Never incursions, there is no use for something that gives no boosts and does no DPS in a situation where you intend to lose no ships. Also incursion fleets have a backup for the FC and could actually run themselves fairly well without the FC in an emergency as well as having a quasi backup FC in the form of the LC and occasionally a backseat FC.
2 Likes
Bruh thatâs like 6-9k Alpha from a Cruiser, itâd make Ishtars look like bitch, whilst being faster, more agile, and looking 420% cooler.
1 Like
Medium LR weapons in general are already some of the strongest modules in the game in terms of power & flexibility - Med Rails & Beams allowed old T3Cs to leverage their tank power incredibly well with 0-1 damage mods.
If youâre going to touch up the Harb you make itâs cap better and maybe give it a bit of fitting room. Potentially one could give it different bonuses too.
3 Likes
Making trade offs in fits is a core part of eve. That said Iâm glad you like the direction the Mach headed, it was something I heavily pushed for along w/ the rest of the CSM.
1 Like
Dammit, @Jin_taan stop making sense! Youâre a CSM, youâre not supposed to make sense! Youâre only supposed to mindlessly do our⌠wait, hang on, lemme check the list⌠ours, ours, PLâs, PLâs, ours, PLâs, PLâs⌠yeah, our bidding! </SARCASM, PEOPLE, JESUS>
5 Likes
Itâs an observation bias - the rest of the CSM tells me my stupid ideas are stupid 
1 Like
Duh, we told them to tell you that. 
Your stupid ideas are stupid. 
4 Likes
The first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club
2 Likes
Whoâs idea was it to make the Munin incapable of probing for Combat Exploration?
Bring a mobile depot. Drop a gun, add a probe launcher. Probe what you want and swap back to a gun.
2 Likes
Or use a ship with scanning bonusâs and do all the scans first go in your combat ship after, not really optimal to be jumping gates in a slow align ship
1 Like
As opposed to the never ending balance changes? All this does is create a new flavor of the month which will be followed by the inevitable calls for nerfs of what ever that new fotm is.
1 Like
Nothing wrong with never ending balance changeâs so things donât get stale, adapt or die.
2 Likes
Youâve been playing for 8 years. Youâre just noticing that the Flavor of the [interval] cycle is basically the very core of EVEâs meta and always has been?
Youâll still have that with the âno nerfs only buffsâ idea, itâll just always be âthis ship is now BETTER than everything else!â instead of âok, the Proteus is no longer great at everythingâ or âthe Mach is the king of all battleships in damned near every roleâ.
So what are you advocating here? Doing nothing at all and let the game stagnate? Everyone in the same ship? Ishtar Online for the next 10 years? Thatâs your plan?
Change is needed, in ships, in meta, helps slow down boring decline.
1 Like
What I advocate is what I have been saying for years. Having devâs constantly chase after balance is a losing proposition. All it does is consume endlessless dev time chasing an impossible goal. On top of that, nerfs always piss off those who are effected by them, potentially driving those players from the game. Eve is supposed to be a sandbox. The solution for balance should come from the players. It was a mistake for ccp to impose roles on ships to dictate how they are fit and flown. It is fundamentally un-sandbox. Instead ccp should have gone for more generic hulls such has small, medium, large and then allow the players to customize them into whatever role they deemed appropriate. Want to turn that large hull into a hauler then fit the appropriate mods and rigs; want to turn it into a bs then fit those mods and rigs; want a hybrid then fit some combination of both. This way in a real sandbox balance would come from the players through competition. Sure there would be limitations but this would come from trade offs players made through fittings. Ofc none of this is going to happen. Unfortunately we are locked into this endless cycle of nerfs which never pleases more people then it angers. Nerfs are like that. People are invested in the their play style. Nerf their play style and they get angry, maybe angry enough to leave, and ofc this is never counterbalanced by new players entering a game bc new players donât know enough to care about nerfs. So nerfs drive away players without attracting new players, which in turn means that it would be better for ccp to focus its efforts on seeking ways to get new players instead of serially angering portions of its player base through nerfs.
1 Like
The first iteration of T3Câs had huge amountâs of combinationâs and CCP said many times how much of a nightmare that situation was, your idea sounds like even more nightmarish situation where you have to somehow balance 10000000000 different combinations.
I never forgot them. They are my go to weapon.
Okay. Just wondering as this is a discussion about the up coming balances - would it be possible/feasible for CCP to maybe take a whole patch where they overhaul all the ships in one go. Comparing size/class to size class across each faction. As everyone knows, some ships shine better than others, but when entire classes of ships are over shadowed by another class it seems like a waste of reseouces in the game.
I am also wondering if it is technically possible to do something I proposed for modules before.
Allow a single module to be fit in low-mid-high and depending on where it is placed, has different effects/cost.
Take the Sensor Booster - Low slot would be passive. Mid active. High Remote. Instead of 3 module types cluttering up hangers you have one.
Now it wouldnât would for every module, but I think it would work for a lot of them.
5 Likes