50% more than others. The Thani has Shield and Armor remote repping bonus so we are even.
BUT: I want to fitt 3 remote reppers, 1 Cap transfer, 1 Triage and 2 local reppers and have enough PG/CPU spare to fitt tank/ Cap recharge a.s.o. Perhapt the thani can get more cap to even the better tanking ability of the Archon. I don't care.
I don't want to make them the same, I want them to be on the "same" level...

Can we discuss Carrier there: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=46814&find=unread and keep this thread for T2? :-)

the tengu may get a double damage bonus however, asides from it's superior range, it is merely competitive with the others in terms of damage output. shield slaves would not imbalance this paradigm. it would more or less even out the playing field.

In regards to all this carrier discussion going on here. Trip local rep archon is not what I would call an ideal setup. Triage carriers primary function is to keep the fleet alive. If that means keep the fleet alive at the risk of dying so be it. It typically is being used to support ships that cost nearly as much as the carrier itself and in some cases even more.

As far as the other carriers go and using them. The only one that we have labeled with a big AVOID is the thanatos. For a triage platform it has a bonus that does not complement the role very well. All of the other carriers get a useful fourth bonus whether it be extra resistances or more RR amount per cycle in the case of the nid. But, yes, the nid and chimmy are not going to be able to take withering fire from multiple dreadnaughts like an archon can. Unless of course your using a chimera with an officer fit or in a pulsar.

They sure as **** are fun in a pulsar though. Allow me to direct you to these vids.
Ash alliance pulsar
Strag3s pulsar

CPRs used to be without the shield boost penalty, years ago, CCP added the penalty because everyone was running multiple shield boosters on ships designed to armor tank.

Triage Chimeras are used, and are good.

I would however remove the shield boosting penalty from CPRs on capital ships, or boost CFCs to make them a viable alternative.

I've been reading this post with great interest and here are my thoughts, if anyone cares. I do have max leadership skills (well, 9 days from FC5) and normally utilize 1 to 2 links in my Myrm supporting our fleet actions, normally interdiction maneuvers and rapid deployment. I find the Myrm to be a fairly good fc/support boat and the bonus from the 1 -2 mods more than sufficient and doesn't break the bank. I get on grid in the fight normally and don't sit at a pos or such. But for those who do, who cares? Though if this really cause people a lot of ass pain then just have CCP make it so you can't activate those mods inside a force field. DONE. But if I was defending a POS, I frankly think I rate to be able to sit in it and boost my fleet defending it so....I just say leave it alone. I do have a problem with the whole idea of having to be on grid. That would suck, for the following reasons:


1) This whole forcing the booster to be on grid does not make any sense at all as things are already difficult when coordinating fleet fights as you need the whole chain of command to be in system to pass bonuses down to squad members. A) Are you going to have to do that for "on grid" also? That would be a real pain especially when engaged in multiple tasks and efforts around a system. Having to get the whole chain of command on grid, especially when baiting would screw this up. Or other such tactics. This would kill sending in your tacklers first to lock down targets as they would not be boosted. This would make a defensively postured boosted fleet way over powered over the incoming fleet especially if they are kiting. Shield fleets would really be sucking if they didn't get their bonus until on grid and don't have time to charge up. B) What is on grid really? I mean how are you going to manage that because all you have to do is grid fu a gate or a spot in space then off grid/on grid starts to get a bit grey. ie, your off grid but actually very close. The grid fu mechanics will just make this a pain and frankly annoying. Easy to set up a battle to grid fu the attacking fleets boosters off grid if desired. So why bother?
c) kiting and catching targets is a real pain, especially with these teir 3 BC's and other ships. Often even with a perfect warp in/punt, by the time you land the ship is so far away you can't get a scram/web even with high sensor strength, and sometimes not even a long point on it. Interdiction maneuvers helps immensely to counter this constant tactic. Having to be on grid to catch targets would mean that right as I land, with my whole chain of command, and my tacklers, I have to get my mods on and hope he hasn't already warped off since he's aligned. This is sometimes more achievable with me being off grid and getting a warp in with our tacklers. Then once the target/targets are locked down I warp in (and shutting off my mods due to warp) and then I can call the fight once I land and turn the mods back on. But bottom line interdiction maneuvers is a god send and a real help against the nano canes/nano drakes, etc. Also, if I'm forced to land on grid with a target, and my chain of command, the target may not engage and just GTFO. But if just my tackler lands, the target will often think "ah, I can win this and stay and fight." But being forced to be on grid just frankly hurts too many tactical situations and only benefits speedy annoying fleets. Which is what seems to be seen 90% of the time at least where we tend to fly.


2) For those who say interdiction maneuvers is overpowered, I disagree. Its exactly what is needed to deal with these crazy fast ships and the only way anyone who fly's gallente has even a remote chance. And frankly, a long point is only some what useful as most ships will just burn out of range anyways since their MWD is still on. Scram range is still only ~ 12.5 km or so, which is still basically nothing. What is really needed is the Brutix to get a range boost to SCRAM only and Mryms to Web range and then things would be interesting, but that's a different subject.

So in summary:
Love the improved T2 gang links, (even better with the even greater buff to interdiction maneuvers)
Leave the grid thing alone, Being in system is fair and reasonable. Being on grid negates so many tactics it would be just be painful and only further unbalance the game in favor of the kiting fleets (which already uber dominate.)