Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Unless you fit a td or a tc.

Btw, when are medium rails going to become in any way usable in PvP?
Arty clearly is, HMs have been, beams too. Rails are just godawful on Gal or Cal ships.

The current Drake with 7x T2 HML launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing T1 Scourge Heavy Missiles outputs 321 DPS.
With 7x T2 HAM launchers and 2x T2 BCU, firing Scourge outputs 401 DPS.

The Hurricane with 6x T2 720mm Artys and 2x T2 Gyrostabs with EMP outputs 371 DPS.
The Hurricane with 6x T2 425mm Autocannons and 2x T2 Gyrostabs with EMP outputs 477 DPS.

The new Drake will only have 0.8 x 321 = 257 DPS at a 25% lower range or 320 DPS with HAMs. It becomes the shittiest battlecruiser in terms of DPS. And if you nerf it further by reducing its tank, well....

Oh and now they can be tracking disrupted? So let me get this straight. Missiles will loose some of their range, will have the lowest DPS among weapons, they have flight time and they will also be tracking disrupted? And their only advantage will remain the ability to choose damage types? (which no one does because of the kinetic bonus on Caldari hulls) Did I mention that missiles can be smartbombed or taken out with defenders? Goodbye solo missile platforms!



No other high tier battlecruiser requires implants or gun downgrading to fulfill its intended purpose. These decisions seem terrible on paper imho.

TDs will be the new and improved ECM. At least with ECM you're taking the risk of bringing the wrong jammer. If TD effects will apply to everything there's absolutely no reason to not bring one.

Not flown a Brutix recently then, I take it.

Who said the intended purpose was 2 medium neuts?
Or that BCs were balanced?
Or that a Brutix can fit Neutrons while using its active tank bonus?

Yes, as if shield tanks have enough slots for random crap, its enough that armor tanks can fit ECCM and TCs and everything they need to combat ewar while shield tanks just die in a fire.

On to the attack cruisers thread to see if they've killed the Caracal with these HM nerfs. I do hope that they changed the Caracal with that in mind, I always found it difficult to fit HAM's, HM's had pathetic DPS, and Light Assaults were... Oh god.

But I'm happy to see change, so HUZZAH!
On with change!

Hey Null sec blobs... get it right round yees..

Interesting. And to all the folks who put so much effort into saying there is nothing wrong with HMs, Tengus, or Drakes . . welp.

Anyway, if I'm reading these changes correctly it is only a nerf to current kiting tactics with Drakes and other heavy or heavy assault missile boats. A ship that has such a sturdy tank should not get a pass with range advantage as well. Ironically it may signal that the resist bonus might be staying (but that is not to say the same hp or regen stats will be there).

Basically you are losing damage with standard ammo at range, and you are losing base range. You will be gaining damage with Fury, if you fit for it, i.e. painter or painter support, and rigs to overcome the drawbacks (thus competing with tanking rigs). If you want to retain the present Drake sweetspot of 70km you will need to fit TE or TC and thus lose either tank or damage mods. And just like turrets you will be wary of TDs.

Not sure what to make of precision missile changes. Frigs may have to start fearing an ammo switch to it.

WIth Rage you are gaining damage, if you get closer than you may be presently used to. Rage HAMs will opperate more like blasters.

Just my quick impression and without all the coming other changes apparent. So the Tengu and Drake are getting an indirect nerf to their current ease of fitting and tactics. They can keep the range but at the expense of tank and/or damage, or they can keep the damage and possibly more damage but at the expense of range and the need for support painter and webbing ships.

Fozzie, are you guys considering any slight nerf to TD base strength? Because if not, everyone and his mother will be fitting TDs. It seems to me that the module could use little nerf, so as not to become the must have "multispec of doom", and to make the speicialized ships more desirable in fleets.

A 20% damage reduction on HMs is just too much. I'd say 10% is way more reasonable considering the range nerf.

I would think a 10% reduction to HM damage and a 10% increase to HAM damage would be more reasonable, because the reason HMs are used so much right now is because of two reasons:

1. They have pretty good damage, but not amazing, they're "just right" in terms of missiles.
2. Hams are barely better for damage, whereas they should be considerably higher DPS, like the difference between cruises and torps (around 300-400 dps for cruises to torps, should be around 200-250 for HMs to HAMs)

Thus, by buffing HAMs, you fix one of those, and by nerfing HM damage, you fix another. Nerfing one of them a huge amount just makes the respective weapon completely useless. That's why I would think a 10% reduction for HM damage along with a 10% increase in HAM damage is better. HAMs are decent but they are always avoided in PvP because they can't match up to HMs. But making HMs useless to promote HAMs is stupid, HMs should simply be made a bit worse and HAMs should be made a bit better, which will solve the problem.

I understand the range nerf though, such huge range on HMs is really unnecessary.

Week later edit:

At this point I really don't care what they do to HMs as long as they fix the fitting on HAMs and possibly buff the damage on them a bit.