These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Retribution 1.1] Combat Battlecruisers

First post First post First post
Author
Mund Richard
#821 - 2013-01-11 03:08:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Grath Telkin wrote:
I think you'll find that most people like it because at one point and time the Myrm could field 5 Heavies, and this brings it back closer to the old days when the Myrm used to be one of the most fearsome BC's on the field. Same with the Gallent CS, the drone bandwidth changes killed all of that for anything sub BS.

True.
Is that, what's worth commenting? Big smile

Quote:
Algos: +12.5% drone bonus/level, 25 bandwidth, 50m3 bay.
Vexor/Prophecy: +12.5%, 50/100
Myrm: +15%, 50/100-125

Unless I'm doing it wrong, a Hob is 15 points of damage, a Hammer 24, an Ogre 48.
Algos (35) : 3*15+2*24 = 93 vs 5*15*1,25 = 93.75, a net 0.8% increase.
Vexor/Prophecy (75) : 2*48+2*24+15 = 159 vs 5*24*1,25 = 150, yielding a net nerf of 6%
New Myrm(100) : 4*48=3*48+2*24 = 192 vs 180, yielding a net loss of some under 7%

So I'm not trying to get a damage buff to myyyy prescioussss.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

fukier
Gallente Federation
#822 - 2013-01-11 03:10:20 UTC  |  Edited by: fukier
So this is my idea to make armor tanking a better skill to have that scales from small pvp to fleet pvp...

if you include external incoming remote Armor repair to have the ship repair bonus...

example compare an unfit incursus and merlin both unit and both with either a large shield transporter on them or a large remote armor system

as it stands the merlin will get 155 dps tank per large RR

and the incursus will get 124 dps tank per large RR

but if you add the ship skill bonus to affect incoming remote repair

though i am a little different than eft for ehp i take the average for resistance to determine base ehp...

so take 384*1.5 = 576 (amount of hp repair per unit)

then 573/0.675 = 848.88 (base stats are for armor 50+35+35+10/4= 32.5)

848.88/4.5=188.64

so that means the incursus when it comes to remote repair with get a base 18% boost over the merlin for RR...

but still the Merlin still gets a bonus to EHP not to mention shields repairing that the start of the cycle means that this would be balanced...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#823 - 2013-01-11 03:11:02 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Mund Richard wrote:
rep as well.Harbringer: Wait, did you just suggest 10 gun's worth of dps there?
Yes, yes he did.
I suppose it's not THAT outlandish, Cane has 10 as well, if I did the math right.


If we are at "interesting" suggestions already:
Algos: +12.5% drone bonus/level, 25 bandwidth, 50m3 bay.
Dragoon: No Change
Vexor: +12.5%, 50/100
Prophecy: +12.5%, 50/150
Myrm: +15%, 50/100-125
Gallente keeps the higher damage, Amarr keeps the larger bays.
And it's a lot more "neat". Orderly. Satisfying my OCD.

Let's face it.
Half the people like the Myrm's bandwidth buff because they flew it with 5 hammerheads till now, and compared to that, 4 ogres are an awesome jump.
Mix-matched flights with their different speed and tracking aren't fun, nor is trying to replace one that gets killed when you only have the other in bay. Heck, Vexor/Myrm needed to keep 3 different sizes in bay (now the Proph). It's a nightmare! No wonder folk didn't bother!
"Oversized" drones on targets of your size also not fun, specially when with MWD they can just kite the poor drones, leading to no damage applied.

If we can step away from the traditional 5% damage bonus for a turret or 7.5% armor rep (incursus) even on T1 hulls, so should we be able to accept the "heresy" of not sticking blindly to 10% drone damage/hitpoint.
At a MINIMUM, Gallente drone bays should be able to hold at least another flight of drones. Too often in a fight you have to warp out, and if you're only using drones for meaningful dps, then you're leaving lots of your dps on the field when you warp out---especially if those drones are SLOW Heavy drones.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Mund Richard
#824 - 2013-01-11 03:17:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Maximus Andendare wrote:
At a MINIMUM, Gallente drone bays should be able to hold at least another flight of drones. Too often in a fight you have to warp out, and if you're only using drones for meaningful dps, then you're leaving lots of your dps on the field when you warp out---especially if those drones are SLOW Heavy drones.
Well, yea, my suggestion "solves" both:
Dessies go with lights, Cruiser/BC with mediums, and all gallente have precisely two (ok, so I'm hoping for 2.5 with the Myrm, but I *am* suggesting a paper dps nerf so please forgive meRoll), amarr three maxed flights, each translating into two smallers.
No odd flights, no missing an Ogre or Hobgoblin when you have only Hammerhead spares left in the bay.

