Player Features and Ideas Discussion

instead we get -50 hull every 6 months. I'll take the bat anyday.

Would love to see a dev response here on why the confessor is getting hit relatively hard and the svipul is not.

Clearly there's not a desire to remove the ability to use 10mn abs on these ships, as if that were the case, there would be more drastic changes. However, from the _extremely_ targeted agility and mass changes on the confessor, it seems like the devs want 10mn fits to be as clunky as possible. I personally dislike the hell out of this on the confessor as I enjoy agile ships, but I guess I'm just going to have to fall in love with the jackdaw.

I personally have felt the confessor was _fairly_ reasonable since it came out on the test server. The confessor tanks very well, but ironically is terrible at engaging frigates at close range. Tracking is a major issue with this ship at close range. Its pulse damage is also relatively anemic when taking on larger active tanked targets, which are not uncommon in small gang/solo. Overall I feel the ship has enough weaknesses and faux bonuses on it to be considered balanced. The proposed speed reduction in and of itself is relatively significant as the confessor will certainly be slower than some ab frigates when under a web.

The real question is, what is going on with the svipul changes? The svipul is not agile, but it is fast. The apparent goal of clunky 10mn ship already seems achieved here. The real problem with this ship is how much damage it is doing, oh and like a real "destroyer" it can get a tracking bonus if it wants it. The fact that virtually every fit is rocking triple gryo is a major thing here. The svipul should be losing CPU _and_ GRID.

Is gud.

/agree with Aiyshimin 101%

Correction I love them and I love when people fly them cause I can kill them so easily and they are a big pinata usually.

even though cruisers are supposed to counter destroyers pretty hard

Exaggerations aside, you have your opinion on CCP's balance practices and I have mine. Personally in this and every other game I've played I've seen small continuous tweaking provide better results than bit nerf-bat whacks taken out of things and then trying to put them back together. If you care to read into Game Design literature you'll find a lot of people advocating for faster and smaller balance iterations based on feedback from metrics and data over "whack whack whack" too.



Which assumes that 10mn AB fits are the only problem or the only thing these changes are meant to hit. Besides, CCP generally takes the view that players should be given tools and then let loose to build things with them. We were given the Svipul and people immediately said "screw the range bonus, I'm bringing a 10MN AB and Autocannons" and that's what CCP have to react to. Not whatever intent that designer had when building the ship, but how the ship is actually being used.

The range bonus does still apply to ACs, and it's still there for Arties if you want to bring arties. In-fact throwing together a few fits from what I can tell the difference is pretty much one fitting module on either type of fit, with a few fits scattered around that just flat don't work anymore.



Can't be a rounding error, I was using Excel and with the numbers we're talking about here a rounding error should be on the order of .1 or .01 PG, not 4-5PG. Out of curiosity what fitting tool are you using?



Correction, you can't be scrammed, you can absolutely be tackled. The agility matters if you're trying to sling-shot out and/or past someone's webs or escape a long point. Also since you're now slower than a lot of the frigates people will send out trying to catch you the agility loss hurts more when trying to maneuver against them.



I have seen a number of kill-mails that disagree with you on this point, and I suspect a decently fitted and piloted Daredevil would beat a Svipul nine times out of ten. And trust me, there is no such thing as an idiot proof ship. Ever.

As to Cruisers, that doesn't hold up. A Svipul hull costs a base 50mil, then apply *at least* 20 mil of fittings to it, and you've got a 70 mil setup. A T1 Cruiser costs 10mil base for the hull, which means you need to spend 50-60 million in order to equal the cost of a T3 Destroyer fit, which you are perfectly capable of killing *if* you fit for it (you know, trade-offs).

Personally, I'm not convinced oversided AB fits need to go. They've survived just fine on T3 Cruisers for ages now and those things absolutely do die and drop lovely loot when they pop. The T3 Destroyers are brand new and trying to find their own niche. If there's still an obvious problem after this round of balance changes then I'm sure we'll get another round of tweaks. So lets either suggest tweaks to these tweaks or wait and see, instead of yelling and screaming for CCP to bring down the nerf-bat and smack these things into uselessness, because that's not good policy.

