Ships & Modules

Please for the love of god, do not tell someone to buy a nighthawk... Ship has 2 less slots than a drake and not enough fitting to get any viable setup w/o the use of fitting mods. In conclusion, do not use a nighthawk for pvp as there are many other much better options that don't cost 300m fitted.

As for the Astarte... It's a "decent" ship if you manage to put it into the right situation against the right kind of targets however it's counters are common and the ships capabilities are easily matched or exceeded by less expensive options. The astarte like other commands excluding the sleipnir and claymore have two less slots than tier 2 BCs. 1 rig slot, and 1 normal slot, wtf is this about? Until Field commands are brought inline with tier 2 bcs and t3 cruisers you will not see them used with any kind of regularity until this 6 year old issue is addressed...

The solution to these ships is more or less two fold. First is going to be the mandatory addition of 1 slot or the mandatory removal of a slot from tier 2 bcs. There is no reason that one of the most skill intensive lines of combat related sub caps is exceeded in fitting and slots by tech 1 ships of the same general class. I also strongly believe that the tier 1 bcs these field commands are based off of should receive an additional slot as well, bringing them more in line with the blatantly overpowered tier 2s. Tier1 bcs would now have 1 less slot than tier 2s, and Field commands with have the same number in the case of astarte/eos and 1 less in the case of all other commands compared to tier 2s. This needed change still puts the advantage in slot numbers to the tier2s however will start closing that balance gap that has existed for so long.

The second less mandatory fix but still 100% needed would be a change to Command ships base hp values. If you take a second to gander at these values on command ships you will notice that their base hp is below that of the tier 1 bcs they are based off of and significantly below that of the tier 2s that were introduced after their implementation. The reason for this discrepancy is based off of a bit of eve history... As many of you remember there was a large buff to overall hp values on ships introduced many years ago to promote longer fights, this change is common knowledge... However there was another hp buff applied to the game that was only granted to BCs in favor of shrinking the performance gap between them and BSs. The second BC specific hp buff I'm talking about was never applied to the tech 2 variants for some mongaloidish reason and resulted in the discrepancy between t2 and t1 bc hp values. This lack of additional hp was obviously an oversight and most certainly needs to be addressed.... 6+ years later.....