Ships & Modules

So you're admitting your entire basis for wanting a nerf is people fly them too much? Seriously?

Let me tell you about how 90k EHP is acceptable for a fleet BS these days



(No)

:sigh: ITT I've never said anything about Drakes, a BC, uniquely stepping outside of that ship class into the class of BSs, nope.



Quoting your argument and my response. BTW your premise above is flawed imo, unless you have given up on Muninns. AHACs can be mixed, and probably work better mixed, as noone could get intel such as "they're in Zealots with armor logis" and just refit for all em and thermal resists. Regardless, as I said your argument is a red herring. Zealots are not topping the kill stats in a lopsided fashion. And considering the skill reqs and expense of a HAC there is not the same balance issues between them and BSs, were your mythical example to come true.

As far as it goes, the numbers are an indication that people are finding something worth using in a ship over another option. There will always be a number one. The number one should not be represented in a 3 to 1 ratio on the kills though. So if you want to mischaracterise my argument (again) and reduce it to simply the top ship should be nerfed, have fun congratulating yourself for your flawless reasoning. If you can't understand my posts about the confluence of expense and shipclass hopping (and pve utility also out of proportion) that I'm saying lie behind the drake numbers then I don't know what I can say for you to understand.

Im a somewhat new player (a bit more than one year of game) but enough to get to know a bit about its ships. I was annoyed by the fact that every time I asked for advice on PVE ship choice people always answered the Tengu was the only choice. I tought that was because Caldari is popular and really didnt listened to it. My choice for ships was Gallente because of the facemelting DPS and because I think drones are cool. Now that I can fly a Proteus Im really disappointed by the fact that the best DPS fit I can get is really close to the HAM Tengu DPS. The difference is the Tengu can hit from much farther away without tracking penalties and has a much better, much easier to fit tank. That for me is something that can be categorized as unballance.

The Tengu is so easy to fit and fly that I see really noob players braging about soloing Blockade missions with less than 5% shield damage. The little I know about PVP tells me that it does have a weakness that is being cap drained but wtf... how can you cap drain a ship that can shoot missiles from 100km away with MWD and tank on cap stable? (Rethorical question, please dont lecture me about PVP possibilities).

CCP should either buff the other T3s or nerf the Tengu. As buffing 3 T3s is much more trouble maybe nerfing is the best solution. As a Gallente pilot Im really disappointed to see that the Proteus, a ship that is much harder to fit and fly, has a DPS potential (if you do it right) close to a ship that all you need to do for it is to target and press F1 while orbiting stuff.

What is Jersey Shore?

Or, for the last ******* time, because it's easy to train to a level that's useful for fleet combat as well as PvE, and forgiving to fly, not because it's OMFG superior.

Seriously, bring some analysis and numbers to the table other than just "A lot of scrubs fly drakes through gates therefore KILL IT WITH FIRE".

precisely. Harbingers not so much.

Yes, you show me how those fad following drake pilots could get the same or a better package of easy to skill, tank, range, and dps at range, at a cheap price with any other ship. The closest would be the Cane. That is probably why it is in the top ten. But then it falls short, and sadly is not pushing 300k kills to 100k for Maels. It is not number one by a ridiculous margin in overall use as indicated by gatejumps, and 425mm ac are not number one (or 2,3,or 4 for that matter) for module activations.

I'm glad you're getting mad. It means you are attached to the drakes that you rep every day in your scimi. I suppose you are also attached to your pirate mission running Tengu. Malc, I'm sure you will feel the same about other ships you will end up repping, and that you have the skills to find a replacement for your tengu.

Nerfing the Drake won't miraculously make other BCs viable... in the end it's taking away one hull you swear up and down is currently usable ("stepping outside it's class"). You also seem to want a Tengu nerf, turning sov fights into "MORE BATTLESHIPS" and taking away one common comp that is able to fight effectively under tracking titans.

I didn't realy ment it as an arguement, or as a way to defend the current situation, I just want to analyse where it might come from.

So that when people think about adjusting things, they'll look at the entire picture instead of 1 or 2 ships.

That "fixation" is also there for a good reason: the extended discussion of "Drakes in numbers, means numbers".