Post at the top (yay, I got another first new page) now with math!

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Kristoffon Ellecon
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#825 - 2013-01-11 03:22:49 UTC
So now that we're up to battlecruisers do we have an ETA on when faction cruisers stop being worse than their t1 variants?

Oh and the pirate cruisers.

The Phantasm is in a cruel state -- it ALMOST works but not quite, just enough to get us to waste lots of time tyring to find a way. It could be the coolest cruiser in game IMHO however it can't do anything productive except be bait. And bad bait that dies fast. It needs a massive powergrid increase so it can actually manage a good fit without dropping a bil on faction and deadspace modules. Not to mention a spaceship could do with a capacitor bigger than the 470uF the likes of which are used to filter DC on small electronics. What would make it awesome: a bonus to active tanking that let it tank 400dps or so without unreasonable pimping, enough cap that it could do with a single cap booster, room for a med neut with heavy lasers and SPEED. You know I read somewhere that shield ships were supposed to be fast but there's one that's slower than an armor battlecruiser so maybe look over the original design file -- the Nightmare can fit the biggest of everything and still have 2 or 3k pg left it makes me believe somebody might've missed a comma when they transcribed the phantasm specs into the game.

The Ashimmu is worse than useless. It doesn't need to be fast I suppose but you know being able to get cruiser-level dps AND tank wouldn't hurt. As it stands it has no dps to speak of and no tank which don't let it do anything with its neuts because it just dies so quickly or can't kill the enemy fast enough before help arrives. Given the curse and rapier are obviously so much better individually the only thing the ashimmu can possibly do is serve the solo player so PLEASE ungimp this beautiful ship. Another low slot (or two even) and decent pg to be able to fit a tank and heat sinks at the same time.

Vigilant needs 20% or so more dps to keep up the edge on the thorax. It's a 400m cruiser for crying out loud it should hurt like 4 pedestrian cruisers all at once.

Come to think of if since you already did frigs such a long time ago take a look at the succubus as well. It's in such a sad state I don't even know where to begin.

It feels wrong to me that new ships keep getting added while there are so many cool ones that have been broken for such a long time. OK the T3 bcs were awesome, the mining frig also for people who like that, but 4 new t1 destroyers? Seriously? I couldn't even learn their names yet. Furthermore they're cheap pedestrian crap on a game with, I don't know, 50 or so different ships costing 1M or less I seriously doubt 10 people outside of CCP know the names of all the T1 frigates. Where's the proverbial "end game" of subcapital combat left when a 20M frigate is worse than a 2M one and a 200M cruiser can manage less of a proper fit than a 10M one?

Please Lord give us our pimped ships and let we fly onto combat to defend Your name one-to-ten against infidels in equal footing and let we defend Your honour because You giveth us our deadspace glory and let us be enourmous targets among men to draw the good fights upon us so that we may die and consume isk for You and have mercy upon our sensors and keep the jamming devils away, amen.

* The opinions stated on the above post do not reflect those of its author. Even if they're blatantly wrong that's entirely intentional.
Mund Richard
#826 - 2013-01-11 03:27:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Kristoffon Ellecon wrote:
So now that we're up to battlecruisers do we have an ETA on when faction cruisers stop being worse than their t1 variants?
Officially, they want to be done with the T1 subcaps, and then, after they see what the new balance looks like and have a feel for it, try and put the faction and T2 ships where they SHOULD be, instead of where power creep put them.
Hopefully somewhere around the summer expansion, either point release, or gradually?

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#827 - 2013-01-11 03:41:52 UTC
Kristoffon Ellecon wrote:
Some stuff about faction cruisers
Lol a faction cruiser winning 1 vs 10 is not what we want (or at what I don't want) and just goes against the whole point of tiericide. Yes, faction cruisers should be better than their T1 (As opposed to T2 which should only be better at 1 particular thing, i.e. specialise), but we don't want another Tengu scenario.

