Yeah, buff subcaps. As it was not already almost impossible for a 20 bil citadel to destroy 300mil worth of cruisers.
1 Like
Didnāt expect the Ferox to get nerved - by it self itās not really a good ship only it gets used a lot in fleets. Guess iāll have to forget about solo PVP in a Ferox alltogether but maybe i can come up with a nice fit for the Harbinger now? Will have to do some simulations on this.
I definetly like that you try to give Battleships some love but the Abaddon needs more cap to be competitive, damage not so much but iāll take it.
T1 Battleships are cheap and provide some of my favorite gameplay when i engage small gangs roaming my home space or when im in the mood for welping myself somewhere in low sec.
More often than not i die a quite miserable death though so i would really appreciate some more self repping power, larger cargo cappacity so i can bring a bubble and some extra cap boosters, ecm resistence or really anything that generally benefits more in this scenario than in large scale fleets.
The Leshak feels like itās in a good spot. Most of the other faction Battleships need a hand full of buffs if they are supposed to have similar performance for the pirce class. I would absolutely love any reason to add more different Battleship hulls to my hangar!!! But as it stands now most of the time using a BS is more about the swag than playing āefficientlyā
Marauders are in a really sad position where theres a cheaper and better alternative for every possible usecase.
Really those are the ships that should bridge the gap between capitals and sub capitals.
Maybe the balance could be handled better if the gap between small ships and caps is made larger to make more room for every ship class to play a significant role on the battlefield instead of nerfing caps downwards?
I know how fun it is to burn down a carrier with only a small gang of frigs but it also doesnāt quite feel like it fits the actual scale of things that this is even possible when frigates are the size of a house and capitals the size of a mountainā¦ Just a thought.
Iād like a percent bonus to damage per dread skillevel better than having it on the siege module. This way it wouldnāt affect drive by dreads while accelerating and give an extra reward for going all the way up to level 5 instead but really itās a minor inconvenience i guess.
Over all i think this patch is a good step in the right direction.
1 Like
Any idea when this patch is rolling out ?
I run T5s in a shield ishtar with no drugs and have never lost my ishtar yet. Closest I came to losing was in PVP room 
. I actually think the Ishtar is better than the Gila. As my fit in has never been capped out and has a MWD, whereas my gila fits have an AB. Only way a gila would be better is if you only ran electricals as you could have a MWD and be cap stable with the filament bonus.
I mostly run Electricals and Exotics purely because of finish time. But I have ran all except darks.
Abyssal PVP needs some balancing/fixing for sure. We need a way to make sure people actually die to players and not the clock. I was even contemplating on one of my alts running T1 cruisers with a cheap high tank just to stalemate people and ransom them because of this error in Abyssal design, but it felt too immoral haha.
If you want to have a real Arena feel. Why not have where after 10 minutes they release the lions! and rats start spawning in the arena attacking the players.
5 Likes
Yeah rightā¦ I donāt even want to think about how much money CCP made the last 3 years off people injecting alts into blatantly overpowered capitals.
3 Likes
All these changes to Null Sec make me wonder who actually influenced the changes, obviously not miners, obviously not ratters, so am I to believe itās just PVPerās that are influencing the changes? All these changes arenāt about balanceā¦itās about the bottom line CCP making money. We didnāt see these discussions until CCP was bought out so these changes are no surprise. Ratting and Mining all generate isk which helps people plex their accounts. If you make it harder to plex and Ships and drones more susceptible to death than people will have to pay for the account more or buy more plex. I am sure there have been long talks with the company who purchased EVE to bring in more revenue. Well hereās one way to do it. CCP is looking at making money not catering to itās players.
Who suffers. The Playersā¦the veteran players who were with CCP from the beginning who had to queue their skills, not buy them.
7 Likes
When do you guys think this patch will go live guys , seems pretty tough for capital pilots .
@CCP_Falcon Please also remove Travel ceptors 
thanks
1 Like
At the moment Carriers and Super-Carriers will often out-damage sub-caps against targets of any size even without support. That because they are carriers and super that up the are ā ā ā ā ā ā ā made to do ffs
2 Likes
I donāt think it goes far enough if your looking to nerf the rorquals. They will still be the ship of choice for mining.
Perhaps you need to add that rorqual boosts can stack at a deminished amount. So two rorquals boosting could extend barge:exhumer in range up to 65 km or so and make the cycle times much lower. That would return the rorquals value back towards a powerful fleet command ship like it was first intended. Then you may see smaller exhumed/barge based corps be able to mine more, if they risk putting a rorqual on grid. It keeps value in mining with a rorqual but makes them more powerful for use subcap ships.
When is CCP going to look into cloaky camping? 1 person with 20 accounts can remain defended and drop support at any second un challenged. Seems out of balance. I would think that there should be a ship mod that can be fitted to a dreadnaught that takes up so much cpu/PG that the mod is all it can fit and would require a new skill ācapital combat scanning 5ā. The mod would act like siege so to make the ship vulnerable (creating bait scenarios) but the mod would either act like current combat scanner but can pick up the location of cloaked ships and land on them to uncloak them or it could act like the Kraken to turn off cloak mods.
This would turn cloaky camping into an active activity because the camper would either have to keep warping around or make sure they can turn their mod back on.
