Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I really think that the Ishtar needs some sort of buff to fitting. I fully expected it to get some sort of love in this regard with this balance pass and am disappointed that it has not. I think that the comparison to the Faction Cruiser equivalent is a fair one to make. The Vexor Navy Issue(VNI) and the Ishtar have very similar bonuses to drones. However, it is a toss up and maybe even more of a nod toward using the VNI just because of fitting. I don't believe this should be the case. I feel that the nod towards preference should not be towards the Faction Cruiser but toward the HAC. I think this could be done simply by expanding the fitting to be more in line with the VNI.

VNI Fittings: 800 PWG, 310 CPU

Ishtar Fittings: 700 PWG, 285 CPU

Just under 10% more CPU and well over 10% more PWG is pretty signigicant and I would like to see this addressed or at the very least I hope to hear the reasoning behind making the Ishtar or even some of the other HACs either very similar in power or even having the Faction Cruisers be slightly better than there equivilant HAC.

cerb could really use a rapid light missile bonus along with the ham/hml bonus seens how hml's are pretty ******* worthless atm

honestly, the better comparison to make is gila vs ishtar, and the gila literally does everything x10 times better fitting wise then the ishtar

that cap bonus is actually pretty nice for its tanking role. especially when active tanked for small/solo work.
add the cap battery changes from a few patches ago. planned nos changes will also help.

well if we had the TD missile change (when are we getting that btw CCP?) it would be fine without it.

First impressions, I like the changes, I particularly like the change to the Ishtar, not sure on giving the Sac more drones though, remember you can't balance everything with drone bay. I'd still like to see more capacitor across the board for all ships and the cap bonus on the Deimos changed out for something else.

Ishtar needs CPU, it's kind of ridiculous how short on CPU it is. I have no idea why it gets so little.

ALL HACS need better lock range. The **** poor lock range on these things interfears with their intended specialised role, for example the Muninn is supposed to be a sniper, but its lock range is 55km... Not enough.

Vaga needs more CPU if you want it to fit an ASB. It needs more PG as well frankly, the TE nerf has hit Auto kiting hard and it hasn't got the powergrid to fit Artillery, the SFI does a shield arty boat better which is sad. Unless you want to pigeon hole it into dual 180 XL ASB config.

Given the sort of mildness of these changes, I presume Tech 3's will be getting the nerf bat straight up the clacker.

Yes pls

I'm quite afraid that the Vaga won't be getting any more PWG.
Just think of it, it'd become a cheaper, more mobile Sleipnir, with the same tanking capacity.

The Sacrilege still stands, to me, as the odd man out.

While adding HMs to its possible armory, HMs are still kind of in a bad place here. Their Damage is rather lackluster on a ship that comes with a HAM Bonus, and most people will try to avoid using HMs on a ship that's always been a brawler, and instead opt in for Tech II LR HAMs.

Would tacking on, say, an explosion velocity bonus to the Sac make it far too strong? How about missile velocity? I wouldn't mind being able to throw HAMs a good deal further with this platform, and not worry about HMs at all.

Also, the Amarr and Gallente HACs really could do with a small boost to their targeting ranges. Another 5km on the Amarr ones would be absolutely fantastic for sure, especially if the HMs stick. It always bothered me that I could throw something further than I could lock on to what I'm throwing it at. :)

why did you keep the outdated mwd cap bonus?

you replaced that bonus on the thorax with a tracking bonus... why leave the deimos the same

here is the version i would like to see.