Phantasm does need a lot of work since it was weak even before tiericide (25 drone bay, better cap, better speed and possibly 1 extra low to either fit a TE or a nano). Vigilant on the other hand is fine. And the point of the Ashimmu isn't DPS. In fact most of the Pirate Cruisers (and faction crusiers) IMO just need their speed buffed to be on par with their T1 Hulls and Fitting slightly buffed (except for the Angel line, please don't buff them).
IbanezLaney
The Church of Awesome
#828 - 2013-01-11 03:42:47 UTC
Fon Revedhort wrote:
IbanezLaney wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Why are you removing so many empty high slots from BCs when they keep the Gang link bonus?

This is a very legitimate concern, and I'm going to be working to see if we can ensure that each race has at least one T1 BC that can fit a gang mod without giving up too much from the highslot. Even though gang links on T1 BCs are not incredibly common at the moment, it would be great if it became more common so we'll see what we can do to help.



Check my hangers dude - I use them on this toons HM Drakes and on Feroxs.

Removing the utility slot from the Drake will make it less likely that people will fit links to it - not more likely.

Everything else looks good but just a logic fail removing the utility slot if you want people to on grid boost as you are removing an economical way of doing it for small corps/gangs.



No one is forced to fill up that utility wih link. So leaving the slot as-is just results in it being traditionally (ab)used for neut, cloak or w/e.

Let's admit it: current slot number of Tier2's is insanely high, given they also have 3 rig slots.


The point of some of these changes is to promote on grid boosting and get the whimps out of their pos shields - you might have missed that so now that you have some context you will also realize that - Anyone with a brain knows ccp can make a utility slot so it can only fit links only if they wish.

But you knew this and thought it through properly before posting.... right?
Eli Green
The Arrow Project
#829 - 2013-01-11 03:47:38 UTC
Kristoffon Ellecon wrote:
The Ashimmu is worse than useless


neuting AHAC Ashimmu Disagrees

wumbo

Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#830 - 2013-01-11 04:03:06 UTC
Harbinger still has horrific fitting. Prophecy has a hilarious drone bandwith for a ship that's meant to be a drone boat. Drake is still the obvious choice vs the Ferox. Mrym was fine IMO, not sure why nerfed so hard - at least give it 125mm drone bay - not a big change considerabering all the available counters to drones. Unsure about the Cyclone, i.e. but added variety is definitely nice. Hurricane probably didn't need such a huge capacitor nerf... will impact nano setups considerably.


To sum up my thoughts in general and the direction of tiericide:

The cruiser remakes were fun because it essentially made ships that were previously not viable actually usable and even competitive. In other words, the winter expansion gave but didn't take so it was a very popular expansion. It ADDED to Eve. The current rendition of BC changes is very iffy. It seems to carry an unnecessary risk of making some BCs that were previously viable not viable (e.g. Myrm). To be honest I was hoping that rather than nerfing the tier 2s (and really only the drake and cane needed the nerf) you would simply buff the tier 1s (as well as make some adjustments to the Myrm and Harb). A lot of the reasons why BCs were used so overwhelmingly over other classes was because BSes weren't mobile enough and because cruisers were so bad but that's no longer the case (for cruisers that is). I hope CCP takes all this into consideration when moving forward with these changes.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#831 - 2013-01-11 04:51:32 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
I think you'll find that most people like it because at one point and time the Myrm could field 5 Heavies, and this brings it back closer to the old days when the Myrm used to be one of the most fearsome BC's on the field. Same with the Gallent CS, the drone bandwidth changes killed all of that for anything sub BS.

True.
Is that, what's worth commenting? Big smile

Quote:
Algos: +12.5% drone bonus/level, 25 bandwidth, 50m3 bay.
Vexor/Prophecy: +12.5%, 50/100
Myrm: +15%, 50/100-125

Unless I'm doing it wrong, a Hob is 15 points of damage, a Hammer 24, an Ogre 48.
Algos (35) : 3*15+2*24 = 93 vs 5*15*1,25 = 93.75, a net 0.8% increase.
Vexor/Prophecy (75) : 2*48+2*24+15 = 159 vs 5*24*1,25 = 150, yielding a net nerf of 6%
New Myrm(100) : 4*48=3*48+2*24 = 192 vs 180, yielding a net loss of some under 7%

So I'm not trying to get a damage buff to myyyy prescioussss.

