Player Features and Ideas Discussion

No, and I was pretty clear about what I meant from the beginning. But okay, I'll do this one more time.

I suggested bonus to AFs for received neut/web effect because I said neuts on big ships ruined AF chances against them; when you pointed out large neuts had long cycle time and thus AFs could counter them for quick cap regen, I pointed out that large ship pilots have long known that and used combinations of small+medium or 2x medium neuts with varying activation times to keep AF caps dry. My suggestion would counter this by making the amount drained by neuts from AFs lower, thus allowing AFs to keep their caps alive (even in cases of neut combinations stated above) for staying alive while fighting bigger ships.

Now this is getting ridiculous.

Page 1: post 1, post 2 - both indicate the AF vulnerability to neuts I mentioned. Just because you saw a third post suggesting otherwise doesn't mean you should start making false statements in the hope that nobody will check their validity.


Multiple=more than one. And 2x neuts staggered in activation is exactly what I have been mentioning for the last three or more replies now.


Two neuts can be fitted to any BC/BS without any issue, and is done routinely.


The only way to fit AFs to counter multiple neuts from a BC/BS is to have a cap booster, and maybe even NOS in addition (and even then multiple and timed neuts could nullify that fit). Fitting a ship already scarce on mod slots that way will sacrifice its tackling/tanking/damage potential and thus undermine its role as anti-big ship brawler, the role discussed within my suggestion.

You don't like my idea - I have no issues with that. But please stop skipping/twisting my points or creating theories suiting your agenda.

Not true. Fleet cane and cyclone are the only 2 BC's that can fit 2 medium neuts+weapon compliment. The myrm/proph can fit 2 neuts as well if it sacrifices turrets/launchers.

I suppose if you want to be derpy, Any BC could fit 2 neuts if they start dropping guns, but thats kind of silly to use that as a balancing point.

Same goes for battleships, geddon, fleet phoon, tempest and maybe 1-2 other BS' can fit dual heavy neuts, or 1 heavy neut/1 medium neut. Again, you can claim "2 neuts can be fitted to any BC/BS without issue" if you start dropping guns.

We don't need a neut reduction gimmick. Neuts are there on purpose so bigger ships have some way to mitigate smaller ships. You already mentioned the best counter there is, a cap booster. We don't need gimmicky little AF with neut/web reduction bonuses. AF work decently now, they're just overshadowed by T3D which do the same thing for a similar price and completely dunk most AF's in comparable fights.

AF were good at holding down larger ships. The tank/sig of most of them is pretty significant when you're fighting against a non RHML BS or drone BC. Yes, BC/BS have fits designed to counter smaller ships. That is not a weakness of the ship class, its a counter. The last thing we need is yet another nerf to larger ship hulls. All they have going for them to counter small cancer ships are neuts, webs and drones. Excluding drone boats, most don't have extravagant drone bays either.

So now we want smaller, t2 resist profiled ships, with MWD sig reduction bonuses to have an immunity or reduction against webs/neuts? Fix cancer with more cancer, sounds like a good idea.

STOP TRYING TO IMPLEMENT GIMMICKS INTO SMALLER SHIP CLASSES THAT NEGATE LARGER SHIP COUNTERS.

FFS, there are more things in EVE than frigates and destroyers. Every suggestion to improve frigates seems to ignore the fact that you will be shitting all over larger ships even more, which don't need any more nerfs.

Rebalance AF stats, more solidly define their role as heavy tackle. Increase fitting, adjust traits, etc and MAYBE work on an AB bonus as that is the least derptarded thing mentioned so far.

Exactly. It takes quite a lot of fitting compromises to get an effective cap warfare BC or BS, neuts take a tonne of powergrid and use up a utility high which a lot don't even have. Even then they can be countered by use of nos and cap boosters unless you have a bonused ship.


Also even a small nos will give you enough cap to run frigate sized modules such as an afterburner, web, scram. Combine that with a cap booster and a decent AF pilot will have literally no problem with neuts. If anything neuts need a buff.

I consider AFs to one of the most well-balanced ship classes in the game. It's the T3Ds and RLMLs that are the problem. If CCP were to fix those, you would see AFs flying around again.

Oh, and by 'fix' I mean 'nerf into the ******* ground' because it needs to be done.

So wait, assuming this actually happens "frequently" (i doubt it, ive never ran across this scenario and ive solo'd for years), you want to introduce a gimmicky counter to ships that drop turrets/dps for neuts designed to counter frigates. They are sacrificing dps for better utility against frigates but are then vulnerable to larger ships. Your reasoning makes no sense.

Fitting ship A specifically to kill ship B, but in turn will be at a disadvantage to ship C is literally a non issue and is how the game balances itself. You are basically crying about a setup designed to kill frigs (while sacrificing elsewhere) and use that as a basis for allowing AF to have web/neut immunity/reduction. Which is just.. derpy as hell.

