"Hunter's Boon" update on Singularity

While I agree T3Cs don['t need any more nerfs, what you’re describing is actually the way (imo) they always should have been. T2 ships should have always been better in their role. As you rightly point out, T3s are versatile, easily refit based on mission parameters (assuming you have a place to refit or a mobile depot), and that should have been their role all along. Good at a lot, not great at anything. In a medium to large fleet, you should be using the T2s. It just makes more sense - you have the people to focus on each doing one thing right.

As far as nullification goes, passive nullification was a cancer. It should have been active from the beginning (again, imo).

1 Like

I didn’t mean to suggest that T3Cs should be as strong as their t2 counterparts, I was merely using that fact to point out that they’re already a hard sell in fleets. Perhaps they could be better at their different roles, but not as good or better than the t2 hulls.

Hi everyone, thanks for the replies so far - we’re reading through the feedback and suggestions.
Just to give you an update, I’ve edited the post and the following changes are now on Singularity:

  • 25-06 - T3C Skill Loss Removal is now implemented into Singularity.
  • 25-06 - The new hardened cloak booster now has a blueprint, materials and distribution are not yet final numbers.
  • 25-06 - Interceptor role bonus changes are now included (added an 80% reduction in the scan resolution penalty from nullifiers)
1 Like

Whilst some good changes it does nothing for the game eve was, im sure many will like this new cuddly version that is super safe and risk averse but i imagine many that have been playing for years do not.


80% is better than nothing, but why not going 100% for all penalties? What is the reason to nerf tackle ceptors in their primary role, tackling? Do you think nullified tackling was that overpowered that it requires nerfs on multiple fronts (module duration, fitting, scan res, tackle range)?


Without docking? Yes, and no…

You can’t change a fit in the middle of a battle/activity, though, not without docking or using a mobile depot. You make the decision before you’re doing whatever it is you’re going to do, and as others pointed out above, a t3c will perform most of those roles to a lesser efficacy than the T2 specialised ships. You get the flexibility, but never the meta. Jack of all trades, but the king of none. That’s the trade-off, so anything on top of that is excessive and uncalled for. The T3C’s ability to transform isn’t going to upset the balance of a PvP fight, for instance, unless it’s to the T3C’s disadvantage…because the only way it will affect a fight at all is if the T3C is refitting at a mobile depot in open space and gets ganked.

I’ll concede that you may have a point about price. But that’s a function of supply and demand, as well as how CCP balances industry requirements. But, can we not agree that this would be better dealt with by CCP making them more difficult to build, or HAC’s easier to build, rather than skills loss? I agree with you that a T3C should be more expensive than a HAC, but they also need to be remain better with the extra features because they’re higher tech. It’s better to change the price, than change the ships, since you rightly point out that it’s the issue.

OK the null pve environment needs to be redone to force people to undock shiney stuff make it worth ratting in a golem or rattlesnake carrier or super make it impossible to run a sanctum in a vexor that’s stupid

Sanctums should be capital or expensive faction/t2 battleships or battleships with logi only

With much higher rewards

Havens doable with a good fit battleship or bc with logi

And lower ones for vexors etc

I feel this allone would put allot more targets in space as its worth risking it

And bigger mounts of cash in ess will make them more likely to be content generators

Also I hope the covert beacon will not show on d scan so I can bring one in my rook
Maybe even give combat recons a buff as well as not showing on dscan as delayed local show up 60 seconds would be fine.

Still never getting a dime again from me until the test to prove you aren’t AFK doesn’t involve decloaking and recloaking.

1 Like

So you agree that skill lose have to stay. This make your t3 shine. Because you have to protect your skills with good expensive modules for the best performance. Also possible skill lose give you that fealing of outstanding fearless pilot. T3isnot for everyone just for the best.

I see enough marauders in null space and see enough carriers and even supers dying that I don’t think changes are needed.

Once people stop undocking those expensive ships to rat in we may need some changes, but that doesn’t seem to be the case at the moment.

I see no point of the mobile cynosural beacon with 400 m3 and these skills (Anchoring V and Cynosural Field Theory V). Just use a covert ops, much easier.

I thought the goal of the new deployable is to make covert cynos more accessible.

Mobile covert cynos will make covert cynos be more accessible to players with only one account.

  1. Drop mobile covert cyno.
  2. Conduit jump your fleet into a fight.
  3. Kill.
  4. Conduit jump back to safety on your mobile covert cyno.

With the recent changes, the blops doesn’t have to stay behind. With covert cynos, the out cyno doesn’t have to stay behind either. Everyone can join in on the fun!

Another trick is that this covert cyno can be burning in a system without someone in local. Jump into system, anchor the cyno at a safe spot. Jump out of system again. 20 minutes later you jump your entire blops fleet in, starburst and try to catch whoever is in space.

The skill loss removal is a good move, was stupid really and actually stopped me using T3C.

Why do you keep sticking plasters over everything? So now you implement a covert cyno? Like what was the point using the first one, of course everyone is now going to use that, why the hell would they use anything else?

Now remove stupid drag and static bubbles, because damn they are stupid, you want to bubble camp then take the risk and get your HIC and DICs out!

Because it will be 10x more expensive?

So as I have thought all along, it was never about AFK cloaking. It is about cloaking in general.

Today’s update included some further changes, most notably includes a first set of changes to the Pacifier and Enforcer and updating the Covert Cyno deployables industry requirements and skill to anchor.


  • PG increased to 60
  • 1 Extra High Slot
  • Max Velocity increased to 340
  • Increased both max turret/launcher hardpoints to 4


  • PG increased to 1150
  • 1 Extra High Slot
  • Max velocity increased to 190
  • Added Drone capability: Capacity 25m3 and Bandwidth at 25Mbit/s
  • Increased both max turret/launcher hardpoints to 5

Changes are still in progress and may be updated.


Still need to test the changes, but they look promising so far!

I am using my Pacifier for scanning only, cause its fancy. Could you consider giving it the scan devi bonus as well?

Cause right now the Buzzard/Anathema are the significantly better scanners and i would have to drop my fancy looking ship :–(

I just did the math now that we have the costs for the Cloak Stabilization Booster (Only in the BPO, “Industry Tab” is not linked to booster yet).

For 2 hardened cloak boosters you need:
75 Pure Standard Frentix Booster (Lime) 
75 Pure Standard Crash Booster  (Golden)
45 Pure Standard Mindflood Booster (Malachite)
30 Pure Standard Blue Pill Booster (Amber)
Takes about 14 hours for one Booster
  • Using two types of pure strong boosters, the reactions need a high investion in SP and A LOT of high priced reaction formulas
  • It uses types of gas which are already in high demand. Why?
  • Nullsec locations are somewhat paired

With the price I’m calculating it will probably only make sense for capital pilots to use for travelling purposes which might be intended.
As an established producer you won’t have much effort to produce it, but it won’t help the gas market at all.

Hoboleaks shows Enforecer turret/hardpoints 4 to 5, not 7
please check