These Figures would be well under the current setup. In order to get close you would need the following
Algos: +15% drone bonus/level, 25 bandwidth, 50m3 bay.
Current 184.14DPS 5 Light 12.5% 160.8DPS 5 Light 15% 173.25DPS

Vexor/Prophecy: +20%, 50/100
Current 314DPS 5 Medium 12.5%/Level 257.4DPS 5 Medium 20%/Level 316.8DPS

Myrm: +30%, 50/100-125
Current(New) 380DPS 5 Medium 15%/Level 277.2DPS 5 Medium 30%/Level 396DPS

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#832 - 2013-01-11 04:54:57 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Examples of split weapon ships are the Typhoon and Naglfar, both of which are designs that I consider obsolete and worth changing when we get to them.

A bit offtopic, but while we're at it, I'd like to say:

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Typhoon is one of the best close-range battleships ever. It's really versatile, and that was the reason I started training for missles. If you make yet another missle-boat of it, I'll postpone that training, because boring ships are boring. If you want to add some torpedo-ish flavour to the Phoon, you have my permission for bonusing target painter. That would make it even more versatile (thus fun to play) and compensate for missing e-war battleships in all races other than Caldari.

Cant say much about Naglfar, but let's estimate. All other dreads have 3 weapon slots, while it has 4. Then, gyrostab+BCU > 2x gyrostab because of stacking. That is, Naglfar should be superior of them all... The fact that it's not may be because of some broken weapon system (citadel missles) or tanking issues, rather than split-weapons themselves.
Streya Jormagdnir
Alexylva Paradox
#833 - 2013-01-11 05:00:11 UTC
I have to second a lot of what's already been said


  • Cyclone does NOT need split weapons. Swap out a turret slot for a missile hardpoint.
  • Ferox should be in line with the Merlin and Moa; give it a damage bonus rather than a range bonus. Naga already snipes
  • Both Gallente BCs don't need an active armor tanking bonus. Active armor bonus pales in comparison to passive armor resist bonuses
  • The viability of a PvP shield Hurricane is more or less gone. Why not swap out a low for a mid to keep it nice and flexible, like the good Minmatar ship it should be?


Just my 0.02 ISK.

I am also a human, straggling between the present world... and our future. I am a regulator, a coordinator, one who is meant to guide the way.

Destination Unreachable: the worst Wspace blog ever

Trifle Donier
Sham Rocks Incorporated
#834 - 2013-01-11 05:24:23 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:

If we are at "interesting" suggestions already:
Algos: +12.5% drone bonus/level, 25 bandwidth, 50m3 bay.
Dragoon: No Change
Vexor: +12.5%, 50/100
Prophecy: +12.5%, 50/150
Myrm: +15%, 50/100-125
Gallente keeps the higher damage, Amarr keeps the larger bays.
And it's a lot more "neat". Orderly. Satisfying my OCD.


I like this idea a lot, it lets you get higher damage to the ship class you want it in. As a newbie I can't even put heavies/sentries on my vexor, and doing level 3 missions (because 2s are boring) I kite alot so heavies would probably just die before I could recall them anyway.

By the time I can effectively use heavies/sentries I'll probably be flying a dominix anyway, so the 75 mbit/bandwidth really doesn't seem worthwhile.

And for example, going thorax -> brutix the difference is you can fit more cruiser size blasters for increased dps. Whereas due to drone number restrictions, going Vexor -> Myrm, the difference will be that you can fit more battleship size drones, which may or may not be a damage increase due to flight time / tracking issues... it makes no sense.
Theo Ramone
Stryker Industries
Stryker Group
#835 - 2013-01-11 06:01:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Theo Ramone
So, I'm open to the fact that I'm doing it wrong here but in my mind the Ferox is completely underwhelming. To put it mildly. Theres not one role this ship fills that another ship cant do as well or better.

