These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Battleship and HAC pass

Author
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#21 - 2014-06-30 11:43:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
baddon - meant to be cap unfriendly, its a beast. but it does have 4 mids to make up for crap cap. (did it used to have an 8th low did it?) it can fit 8 tachyons and it still tanks more than the oracle whilst doing so, u just have to make some sacrifices else where for that awesome power.

apoc - meant to be cap friendly, it had its former laser cap use bonus rolled into base stats. its fine.

geddon - extra hard points, yeah maybe. but if u dont want to use drones and neuts, why are u using a geddon?

mael - dont think it needs it.

pest - doesnt really know what it is, but then neither does ur opponent. It is still a great wild card. those neuts and 5 mids are freaking useful. However, either turning the T1 or the faction version into 8 gun, range/application bonused artie platforms is very ok with me.

phoon - thats mean. maybe too mean.

rokh - Could do. doesnt really need reactor controls or co-pros.

raven - yes.

scorp - no, doesnt need a damage bonus. its 5th low made it pretty sweet. i'd just like it to be more competitive with the falcon and rook on ecm str. whether the recons come down in str or the scorp goes up.

domi - doing its job

Hyp - its niche in skirmishes leaves it under used. but it does its job.

mega - i believe rise expected the 8th low to be used for a 3rd mag stab, but its more commonly fit with a 3rd 1600mm plate. so its an attack bs with more ehp and less dps than the hyp. Personally preferred the pre change mega with a heavy neut and more dps instead of tank.

What would a mega with a RoF bonus, 7 lows and a 110m/bit drone bay be like?

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Jewels04
Zorg Incorporated
#22 - 2014-06-30 11:49:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Jewels04
I don't think OP has ever flown any of these ships in pvp.

All the changes are absolutely disgusting.
And here I thought CCP changes were bad.

Ok yeah ishtar is a bit OP but you are trying to make it unable to do shields or armor and thats is just lame.
Armor has too many good ships already.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2014-06-30 12:59:17 UTC
HACs are fine IMO, with the exception of the ishtar which is only OP due to drone mechanics.

There is next to zero reason to fly a battleship in pvp and this will always be a case as long as CCP use as rock-paper-scissors approach for ship ballance.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#24 - 2014-06-30 13:28:07 UTC
Zealot - does not need the same drone bay as the harby. maybe some speed love and a 25/25 drone bay. the navy omen looks better for tank, speed and dps for close up skirmish ranges, but the zealot is far better at damage projection.

sac - some say OP. Would rather the heavy missile and missile velocity bonuses goto T3 subsystem and the sac had a cap bonus again. wouldnt improve the tank myself.

muninn - high slot to mid (or even low) would not be terrible. but i dnt think of drones when i think about using a muninn.

vaga - does not need anymore drones or mids. if that high gets moved it should go low.

Cerb - does not need a drone bay, it hits all targets pretty freaking well at 40km+. what is this obsession with drones?

eagle - with a mwd fitted (but not active) and firing the largest possible guns with antimatter, it is cap stable with 2x invulns. does not need more cap. could maybe have a caracals drone bay, if anything.

ishtar - make it more gun boaty? would rather not. it could even lose a high or two and move them to low and/or mids. could have its 10% drone bonus focused to heavies and sentries.

I agree it needs nerfed. perhaps to a 100m/bit drone bay. or failing that, rehashing it out of the sentry/heavy role and giving it 5 uber mediums (and maybe make medium sentries). maybe ehp nerf, maybe weight nerf.

Deimos - fall off or tracking bonus, i dnt really mind. RoF bonus would be useful boost, as would 6-7% more grid and 3% cpu for fitting 250's, prop mod, cap booster and anc rep. The latters kinda a wish more than what i think it needs.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#25 - 2014-06-30 17:31:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
Meandering Milieu wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Meandering Milieu wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:


-The Ishtar
Drop a mid for a high and an extra gun slot


I will fight you irl.

Edit: Note this is clearly sarcasm.

Ishtar OP needs nerf. Hope you don't mind buffing the sh*t out of the deimos to compensate. :P


I wouldn't mind a buff to the deimos at all, though it can be a capable ship if flown right, or in the right fleet comp.

