There’s nothing emergent about headshotting. It’s everybody’s go-to move now. Time to switch it up a bit and keep the meta fresh.
It’s a go-to move when the situation makes it one. You get an FC in a CS flying with low numbers of logi who aren’t standing off in a more defensive posture… don’t headshot, kill the logi. They’ll die faster than the FC will, and most FCs are more likely to overestimate how much logi they have left than they are to overestimate ‘am I dead?’ So you’ve got better odds of turning ‘a fight’ into ‘a slaughter’ before they realize they need to withdraw.
2 Likes
So, hey… I’ve got another question about the balancing around this ship:
Flag Cruisers (the skill) requires Fleet Command I. Which requires Wing Command V.
So at the point where you can use this ship properly, you have 4 months just in Amarr Cruiser V, Minmatar Cruiser V, Caldari Cruiser V, Gallente Cruiser V, and 2 months into Wing Command…
… really, at what point is this ship more accessible than the more versatile Command Ships? And you spend 2 months training skills that just improve the performance of Command Bursts… to use a ship that doesn’t use Command Bursts.
Please… please… just do a damned line of T1 CONCORD hulls if you want to re-use the Enforcer. If you want to produce niche ships, choose a better niche to start with, and get community input from the get-go.
3 Likes
Actually, My view is the exact opposite. The game would be much much better if CCP did not provide the base information for ANY killmails. Of course, that kills their entire marketing gambit of a million bajillion dollars could be destroyed in the next fight.
But if people had no killboards to gauge “success” by, the game would be far better. People would fight for the joy of fighting, period. I am not into that part pf the game, but understand it. I am talking about low sec and null sec fights, not suicide griefing.
6 Likes
Please remove this ship and add.
“Command damage control”
Can be fitted to command ships and command destroyers
Drawback: guns offline or limit dps to 1
1 Like
Anyone else think it could be abused a bit for rolling wormholes?
The Mass is listed as 16,000,000 and it can fit prop mods which will increase the mass a bit.
Granted it can’t fit plates or Higgs Rigs so it would make for slow rolling but could be effective in numbers especially if the hole is hostile.
I haven’t done any math just a passing thought and no one else seems to have commented on it.
Not really. Monitor: 16,000,000 + prop mod. prop on, that’s 21,000,000 kg (too big for a 20,000,000 hole)
Legion: 14,500,000 + [2x 2,250,000 plates = ] 4,500,000 = 19,000,000, and it has a cloak.
Starting with Auto Targeting systems…
Their default equipment use is 1 PWG and 1 CPU.
Thus adding this to your ship ends any other object use.
V2 uses more than the ship can fit.
Target painting:
Ignoring the range bonus and effectiveness just for the moment and going with function how would the fleet know what you painted as a target without also setting this object as a fleet commander would? If we’re going to put in an effect so they can command easier then why not make this a fleet target painter module specifically only usable on this ship? You could then put zero bonus to target painting, ignore it’s powergrid and cpu requirements while setting the target you “painted” as a priority for your active fleet.
Actual use:
Have you put any thought about what people can do with this ship rather than what you are attempting to build this ship into? Historically going into way the heck back machine there was a time where the best mining ship was the Navitas for rookies. It was changed into a logistics ship and replaced with the Venture which became the dedicated frigate T1 mining ship. Now what is this ship actually replacing that is not provided by another ship that already exists? Do those other ships get a benefit for this ship existing?
I’ll leave it at that.
1 Like
Well that’s beyond what I can answer XD, I was there to answer your previous questions.
I will say your suggestion could work, but the decision is on CCP’s side.
It is truly a little bit slower and will too easily to make it even slower.
7.49s or more align time is not as fast as you think. In fact, it’s slower than nearly a half cruisers, even a lot of battle cruiser fits maybe more faster than this. And 3.3au/s without a way to improve, not that good either.
In the other hand, due to their recognition, these new FCs are vulnerable to warp disrupters, thus may totally slow down entire fleet.
Would it be possible to allow the monitor to use 100MN while not allowing it to use 500MN?
100MN in a lot of situations is a very valid fitting choice, and FCing a 100MN fleet in a 50MN cruiser would be very very bad, even IF the sig radius of an MWD monitor is still lower than that of a 100mn shield cruiser.
Even with a 99% reduction to the requirements of a 500MN which is a 1375 powergrid T2 and 1250 T1 the T2 would need more powergrid than the ship has of 13.75 and T1 12.5 out of 3. They would only work with a 99.9% reduction which the role bonus is not at.
I’m not asking for an option to allow 500mn, I’m asking for an option to allow 100MN. 100MN cruiser is a viable fleet doctrine, 500MN cruiser is not
No, this specific shop can only fit probe launchers, target painters, and prop mods.
You asked:
So the 500MN (Microwarp drive) is by default not an option due to powergrid.
The 100MN (Afterburner) is at a cost of 668 Powergrid for the T2 and 625 for T1 which at 99% reduction is easily fit.
Edit:
Oh wait… that’s my brain doing math wrong again… 6.68 or 6.25 out of 3 PG… Boost powergrid to 6? Would that cover it?
Edit 2:
More math:
6 powergrid + 25% bonus from skill Power Grid Management = 7.5 Powergrid. That should do it.
5.6 would also put it just at 7 after max skill.
Bad idea IMO. Kinda defeats a valid strategy of cutting off the head of a snake.
The same logic could be applied to rank and file ships to ensure everyone has a chance to engage in a fight and not get alphad off before they get to fight.
Why make an invincible ship that only does o e thing and not a meaningful new class that shakes stuff up.
Why does CCP feel like they need to design around the player community’s failure to train a sufficient quantity of FCs to mitigate the issues caused by headshotting?
This super-niche ship with all these special-case gimmicks and limitations just seems…unnecessary.
5 Likes
Yang without the Yin …not a balanced concept
1 Like
Easy, just make everyone an FC, problem solved?
2 Likes
If you add this ship, just choose not to fly it. No one’s forcing you. Could be used to tank some sights, but so what, you’d need an alt to do damage anyway. Unless it’s simply not let in warp gates, which by default they aren’t anyway. Could be used for Incursions, but would cut into payout and limit effectiveness of contesting. Don’t want it to be an explorer either that can’t be killed in WHs while marking pings.
Legit, will be used to keep fools like Brave from headshotting to end battles. Head shotting, noble when defending timers, just stupid on roams. You go out for a good fight and content, and you all retreat after one FC ship is killed and podded.
So far, the only complaints are from people who reserve the right to end content early because they might be losing by headshotting. I support this ship, I think it should live.
+1 CCP, a nice tool if you want it.