Ships & Modules

Really a dual-rep astarte is best. using cheap imperial navy reps and EANMs, a DCU and 2 T2 aux. nano pumps you can tank up to 654 DPS, and with a single faction magstab, full rack of neutrons and faction ammo and hammerhead IIs you can get around 900 DPS. All this is possible with a medium cap booster and mwd without any pg mods or implants. thats my 2 isk on astarte fitting, though it really isn't fair to compare the OMGWTFPWNED proteus to the relatively terribad astarte until it is balanced.

I have actually been surprised by how big @$$ of a tank a proteus can mount. usinf a full Hg slave set, 2 meta 4 1600mm plates and c-type EANMs you can have 343k EHP!!! that's more than an officer fit vindicator

Went to class and came back and already received some comments. This is the point actually, CCP with the creation of T3 cruisers made a class of ship that has blown other ship classes away, so what do we/they do now? Do they nerf T3 cruisers?? I wouldnt suggest that, I love the proteus, but I use to love the astarte too. But what I hoped to influence with this post was perhaps some thought on what changes can be made to improve the Astarte, since I know the improvements are coming and nothing has been set in stone yet, now is a good time to throw some ideas out for improvements for the Astarte.

So... How can we make it so, when given a choice, given a scenerio someone would choose an Astarte over a Proteus for a given situation, instead of in any scenerio, in any circumstance the Proteus will always be the better option. Thats the problem at hand, because even if the Astarte is "balanced" but a Proteus still dominates over it in every category, you will keep running into the same question, "Why fly an Astarte when a Proteus is better for every situation?"

Ive long been an advocate of dramatically improving armor tanking, I would love to see the Astarte as King of the active armor tanking by perhaps removing the warfarelink role bonus (since who really puts fleet boosters on astartes) and adding 50% bonus to repair amount and even going one further by adding 5% armor resistance per level on top of the role bonus or in place of the accuracy falloff bonus.

-Theory-
I can go into alot of theory about Eve PvP, and really what it all comes down to, especially in small gang stuff is SURVIVABILITY as it is now, survivability is truly determined by who is the fastest and well with armor drawbacks, armor tanks will always suffer in this case. I've been in fights, as im sure you have where ships just orbit you keeping you pointed at distance, and if you have close range guns, you are not even able to fight back (except with drones and we all know how easily those are destroyed). The new module "Micro Jump Drive" will really give benieft to armor tanks in these scenerios, adding to their survivability. And thats what its all about in Eve, survivability (and the kill), but survivability is foremost.

I would love to see Command Ships flown by Fleet Commanders (FC's) not because it has a nifty "Command" name but because they have increased surviability than other ships, it would be really cool if Command ships get better the more pilots are in the squad , where typically you will see Squad Leaders of a fleet flying command ships reaping the rewards of the position. Just thoughts. I've said enough and im heading to TQ.



Would love to see your ideas for improving the Astarte

Why on earth would you want to dual 1600 a proteus? What are you attempting to do? Be outrun by a moon?

Meh..

Damnation will be ******* win.

As a note, if youre armour tanking your astarte, youre doing it wrong.

Great way to ensure it doesnt get used anymore.

I'm pretty sure that it will have to sacrifice one of its tanking bonuses for that damage bonus CCP mentioned.
Seeing how boosters are pulled on grid, I'd rather have it with old double bonus to tank to keep FC and boosts on the field as long as possible, but I'm afraid that it's not gonna happen.

When everyone use the same stuff, it's the sign that there is a real need of balance. I'm happy that CCP apparently wishes to do it correctly from the floor to the ceilling. Let's see how it will turn, i'm not trusting them blindly.
What i like in EVE is the choice of tools. But each time you ask for fits you get as only answer : go fly a Tengu you noob. How can people be happy to all fly the same clone ? Don't they have any desire for a bit of creativity ?

Proteus having a 10% rep per level bonus compared to the astarte's 7.5% is one problem. Proteus having full t2 resistances compared to astarte's nerfed t2 resistances is another problem. Proteus having 3 rigs compared to Astarte's 2 is yet another problem.

The undeniable reality is that compared to field commands with the exception of the Sleipnir, t3 in hac mode are pretty much flat out better. Sure the Astarte has potential to do more dps, just as the Absolution compared to legion however these modest advantages to no make up for the massive shortcomings in comparison.

With the future buffs to come to the command class I'm sure the gap in power between t3 and commands will be reversed however this will not address the real issue which is t3 compared to hacs. The fact we are comparing a command ship instead of a hac to a t3 cruisers is an indication of problems to begin with. The only inevitable outcome I can see is an overall nerf to t3 combat capabilities along with modest buffs to HAC abilities. This of course should be combined with a very modest reduction in build cost of t3s, the added ability to change subsystems at a POS, and of course the Mandatory removal of sp loss when loosing a t3 ship.