Player Features and Ideas Discussion

For base stats T1 then Navy then Pirate. T2 and T3 are completely separate but should be around T1 & Navy for raw stats, their power coming through hull and subsystem bonuses

Firstly I appreciate leaving the deimos' MWD bonus intact. I was sad to see it disappear from the thorax, and it's been one of the reasons why I love my deimos on the odd occasion I fly it in a level 4 mission.

That said, the ishtar... I like that the hybrid damage bonus was replaced with the same range/tracking bonus that the dominix got, but I don't like the lack of a buff to the ishtar's CPU or the drone bay bonus remaining there.

As it stands an "all medium fit" ishtar built to try to maximize the potential of its drones, or at least packing 4 DDAs, is going to run short on CPU. While the removal of the hybrid damage bonus and the subsequent implied obligation to fit medium guns has been removed fitting small guns on the ishtar just doesn't feel right. Unfortunately with the ship using 317tf out of 356.25tf (even with using only a medium shield booster) there isn't much room for anything larger than small guns.

Giving the ishtar another 40tf probably wouldn't make it overpowered compared to the other HACs, and at that point the only HAC with less CPU output would be the zealot by a whole 5tf base.

I've also never been keen on drone bay bonuses, and would frankly rather see the bonus rolled into the core ship capacity, in part or in whole, and the bonus replaced with a bandwidth bonus. Drone bay bonuses, for many players, do little more than enhance ship utility while a bandwidth bonus would enhance functionality. Even if you did have to nerf said bandwidth first it would, to me at least, be nicer to have HAC training raise the ishtar's bandwidth from 75mb to 125mb instead of its bay space from 125m3 to 375m3.

Along those lines the drone "control range" bonus is also a bit underwhelming. it's nice, and 25km is nothing to sneeze at in a sentry build and especially in light of the optimal/tracking bonus which would conceivably let an ishtar punch out 800 rDPS at 50km+, but it doesn't scream out "train HAC past level 1 nao!!!" like some of the other HAC bonuses do. In point of fact it's about the only HAC that really doesn't require you to train the skill past level 1 for maximum functionality.

Frankly while I don't expect the drone bay bonus to disappear or be swapped out for a bandwidth bonus and related base ship attribute changes what I would like to see here is the range/tracking bonus swapped for either the bay space bonus or the "control range" bonus. Rearranging the skills like this wouldn't alter the ship's performance at all with HAC5 trained, but it would at least provide players incentive for training HAC past level 1.

Speaking of the control range bonus... Since skills are being renamed and regrouped is there any chance of having "drone control range" changed to something that more accurately reflects what it does? I mean given that it's the distance from your ship that the target has to be, and not your drones, in order for you to order your drones to interact with it, or rather control your drones, saying it's "drone control range" is a bit of a misnomer.

Suggestion for Ishtar:


remove the drone optimal range bonus from the optimal and tracking bonus
remove the +5km drone control range bonus COMPLETELY
remove the drone bay expansion bonus COMPLETELY and add in drone bay as part of the ship

add a 10% per level drone speed/tracking bonus. (yes, double tracking bonus)
add a 7.5% per level to armor repair effectiveness (was also thinking 4% resist bonus but I guess its for gila only...)

move one med slot to low. (or two! ...........)
add 75CPU


This will make it more a closer range brawling ship viable with heavies, like heavy assault ships are suppose to be. I don't think optimal bonuses fits on heavy assault crafts. even if its a drone boat.
and......
need some test on sisi to see how it would work. ::p

Insufficient almost cosmetic changes to ships that cost 3 times mroe that t1 BC and can do the josb just 10% better.

Arty Huricane is still more cost efficient and do almost same job as a Muninn

Naga will still see more usage than Eagle

No one will be flying Deimos it has just a bit more tank and damage than Thorax and costs 6x to fit

Vagabond will not be able to tank any better to be able to brawl close range with anything that has 600+ dps, and it will still be flown passive tanked

Zealot is so bad compared to Legion or Oracle that it will still be used only for ahacs pilots that have no money or skills to fly a Legion.

T2 cruisers should be superior to navy and pirate T1 cruisers, and they should justifie their cost compared to T1 battlecruisers in a similar role.

Discussion should go further because extensive changes to battleships made in Odissey 1.0 are also useless cuz 2 BC together cost 60% of a BS and still can own his soul, which could never happen back in the days of just one version of a battlecruiser when BS actually had a huge place in eve.

Vagabond is not a monster. 4 mid slots and lack of CPU to fit a good ASB (Because no way you can use nromal booster with 4 slots).

This change means ZERO.. NADA to vagabond. Good vagabond pilots avoid damage.. and the increase in tank potential... is not worth the risk .

I would have given the following bonus to vagabond

Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret falloff

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
5% Signature radius reduction per level
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage

It look s to me like these are just going to end up as slightly quicker versions of navy bc's minus the hefty tank and sig radius and dps..

And no matter how good you'll make them for solo/small skirmish work they'll be stupidly OP in larger numbers.

Yes they need bonus tweaks and fittings adjustments, more CPU PG and either +1 slot or +1 rig slot -I'd rather see another rig but wouldn't mind rig+slot.

Eve is about numbers no matter how much we argue about who's right or not, CCP dev's already said it many times and even delivered videos where comment starts "Eve is about numbers" so no need to consider solo snowflakes.

Pick the T1 version:

-make it tankier ? hell yes
-higher dps and range application? -hell yes

-give them better fittings so they don't have to use fitting rigs or mods? again yes !!
*a huge chunk of interest is given away to T1's advantage at each fitting rig/mod fitted to the hull, which is not much of a problem in small skirmish/solo job because they're not really bad at this but when you stack numbers the drawback becomes exponential for little gain over T1 ships

Then add med long range weapons changes, for the sake of a good example who will end terribly is rails change, first rails changes they got about 15% tracking, some rof taken away and given a better dmg multiplier on top of fittings.
Now the best bonus rails need to ever apply dmg is being taken away (tracking) add some rof and dmg but nullifies the dmg increase because of lower tracking which means without several TE's and TC's making the poor ship even worst than a T1 he will not be able to compete with T1 versions.

This is the current silliness: T1's in numbers with support can easily kill same numbers of T2's which should be possible by fleet tactics and players/FC's awareness but not because T2 HACs are simply terrible, and for each T2 HAC you kill they need to kill about 6 T1 versions, there's no T2 HAC currently that can deal with as much DPS from 6 T1's, this ratio needs to be lowered at 1:3 at least which means T2 versions are in need of huge changes and not the simple ones proposed.

make sense because it get the same bonus of the T1 version for the cruiser skill, but would like to see something more assault-ish then a sig bonus still dont know what.
would love to see a -5% mass per level but yeah i know its not gonna happen

Nope.. because the bonus would apply over the total sgianture radius... AFTER you added the extenders and rigs.