Why is the Pilgrim the ONLY force recon that does not receive the same non-weapon system Recon Ships Bonus as its Combat Recon cousin ship? The below comparisons illustrate my point.
Pilgrim Recon Ships bonuses: ……………………………………………………Curse Recon Ships bonuses:
+20% to Nos and Neut optimal range……………Not Equal….……….+40% to Nos and Neut optimal range
+10% to Nos and Neut falloff range…………….…Not Equal….………. +20% to Nos and Neut falloff range
+10% to Nos and Neut drain amount………….…Not Equal………….…+20% to Nos and Neut drain amount
Arazu Recon Ships bonuses: ……………………………………………………Lachesis Recon Ships bonuses:
+20% to Scram & Disruptor optimal range…………Equal ……… +20% to Scram & Disruptor optimal range
Rapier Recon Ships bonuses: ……………………………………………………Huginn Recon Ships bonuses:
+60% to Webifier optimal range…………………… Equal ……………… +60% to Webifier optimal range
The Pilgrim is uncommonly used in EVE, and I think it’d be a great idea to give the Pilgrim the same Nos + Neut bonuses that the Curse receives. The Curse would still be a unique ship because of dscan immunity and the extra high + medium slots it receives relative to the Pilgrim.
The pilgrim is amazingly tanky. It doesn’t need more because it can live practically forever. For reference, show me a single useful force recon fit with 100k EHP.
The pilgrim can neut slower than the curse, for a few reasons:
The pilgrim can tank for days - it might neut slower but neut it will. It has a better tank than the Curse even.
Cap is vital. Many guns need it, it controls active tank, it controls shield buffer tank, tackle, prop, you get the idea. Surprise buttsexing someone with neuts is by far the worst you can do to them in almost every case. It neuting slower is generally called “balance”
“But I’m talking about neuts and ignoring everything else on the ship” isn’t how you balance something.
Please stop derailing this forum thread, and please delete your posts as they do not address the thread’s topic: the pilgrim is the only force recon that does not have equivalent EWAR/support function as their combat recon cousin.
The pilgrim’s tankiness is a matter of general ship balance, which is a slightly different topic. I would argue that the massive underuse of the pilgrim according to zkillboard relative to the Rapier, Falcon, Arazu (as other force recons) as well as all other ships in the game provides evidence that the pilgrim is in a very bad spot.
All things considered nonstatic, there is also the possibility that CCP could buff the pilgrim neut/nos range while adjusting its tank, speed, or any other characteristic.
THIS IS ONLY A THREAD TO DISCUSS OPINION ON INCREASING THE PILGRIM’S SUPPORT CAPABILITY BY GIVING IT THE SAME NUET/NOS BONUSES AS THE CURSE.
Below are graphs of Force Recon Usage from Zkillboard for 2018. Please note three observations from the data:
The Pilgrim is used for significantly less PVP Kills than the Falcon or Rapier.
The Recent Zkill Rank of the Pilgrim is the worst (highest number) of all 4 force recons. I believe this Zkill statistic incorporates several factors to rank a ship’s pvp success in pvp.
The percent usage of the pilgrim in gangs is drastically different than all other force recon ships.
Note: The statistics make it seem that the Arazu is also in a fairly bad place… but this is not a thread to discuss the Arazu.
Conclusion: The Pilgrim used significantly less than the Falcon and Rapier, and the type of usage is different for the pilgrim too as evident by a much greater use in solo pvp (3 times higher than the Arazu or Rapier).
I argue that the Pilgrim’s fleet utility could be drastically increased by buffing the nuet/nos ship bonus to be equivalent to the Curse.
odd https://zkillboard.com/ship/11965/ states that the pilgrim is 79% more likely to kill you, than you it, and 87% of kills were found in gangs.
I feel like your numbers are deceiving.
Infact if you look at all the Force recons, they follow a very similar pattern. All of them on killboards has well over 70% success rate, and they are extremely well liked in group combat(The lowest number being 87%, which means that the other three are more preferred in gang combat.)
It’s impressive how many people can respond with random facts about the Pilgrim without ever addressing the main topic thread: WHY DOES THE PILGRIM HAVE WORSE FLEET SUPPORT THAN THE CURSE… WHEN NO OTHER FORCE RECON IS COMPARATIVELY WORSE AT ITS SUPPORT ROLE THAN THE COMBAT RECON COUSIN.
“Pilgrim is the strongest force recon” …sorry but the graph above shows it has been used the least in PVP. 1/3 as much as a rapier and 1/2 as much as a falcon.
“The pilgrim has cruiser bonuses” … a quick glance at these shows that all fleet support (non damage) cruiser bonuses are identical for all combat and force recon variants. This reinforces that the neut/nos recon ship bonuses should be equal for the pilgrim–as it’s the ONLY example of a non-damage ship skill disparity among all recon ships.
“Your numbers are deceiving; and the Pilgrim is least preferred in gang combat” … average monthly kills is the simplest way to measure a ship’s use in pvp, and each data point in the top graph represents a month of 2018. It’s really clear the Pilgrim is used 1/2 as much as a Falcon and 1/3 as much as a Rapier. This most definitely is a factor of it being the least suited for gang combat (which is the vast majority of EVE PVP), and I think giving it equivalent fleet utility as a curse would increase its usage.
Just because a usage is common doesn’t mean everything should be balanced around that one activity. What everyone is trying to point out is rather simple: the Pilgrim excels in niche activity and “balancing” it around another activity is a bad idea. If you balance it for something it’s not good at right now, what will happen in the ecosystem where it already excels?
Probably because the neuting abilities are somewhat being treated as a weapon system in this context. Note that the drone bandwidth and bonuses are the same for both the Pilgrim and the Curse, something that doesn’t happen with the weapon systems of any other pair of recon ships.
Okay, lets consider this. They buff it to be the same as the other recons. Is it too OP now? Yes, yes it is. Ergo, something else needs to be changed to maintain balance.
The pilgrim does not need more, it is effective where it is. No buffs needed.
And that is my opinion on the subject. As for the rest, go ■■■■ yourself; I’ll post what I wish, when I wish, where I wish.
Well, thanks for the opinions. I guess it’s clear that none of you support my idea. I didn’t expect that considering most people think the Pilgrim sucks currently and can be replaced by a Stratios, Legion, or Curse to do any intended job better for the same or less ISK cost.
There have been many discussions comparing the Pilgrim to a Stratios, and nearly all of them conclude a Stratios is much better for solo PvP. I thought giving the Pilgrim at least the same neut/nos bonuses as the Curse would give the Pilgrim a chance to compare better to a Curse; and yet the Pilgrim would still be worse than a Curse for most combat situations due to 1 less high slot.
I still think the Pilgrim and Arazu both could use a little buff from CCP–whatever form it comes in.
The Pilgrim stands out from other force recons in having higher defense than its combat recon counterpart. It makes sense that its potency would be reduced. I would suggest buffing its range bonus to be equal to the Curse, so that it can play in the same field.
While we’re on the topic of buffing ships, i think we should buff the Virtuoso too. Regular cov-ops AT frigs get no targeting delay after decloak and a 5 second cloak, the first of which should be unique to stealth bombers. The poor Virtuoso suffers from a 15 second decloak, and has no bonuses to it’s inherent lack of targeting delay after decloak. In order to l̶o̶w̶e̶r̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶p̶r̶i̶c̶e̶s̶ balance ships such as the Chremoas, the Virtuoso needs a 500% bonus to sensor strength and scan res.
Also maybe another 3 turret hardpoints and an extra 500% damage to small hybrids to make a mini-titan
