These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Citadels] Carriers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zenafar
#761 - 2016-05-13 15:14:15 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Voodoch1ld wrote:
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Voodoch1ld wrote:
You need webs and painters to do that.
For a carriers you do not need either one.


Yes you do to apply damage to anything smaller than a BC

A cruiser going 500m/s is negating most of the carriers damage

GL with that.



Apparently I need to relink it.

Stop shitfitting. Stop dying.


Can u tell carrier fit pls?
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#762 - 2016-05-13 15:50:53 UTC
It was on P34
Zenafar
#763 - 2016-05-13 15:58:53 UTC
I c, ty

omni with tracking script i hope?
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#764 - 2016-05-13 16:14:14 UTC
Naturally.

Like I say, 10 mods for damage and application.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#765 - 2016-05-13 17:59:05 UTC
[Thanatos, Goliath v5]

Damage Control II
25000mm Steel Plates II
25000mm Steel Plates II
Centus B-Type Armor Explosive Hardener
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

Remote Sensor Dampener II
Remote Sensor Dampener II
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script

Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer
Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer

Capital Anti-Kinetic Pump I
Capital Anti-Thermal Pump I
Capital Drone Durability Enhancer I
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#766 - 2016-05-13 19:20:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
[Thanatos, Goliath v5]

Damage Control II
25000mm Steel Plates II
25000mm Steel Plates II
Centus B-Type Armor Explosive Hardener
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

Remote Sensor Dampener II
Remote Sensor Dampener II
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script

Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer
Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer

Capital Anti-Kinetic Pump I
Capital Anti-Thermal Pump I
Capital Drone Durability Enhancer I

Why oh why do you have sensor dampeners and no Networked Sensor Array? Also, by the time you have 3 tracking links, you should really have some DDAs.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#767 - 2016-05-13 19:44:37 UTC
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
[Thanatos, Goliath v5]

Damage Control II
25000mm Steel Plates II
25000mm Steel Plates II
Centus B-Type Armor Explosive Hardener
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

Remote Sensor Dampener II
Remote Sensor Dampener II
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script

Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer
Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer

Capital Anti-Kinetic Pump I
Capital Anti-Thermal Pump I
Capital Drone Durability Enhancer I

Why oh why do you have sensor dampeners and no Networked Sensor Array? Also, by the time you have 3 tracking links, you should really have some DDAs.


TBH i have found shield thannys to be best you have similar tank but better damage even with one OTL

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Krovos
Clone Vat Bay
#768 - 2016-05-13 20:32:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Krovos
Let me first state my bias so that is clear and there can be no argument about that. I am an EVE player, I have been playing EVE for the better part of 10-years, 9/10 of those years has been spent in nullsec, roaming nullsec, and playing sort of a "terrorist" hit and run small (average fleet size of 15) man gang. I love this game, I fully support CCP in the world they have created, and have been providing content for myself and my friends for the majority of my time in this game under Mafia Redux, and now Furnace. I have flown subcapitals, and I have flown capitals. I will agree that capitals in their past state were lackluster, I found myself using them in W-Space for krabbing more often than I did PVP. However, my specialization is in subcap warfare; small-medium gang sized. Also let me state, we live in a C2-C5+NS WH. We decided to live in such a place because we like fresh roaming on a whim, and the ability to roll our static nullsec as we desire. We originated in Thera, but decided to move for :reasons:

Within those many years of roaming, carriers were not a common sight. Over time that changed, however, and carriers began popping up in nullsec more often, albeit, mostly in anoms. It was never entirely easy for us to kill a carrier, we still had to be careful, watching out for sentries on our DPS ships, light drones on our interceptors, or fighters on our slower/less tanked ships, but we managed. Especially what became difficult was when multiple carriers became an equation, or if the carrier pilot was smart and fit a triage module. It always astonished me how so few of the carriers we killed pre-Citadel never fit a triage module. Such a simple module could have given many of these carriers precious extra time to ask for backup, and have our small gang removed. You know, back before Citadel, carriers actually needed a support gang to back them up.

So Furnace in its short time (less than a year old), as a small gang corporation has killed probably over 100 carriers. I feel like we had a pretty good grasp on to how to handle them. As I have stated above, I undoubtedly think they needed some kind of rework, but the rework that we have presently is far too extreme. Combine that with some other changes to the game that CCP has made, the ability for corporations such as my own to work around this new meta has become exponentially more difficult, to the point of us not wanting to even roam anymore. That's a tough pill to swallow for a corporation and group of guys who have been roaming together for years.