EFT. Are you using a named MSE or T2?
MWD variant -> 112.2/112.41
10mn variant -> 146.2/147.29


No, you can't be tackled in the traditional sense. Because if you want to, you can cruise out of dual webs @ ~700+ m/s in speed mode. Just under 1km/s in defense mode against a single web. No destroyer, cruiser, or tankable frigate can deal with that.

A Svipul out tanks and out damages a Daredevil significantly. It would need to be a horribly fit/flown/afk Svipul, or extremely lucky Daredevil.


You certainly DO NOT need to dump isk into a T3D to be more effective than a Cruiser.
Your average T2 fit and rigged T1 Cruiser will cost you 35-40mil AFTER insurance payout.

T3D are VERY cheap to fit because frig mods are cheap and the insurance payout is so high.
With the changes proposed, T3D will cost slightly more, but T1C will be far less worth the investment.
This is especially true if you start pimping you ship.

Gimping a Cruiser solely to take on T3D is not a viable *counter*.
The reason being is that you could spend a few isk more and get a T3D and make no compromises whatsoever.

Hell, the best tracking cruiser in the game can't close-range track a T3D when using webs.


T3D are a totally different bag of ****. People have been complaining about the Tengu since day 1, and that's part of the reason whyb HMLs got nerfed to hard. Complaints have died down because HMLs are ****, and RLMLs don't make sense on a Tengu/Legion.

Many of us have been playing for a LONG time to see patterns in development.
If players don't recognize the problems in ship balance, good luck for the clueless devs to notice.

The Angel ships were OP for what felt like eons, and eveyone and their mother was abusing them until they were nerfed.
Are the Angel ships bad now that they are shadows of their former selves? No, I'd say they're just fine if it weren't for the Vagabond being so ****.

The same thing is happening with T3D. It doens't take much effort to see that people are just upgrading into this affordable joke of a class. You may not think it's that widespread, but there are still people holding out of the Jackdaw (20+k hp Garmur), and Hecate (15+k HP, 800dps Eris).

This class is going to get a whole lot worse before it gets better.
Especially with the devs pussy-footing around the real issues.

It doesn't help that the class still doesn't have a definitive role yet.
If it's to counter cruisers (what AFs are supposed to be), then Cruisers need to be better equipped to deal with the cancer.
If it's to counter frigates, then why are they so HORRIBLY overpowering against small ships?
Hell, whose idea was it to give them a PROBE LAUNCHER bonus on top of it all?

This is textbook powercreep.
We don't need more buffs, we need more nerfs.

T2 unless otherwise specified. The issue is more the final PG value of the hull with the fitting modules, not the modules themselves though. I'm showing a lower final value for the total PG of the ship, but I'm also doing my calculations by hand rather than using a fitting program with the changes inputted.



Sure it can, it just needs to orbit outside of your scram range with a faction web, and thanks to your horrible agility it can do that pretty much indefinitely once it has a web on you. Out at 11-13 KM you're so far into falloff even with Barrage that you're not doing more than 60-70 DPS at the most, and that's against an Ishkur with just a MWD fitted. Even a minor active tank can deal with that kind of incoming damage.



I'm showing a 125mm Rail Daredevil actually putting out better applied DPS at optimal web range than the Svipul. The Daredevil can't break the tank on the Svipul (assuming dual ASB fit) but depending on the fit on the Daredevil it's questionable whether or not the Svipul can kill the Daredevil or escape before he either runs out of cap charges or more people show up.

It's not a definite win on either side but it does seem to me to come down very heavily to piloting ability.



Fair points, maybe that means the insurance payout of the Tactical Destroyers should be re-evaluated?

Though I am wondering what the heck you're fitting a T2 fitted Cruiser with that it's that expensive. After checking a few fits in EFT I'm showing on the order of 25-35 million before Insurance and including hull cost.