My disagreement with you about the ishtar though has nothing to do with it needing or not needing a nerf. It has to do with your suggestion being pants on head stupid.

The ishtar does not need more high slots, it does not need another turret slot. Turrets are worthless on it for the most part, as it gets no turret benefits at all.

Further, removing a midslot compromises shield fits. You might think this is warranted, but as it stands the ishtar is one of the few ships that offer fitting versatility the way it does. For fleets, small gang, or even solo pvp you have the option of armor with ewar, or shield with dps and speed mods. Most pvp ishtars fit neuts in highslots anyways.

I would sooner sacrifice two highs entirely for no reward what so ever, just get rid of them, before removing a midslot.

Further, ishtars have received nerfs (all drone boats have, in regards to sentries), though indirectly. Drone assist gone (and thank god); Omnis now have 30 second cycle times; gardes now do less damage than previously, and are still the highest dps sentry, meaning that the total highest damage you can manage from sentries has gone down. In order to get previous damage levels from sentries, minus I think wardens, you have to train a 20 day skill (racial spec V) otherwise you are looking at a 2-6% dps nerf, or possibly a 2% buff with it at V, but that buff is on the sentries most didn't use anyways, not gardes, and so overall damage is still lower. Then take into account that drones can be killed, and any amount of warping in and out of the battlefield makes drones a pain compared to other weapon systems.



Good point; I'll consider dropping the changes I made in favor of leaving it alone, unless I see a better build for it that addresses some of the issues people have. That being said, with the other HACs coming up to par, it may not be necessary to kill its fiitting. Good points were made about not adding more drones; I will take those into consideration.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#26 - 2014-06-30 17:41:16 UTC
Joshua Foiritain wrote:
HiddenPorpoise wrote:
I don't think you use HACs.


This. Most of those suggestions are full blown ********.

Dialed down the drone-frenzy on the HAC proposals, and reversed the Ishtar nerf. What changes would you like to see happen? Smile
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#27 - 2014-06-30 17:55:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
Daichi Yamato wrote:
baddon - meant to be cap unfriendly, its a beast. but it does have 4 mids to make up for crap cap. (did it used to have an 8th low did it?) it can fit 8 tachyons and it still tanks more than the oracle whilst doing so, u just have to make some sacrifices else where for that awesome power.

apoc - meant to be cap friendly, it had its former laser cap use bonus rolled into base stats. its fine.

geddon - extra hard points, yeah maybe. but if u dont want to use drones and neuts, why are u using a geddon?

mael - dont think it needs it.

pest - doesnt really know what it is, but then neither does ur opponent. It is still a great wild card. those neuts and 5 mids are freaking useful. However, either turning the T1 or the faction version into 8 gun, range/application bonused artie platforms is very ok with me.

phoon - thats mean. maybe too mean.

rokh - Could do. doesnt really need reactor controls or co-pros.

raven - yes.

scorp - no, doesnt need a damage bonus. its 5th low made it pretty sweet. i'd just like it to be more competitive with the falcon and rook on ecm str. whether the recons come down in str or the scorp goes up.

domi - doing its job

Hyp - its niche in skirmishes leaves it under used. but it does its job.

mega - i believe rise expected the 8th low to be used for a 3rd mag stab, but its more commonly fit with a 3rd 1600mm plate. so its an attack bs with more ehp and less dps than the hyp. Personally preferred the pre change mega with a heavy neut and more dps instead of tank.

What would a mega with a RoF bonus, 7 lows and a 110m/bit drone bay be like?

I would say that in regards to the mega and the abby, the abby should have more low slots. I find that while the megathron does more dps, it IS a little more vulnerable to neutralizers. I would support bringing back the old mega since it was more applicable with rails, and it seemed Rise was intent on turning it into a rofl-stomp blaster boat. I actually do agree with the decision to shift the drones over to the hyperion, since with the lack of a tracking bonus it makes slightly more sense for it to have the big drone bay than the mega.