Since 4/27, more often than not, our roaming has ended in a carrier warping on our grid, or a carrier jumping the gate on us. Hell, we even got camped in by a HIC supported by 4-5 interceptors, and 2 carriers. An Orthrus was instantly killed, as well as a Cerb, and two interdictors. I say instantly, and I want that to be made clear, that that is not an exaggeration. What kind of game play is that for something to decloak, get instantly locked, and just die? I understand well that this kind of game play exists else where in the game. We have the insta-locking Svipuls in lowsec killing frigates and other things in the same fashion. However, that is subcap on subcap PVP, it can be dealt with, with little effort for those trying to dispatch the Svipuls.

EVE is in a way about rock, paper, scissors. As a small gang, we often are "countered" by being

a. Blobbed
b. Superior fleet comp'd

Both of which, we'd deal with. Being blobbed is something my friends and I have no problem dealing with, in fact we enjoy being out numbered, it's under those situations that we become better pilots. Same goes for when our enemy brings a direct counter to our fleet. Both situations were challenging, but they were fun and emergent game play for both groups involved. In this current meta, however, it seems that this is the new norm for my guys.

1. Roll our nullsec static until we find a region that we like
2. Form a fleet, for example a standard fleet of ours would consist of [Oracle x2, Keres, Rapier/Huginn, Navy Omen, Interceptor, Interdictor, Command Destroyer, and Links]
3. Roam around, likely get a few ganks on people ratting
4. Search for a fight, likely find a fight and begin fighting usually a fight that is in the enemies favor
5. Enemy realizes that they either are losing, not killing things as fast as they would like, or want to seal the deal and....
6. Drop a carrier or several carriers, and begin instantly killing any of our usual roaming ships. Roam over.

There has been occassions, where carriers have been used on us with absolutely no support gang of their own to speak of. This has been solo/duo carriers on a gate, just blapping anything that comes by. Since when did that become the new meta of EVE-Online? Since when did this game become Capitals-Online? I know that term, Capitals-Online has been thrown around before, but this is indeed the meta for which that meme rings especially true, as sad as it is.
Krovos
Clone Vat Bay
#769 - 2016-05-13 20:34:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Krovos
We provide content for a lot of the smaller/medium sized alliances that you now see holding space thanks to FozzieSov (thank you for that, that patch was amazing and has improved the game, I humbly mean that). I’ve had people that we’ve fought against compliment us on our game style, they have personally thanked me for roaming in their space and for teaching them how to PvP better. While we didn’t directly teach them, these pilots became better at the game by playing against people who were at the time better than them. I realize how arrogant that comes across as, but it is true, and these adversaries of ours have become better from it. So before writing off this argument, note that there are people out there who benefit from our niche style of playing, however I am running off-topic and digress.

If one of these proposed counters to fighting carriers is to roam in a full T3 armor gang with links, AB’s, and Guardians, then that is again a sign of how utterly broken carriers are. First of all, we aren’t interested in fighting carriers, we just want to fight subcaps, there are after all what seems like 100 or so subcaps in this game compared to the 16-20 or so capitals I can think of offhand. We roam in ships that look engage-able, for a reason, we want people to come out and fight us. We want people to dock up their ratting boats, or to come out from the station and form up and fight us, it’s what we enjoy. If we’re rolling around in this T3 gang either these groups won’t want to bother with us because we “look too scary” or they will automatically ship up to counter us, and camp us in with our slow moving high value fleet comp.

The last proposed solution that has been talked about in this thread is to “well go and bring your own capitals then.” To that I say, we gladly would, however, for one we live in a wormhole to where mass is limited to under the threshold for that of a capital. And to that you will say, well then get out of a C2 wormhole. I would more than love to get out of a C2 wormhole, but you may recall a patch that happened around the last year in which CCP nerfed PL’s force projection through WH’s. We used to be one of those C5-5 corporations, probing massive chains and roaming through nullsec via our C5 highway. We dropped capitals frequently, at great risk moving them through WH chains, lighting a cyno in nullsec, and dropping our own Dreadnaughts, supported by our small gang on bigger sov holding alliances. So please, don’t tell me that myself or my corporation lacks the balls to use our own capitals. We very well would, and be excited too, but we lack that ability due to a playstyle of ours that was indirectly nerfed some time ago.