Blaster? Good luck with the fit, and you'll get smoked by brawler ships with damage bonus over range. Never mind that even if you did have a damage bonus you have one hell of a time getting any type of decent tank on once you get blasters fit.
Kiting? Sorry, this hull is too slow. You'll get chased down like a fat kid with a football.
Range? Naga please. Yes I know, large vs mediums here so rather apples to oranges but it all falls into the BC hull size.

PVP seems like a total whiff on this ship. PVE feels very similar as the Drake doesn anything the Ferox does it just does it better (Inside of....50k or so).

Now I want the Ferox to work. I wish it would work, damn I wish it would. But I havent found anything it does at least well enough to justify flying it. Every time I work up a good fit or a fun fit it ends up with some type of glaring flaw, whereas shifting to a different BC hull seems to give a more rounded ship.

I want to be told I'm doing it wrong, so please someone tell me how to get this ship to work well at anything besides being a hanger queen. I say all of this as I dont see the proposed changes dramatically altering the problems of this ship. You'll still play hell keeping your DPS high and fitting any semblence of a PVP fit (prop mod and tank), or you'll end up with a decent enough tank but gimped DPS. I think its going to take more PG to make this thing work.

But again, I'd love to be proven wrong as I'd like to see this ship work.

ETA:
Or give it a bit tracking speed bonus. Throw on a few tracking computers and get your medium blasters to track like smalls. That'd be fun as hell.
Dewgong
Order of the Black Dagger
#836 - 2013-01-11 06:13:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Dewgong
To be fair, the active rep bonus is nice, as it keeps it around. I mean, aside from Frig and cruisers, active rep fits are a rarity as at that point you have logis. Added to the fact that with how wide-spread shield gangs are, it's almost needed just to keep armor a viable option aside from buffer/logi strategies. I know with the myrm, with all of those slots, you can just shield the **** out of it and call it good, not so much with the Brutix, which imo, needs the armor tank bonus, otherwise it'll forever be the glass cannon that shield doctrines have forged it to become.

I mean, perhaps buff the base resistances for the gallente BCs (at least the brutix) so that it's even with the Proph (which, after sleeping on it, reading through the thread some more and dwelling over it, is, imo, worse with the proposed changes than now).

The Myrm should be able to field a full flight of heavies, but subtract another mid? One of the biggest strengths for the Myrm is how it's been able to go shield or armor to great success for each. It's almost the best example outside of the Hurricane that personifies the full versatility of what BCs should be. While yes, the Caldari and Amarr boats are more specialized (as in, Full up shield and full up armor), given the Myrm is already (and from the changes will always) be the better drone boat, just give it the heavies, but drop the slot layout a bit so it doesn't become too good? I mean, if you're going to give it an armor tank bonus like that, you don't need all of those mid slots (unless you plan on finally creating a mid slot module that helps armor tankers)

Or at least turn the Proph into something more akin to the Myrm in terms of slot layout and drone bay (Also, as I said earlier, the fact that the proposed change is splitting the highs between turrets and missiles is terrible. Keep the missiles for T2s. Or at least enable it to fully fit a full compliment of turrets or missiles, but don't split it) If you gave the Proph the same slot layout as the Myrm, I'd be a happy camper <_<;

In short: Don't touch the Harb (or at least give it the larger drone bay and call it good), you can do better than that crap than you have shown with the Proph, and just turn the Myrm back to how it was, minus a couple of mid slots. Or at least give it something like, I dunno, a 2% bonus to drone control range per level instead of the rep bonus?


Also, on the subject of pirate faction ships, can we please make the Blood Raider ships not a 'fleet only' thing? I mean, seriously, you cannot solo with a Cruor or (with a bit more success) the Ashimmu. If I wanted to solo with a Cruor, I'll just use a Sentinel instead and save myself most of the cost.

ITT: CCP starts the hate on Amarrian ships, confirming they're ******* up the only good thing we had at the BC level and now both will be mostly useless.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#837 - 2013-01-11 06:19:09 UTC
Sinzor Aumer wrote:
That is, Naglfar should be superior of them all... The fact that it's not may be because of some broken weapon system (citadel missles) or tanking issues, rather than split-weapons themselves.


