That is obvious thou, and i’m sure CCP are considering everything when they make their changes, better to change a few out of place thing’s than everything around it.
I think the evidence shows just the opposite: they’re attempting balance in isolation.
1 Like
I understand now.
What about the harb? This fit:
X6 t2 heavy beams
x2 t2 tracking comps (optimal scripts)
1 t2 sebo
T2 AB
1 t2 heatsink
T2 1600 plate
x2 EANM
T2 DCU
Adaptive nano plating, explo plating or another heatsink with some massaging
1 ACR
x2 trimark
75k EHP
87km optimal, 290ish dps using aurora with 1 heatsink, 350dps using 2 heatsinks
Cap stable @ 37%
Looking at some other ferox fits in this thread, it beats them in EHP by about 3k and comparable dps.
You can swap in an mwd in place of the ab by using a meta plate and 1% pg implant. Or t2 ACR. The only issue is no cap booster. So void bombs would be bad. Not sure how to work around it, as dropping the sebo messes up lock range and losing a computer brings optimal range down.
Its there and could be competitive with the ferox, but i agree, its missing the flexibility. Navy harb would perfectly mimic the ferox in versatility, but its x3 more expensive.
Edit: Quick numbers on navy harb. 92k EHP (dual heatsinks, easily over 100k with 1 heatsink/tank mod). 350dps at 87km, cap booster/stable with mwd off.
1 Like
I do but you don’t.
Now right now on SISi a Hyperion with me as helms woman has 106.75km lock range without sensor boosters or signal amplifiers or rigs or implants that influence targeting range.
Oh and 844m² cargo hold.
Ferox:
73k EHP [96.6k EHP after boosts Resists: 74.5 / 70.5 / 70.1 / 75.1]
122km Opitima, 277 dps using Spike. Will still be able to target that far w/info boosts after changes.
Your resist hole in Explosive or Kinetic is a problem. The fact that you’re 1/3 the speed is another problem.
1 Like
Depending on the fit, 250mm railguns have 121/140km and 200mm railguns 100/118km with spike M.
A regular Zealot with heavy beams has 81/91 without range mods and aurora M.
Oh well nevermind, one railgun moros or xl beam revelation will vaporize such a fleet anyways.
Edit:
My theoretical Ferox fit has 2x magstabs and one tracking enhancer because the tracking isn’t the best.
Meh, i tried lol. Also, an mwd will fit, just meta the plate or t2 the ACR. So speed difference isnt significantly different.
Its hard to say if its rail guns, the ferox or beams that need adjusting. I feel rail guns could use slightly less range. Then again caldari are known to having long range guns and high targeting range. Reducing railgun optimal would still allow the ferox to be a sniper, but bring its range down some.
Alternatively, lets say CCP buffed medium heavy beam optimal and targeting range on the harb. Would that make it more competitive with the ferox?
Are shield links stronger than armor links? Why did the harb with higher EHP fall below the ferox after links, when the ferox started with lower EHP?
1 Like
Because of the resists. As for the rest… hard to say, really. That’d take a lot of time and work to examine, plugging the numbers into simulations and then gaming it out. And frankly, I don’t get paid to balance their game. They do.
Seems to me that null crubabys need to adapt, the hic should not change just some null dudes can’t handle it.
There is no problem here to fix anyway, not like there are fleets of 200 hic in null… .
No one ever complained about the hic anyway.
So changing the effect of the hic bubbles , why would one ever want to do that?
The monitor seems a waste of time, usuless in all but null sec big fights so why bother?
A little fiddling gave me this:
Harbinger:
6x heavy beam laser II, imformation command burst I (sensor optimization charges)
50mn compact mwd, 3x compact optical tracking computer I (optimal script)
800mm rolled tungsten plate, damage control II, 2x anp II, 2x heat sink II
3x trimark armor pump 2
Optimal range with aurora M: 89/110km and 346.7dps and 108.67km targeting range
For a 1600mm plate, you need to gun down or make do without links.
With an armor command burst I (armor energizing charge) 68.652 ehp but you need to take in some more from the armor reinforcement charge.
If the Absolution would get the projection bonus of the Harbinger, the Absolution would look like this with one tracking computer II (optimal range script):
Optimal range: 77.5km and 93.75km fallofff (maximum targeting range of an unlinked Absolution is 93.75km.
And still slower than the Ferox, with 20k less ehp (with full boosts, you’re at 76.9k), resist holes in Kinetic and explosive (62.9% kinetic, 60.4% explosive), with a 30km shorter range than the (still faster) Ferox. For roughly 40% more ISK (114M to the Ferox’s 80.2M).
1 Like
Wait are you complaining that a plated armor ship is slower than a shield boat??
That is almost new in EVE.
No, I’m not complaining at all. I’m saying offering that as a competitor for a ship that outperforms it in pretty much every respect is silly.
Edit: Keep in mind, the normal tradeoff there is ‘Armor is slower, but Shield has the higher sig, so it gets hit for more damage’. With the MWD on the Harb, you’ve bloomed the sig up to 1.62km to the Ferox’s 1.68km. Negligble difference. So you’ve removed the entire advantage of armor tanking to get… less performance.
1 Like
With focussed medium beams, a 1600mm steel plate II and one armor link with energizing charges, the same Harbinger starts at 80.239ehp and that is without the armor hp link.
You clearly need better logi.
That’s right, and with focused medium beams and a 1600mm plate and full boosts, that Harb’s still got a kinetic hole the Ferox will blow clean through (62.9% to the Ferox’s 74.5% in EM), and now you’re down to a 78.1 km optimal, so at 94.1km, you’re past falloff while the Ferox is still 18km inside its own optimal, and still capable of controlling the engagement range. Especially since with the plate, you’ve lost another 100m/s.
That’s not a question of Logi. It’s a question of the DPS ship is being outperformed, badly.
2 Likes
Instead of putting nerfs, update the ships that lack a bit to make them more viable to use. There will always be a flavor of the month and this will just upset people. Especially if you spend a lot on skins or skills for a particular ship.
2 Likes
Great changes! Small balance tweaks like these should be a regular thing!
1 Like
Great idea! Let’s do nothing but a never-ending spiral of power creep!
1 Like
Those are hard to fit and heavy beams even harder.
Conclusion: The Harbinger needs a tad more powergrid (5-10) and 50 more cpu.
Beam lasers need a little more range (5-10km base optimal).
1 Like
As a fleetcommander of the NS alliance EBOLA:
I love the changes. But i will not enter a FC ship as long as i dont have a possibilty to whore on expensive kills my fleet does. Give it the possibility to fit a civilian gun or a target painter (and reduce target painter effectivity about 99%) so FCs dont have any additional damage or influance other than FCing the fleet but still gives the chance to get on the shiny kills your fleet does because of the FC.
2 Likes