You used the 200+ figure as part of an argument: I turned that around and asked you to look at what alliances can steadily field 200-man gangs. When i say steadily i mean frequently, and when i say frequently i mean in a manner that create emergence in the day-to-day interaction of the game.

You bring up the CFC: Let's use that example. Do FA, FCon or RZR frequently field 200 pilots? The fact of the matter is that those numbers are only really reached with coalition numbers or in very select cases looking at alliances. Most of the time when those alliances pull such size they do it with peripheral members of a coalition anyway.

That means the amassment of Drakes is only a coalition-issue, barring maybe one or two alliances, and how many coalitions are there out there pulling such numbers? Two, three, four at most? It may be Goons (with the CFC), PL (with NCdot, RDN or Test in various constellations), AAA (with Stainwagon etc.) and Solar (with remnants of their russian block).

Conversely groups like PL or NCdot also have issues fielding 200+ with some frequency themselves. All the groups in the example may be able to pull those numbers over some important Tech moon every other month, pulling bored members from other games with a jabber alarm, but not on a daily basis. Not with emergence.

That volume, those numbers, is what feed the popularity of Drakes - but also snuff out the interaction of the game.




That is incidentally also the overlapping problem with EVE at it's most zoomed out perspective. There isn't enough regional actors left to spark life throughout the gameworld.

There are plenty of other Drake-wielding groups out there, but alone they do not hit breakpoint or critical mass to cause the issues you describe that makes a Drake popular or overpowered.

All those groups could also bring life to the respective regions, but they can not interact properly with the infra which is why more and more groups begin clumping together. When alone, those groups (flying Drakes) could also be beaten by a myriad of counters ranging from other BC to HAC to BS to Cap. All the things intended to counter Drakes. Alone they may field fleets of 100 that can be beaten by gangs of 50, or they may field gangs of 50 that can be beaten by gangs of 25 etc.

They just don't don't fly the Drakes by themselves enough to experience it. They would get slaughtered.

That has happened in the past and continue to happen today, though it's resonance in the world is small. The game is teeming with groups who can amass 25-50 and beat up to 100 proverbial "Drakes" (in lowsec, in full npc-null regions like Syndicate or Curse, npc-null pockets such as Fountain or Tenal, in Factional warfare and in Wormholes; today they are relegated to isolated, less emergent aspects of the game. Instanced, disconnected. Those groups are also capable of pulling those numbers on a daily basis, creating alot of more life in the sandbox.

Current design trend however go against them, and you see less and less of them as well. We are encouraging more people to enter the TiDi meat grinder under the preconception that EVE is all about big, awesome fleet fights.




Everyone would become an actor when scaling is balanced where 1 can beat 5, 5 can beat 10, 10 can beat 20, 20 can beat 50, 50 can beat 100 and so forth. In pure PvP they can. The game need overarcing sandbox mechanics that do not encourage simply aiming for critical mass. It doesn't matter if you talk about POS, SBU/TCU or POCO, they are all hitpoint-based, they all encourage amassing their own critical mass and they all result in stagnance.

It's another downside of stagnant feudal life, the peasantry (pets, renters etc.) don't take their own initiatives and don't have their own direction.

The game is stifling and stagnant in how few groups there are left out there who can amass 200+ Drakes, and create daily, interactive and emergent action. The Drake is only a problem in that paradigm. That paradigm is encouraged by current and ongoing game design. Including, though not limited to, the proposed changes to the Drake with firerate and projection over resistance and kinetic. EVE today has more players, more Drakes going pop, but less action. Quite a paradox. The same ideal the proposed Drake changes build on. Nerfs you support!

In turn they would lead to even fewer groups going around shooting each other, as there would be less incentive fighting the other group who have more Drakes (better application, less tank = more ships go pop, which makes more ships better) and they would rather opt to join a big coalition, where they use "Drake and Tengu 200+". So, Lili, in an amusing turn of events one could say that you argue for the "Drake and Tengu" when you propose to nerf it. You just haven't realized it yet.

It's all related, yet it's important to be able to dissect and understand each example in it's own context.