AF are easy to train into for most new players. HICs, recons are not. EAF are fairly easy to train as well but are by no means considered heavy tackle. You so much as sneeze on them and they will pop, not to mention they do very low dps. AF on the other hand are the definition of heavy tackle for 2 reasons:

1. MWD sig reduction bonus - Meaning its harder for larger guns to track, allowing you to get close and tackle

2. T2 resist profile - Yes t3ds have their tank mode, but they sacrifice range/speed to get comparable resistances. AF do not, its all in one package.

It is a gimmick and a gimmick that reduces effectivness of counters. To put in a different light, it would like saying giving the orthrus a bonus role for 90% reduction of effectiveness to sensor damps and missile disruptors because those counter it and its not fair.

AF need stat rebalances which include fitting resources and tweaking some of the weaker ships to balance out the group. You givethem the resources for fitting decent tanks without gobs of fitting mods and enough damage to be dangerous, you will see them come out again and be more evenly matched against t3ds.

To those who think t3d should dunk any frig are delusional. T1 destroyers by definition are anti-frig, yet can be killed fairly easily by a well skilled pilot and properly fit ship. I see no reason why t3ds should be an I win button. Again AF have tank/projection in one package. T3Ds do not. If AF had better tank and a bit more dps, that would solidify their role as heavy tackle and could even kill t3ds as long as they were a good pilot with a good fitting.

There are certain AF that need help even before t3d (jag/wolf/retribution/ishkur). These arent radical rebalances mind you, more like optimization. Things like the ishkur drone bonus trait. Just give it enough bandwidth from the getgo and change its bandwidth trait to something like armor rep. Same for jag/wolf, consolidate the dual damage bonuses into one damage bonus and add a different trait.

All AF need a cap rebalance. They have terrible cap and some can barely run an MWD and t1 point longer than 1 minute. Giving them more fitting/cap and rebalancing some traits is all fairly minor and requires no gimmicks to get the same effect.

T3Ds are being nerfed, so we will see how it settles once the focus groups are done.

I also think it goes without saying that AFs should be faster than T3Ds, meaning either AFs need to get faster or T3Ds need to get much, much slower. If anything, T3Ds should be equal in speed to AFs while in speed mode, or maybe slightly faster. As it is now, T3Ds run circles around them. Hell, the Svipul even runs circles around my Crow, and I have prop rigs.

as the other thread was rightly closed ill inject the essentials here.

the op's suggestion was an infinipoint for assault frigs
we immediately ignored this and started speculating what slightly less mad things might be good for them.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
afterburner bonus ?
i know its something id love to see on them.

elitatwo wrote:
Me too but I think my Succubus would become very sad. Anyhow didn't they try that on SiSi once and say it was too strong already?

The one thing assault ships are good for is burner missions.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
pretty sure that was before the t3's were a thing though.

Goldensaver wrote:
It was before anything else at all got tiericided.

Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
may be worth revisiting then eh.

ill be clear here though, im actually fairly happy with assault frigates right now,
yeah t3d's will go through them for a shortcut but im not all that offended by this,
before they were thing i would have happily jumped on any of the destroyer class in my ishkur because they just weren't that scary , you have the resistances to tank them and if you caught them off balance you could kill them before they actually did all that much dps to you.

im not saying they aren't broken as f*** , they are and i know it , but the food chain seems a little more appropriate now , even if its gone too far in the desie classes favour.

Iain Cariaba wrote:
I don't know what CCP was thinking when they introduced d3s. Why ever would they implement some hulls, of the size group that's supposedly purpose built to be frigate killers, that are actually good at killing frigates?

The concept boggles the mind. Shocked


Iain Cariaba wrote:
...-said there were too many quotes-...
I don't know what CCP was thinking when they introduced d3s. Why ever would they implement some hulls, of the size group that's supposedly purpose built to be frigate killers, that are actually good at killing frigates?

The concept boggles the mind. Shocked

elitatwo wrote:
Didn't CCP Fozzie say in one of the o7 shows that CCP is planning on shaking up things without predicting the outcome just for the sake of shaking?
You take the words right out of my mind, destroyer kills frigate, destoyer op - LOL.

I think people give some values on the fitting screen too much credit. Assault ships have t2 resists, sure, but those resistances only postpone the inevitable or slow them down.

A frigate is still a frigate.

And frigates had a good run. Now they have more predators. Anyone remember tier 3 battlecruisers? I hear tornadoes kill destroyers with one shot. If only they would cost a tad less.

D3's heavily nerfed and RLML's converted into a light assault missile/launcher combo might bring AF's into a more useful place, perhaps with the assault line gaining some e-war resistances they are adding too capitals.