I completely agree that a few cruiser sized vessels should not be able to kill a carrier. At the same time, they shouldn’t be instantly removed from the field from an unsupported carrier. What was great about capitals pre-Citadel is that they required some kind of support. They were slow high damage ships with poor tracking or damage application. They could kill our own damage ships, or at the very least force them off the field, but they could be tackled by us and for their defense could tank us for a meaningful amount of time. If fit properly, they could hold out until their own backup arrived, and force us off the field or even kill us. The capitals of today, however, have the capability of moving freely across space, unsupported, killing most of anything in their path until either they are blobbed or are counter-dropped.

I think it speaks volumes when you have some of our most viewed streamers going out in carriers doing “solo carrier roams.” When has that ever been a good idea? Well since 4/27 it’s been possible, and not even possible but very much viable. I absolutely love EVE-Online; it’s been a part of my life for almost more time now than it has not. I wrote my senior thesis paper on this game and its culture and community. I have brought many friends, including my girlfriend into this game all of whom very much enjoy it. I have sitting next to my desk a fan-made Oracle portrait, displaying one of my favorite ships in the game and a staple to the Furnace history.

However, I am saddened at the state of the game presently. A large portion of the ships that were once viable roaming options are not looking so viable anymore. More and more regions on my internal maps have become “no fly zones” because of their tendency to use capitals against a small gang, one that on paper is much inferior compared to the numbers, and war chest of tools at their disposal. I want capitals to be fair and balanced for both parties involved, this game should not become Capitals-Online, this is EVE-Online. The little guys always had a fighting chance in this game, it’s what made it great. We’ve never had to conform to a major alliance / coalition if we wanted to PvP in nullsec. Sure we’ve had to adapt, we’ve had to adapt a lot, but we’ve never had to change the way we want to play the game. With this current meta, it’s increasingly looking like the way we and many others outside of my corporation have played this game have to move on and conform to what we’ve been fighting against for so long. And that’s truly a shame.

TLDR; CCP please have a good hard look at capitals, especially carriers and re-evaluate their effect on the game presently. When the solution to any size or composition of a gang is to “drop a carrier on it” (with or without support) something is unbalanced.

Edit: My paragraph on ECM didn't copy over. But I am well aware that ECM works wonders on fighters. But is that really a valid solution to something? Preventing something from locking, therefore preventing it from doing anything outside of warping off is not a solution to carriers. ECM in itself is broken, and the day flying ECM becomes a requirement in this game is the day I retire.
Brother Zahariel
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#770 - 2016-05-13 20:48:15 UTC
The man above is well educated and his post is valid and correct in all formats and uses. You can tell just how good it is by the fact he's wearing glasses which make him look smart.
Leviathan Tank
T.R.I.A.D
Ushra'Khan
#771 - 2016-05-13 20:54:11 UTC
yup carriers are op
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#772 - 2016-05-13 21:34:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
Krovos, the thing about Eve is that it's all about numbers, counters, and counters to counters. While a group like yours may be countered by carriers, carriers themselves can be countered or blobbed. It takes time for people to figure out the counter to the current meta, and the counter seems to be carriers. That then turns the meta into carriers for everything, and it takes a bit of time for people to figure out the counter to that. Carriers are very scary for small gangs like yours, but they're big, expensive, and slow ships that look good on the killboard. It's not hard for a group bigger or better prepared than yours to kill a carrier or two, and if carrier pilots keep doing what we're currently doing it won't take long before the gangs coming through start turning into bait and carriers start dying. Then the carriers will once again go from predator to prey and you won't run into them every roam.

That said, I would like to see carriers rebalanced a bit. The way things currently are they're oppressive in small numbers against small numbers, but virtually useless in larger numbers against larger numbers. I think light fighters need significantly less missile alpha/DPS and MWD speed, and more main gun DPS, range, and base speed (basically like a faster version of the long range heavy fighters but with anti small stuff missiles instead of bombs). That way they could be of use in a prolonged battle against a significant fleet while not putting that lone cruiser in deep armor before it can get away or brutally hazing any small gang that has less than 8 missile volleys of EHP.
maCH'EttE
Perkone
Caldari State
#773 - 2016-05-13 23:05:02 UTC
Krovos wrote:
We provide content for a lot of the smaller/medium sized alliances that you now see holding space thanks to FozzieSov (thank you for that, that patch was amazing and has improved the game, I humbly mean that). I’ve had people that we’ve fought against compliment us on our game style, they have personally thanked me for roaming in their space and for teaching them how to PvP better. While we didn’t directly teach them, these pilots became better at the game by playing against people who were at the time better than them. I realize how arrogant that comes across as, but it is true, and these adversaries of ours have become better from it. So before writing off this argument, note that there are people out there who benefit from our niche style of playing, however I am running off-topic and digress.

