No, I’m arguing that there’s tradeoffs in either direction, both builds have strengths, both have weaknesses. Comparing Machs v Machs directly is useless, though, because they don’t exist in a vacuum. They have to be evaluated in the full ecosystem. And in the full ecosystem, they’re faster Maels with better application and a much higher price tag.
Honestly, I don’t think you’re gonna see either type of Mach used as much as they’re being used now. Armor machs get replaced by cheaper armor battleships. Sure, maybe they don’t have as much EWAR, but you don’t need 5 dampers to neuter someone. What you need is better support than the other guy has.
But thats exactly the problem. The armor mach is the swiss army ship and Doesn’t need much support (other than ofc logi & links).
And why would I use maels against the machs they will have the same problem cause the machs can neuter most of the enemy maels after loosing the first 1-2 ships & disruptors get spread.
If the mach fights typhoons you can jsut fit ur machs with Sensor damps & & deny them sniping with cruise, or even missile disrupting them to just neuther their range / application.
And I could do exactly the same thing with Megas, or Apocs. Again: you don’t need 5 disruptors to shut the enemy down. Even without other support ships, you just need to lock first.
The problem with this analogy is that in most likely hood out of 100, 10 people are going to have 40 ewar on them 20 will have 15ewar modules each on them, 30 will have 1-2 and the other 50 will not have anything on them.
The shield ships that are not using e-war and have no e-war on them will have greater tracking and greater dps than the ewar ship’s which makes up for those who are disrupted. so it will sort of even out.
The advantage depends greatly on how well the ewar fleet is able to evenly distribute that ewar with as little overlap as possible, which is realistically extremely difficult.
If this really is a problem with the current meta then what can be done is ewar modules get -50% effectiveness and ewar specialty ships get an extra 100% ewar effectiveness bringing it back to where it was, either that or cpu cost on ewar modules raise and ewar specialty ships get a cpu reduction on all ewar modules.
Also armor is more susceptible to exp damage (long range) than shield
I personally know a few guys that have had enough with the Mach nerf bat. Eve will lose a few good players. The fandom was too strong. Other then the Mach nerfs, I like the changes. Not for sure what the Eagle “buff” is about.
Since you’re touching he Machariel, would now be a good time to reduce the volume down from 595k to something reasonable like the rest? Barghest could probably use it too.
/darth vader voice - NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
plz not odd number of launchers on Navy Drake
sure, adjust damage how you like, but odd numbers trigger OCD
It’s like fueling your car and its at 10gal & $29.99
lol. ‘The changes are good, but this one thing that’s been ridiculously overpowered for years to the point where 90% of the people who use them want them nerfed? Touch that and you’ll lose people!’
Yo CCP, could you maybe take a look at the Hyperion’s base target range and adjust your buff to it accordingly? Long story short: many years ago, the Hyperion was introduced as a blaster boat, thus it had above-average speed and a nerfed-to-hell target range.
You essentially abandoned the whole “Hyperion Blaster Boat” philosophy years ago, the final nail in the coffin being whenever its base speed was nerfed. At any rate, you made NO SUCH ADJUSTMENT to target range.
Again: max skill Hyperion target range is 75km before March patch, 90km after patch. 90km is where most max skill battleship target range rests RIGHT NOW. Hyperion target range needs adjusting. Please adjust <3
I predict it will be a little less bad. People get more angry when you nerf expensive toys than relatively cheap ones. Just look at the ridiculous rage we saw when CCP said they were nerfing carriers/supers.
“Adapt or die/HTFU only applies when you nerf my enemies’ toys, don’t you dare ever nerfing mine” should be EVE’s motto now…
Monitor - No if hitting the command base is an effective strategy then fleets need to learn to defend against that not just have a bigger tankier ship to hide in.
Cyclone - this is the bare minimum needed. As said previously, this brings the Cyclone up to 8 effective turrets of DPS, which means it has a tenth of a percent chance of killing something before it’s ancilliary shield booster runs out. That said, it’s still not competitive with a Drake for tank, range, etc, so I’ll take what I get. Might top 650 DPS in full gank mode.
Munnin - laffs. This is not a balance, it’s yet another failed attempt to work around the problems with Arty vs ACs, which have to be fixed in terms of PG and CPU requirements. I’ve said it 5 years ago, will say it again; until you can swap arty for AC without altering your fits overmuch, you’re not going to match medium missile interchangeability (literally swap RLML for HAm for HMLs) or even rail/blaster or pulse/beams interchangeability which is generally good. Projectiles, good luck fitting arty to literally any projectile boat without 3 fitting mods these days. So, nice “buff” but no one will fly Munnins when you can fly 5 fleets of Feroxes any day of the week for better results.
Eagle; now the ADCU exists, it needed the drones because suddenly you can brawl with HACs again.
Monitors
Can they please at least fit a TP? Its nice being an FC, and worrying about being headshotted, but you do realise it’s going to simply be ignored because why would an FC take this brick into combat, get his fleet say, 20 Titan kills, and then not get onto any of them? Srsly. And on that note, why these lilly-livered FC’s don’t run 3 alts in the fleet and have redundancy in toons is, well…I guess those guys get the Monitor. Or guys who like ferrying PLEX around.
Which leaves Hyperion even further behind in absolute range since its a percentage based targeting increase.
And the Hyperion does not appear to be getting any other unique advantage to make up for this unique disadvantage.
Well it is a step from 90 to 108km. You can lock at 107km and jump into brawl range if you want.
However just because 600000000000 Ferox do 600000000000 more damage than one, doesn’t mean the boat is overpowered.
It means humans are not very creative and reading is not everyones strong suit these days.
@CCP_Falcon, do you know what happens to a (as in one or 1) Ferox happens in lowsec at any gate?
Bzzz bzzz bzzz minmatar, minmatar, minatar, svipuls - POOF -> DEAD.
Maybe few of you remember, the Ferox lost the resistance bonus.
If some blobbh “commanders” wouldn’t be so narrow and Zealots had a much cheaper alternative, beams sniping would be a thing too.
The sad thing is, you need to fly an expensive battleship and don’t get to use medium beams.
I said this in the command ship rebalance thread, the Absolution and Harbinger could use a nice range bonus.
And then we get the whine threads that 10000000 beam lazors are so op, make nerf hahahahahahahahhaha…
A thing about the Drake Navy Issue, why does the resistance bonus have to go and why is 753dps (hams) not enough??
The Drake Navy Issue is not damage type locked like the regular Drake and has a projection bonus on top of the cake.
Give me an effective beam platform that can do what the Ferox can do, at a similar price/skill point for our line pilots, and I’ll use it. I can put more useful crap in the hold if I only need 6 sets of crystals instead of 6000 rounds of ammo.
whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat? -1 launcher slot to my DNI AAAND taking the shield resistances away x.x? AAAAND turning it into a normal drake? HOW IN THE HELL WOULD THAT REVIVE THE DNI? thats THE DEATH! for the DNI =/ whoever thought about that change in the ccp team putted his/her brain into vacation =w=