Yeah, you’re right HAW dreads are entirely unreliable, might as well give them away.
These fights don’t exist btw, because logi is %100 reliable in fleets.
These fights don’t exist btw, because logi is %100 reliable in fleets.
2 Likes
With the changes, 2 Hulks can mine as much as 1 Rorq. Before, it was 3.
2 Likes
I’d prefer the investment and the risk of having VERY EXPENSIVE SHIPS out to be paying off. You know, so some of those veterans with only a couple toons can make ISK not just by making more toons to do the stuff like SBing/multibox mining/mass VNI.
It’s not about being perfectly safe. It’s just that a super will now die to every single random roam if it uses NSA for ratting.
3 Likes
I haven’t watched all those videos, but I am partial to Lasker’s love the dude
Haven’t seen a video of him fighting a BS fleet with logi tho, which is what we were talking about right?
In fact in all those videos I’m not seeing a lot of BS fleets with logi. Mind telling me where they are?
Reguardless, it’s always been more efficient to mine with sub caps. (Especially when considering a mining barge takes a week to train into). Ultimately, I feel you should train barges until you can’t multibox anymore, then start training each account into better ships (ie. Rorqs). So, while I disagree with the direction on the rorqual changes, it doesn’t change much.
Edit: Just thought I should add that overall I agree with all the changes except the rorq ones (I think HAW dreads should be nerfed though).
Hello CCP,
Just some simple math for Rorquals - months of training to get into it, many more months to max yield, many more months to proper tank, many more months to be able to max jump, many more months to get the isk together to get it. You FINALY get your rorq that costs around 8-10 bil to make which is still maaany months of grinding for an average player. Right now if you get ganked (which happens all the time by the big number of blops fleets everywhere) if you play properly you will only lose the ship and you may be able to save the drones, so only a 5 bil loss. But NOOO, that’s OP, let them lose all and start from scratch…why not make a player lose hundreds of hours of play in one go,just to maybe grind many more hundreds to get it back
On the other hand this will only raise prices for EVERYTHING in this game, what is wrong with cheaper CAPS/SUPERS/TITANS? more people will use them so bigger and better fights, that is why the 64bit client is implemented for right? Even now, capital ships as of pvp are used as late game tactics in big alliance fights and usually offer the defensive/agressed alliance a standing chance in the early stages of an invasion because of rapid deployment of existing caps while attacking only uses subcaps.
P.S Rorqual changes will not affect those with 10-20 rorqs in a belt, only those who want to get into one or just have 1 or maybe 2. And making so less rorquals can be in a belt is just idiotic, why train up to a year to not be able to use it?
6 Likes
No changes to boson titans???
I agree with most all of these, but there are a few real standouts:
Gila: THANKYOUCCP!!! RIP GILAS ONLINE!!! (Breathe…)
Cyclone: CPU was sorely needed for a shield boat. Very good change.
Carrier changes: all around good balance of risk/reward.
Reps: cautiously optimistic, looks good, solves FAX+1 anyway.
Laser changes: STRONGLY DISAGREE.
Reasons follow:
Already some of the best turret based projection in the game, instant ammo swaps, and good damage. If all hulls were equal, would be an instant default choice. But all hulls are not equal, and most laser platforms have major issues with mid slot starvation, lack of utility, and agility. These are the reasons I have for not flying lasers, and they have nothing to do with the lasers. Currently, when compared in their own size class, lasers have more optimal than anything but T2 spike rails. And with pulses vs AC, they have more optimal than the AC has total range with optimal and falloff combined. And no, selectable damage types dont make up for pathetic projection.
TL;DR: lasers fine, fix ACs.
2 Likes
First off
you can still save 3 of your drones
Second
Yes in eve you can lose hours of play time when you die, this is normal, welcome to eve
Unlike most big juicy targets you still get to stash a huge amount of your value away in a depot
2 Likes
Here is my feedback: I love you.
4 Likes
Didn’t understand it? Rorquals are only to entertain pvp subscription players…
They got nerfed indirectly due to the Haven respawns nerfs yesterday.
BOSON changes are still on the table for future discussions.
2 Likes
Any chance we could get our hands on the diminishing return formula for remote reps? I’d like to do some math. Pretty please! <3
2 Likes
As well as the haw guns on titans recieving a %50 nerf.
1 Like
Well this is a pvp game…
3 Likes
CCP may make a post with the formula and further discussion in a few days once the changes have been digested and aired out 
2 Likes
The changes made to the vni won’t hurt it’s ability to rat solo in null anomalies. If that was your goal you screwed up. What it will do is make it highly vulnerable to any solo frig or destroyer than can maintain 5k/s because even warriors unbuffed won’t ever be able to settle on target. The speed bonus was a key component in the vni’s solo pvp viability. Balance changes are a double edged sword and both sides cut, ccplease pay attention.
3 Likes
Also so the out of game fitting tools can simulate it, pyfa plz
(eve-ccp) It is a pity that they can not plan the design of the ships if they have to change them later because they have not been provided for the game. It costs us players to get on the ships in time, so that after the ship is not what we expect for the changes they make. I ask you in the future to be more careful about it.
I get the impression that they encourage new players (it’s natural and good for the game) but do not forget those we have many years in and we have put time and money to have what we have. please do not punish us anymore for that.
1 Like
You could probably figure it out by the graph and figures they gave.
1 Like