It would make looking for campers a small fleet activity where the dread would need fax and carrier support and you would need your tackle ships to warp after decloaked ships.
3 Likes
So can a rorq with a cyno fitted. The second anything dangerous shows up you hit PANIC, light a cyno and a bunch of supers jump in unchallenged. Seems out of balance.
I like how you think pvper come to help miners
Iāve already stated that caps are literally being killed off the game except for the big blobs.
What I still cannot understand is CSM and CCP kinda forgets about how time consuming and expensive it is to actually get to those capitals they so eagerly keep nerfing, like Rorq. 400m Hulk mines 1/2 of what 10bil Rorqual does. Then what is the point of skilling up to Rorqual, when I can achieve just the same with 2 toons and 10% of skill and ISK investment? Same goes for caps. You spent 8 months training into a super and spent 35 bil ISK to have it nicely fit for both PVP and PVE combat? Well, deal with it, now we made all your caps just big blob PVP ships and donāt care about your way of doing things. All ballance is getting tipped over. 3 AFK VNIs you could fly for 300mil in couple weeks make as much ISK as 2 bil carrier after long months spent on training, but with less risk, especially after NSA changes. Same for supers. Double the AFK VNI (well, Ishtars after the change) amount and youāll match the 35bil Super income with years of training, but with no risk compared to the cap.
So my question is - after spending almost 200bil on capital ships I have in my hangars and spending YEARS to max them out - what is my reward for that? So I can take part in 4 big battles a year? And what about the Rorqual I bought 3 nerfs ago?
Another question - after YEARS of specializing as cap PVE pilot, what are my ways to make ISK with them now? Itās going straight from high risk-high reward to enormous risk or no ISK. All in all it just comes down to āget more toons, multiboxā. Thatās not my way of playing Eve.
Some of you keep repeating that the changes hit Goons the most. No, they donāt. Try catching and killing a Super in Delve. You get Goon titans warping to you before first bubble pops next to that Super. You can just not care about the intel and only react to local in most parts of Delve, easy as it is. People there will keep their NSAs on at all times and keep making crazy ISK with their supers. Not even mentioning Rorquals. By the time they have to PANIC, the super fleet is already in system. Nerfing PANIC time only affects those who need that time to assemble response fleets, not those with permanent super umbrella in standing.
3 Likes
Here is my take on this:
Insurance changes - good thing to happen , i am a cap pilot and the whole ide of easy replenish cap loss seems to be wrong .
Rorqual: - changing excavators seems doable and buff to ābuffingā ability seems ok , but why would you decrease the defendebility of such expensive and hard to train for ship ā¦ you need to respect the time and isk placed to fly, build and fit each ship
Titans : - seems to be a bit overboard for a ultimate spaceship not being able to fend for itself - its a titan for godsake why would you deminish it . you want to make it harder for titans - increase time needed to build one but not its abilites ā¦ cost bilions to mak, billions to skill4 and billions to fit ā¦ there is a bit of perspective needed here ā¦ 4 triglivian BS can take out titan at this point ā¦ look at this instead of titans ability to fight
ā¦ while on subject - maybe apply same stacking nerf on triglivian ships as on Fax reps?.. they are waaaaaay overpowered at this moment ā¦ they deal almost as much damage as dreadsā¦ please look into that
Fax changes - sure ok - just aplpy stacking penalty mechanics to triglivian stacking damage
Carrier and Super Carrier - Super carrier has more fighter slots so can do more versitile combos of support fighters but carrier with 3 fighter bays kinda looses sense if can not defend against fast targets - its same principle and hate you deal on caps here ā¦ those are expensive ships that takes long time to train - need to be able to fight off fast ships ā¦ unless your secret plan is for single AF to kite carrier to death ?..
in summary i do feel one sided hate coming from you towards capital ships , i understand that some pilots wants to nerf them but also you have another base of loooong time playing pilots that placed tons of time and isk to fly them and your making them unflyable is just wrong and can cause decrease in loyal long term player base in long term . PLease focus on big picture and on unblanced new ships vs cost and time placed towards flying capital ships . I do agree that changes of ease of replaing capital ships were needed but rest is just going waaay overboard on your part i belive . Come on falcon your a kool dude ā¦ stop hating capital ships ā¦ they are capital ships ā¦ a goal to stride for - make it so
1 Like
Why the nerf to the Vexor Naxy Issue?
To make VNI ratting less appealing.
Iām glad to hear about the more implants and more module tiericide parts. Sad about the Gila and VNI nerfs.
Bit of a mixed bag overall.
1 Like
Goons of course, because they are the least affected by these changes (or even benefit by nerfing drone booshing).
1 Like
Yep, guess that makes sense from their wallet point of view.
But i would not care if EVE been cash only possible to be able play from start and if they made changes that make some sense. This is just killing us who love the mining, industrial partās of the game.
But as you said, no income = no plex = no playing (unless CC payment) ā more cash to CCP (read new owners).
1 Like
Thatās taking the topic on a tangent. They are tweaking the rorq to make the panic shorter. But do you honestly think a small gang of frigates should be able take down a defenceless capital? Of course it needs a equal defence.
The point of my post is to make camping an active activity or risk being found.
1 Like