25m³ for the Harbinger, Harbinger Navy Issue and Absolution

Maybe it is just my OCD but we can do better!

Something that I overlooked last time because I have a lot on my plate at the moment was the cargo hold size of the Harbinger variations and I wanted to propose that all variations get a 25m² cargo hold size increase, which will give all of them a cargo hold of 400m³.

For comparison let me list the other battlecruisers cargo hold sizes:

  • Prophecy: 400m³
  • Harbinger: 375m³ (currently)
  • Ferox: 475m³
  • Drake: 450m³
  • Brutix: 475m³
  • cyclone: 450m³
  • hurricane: 425m³

My totally self-serving proposal would give solo pvp fits the room for one more navy 800 capacitor charge, increasing the total amount of capacitor charges to 16 instead of 15.

Both Amarr battlecruisers will still have the smallest cargo hold size and lasers have a very high capacitor demand.
I don’t believe it will hurt the game or will create fleets of Harbingers running amok and suddenly making the news.

Another comparison just for the sake of being complete:

  • Drekavac: 650m³ (holding 25 navy 800 cap charges)

What do you think?

Have you compared all the BCs other specs?

The chances are highly likely that the Harbinger has a bonus in another area that surpasses the other BCs.
Which isn’t uncommon for each ship size.

I believe it is due to energy weapon use crystals, which is significantly smaller in size than things like missiles, and other ammunition.
For Drekavac yes CCP want to make it OP.

My guess is with the reduction on m^3 in Trig ammo, it might get a reduction in hull size, but it might like the Arma, a huge cargo cap compared to other ships of its size.

Drekavac is basically superior (or at least the same) in almost all attributes than even the faction BCs

MWD Speed
PG output (remaining pg when full set of weapon fitted)
Raw ehp
Lock range
etc. etc.

They wish to make it strong. it is very obvious.

Id suggest you check its shield HP and shield regen rates.

Last time i checked it was the worse of all BS, to the point that some Cruiser actual had better shield HP and regen.

it is a armor tanking ship

(Total) EHP (probably after proper fitting) is what matters, thanks.

That’s subject to debate depending who you talk too.

I know players with high ehp, with active modules yet still get killed if someone focuses on the weak point in their tank. While others will a lower ehp with a well designed passive fit can survive.

A lot of players focus on ehp, but fail to realize that total, not individual damage types. All it takes is one point of weakness and you could lost your ship.

Even throwing on a DC can cause ehp to jump, but might only add a very low increase of protection to a weak point, though it might increase already high protection higher.

So as you can guess i only use default ehp as a very rough figure.

I I would compare trig ships with amarr equals, as both are armour tankers.

The above apply not only to Drekavec, but also on other BCs.
It is not a valid argument about the comparative strength between BCs.

You do need to consider on factor that isnt show in the ship specs…

Trig turret lack of falloff range, which requires trig ships to engage at close combat range sub 60km for BS with range ammo, and much close as you step down in turret size. Most other ships with autocannons, blasters and pulse turrets can still engage trips ship well beyond trig turret range
Due to this fact, you’d have to add a better tank just so a trig ship could survive long enough get close enough to fire its single turret.

:slight_smile: I think I’d stop here because I realized I am talking to someone who got no idea about Drekavac.

This thing with t2 ammo can hit easily to 40km (even longer with T1 ammo), raw without tracking computers, better than the short range weapon type (Blaster, Pulse, Autocannon) in the given ship size (Battlecruiser hull), Range + falloff.
Don’t compare it with long range turrets though, they are aimed for different roles.
BTW it got only 1 turret size (clarification, 1 within the hull size)

it is also laughable to see you take about “only use default ehp as a very rough figure” but emphasize lack of shield HP itself is a weakness.

Thanks for the talk, but you need to do your homework better.

All good, though will say i do fly amarr and trig ships, and know their issues and strengths.

As you know everyone has their own views on eve features. And many don’t even bother to look at any concept that isn’t theirs, others that do learn new things and new concepts.

But this topic is about the Harbinger series, not the Drekavac.

Hence the suggestions to look beyond the basic ship information.

It is likely that it is sure but laser crystal have a size of 1m³ each and I wanted to carry 5 different crystal sets of 6m³. Scorch, conflagration, multifrequency, standard and radio.

And I am talking about the cargo hold, nothing else. I think the amount of navy cap charges a Harbinger should be able to carry is 16 that is all. Why should a battlecruiser have a smaller cargo hold than a regular t1 cruiser?

Everything else on the Harbinger and variations is fine.

1 Like

Um I think that is kind of a historical issue over here.
The harb is considered to be some kind of “Fleet ship” where player “should” just get 1600 plates not active armor tank on it, no need for huge cargo for cap charge, especially with the good 50% cap requirement decrease buff. Harb navy on the other hand do suffer from this.
Where things like Brutix is designed as a active rep ship, who need lots of cap charge.

Not saying this is what it should be though.

For the ammunition yes 5x6 = 30m3, sounds a lot, but Drake who take 66x6x4=1584 (4 full clip reload, 66x4=264 rounds) Scourge Rage, Faction and Javelin will use 71.3m3
Crystal will last 1000/4000 rounds, that is much higher than 264 rounds you see, and drake is not carrying any other damage type yet (though maybe not necessary either)

There are many other interesting little things just like this one you mentioned, CCP need to get the balance right.

BTW never forget the 900m3 Gnosis :stuck_out_tongue:

My question to the audience was more in the line of “can you guys think of any reason why a 400m³ cargo hold would brake the game”.

I couldn’t think of one, so I am asking the rest of you.

Even the Omen and the Maller have a cargo hold size of 400m³ and 450m³ and they are both laser ships.

Well no,
I agree with you on the topic that they should look into this.

  1. I am not sure if 400m3 cargo is the number to go.
  2. Will this 1 extra charge help harb? Why should it be able to bring 16?

yet it sucks at alpha strike and range…

1 Like

Well at least the Harbinger would have the same amount of cap charges as the other battlecruisers of the same class. If it helps with a solo fit I would still have to find out.

Harbinger is an awesome ship, 6 turrets with gleam doesn’t even put enough stress on capacitor, with 375m3, marginally lower than other ships yes, but if you’re going to use them for 800 cap booster I would strongly consider using 400 for more longevity instead, be mindful that Amarr ships have more native capacitor space and regeneration than other factions, so you could also try improving those aspects instead.


This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.