Ships & Modules

Indeed, that's why they need a buff. Seriously. Cruise Ravens are very situational - barely relevant in small scale or fleet PvP. Torp Ravens are heavily dependant on support to work.

HMs are the working long range missile system. With advantages and disadvantages. Still some people moan about them.

(1) low damage at range against targets smaller they are intended for
(2) low damage at range against fast targets
(3) when solo/small gang: not able to finish targets at optimal range very quickly
(4) need support or webs/TPs fitted itself to address point 1, 2 and 3
(5) ...which weakens tanks on shield tanked ships
(6) travel time (only an issue in bigger, mixed fleets)



Not in every situation. As said, HMs are perfect for current fleet doctrines maybe. Also in some small scale scenarios. What makes them very common. But in small scale PvP I prefer pure, raw turret damage and the ability to maximize that damage by piloting...sometimes.

Torpedoes inferior? Did something drastically change while I was away, because last I recall plated torp Typhoons worked very well for close-range BS slugfesting. Well, Ravens and such too if you did not mind it being a shield BS. I mean, obv. it's not going to work in blobs, but when you are fighting other battleships in hugging range, Torps work damn well.

Cruises are mostly pointless, though.

HMLs are awesome because they have the range to work in blobs... and other long range weapon systems either cannot be fitted to their racial battlecruisers (Harbinger/Brutix), or actually can be fitted but are inferior from 30km to the remainder of lock range (arties). Plus, you get some actual EHP with a Drake.

I mean, when you compare it with other cruiser-sized long range turrets it's not that bad, since arties compare decently* to them (read, arties are better under, say, 30km although they have a harder time at hitting frigs but this isn't really relevant in gang), and rails and beams would maybe in theory be okay if you could actually FIT them to the BCs bonused for such guns (Brutix/Harbinger) which you cannot without excessive use of fitting mods.

*Ofc, the bigger the gang, the more important range is over a bit of dps.

Granted, HMs are more common on Drakes than HAMs. One reason for that are the issues with HAMs I mentioned. HMs tend to be more flexible against targets they are not perfect for. HAMs are much more specialized against medium ships and above. This flexibility makes HMs a better choice over HAMs often. Long range turrets are much more specialized here.



Only if solo. As soon as two long range turret ships come into play it's possible to have at least one of it in a good position to do full damage to even smallest targets. As far as I know (from the forums) exactly this was done with titans before their recent change. When well positioned on the battle field even XL turrets can blap smaller targets.

Again: missiles just cannot do this. This one a price they pay for better damage projection.



After all one could say damage wise it's maybe like:

short range turret > short range missile > long range missile > long range turret

Despite their lower absolute damage long range turrets have advantages in other aspects: instant damage + at least the ability to hit smaller targets with full damage.

Torpedoes are generally only effective on ships designed to field them and even so they are only good vs. Battleships and bigger. In comparison to both Rockets and HAMs that is just such a severe limitation!

A Tengu with HAMs can take on any ship of virtually any size*



*Maybe not an Interceptor....

The Heavy missiles of a drake can be speed/sig tanked using Afterburner or small sig.

Firewall Battleships are an excellent counter to drake. Drake has a very specific weakness.

A hurricane however is a different story.

A hurricane can easily destroy frigs, destroyers, cruisers, drones, anything below a hurricane is easy kills for it(other than perhaps recons and tech 3's).


Taking a Frigate against a hurricane is virtually suicide.

With tracking enhancers, a hurricane can easily reach scorch range of pulse lasers with barrage and have better tracking.

Even interceptors with bonused point range are in trouble by hurricanes.

Staying at range makes you an easy target as the guns can then easily track you.


Getting close is dangerous as well, the hurricane can pack double webs and/or double neuts to render a frigate completely helpless.

Not to mention its dps is high for everything it can do. It is too versatile of a ship.

I don't mean to be rude but you should stop posting, seriously.

If you paid attention you would have seen by now that the "module differences" is part of the argument. No one is denying that a Drake is awesome at sitting still, recieving reps and projecting reliable damage to 80km. That's what it does. That however is only really useful in a situation when you don't have to move, tackle, break tanks or so forth. It's part of the blob problem, because once you get enough ships to easily break through a buffer and dominate grid-control over your opponents it doesn't matter if your burst, control or utility is relatively poor.



Since when is the stupidity of players an issue to balance the game around? It's part of the "popularity discussion". You're not raising a single valid argument here. "People prefer", "people like to", "safe distance". That has nothing to do with actual balance. I don't care about the hearts and minds of other players, popularity is not something you should balance the game around.



You are both right and wrong here. First up. I do have some fear, given recent track records of balance i think it's only fair to have a certain degree of scepticism. I am also quite attached to Drakes, but not in the manner you allude. I am fond of them as targets. I enjoy flying ships that are good against them and as with other bi-effects of recent changes i fear for today impopular ships falling more and more into obscurity or actual imbalance. Remove a target pool and you will inadvertently nerf another, unforseen, ship.

If you paid attention to my posts you would recognize that argument as well. How Tier 3 BC overbalanced the buffs to certain Gallente ships with crucible or many other LR ships and mid-buffer ships that were Drake-counters by themselves. The list was long. How the range slaughter of the Falcon did more to ruin the Cerberus and so on. So yes, i have a certain fear of hasty changes with poorly calculated effects, that leave the game with less. Balancing the game with only fleet scale (which is not known for variety, but for buffer and projection) in mind is highly detrimental.

Secondly. It's not the most amiable way of putting it, but yes, people are gravitating toward simplicity. It's part of the cost-effect and number scaling discussion. It promotes simplistic large-scale organisation and strategy. In some situations that simplicity border into stupidity. Saying the community is "stupid" is a harsh generalisation though, but there are definately some standpoints when you discuss ship balance on the EVE forums that are downright stupid. Equating popularity and balance is one of them. Looking at the game from a hegemony of "i have more ships and push you off grid" is another.

At the end of the day, good groups continue to field other ships to beat Drakes at all scales. That only cease to exist well into gangs of 100's and wars of attrition. The only real issue with the Drake is that it's almost pointless attempting to kill one, because the damage you inflict compared to the risk you take is so minimal. I'm talking damage in ISK, not that the tank would be untolerable superior in any way. Pointless kills or losses go against the hardcore cornerstone of EVE. At the moment the cost-effect of all BC (and the Drake in particular, with scaling in mind) is damn near that breaking point. That is really the only issue with the ship and class though.

If you dislike me being repetetive, maybe you should stop posting in Drake/Cane/BC whine threads. I'm not the one making them. I'm only responding to tired non-arguments with riposte. It must be frustrating seeing actual arguments and concerns raised against the disgruntled croaks though. I can sympathize with that. Likewise i can understand that it's frustrating when only seeing the game from a BC and large scale perspective.


I have mentioned my preferences of dealing with that many times. Click my name and start tracking posts. In the meantime i'm doing my best to dissuade stupidity and empty statements regarding the balance of ships from people who's grasp of how balance interact in this game is not further than what's right in front of them. The kind of people who thinks the Drake is OP only because it can buffer and project mediocrity en masse.

Autocannons + Tracking Enhancers + Barrage = death to frigates, even interceptors.

This doesn't make any sense. Minmatar ships can outrun all other ships of their class but should be countered by faster, smaller ships that can negate their speed advantage. Yet tackling minmatar cruiser/battlecruiser hull in a frigate is a lot more dangerous than anything else.

You do mean to be rude because you're wrong and obviously just trolling.

Cane is busted for all the reasons posted above.