Also, interesting fact about the hyperion; it's actually the most common battleship that we see outside of giant fleets due to its wonderfully hilarious ability to bait tank, and its nutty amounts of dps. What you said about it being underused makes me curious since the malestrom is used quite frequently for fleets, I assume stems form its ability to field excellent arty damage and be strong in a shield fleet. Would you say the reason the hype doesn't see much use in hybrid/armor fleets is because of the ships bonuses itself, or because it makes more sense to field tempests or amarr laser boats in those giant armor fleets?

The options I mentioned on the geddon were to give the option of making it a straight dps boa with missiles or guns, AND drones to better compete with the domi if it wanted to. In regards to the typhoon and raven, it's THEIR can of worms they opened with introducing the rapid heavies into the game, and it's THEIR fault for half-assing their introduction and failing at the roll-out; they still need to fix ammo swapping, and address how the long reload timer is basically a death sentence if you're fighting an active-tanked ship you can't kill with your initial, tiny clip. To be fair, their reasoning with them being a unique weapon system that should have more unique roles is well-founded, but they should have solved all the issues with their idea BEFORE jamming it down our throats.

Lastly, for the tempest. The typhoon fleet issue is generally considered to be the wild card, but if you had to choose, on the tempest fleet would you consider dropping the RoF bonus in favor of bumping it up to a 10% damage bonus per level, and giving it the tracking speed bonus I proposed for the t1?
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#28 - 2014-06-30 18:09:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Catherine Laartii
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Zealot - does not need the same drone bay as the harby. maybe some speed love and a 25/25 drone bay. the navy omen looks better for tank, speed and dps for close up skirmish ranges, but the zealot is far better at damage projection.

sac - some say OP. Would rather the heavy missile and missile velocity bonuses goto T3 subsystem and the sac had a cap bonus again. wouldnt improve the tank myself.

muninn - high slot to mid (or even low) would not be terrible. but i dnt think of drones when i think about using a muninn.

vaga - does not need anymore drones or mids. if that high gets moved it should go low.

Cerb - does not need a drone bay, it hits all targets pretty freaking well at 40km+. what is this obsession with drones?

eagle - with a mwd fitted (but not active) and firing the largest possible guns with antimatter, it is cap stable with 2x invulns. does not need more cap. could maybe have a caracals drone bay, if anything.

ishtar - make it more gun boaty? would rather not. it could even lose a high or two and move them to low and/or mids. could have its 10% drone bonus focused to heavies and sentries.

I agree it needs nerfed. perhaps to a 100m/bit drone bay. or failing that, rehashing it out of the sentry/heavy role and giving it 5 uber mediums (and maybe make medium sentries). maybe ehp nerf, maybe weight nerf.

Deimos - fall off or tracking bonus, i dnt really mind. RoF bonus would be useful boost, as would 6-7% more grid and 3% cpu for fitting 250's, prop mod, cap booster and anc rep. The latters kinda a wish more than what i think it needs.

Dropped a lot of the drones on them; I'm fine with leaving drones off the eagle, but for the zealot, downsizing it to a 20/30 size drone bay is as low as I'd want to go. The sac tends to focus pretty heavily on its tank like most khanid ships, so I don't see adding a little armor HP, especially if the drone bay drops, to be unreasonable.

I already stated in the post that the cerb needs its drone bay dropped; it serves no purpose on a ship that can already waste an entire fleet of frigates with rapid lights. I'm on the fence about changes to the Eagle; while I made the decision in the end to drop the drone bay since it sets a bad precedent for the other ishukone ships, it doesn't have the same issue with close-range brawling that the zealot has, due to the high level of blaster tracking and it DOES have an absolutely fantastic shield tank.

I have decided to revert the vagabond and ishtar back to their former setups, since along with the cerberus, as they are the bar I was holding the rest of the ships too, and should be on-par strength-wise. The extra high is pretty important on the vaga since it allows for the fitting of a medium neut to drop tackle frigs that are fast enough to catch it. While the extra low would be nice, it IS an active shield tanked boat, and the best setup to run with it tank-wise is dual LASB.