The Nag sucks, everybody who's ever flown a cap of any kind knows it, as its been a hard fought fact for about ....hmm...ok ever since it was released.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#838 - 2013-01-11 06:20:38 UTC
IbanezLaney wrote:
Fon Revedhort wrote:
IbanezLaney wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Why are you removing so many empty high slots from BCs when they keep the Gang link bonus?

This is a very legitimate concern, and I'm going to be working to see if we can ensure that each race has at least one T1 BC that can fit a gang mod without giving up too much from the highslot. Even though gang links on T1 BCs are not incredibly common at the moment, it would be great if it became more common so we'll see what we can do to help.



Check my hangers dude - I use them on this toons HM Drakes and on Feroxs.

Removing the utility slot from the Drake will make it less likely that people will fit links to it - not more likely.

Everything else looks good but just a logic fail removing the utility slot if you want people to on grid boost as you are removing an economical way of doing it for small corps/gangs.



No one is forced to fill up that utility wih link. So leaving the slot as-is just results in it being traditionally (ab)used for neut, cloak or w/e.

Let's admit it: current slot number of Tier2's is insanely high, given they also have 3 rig slots.


The point of some of these changes is to promote on grid boosting and get the whimps out of their pos shields - you might have missed that so now that you have some context you will also realize that - Anyone with a brain knows ccp can make a utility slot so it can only fit links only if they wish.

When they come up with something of that sort they surely can keep slots in their current (excessive) numbers. But no one sane can claim tier2 BCs having 18+3 slots balanced while Command Ships have had only 17+2.

Also, you surely knew before posting that all these talks of removing off-grid boosting have been here since 2008, didn't you?

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.

Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#839 - 2013-01-11 06:48:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Iyacia Cyric'ai
Streya Jormagdnir wrote:
The viability of a PvP shield Hurricane is more or less gone. Why not swap out a low for a mid to keep it nice and flexible, like the good Minmatar ship it should be?

Firstly, Shield Cane is still perfectly viable. Two medium neuts while still having full-on dps and speed was too much. And as with the other Tier 2s 18 slots was imbalanced. The only thing I disagree with for the Cane in this current proposal is the cap nerf. Even without neuts shield canes use tons of cap as they are MWDing 80% of the time during any average fight, either to avoid tackle or to keep range from other BCs that can outbrawl it. I think the capacitor nerf for the cane should be removed as it not only impacts shield cane but hurts any attempt at active armor tanking it (assuming the rumours about medium armor repair buff is true).

Secondly, your proposal doesn't add flexibility, it adds mediocrity to both armor and shield fits. Armor fits losing a low would mean either less tank or gank for them. And 5 mids still won't allow the cane to outbrawl other BCs with a bonus to shield tanking, while losing the low would mean less gank, mobility or damage projection. You would end up being crappy in general.
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#840 - 2013-01-11 06:57:16 UTC  |  Edited by: mynnna
Theo Ramone wrote:
So, I'm open to the fact that I'm doing it wrong here but in my mind the Ferox is completely underwhelming. To put it mildly. Theres not one role this ship fills that another ship cant do as well or better.


[NEW Ferox, Neo-Blasters]
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Damage Control II

Large Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Null M

Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Ancillary Current Router I

Hobgoblin II x5

Just an example. 72k EHP, 569 DPS with max skills (470 from guns, the rest from drones) to 12+14km, or 756 dps (657 from guns) to 6.6+5.1 with Void. Bring support to tackle, you'll need it, but that's the tradeoff of shield tanking. You could also drop the tracking computer which takes the range to 11+11 for Null and 5.8+4.1 for Void and gives you the ability to fit an EM hardener, utility ECM or some sort of tackle. It's probably a worthwhile tradeoff.

You're right that the brutix outdamages it, but the brutix can either outdamage or out-tank it, not both. A max tank brutix has 80-85k EHP but only ~600 DPS (with hammerheads and void), a shield brutix does upwards of 980 dps (again, hammerheads and void) but only has 57.4k EHP, and a max gank brutix with a light armor tank does the same but only has 40k EHP and goes much slower as well.

So yeah, I disagree. Ferox is fine.

e: Ferox is less stellar for sniping but the answer to that lies in buffing rails, tbh.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal