Beside the fact that Bhaalgorns are not always an option cause they are slow Battleships i also think your numbers are off. My pyfa still shows 4 1/2 minutes for a standard fit mino with 2 FULL NEUT fitted Bhaalgorns and it ofc ignores the fact that it can shield boost even after running out of cap cause cap boosters. So it easily survives a triage cycle even with this supposedly great counterplay. Chances are that the bhaalgorns either run out of cap themselfs before the mino does or if fitted with nos have less neut power and therefor take even longer. The more realistic outcome would be 2 dead Bhaalgorns though. Oh and yeah what about Lifs and Ninazus? Surely you gonna cap those out with 3 Bhaalgorns? 
Better yet, remove all caps. Problem solved.
1 Like
Arrendis, and you maybe right. My point is that insanity is the definition of doing something over and over again and expecting different results. There is much less taxing solutions that most can agree upon. I am the guy that is always behind the curve. right before I can fly carriers they nerf carriers. before I can fly supers they nerf supers. Before I can fly rorquals they nerf rorquals. before I can fly Faxs they want to nerf faxs. Seems counter productive. that if you have high skill points you gain full advantage over the latter.
why in the world does your dread have remote repairs on it?
If you nerf fax you are killing the battleship meta.
But once again, you gonna listen you the numerous blobber that juste wanna get stronger and destroy any counter to their lowskill blobs, isn’t it ?
Please buff Loggerhead and Dagon
I hate che changes proposed.
it only benefits to the strongest alliances, and weaken the smaller ones.
37% reduction is taking a sledgehammer to FAX and will likely result in them not being used nearly as much. I believe that is the wrong approach.
Lets start with something more reasonable like 20% reductions and see how that shakes out.
Also some FAX are significantly better than others, I’d like to see some small changes to individual hulls included in this to try and even out the balance.
Surely a nerf of such magnitude is just going to cause the new meta to be who has more FAXs for cap fights, and who can alpha something off the field before a fax can get a rep off for sub-cap fights.
I would say the answer is not to nerf FAXs but to instead give us a way to more efficiently counter them as they are,
I mean after all it is CAPITAL logi,
It’s meant to rep more than anything else while being hard to kill, that is the nature of capitals.
I would like to see something that can jam a fax in triage, some sort of anti cap EWAR that can jam both fax and dread alike, bring something new to the battlefield instead of nerfing something on it.
And on the point of triage reps on subcaps, if a fax cant rep a subcap we need to also reconsider High angle weapons on dreads, because without a FAX, nothing can stop them
1 Like
Instead of such a giand ridiculous nerf, just remove fax from the game. They won’t be used anymore but in giand blobby caps fight anyway
Well I would like to see stacking penalty to avoid the bring more fax syndrome. So the more faxes you have repping you there is a stacking penalty so to speak for each one just like stacking mods
1 Like
I mean you have to have a high rep platform to enable small gangs to fight outnumbered. Otherwise this is another nail in the coffin of castles and titans online
Dunno, what about just bring triage carrier back and change fax into mobile outpost/command platform or something?
In general, I think there is too large of a gap between subcaps and FAXs/dreads, and I am all about narrowing that gap in a variety of ways. Specifically, this is what I’d like to see:
- Lower rep numbers during triage/siege.
- Lower cap amount paired with lower cap requirements to use capital-sized modules (the purpose is to increase nuet vulnerability without decreasing cap stability while unneuted).
- Heavy EWAR that bypasses EWAR immunity (Can only be fitted to battleship and above, and limited number per ship, like a grappler)
- Across the board nerfs to supers/titans so we don’t get an excessive power gap between capitals and supers.
If we had these changes, I think it would be a lot easier to balance some of the weaker capitals without launching them into the realm of the comically OP against subcaps.
The solution you proposed is along these lines, so I support the concept, but I think it may work out better if it’s done as a part of a more comprehensive capital/super/titan balance pass.
Because god knows, we wouldn’t want to ask people to get it right if that’s going to be hard.
The Dagon needs no buffs.
It’s currently the tankiest fax in the game, and the only one that jumps into a fight with no capacitor issues, because it starts stealing cap from the enemy capitals from 150km away. It’s an amazing ship.
Dev time is a resource, getting something mostly right quickly can be better than getting something perfect, but neglecting everything else at the same time.
Simple solution to FAX, HAW, and generally the capital “problem”: restrict any capitals from entering low-sec. So if you want subcapital content only, you stay in low-sec. If you are up for capital escalation, you enter null-sec. That should not be hard to implement, right? Also it would give a more reasonable distinction between low- and null-sec space.
6 mil actual dmg is not 6 mil ehp… Assuming 80% shield resist average it’s actually 30 million ehp.
1 Like
As local rep is an issue more for WH than Nul LS can you not add a debuff along the lines of “when in WH nurf bat ruins local tank”?
1 Like