If I'm buffing up the rest of the HACs, then the ishtar should remain with a large drone bay since that's its ONLY major weapon system, and the gila has made a nice alternative for it. The deimos should focus a little more exclusively on brawling, renewing its focus as a small gang/solo boat, so the changes I outlined would be ideal for that role.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#29 - 2014-06-30 20:06:08 UTC
The baddon has a 200k ehp tank,1000dps and decent range options with 7 lows. doesnt need anymore tank or gank. but that 4th mid is useful for its cap troubles. This is why its a very popular (not so) little BS. i wouldnt change a thing.

With more dps in its turrets, increased tank (option) and longer targeting range, the new mega is much more of a sniper than the old. it is in fact the old mega that was a better brawler with a heavy neut and drone dps.

i say the hyp is under used because its just not used very much. its, on less kills and killed less than any other T1 BS by quite a margin. This is probably due to short lock range (and thinking of it, i'd buff that lock range) and the active tank bonus being ill suited to the roles BS's find themselves most useful, big F/O blap fests. So the only place u typically find hyps is in close range skirmishes. The mael is spared cause it can do both skirmishes and still find a use in large fleets and bashes with arties.

Geddon already out deeps a domi as is. i use geddons for afk bashing.

if the fleet tempest was given a 10% damage bonus and a tracking bonus then id be ok with that. theres a mess of cross over between the tempest, fleet tempest and (much less so after pirate rebalance) the mach.

id rather not add to the sac's tank and keep the drone bay. DPS is something its lacking, tank it has more than enough of.

Deimos does not need to focus on brawling. its fine as a kitey rail boat. but tracking and RoF bonuses neither buff nor nerf either role.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#30 - 2014-07-01 00:12:41 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Zealot - does not need the same drone bay as the harby. maybe some speed love and a 25/25 drone bay. the navy omen looks better for tank, speed and dps for close up skirmish ranges, but the zealot is far better at damage projection.


Sorry for interrupting but I have to disagree on some points..

sac - some say OP

- Who and why? Leave her alone!

muninn - high slot to mid (or even low) would not be terrible. but i dnt think of drones when i think about using a muninn.

- I take your word for it

vaga - does not need anymore drones or mids. if that high gets moved it should go low.

- same as vaga

Cerb - does not need a drone bay, it hits all targets pretty freaking well at 40km+. what is this obsession with drones?

- Agreed

eagle - with a mwd fitted (but not active) and firing the largest possible guns with antimatter, it is cap stable with 2x invulns. does not need more cap. could maybe have a caracals drone bay, if anything.

- What? The Eagle is fine and even looks like one now, no changes!

ishtar - make it more gun boaty? would rather not. it could even lose a high or two and move them to low and/or mids. could have its 10% drone bonus focused to heavies and sentries.

- Already said, ditch sentries. Ishtar fixed.

Deimos - fall off or tracking bonus, i dnt really mind. RoF bonus would be useful boost, as would 6-7% more grid and 3% cpu for fitting 250's, prop mod, cap booster and anc rep. The latters kinda a wish more than what i think it needs.

- What? Have you ever tried 200mm railguns on her, while going about 2000m/s until the end of time?
- Again, no changes needed at this time. The diemost had her name for a reason for all these years..

Now a few pointers about some battleships.

- Apocalypse
If you fire with standard crystals all day long everything is fine, but using Aurora L, Gleam L, Scorch L or Conflagration L is another story on the capacitor.

- Armageddon
I wouldn't change much at this point

- Abbadon
Cry I didn't have the pleasure to try this one out yet, so no opinion at this time

- Dominix
No changes at this point

- Megathron
Maybe move one low to the mid or high. But its not that much of a deal if nothing changes at this point

- Hyperion
Big smile Leave as is

- Scorpion
I am sad that I didn't start earlier when the Scorpion was still a turret boat

- Raven, my Raven
You know exactly what I want for my Raven..

- Rokh
Sad Most expensive turret platform of the bunch

some barbarian slave boats,
well the Empress shouldn't have let those slaves walk but she didn't ask me for advise at the time *shrug*

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Xequecal
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#31 - 2014-07-01 02:43:43 UTC
So much missing the point in this thread. Before doing anything, they need to fix the fact that the Megathron is better than every other BS (other than the obviously unique Armageddon and Scorpion) at everything, and the Ishtar is better than every other cruiser, HAC, BC, and BS at pretty much everything.

