EVE General Discussion

I cannot wait. The tears wrung out by using this will be epic.

T2 neutrons, 2 T2 mag stabs, and a T2 burst areator with CNAM gets it to 503dps before overheat, boosts, or implants. 3 mag stabs gets you up 548 dps.

EDIT: Eris gets the same RoF bonus, so theorycrafting is easy.

Interesting that the weapons bonuses are 5% damage and 5% ROF for the Jackdaw; as well as 5% ROF and 7.5% tracking speed for the Hecate.

Currently, the Confessor is 10% damage and 10% reduced activation cost; and the Svipul is 10% damage and 10% optimal.

Are we seeing signs of an early nerf coming to the Confessor and Svipul with these slightly reduced numbers for the Jackdaw and Hecate?

What your seeing is called "variety." Whats the point in making 4 different t3 dessies and giving them all exactly the same tactical options?

Someone mentioned that images may be released today as well. Did that ever happen?

or just a sign that hybrids are OP vs projectiles / lasers

I think they said they'll show the models at Art & graphics panel

BTW, want to touch on this real quick. Now that I've seen the stats, I feel this would apply equally to all four without ruining the concept they represent (which a lot of people are apparently too stupid to wrap their heads around). The three ways that I would nerf Tactical Destroyers.

1. Increase the cooldown of switching modes to 20 seconds.
2. Restrict the ability to fit 10mn prop mods. Just get rid of that completely.
3. Lower the across the board damage bonuses provided by the Tactical Destroyer skill.

For number 3, I'd say lower the damage bonus on the Svipul to 7.5% and the damage bonus on the Confessor to 5%. Keep the other bonuses the same. Number 2 can either be done with fitting restrictions or just straight up preventing the modules from being used. Number 1 increases the risk of switching modes, but maintains the ability to change modes relatively quickly.

Just my two cents.

EDIT: Wanted to point out, the proposed damage bonuses for the two new ones seem more in line with reduced damage bonuses on the existing 2.

You seem to be implying that a 10% bonus to one attribute indicates a greater increase in potential than a 5% increase to a different attribute on a different weapon system. The effect per percentage is not relative and implying that the lower % on the newer T3's indicate less potential is therefore invalid. The fact that the bonus applies to different attributes does however create greater tactical variety by assigning different strengths and weaknesses to each hull class.

1. They flip modes too quickly. I agree with the idea that managing the modes is the proper way to fly these things, and a straight doubling of the cooldown is extreme. But it needs to be lengthened in some way. Fights might not last long enough to make a 20 second cooldown viable (I'd argue that) but they damn sure last long enough to make a 10 second cool down be mildly over effective.

2. Changing the fitting requirements of the ships is too heavy handed. I'd rather 10mn and 100mn prop mods just not be allowed on the hulls. Don't know how difficult that would be on the coding, but if they can restrict a mod from all hulls except a few (micro jump drives, for example), then they should be able to restrict a hull from using a specific mod (let's not talk about the 100mn Tengu ....we're supposed to be in a brave new age here)

3. Reducing the damage puts more focus on micromanaging the modes, and would give more usefulness to the sharpshooter mode as damage application would be a more meaningful choice. Both of those are good things for the ship class without reducing their engagement profile to any great degree.

And I say all this as a guy who really only has an interest in flying D3's.

Soon the frigates will be used only as role/support ships.