If one of these proposed counters to fighting carriers is to roam in a full T3 armor gang with links, AB’s, and Guardians, then that is again a sign of how utterly broken carriers are. First of all, we aren’t interested in fighting carriers, we just want to fight subcaps, there are after all what seems like 100 or so subcaps in this game compared to the 16-20 or so capitals I can think of offhand. We roam in ships that look engage-able, for a reason, we want people to come out and fight us. We want people to dock up their ratting boats, or to come out from the station and form up and fight us, it’s what we enjoy. If we’re rolling around in this T3 gang either these groups won’t want to bother with us because we “look too scary” or they will automatically ship up to counter us, and camp us in with our slow moving high value fleet comp.

The last proposed solution that has been talked about in this thread is to “well go and bring your own capitals then.” To that I say, we gladly would, however, for one we live in a wormhole to where mass is limited to under the threshold for that of a capital. And to that you will say, well then get out of a C2 wormhole. I would more than love to get out of a C2 wormhole, but you may recall a patch that happened around the last year in which CCP nerfed PL’s force projection through WH’s. We used to be one of those C5-5 corporations, probing massive chains and roaming through nullsec via our C5 highway. We dropped capitals frequently, at great risk moving them through WH chains, lighting a cyno in nullsec, and dropping our own Dreadnaughts, supported by our small gang on bigger sov holding alliances. So please, don’t tell me that myself or my corporation lacks the balls to use our own capitals. We very well would, and be excited too, but we lack that ability due to a playstyle of ours that was indirectly nerfed some time ago.

I completely agree that a few cruiser sized vessels should not be able to kill a carrier. At the same time, they shouldn’t be instantly removed from the field from an unsupported carrier. What was great about capitals pre-Citadel is that they required some kind of support. They were slow high damage ships with poor tracking or damage application. They could kill our own damage ships, or at the very least force them off the field, but they could be tackled by us and for their defense could tank us for a meaningful amount of time. If fit properly, they could hold out until their own backup arrived, and force us off the field or even kill us. The capitals of today, however, have the capability of moving freely across space, unsupported, killing most of anything in their path until either they are blobbed or are counter-dropped.

I think it speaks volumes when you have some of our most viewed streamers going out in carriers doing “solo carrier roams.” When has that ever been a good idea? Well since 4/27 it’s been possible, and not even possible but very much viable. I absolutely love EVE-Online; it’s been a part of my life for almost more time now than it has not. I wrote my senior thesis paper on this game and its culture and community. I have brought many friends, including my girlfriend into this game all of whom very much enjoy it. I have sitting next to my desk a fan-made Oracle portrait, displaying one of my favorite ships in the game and a staple to the Furnace history.

However, I am saddened at the state of the game presently. A large portion of the ships that were once viable roaming options are not looking so viable anymore. More and more regions on my internal maps have become “no fly zones” because of their tendency to use capitals against a small gang, one that on paper is much inferior compared to the numbers, and war chest of tools at their disposal. I want capitals to be fair and balanced for both parties involved, this game should not become Capitals-Online, this is EVE-Online. The little guys always had a fighting chance in this game, it’s what made it great. We’ve never had to conform to a major alliance / coalition if we wanted to PvP in nullsec. Sure we’ve had to adapt, we’ve had to adapt a lot, but we’ve never had to change the way we want to play the game. With this current meta, it’s increasingly looking like the way we and many others outside of my corporation have played this game have to move on and conform to what we’ve been fighting against for so long. And that’s truly a shame.

TLDR; CCP please have a good hard look at capitals, especially carriers and re-evaluate their effect on the game presently. When the solution to any size or composition of a gang is to “drop a carrier on it” (with or without support) something is unbalanced.