Seriously, there is really no reason to ever use a non Mega BS. The only thing it can't do best is snipe past 180km, but that's irrelevant because they can instantly probe a warpin to whatever range they want. The 8/4/7 slot layout combined with the low fitting requirements of railguns means it has significantly higher DPS, range, and EHP than any other option.

The Ishtar is even worse. With the exception of ships with ewar or tackle bonuses, the Ishtar is universally superior to every cruiser, BC, and BS under 1 billion in the game at everything. The only reasons you would use any other ship are cost (t1 stuff is cheaper) and SP. (Ishtar requires a ton of SP) Seriously, it brawls better than any other ship and snipes better than any battleship. 600 DPS at 130km, far higher than any BS puts out. Again, the only thing it doesn't do is >150 km sniping, but there you have the same probe/warpib problem.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#32 - 2014-07-01 02:47:37 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
So much missing the point in this thread. Before doing anything, they need to fix the fact that the Megathron is better than every other BS (other than the obviously unique Armageddon and Scorpion) at everything, and the Ishtar is better than every other cruiser, HAC, BC, and BS at pretty much everything.

Seriously, there is really no reason to ever use a non Mega BS. The only thing it can't do best is snipe past 180km, but that's irrelevant because they can instantly probe a warpin to whatever range they want. The 8/4/7 slot layout combined with the low fitting requirements of railguns means it has significantly higher DPS, range, and EHP than any other option.

The Ishtar is even worse. With the exception of ships with ewar or tackle bonuses, the Ishtar is universally superior to every cruiser, BC, and BS under 1 billion in the game at everything. The only reasons you would use any other ship are cost (t1 stuff is cheaper) and SP. (Ishtar requires a ton of SP) Seriously, it brawls better than any other ship and snipes better than any battleship. 600 DPS at 130km, far higher than any BS puts out. Again, the only thing it doesn't do is >150 km sniping, but there you have the same probe/warpib problem.


Hence my initial decision to nerf it by moving a mid to a high. I'm still not sure whether it should get its bonuses looked at or its slots, or both. I don't use it since I'm mainly caldari/amarr spec, but I do know how strong they are from fighting them, and seeing how favored they are for solo work, either pvp or pve. What you say about the sentries are true; they shouldn't have any place on the ishtar, or at the very least they should just focus more exclusively on them and not heavies.
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#33 - 2014-07-01 06:21:54 UTC
Ok I don't get one thing. How can Sacri be fine (OP? really?) in relation to Zealot? The second one is just better at both dps, and tank (since it has 2 extra lows). Granted, Sac has and extra mid for utility, but does it need it? If you are afraid of overtanked Sacri just increase its base dps and leave those damn lows. But 5 lows in HAC is just bad... Retrubution has 5 lows ffs.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#34 - 2014-07-01 06:49:59 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Ok I don't get one thing. How can Sacri be fine (OP? really?) in relation to Zealot? The second one is just better at both dps, and tank (since it has 2 extra lows). Granted, Sac has and extra mid for utility, but does it need it? If you are afraid of overtanked Sacri just increase its base dps and leave those damn lows. But 5 lows in HAC is just bad... Retrubution has 5 lows ffs.


I agree with you entirely. I was mad about it not dropping a high for a low during the initial rebalance. Since I JUST remembered that, I'm going to update that change. Thank you, and excuse me while I fix this.
HiddenPorpoise
Jarlhettur's Drop
United Federation of Conifers
#35 - 2014-07-01 08:28:34 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Ok I don't get one thing. How can Sacri be fine (OP? really?) in relation to Zealot? The second one is just better at both dps, and tank (since it has 2 extra lows). Granted, Sac has and extra mid for utility, but does it need it? If you are afraid of overtanked Sacri just increase its base dps and leave those damn lows. But 5 lows in HAC is just bad... Retrubution has 5 lows ffs.