Heavy Missiles got nerfed hard because they were incredibly out of line compared to every other Medium weapon system no matter what they were mounted on. The 100MN Tengu had far less to do with the issue than the massive swarms of Drakes floating around Null that put the Drake so far up on the "most often killed ships" list it's still one of the all time winners despite having been nerfed out of Null fleet comps 2-3 years ago.

Also before you play the "I've been playing Eve long enough to see a pattern!" card check someone else's date of subscription... lol. I've been playing since 2009, been subbed all but 4 months of that (the first 4 btw) and I've been active on these forums for most of that. I've played since Rails were a joke of a weapons system and I've gotten to see the entire journey of "fit of the month" over the last six years. I've played a lot other games too in that time, and personally I think CCP is one of the more on top of things when it comes to game balance. You are, of course, free to disagree but you're not going to change my mind with those sorts of arguments.

If you've been around that long then you should know that CCP's philosophy to new ships isn't "this ship shall fill this role" it's "this sounds like a cool concept, lets do some quick tests, give it to the players, and then see what they do with it". The T3 Destroyers aren't intended to do anything, because ship roles in the game aren't created by CCP they're created by the players, and they've changed and morphed and adjusted over the years as CCP have tweaked things and the players have responded and back and forth until we get something approaching a steady state.

You realize that dumping the equivalent worth of the hull your shooting @ into a single mod isn't a counter right?
I also think you greatly underestimate how fast/agile they are.


No, I'd say it's a definite win for a Svipul.
For starters, you're not doing much dps without being close to web range. Certainly not enough to break a tanked Svipul. Secondly, DD rail tracking is garbage without a web. Thirdly, you'd need to invest in a faction web to make it worthwhile, which brings your DD cost to roughly 4x (after insurance) that of a Svipul. And finally, you can't rail fit a DD for tank and damage.


A re-evaluation would be nice, yes.
As for what kind of ship: Thorax, Rupture, Vexor are my most commonly used cruisers, and all hover around that pricepoint. Vexor being the most expensive.



And this would be bad design if that were purely the case.
Every class of ships should be / is made with some intent. They don't just throw together a bunch of stats and release it.
Whether or not CCP has said what their intent is is something else entirely. They may not want to bias the players interaction with the things.

With that said, there needs to be something done.
Right now they are between T1 Cruisers & Battlecruisers. Medium weaponry is NOT designed to handle fights against ships they can't hit. There is FAR too much sacrifice required to combat such *snip* ~ Profanity Filter Avoidance ~ ISD Decoy design.


The Confessor changes are fine.
The Svipul needs a lot of work.

Nope. That is NOT how ccp works for YEARS. In the past yes, they used to follow the "let the players use their tools philosofy". But that stopped long ago, when they nerfed all e-war up to the point their are almost useless outside their bonused ships, when they removed multiple prop mods at same time on a ship, when they nerfed ALL the speed enhance modules up to the point that even if you use 3 of them you cannot reach the same bonus that a single click in overheat can (effectively making speed enhancing modules a waste of slots only justified when you lack CPU or PG to fit something more interesting, a simple example of how this is true si the rise of the oversized prop mod as the ONLY kiting alternative, because it is always better to fit PG modules in the lows to fit a larger prop mod then to use the same low slots to enhance your speed. ). And thousands of other examples, where CCP nerf things under the argument that is is not how the ship was intended to be used. Expect T3 to be the next in line to get this homogenization treatment.


And the range bonus in real game terms DO NOT APPLY TO AUTOS. 50% bonus to a NEAR ZERO VALUE is still NEAR ZERO! Probably once every 100 sivpul fights the 50% range bonus makes ANY difference on a fight outcome.



Again I will reiterate, the problem of oversized props is because CCP OVERNERFED speed enhance modules up to the point that it is always better to use your low slots for POWER GRID and then fit an oversized prop mod then it is to put speed ehnace modules. INCREASE the bonus of the speed enhacne modules and you will see less oversized setups.