Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Bump because Muninn still bad.

Agreed. Muninn is in a mostly terrible spot.

You can get somewhat decent resists with dcu, kinetic/explo hardeners. That leaves you 3 slots for plate/reps/dmg mods. Not ideal by any means, but is manageable. Like you said though, using 3-5 slots on tank, means you will do pitiful damage with arty. Not to mention the confliction of arty and armor and only 3 mids. Range control? Whats that...

If the muninn was actually fast, 3 mids might work. like a nomen.

In my opinion there are a few options to make it viable.

-Reduce arty PG (which is needed across multiple minny ships)

-Move a low to a mid, i dont think moving a mid to a low is going to help. Means a rep is out of the question since no CB. Having 4 mids will mean you can brawl with acs, use CB, and dual rep it. Ive tinkered with dual reps and you can get around 900dps tank with it. It just has no range control.

-Change it to a missile ship. Blasphemy i know, but the armor/arty slot layout is just bad design.

Hell fighting nulli when they fielded muninns they used shield doctrine (that died quickly to arty machs). If you put the muninn in an armor role, you get terrible dps/range and okish tank(53k ehp with a 1600 plate). shield doctrine takes advantage of all the lows but gives a **** tank.

Its actually sad that the broadsword is a better arty fleet ship, than the muninn. Hell you can even put a bubble on it with 720s and a cheap implant. Broadsword fit i made had about 100k EHP, and did more damage. Muninn could never get close to that.

Moving a high to a mid could work.. sort of turns into an SFI, which isnt horrible i suppose. Neuts/utility high are really nice to have on minny ships though. Course if we drop a low for a mid, then we have a pretty poor armor tank.

Can we just get a free mid???

Joking aside, moving a high to a mid might be the best way at balancing without giving it a ****** armor and shield tank.

Nah matari ships actually have the second best power grids in the game, what needs to happen is both beam lasers and Howitzers need a massive fitting reduction. arty deal the least DPS of any primary weapon system in the game and has the worst application. and beams of their own slew of problems there's absolutely no reason a ship should need 2 ACRs for fit a rack of the weapon system it is bonused for.

anyway yes the munin has issues. and you are 100 percent correct the munin's slot layout is really dumb.

I'd say lose a high for a mid, it should be a dedicated GUN boat, it has 4 bones to projectiles for fucksakes

****A transcript from a recent fleet ****

Fleet Member: FC can I bring a Muninn?
Fleet FC: I didn't hear that clearly, did someone asked if they could bring a Huginn?

Fleet FC: Yes you can bring a Huginn.




True Story.

Hey guys - quick idea.

I hear the thing about "Artillery-based Minnmitar ships can't support artillery!" all the time, and something popped into my mind as a possible way to fix it.

Rework the artillery-based ships so that one of their skill bonuses is % less powergrid for artillery. This way, the high powergrid requirement still prohibits their use on non-bonused ships, but the ships that need them can start fitting them.

I got this idea because of my heavy use of Amarr ships. People often whine about Amarr boats having to waste a skill bonus on just having the laser weapons not consume all the capacitor every salvo. I'm fine with it, and I think the spirit of that idea as described above could work to alleviate some problems with Minnmitar artillery ships.

Completely agree, and while your at it, the graphics are WAAAAAY overdo for an update.

The "pirate galleon" look is so 16th century....

That'd be totally cool if artillery damage, tracking and range would be somewhere remotely in line with lasers. Hint, it's not. A double damage bonused hull using artillery still looks pathetic next to lasers with even one bonus.
(Beam-Harbinger and Artycane. Checkthe pun.)

Monthly bump. Muninn aint getting better still.

Halp muninn