Edit: My paragraph on ECM didn't copy over. But I am well aware that ECM works wonders on fighters. But is that really a valid solution to something? Preventing something from locking, therefore preventing it from doing anything outside of warping off is not a solution to carriers. ECM in itself is broken, and the day flying ECM becomes a requirement in this game is the day I retire.

Modern day shakespear.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#774 - 2016-05-14 04:14:08 UTC
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
[Thanatos, Goliath v5]

Damage Control II
25000mm Steel Plates II
25000mm Steel Plates II
Centus B-Type Armor Explosive Hardener
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

Remote Sensor Dampener II
Remote Sensor Dampener II
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script

Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer
Imperial Navy Heavy Energy Neutralizer

Capital Anti-Kinetic Pump I
Capital Anti-Thermal Pump I
Capital Drone Durability Enhancer I

Why oh why do you have sensor dampeners and no Networked Sensor Array? Also, by the time you have 3 tracking links, you should really have some DDAs.


It's a fit developed from use on SISI.

No NSA because it ultimately wasn't paying off vs the loss of EWAR. Feel free to swap the DCU for a DDA though the added damage isn't really that significant. It would purely be personal preference whether to top out the tank or go for a bit extra damage.

The damps are for pulling things in, the neuts are the trap. Worked a real treat at least on SISI.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#775 - 2016-05-14 05:13:22 UTC
Feel you would just be better off having another ship damp that way you could use done navs and a nsa the navs would also let you engage father out

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#776 - 2016-05-14 05:58:01 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Feel you would just be better off having another ship damp that way you could use done navs and a nsa the navs would also let you engage father out


[Thanatos, Goliath v6 fleet]

Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
25000mm Steel Plates II
25000mm Steel Plates II
Centus B-Type Armor Explosive Hardener
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Centum C-Type Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

Drone Navigation Computer II
Drone Navigation Computer II
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script
Federation Navy Omnidirectional Tracking Link, Tracking Speed Script

Fighter Support Unit I
Fighter Support Unit I
Networked Sensor Array
Skirmish Warfare Link - Interdiction Maneuvers II
Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense II

Capital Anti-Kinetic Pump I
Capital Anti-Thermal Pump I
Capital Drone Durability Enhancer I


Federation Navy Warfare Mindlink
Lugh Crow-Slave
#777 - 2016-05-14 06:24:45 UTC
Lol never considered using these for boosts before or after the change but I suppose it works for small gangs

What is the ehp so I can compare with my shield fit

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#778 - 2016-05-14 07:28:45 UTC
1.3 mil EHP. Adds +31.5% scram/webrange and +23.6% armour resists.

Note no slaves implants.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#779 - 2016-05-15 00:30:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
yeah still looks like the thanny is a shield tank w/o tank rigs implants or links and using C-types for adaptive it gets 1.47m ehp (1.77 if you add a DCU II) this also frees up your lows for DPS


[1.63M just shield ehp 4.5kdps]

Damage Control II
Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
Omnidirectional Tracking Enhancer II

Capital Shield Extender II
Capital Shield Extender II
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Pith X-Type EM Ward Field

Fighter Support Unit II
Fighter Support Unit II
Fighter Support Unit II
Heavy Gremlin Compact Energy Neutralizer
Networked Sensor Array

Capital Drone Speed Augmentor II
Capital Drone Durability Enhancer II
Capital Core Defense Field Extender II

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Miss 'Assassination' Cayman
CK-0FF
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#780 - 2016-05-15 00:53:39 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
yeah still looks like the thanny is a shield tank w/o tank rigs implants or links and using C-types for adaptive it gets 1.47m ehp (1.77 if you add a DCU II) this also frees up your lows for DPS


[1.63M just shield ehp 4.5kdps]

Damage Control II
Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
Dread Guristas Drone Damage Amplifier
Omnidirectional Tracking Enhancer II

Capital Shield Extender II
Capital Shield Extender II
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Pithum C-Type Adaptive Invulnerability Field
Pith X-Type EM Ward Field

Fighter Support Unit II
Fighter Support Unit II
Fighter Support Unit II
Heavy Gremlin Compact Energy Neutralizer
Networked Sensor Array

Capital Drone Speed Augmentor II
Capital Drone Durability Enhancer II
Capital Core Defense Field Extender II

I can't help but notice your fit is far more expensive than the armor version you're comparing it to and doesn't give any bonus to other fleet members.