Sac has 20% extra resist and more base armor.
Ishtar has 5 lows and it's most often armor fit.
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#36 - 2014-07-01 10:14:00 UTC
HiddenPorpoise wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Ok I don't get one thing. How can Sacri be fine (OP? really?) in relation to Zealot? The second one is just better at both dps, and tank (since it has 2 extra lows). Granted, Sac has and extra mid for utility, but does it need it? If you are afraid of overtanked Sacri just increase its base dps and leave those damn lows. But 5 lows in HAC is just bad... Retrubution has 5 lows ffs.

Sac has 20% extra resist and more base armor.
Ishtar has 5 lows and it's most often armor fit.


Yet Ishtar has a BS dps at range so it's tank is not a huge issue (besides why I see shield Ishtars all the time). This aside I'm only comparing Zealot and Sacri. With 7 lows Zealot can have as much tank as Sacri (despite +20% to resists), while having higher dps and longer range. Sacri has sufficient tank but it lacks dps. I understand that CCP didn't want to give 6 lows not to get super tanked Sacri, but they missed the fact that now it has no capacity for dmg mods. So either nerf Zealot or give sacri low (BTW that would mean I greater change to Damnation as well - it should get 7th low but have its +10% hp bonus replaced by a dmg bonus).
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2014-07-01 10:50:50 UTC
^ if it's more damage you want then you should be asking for a change to the ship bonuses, not an extra low.
Xequecal
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#38 - 2014-07-01 10:51:45 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Yet Ishtar has a BS dps at range so it's tank is not a huge issue (besides why I see shield Ishtars all the time). This aside I'm only comparing Zealot and Sacri. With 7 lows Zealot can have as much tank as Sacri (despite +20% to resists), while having higher dps and longer range. Sacri has sufficient tank but it lacks dps. I understand that CCP didn't want to give 6 lows not to get super tanked Sacri, but they missed the fact that now it has no capacity for dmg mods. So either nerf Zealot or give sacri low (BTW that would mean I greater change to Damnation as well - it should get 7th low but have its +10% hp bonus replaced by a dmg bonus).


Sacrilege can run its weapons, a web, scram, and the MWD without a cap injector. Zealot can't. Sacrilege can even do an AAR + plate fit with no cap mods, Zealot definitely can't do that, you can't run the guns and the repper without cap charges.

Sacrilege also has 46km range with javelins, Scorch doesn't shoot anywhere near that far.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#39 - 2014-07-01 11:04:45 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
-blablabla-
Sacrilege also has 46km range with javelins, Scorch doesn't shoot anywhere near that far.


To something that does not move at all..

Dear Xequecal,
you should really undock more often and try things out. That missile range only works in fitting tools, thats why a webbifier is mandatory on the Sacrilege.

And the Zealot.
The range bonus the Zealot has should be the first and most important hint for what to do with that ship. Approaching another ship of her size or a bigger boat in a nano ship, guns blazing, should be punished as blasphemy and your ship should explode immediately.

Why would the Zealot want to get close to any ship at all with her fragile state? And why would you want a web and a scram on a kiting ship?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#40 - 2014-07-01 16:13:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Daichi Yamato
Xequecal wrote:
So much missing the point in this thread.


There is more to eve than fleet fights at 100km.

Cassius Invictus wrote:
Ok I don't get one thing. How can Sacri be fine (OP? really?) in relation to Zealot?


right,

DPS: thanks to its drone bay, the sac isnt far behind the zealots dps with only one BCS. AND the sac can select its damage types. (edit - actually, using rage hams the sac exceeds zealot dps).

Tank: the sac gets a better ehp tank than a zealot and with higher resists it responds better to logi than a zealot. Zealots dont do to well with big buffer tanks, they cant match the EHP and they lose their all important speed when they fit plates and trimarks.

Sac's are easy to set up for brawling with drones, double webs and a neut. Zealots are a mean fast kitey laser boat. if ur putting a sac-like buffer on ur zealot ur going to get raped by the first frig that comes ur way.

edit- but i dnt personally believe the sac to be OP. it just seems to come up in conversation. i dnt have a list of names unfortunately.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs