EVE Search - Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Retribution Point Release] Combat Battlecruisers

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 86 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 24 post(s)
Moonaura The Dead Rabbit Society 245	Posted - 2013.01.19 15:39:00 - [1381] - Quote Jorma Morkkis wrote: If you use more than 3 midslots for tank on Ferox/Drake you're overtanking. "Bu... but I have to use at least 2 LSEs to be competitive." And you forgot that lowslots are shared between tank (suitcase is of them too!), TEs, signal amps, damage mods, overdrives, nanos, various fitting mods... Could you also show us shield tanked Harbinger/Prophecy with MWD+LSE+at least one resist mod+point+web+paint+cap booster. Troll harder. We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
Jorma Morkkis State War Academy Caldari State 384	Posted - 2013.01.19 15:47:00 - [1382] - Quote How much EHP do you need if 60k isn't enough on BC?
Bouh Revetoile Barricade. 224	Posted - 2013.01.19 15:56:00 - [1383] - Quote Wow ! I can't believe it ! People are actually complaining about caldari ship not being effective enough at shield tanking ! Seriously people, in what world do you live ? Can't you keep in mind how ship perform in the game currently before posting about balancing the future ones ? And remember : as long as we don't know what Fozzy have in mind for armor tank, we can't really complain about armor ships being bad because of armor. And the same goes for armor bonuses. More globaly, I think they have been rather conservative with most BC (exceptions being Cyclone and Prophecy) to avoid the risk of breaking the balance. Until now, we had very popular tier2 BC, often considered overpowered, and tier1 BC rather weak. They just put them all in a middle ground, and I think its a good thing. I think BC have been a reference for all this tiericide, and modifying them too much now could be dangerous for balance.
Moonaura The Dead Rabbit Society 245	Posted - 2013.01.19 16:02:00 - [1384] - Quote Jorma Morkkis wrote: How much EHP do you need if 60k isn't enough on BC? Depends what you're trying to do with it Jorma and whether you are supported by logistics, and how many you are trying to fight against. Will a 60k EHP fit be enough to kill a tripple tank Myrmiddon? Doubtful. Will 60k EHP be enough to survive long enough to get repairs if fighting say, a 30 man gang? Tricky. And you also put aside the fact that this ship has a very large signature, increased yet further by both the shield modules and rigs, and amplified by the MWD when in use. You say that 3 slots is enough for a tank on a Caldari ship. I agree, but the Ferox doesn't really have that option in an all round fit, it only has 2 slots for the mid slot tank. 2 is not enough. Typically this will be an Invul, or a EM fixer, with an LSE. But the Ferox has capacitor issues. And it has to use the MWD longer because its slower, and blasters don't reach far. And unless you have other pointers in the fleet, a point is required. You can of course drop the cap booster, and 'hope' that your enemy is in range. And you can drop the point if you're in a fleet capable of bringing more. But this still all rather leaves the Ferox as looking a bit crap doesn't it? How often do you see Ferox's roaming around? If they were so great, I'm sure they'd be used. But they aren't. Why? Because for the cost, there are a lot better choices. My point? With these changes, it still pretty useless. There are far cheaper options and other options that work better at battlecruiser level, including its sister ship. Give it another mid slot and more power grid, and we actually have something viable. We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
Jorma Morkkis State War Academy Caldari State 384	Posted - 2013.01.19 16:12:00 - [1385] - Quote Myrm this and Myrm that. How much EHP do you need against kiting armor Harbinger?

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 3215	Posted - 2013.01.19 16:18:00 - [1386] - Quote Just a quick note guys, Sisi is up and running with a working market now. This build has the BC versions from the OP. They are going to change somewhat in the version I'm working on now, but your feedback on this iteration is still valuable. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie

fukier RISE of LEGION 728	Posted - 2013.01.19 16:35:00 - [1387] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Just a quick note guys, Sisi is up and running with a working market now. This build has the BC versions from the OP. They are going to change somewhat in the version I'm working on now, but your feedback on this iteration is still valuable. you tease! tell us what you are planning... its killing me... i haz to know... (entitlement overload i know!) seriously awesome that you got this on sisi so fast... you guys rock! At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
LordJohnn Melnie Vanagi The Fourth District 1	Posted - 2013.01.19 16:37:00 - [1388] - Quote I cant understand way you debaff all caldari ships? Drake ... am speechless Ferox ... there is no such thing as sniping in eve ... can i do a head shot??? long range battle ... yes, but not sniping
Hannott Thanos Notorious Legion 306	Posted - 2013.01.19 16:49:00 - [1389] - Quote I really hope that either the Myrm gets it's high and gun back, or you do a remodel.
Destoya Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion 49	Posted - 2013.01.19 18:10:00 - [1390] - Quote LordJohnn wrote: I cant understand way you debaff all caldari ships? Drake ... am speechless Ferox ... there is no such thing as sniping in eve ... can i do a head shot??? long range battle ... yes, but not sniping Drake still has incredible tank ability compared to any other battlecruiser, and is still largely the same as before other than that. Ferox can be very strong, tanky blaster ship, and the optimal range bonus gives it opportunity to do damage at 15-20km with its blasters, which is a incredibly useful attribute. It's even viable in a mid-ranged 250mm railgun fit for medium sized engagements, it can do very decent damage at the 30km range mark with easy flexibility to hit much further if you need it. Not sure what youre talking about in nerfing them both, as ferox got buffed in every way.

Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy 300	Posted - 2013.01.19 20:41:00 - [1391] - Quote You guys are nuts if you think comparing Amarr lowslot layouts with Caldari medslot layouts - especially when the total rebalance isn't done yet... However I am not that keen on 7 battlecruiser lowslots which I explained in an earlier post. I agree we all want more medslots but fact is the Ferox tanks fine with 5 and a resist bonus. However it will obviously stink in comparison if the Drake will have 6 and a resist bonus. Which is why I think CCP should consider making people happy with a more aggressive aproach on the Drake...
Marko box Pod Liberation Authority Exodus. 10	Posted - 2013.01.19 21:36:00 - [1392] - Quote So i guess any criticism is too late now with changes allready on sisi? But ill post this anyways. That agility nerf and mass increase on drake is totally unnesesery nerf to any kind of kiting fit and basicly limits the ship to a close range brawler. In 2010/11 when we saw huge drake fleets in 0.0 everyone was crying for drake nerf, saying that it has too much ehp. And 2 years later you are nerfing its agility?! Why?! It seems like an unvaranted change. Instead of looking at the insane peak recharge rate on this ship and the abillity with some fits passivly tank same dps as a medium armor rep. Thats the reason why its the only bc in game which can tank lvl 4 missions. Isnt that more out of line? Please reconsider that change as it will make the drake much more boring ship to pvp in and marginalize it again to PVE and maybe suport fleets in 0.0.
Moonaura The Dead Rabbit Society 245	Posted - 2013.01.19 23:26:00 - [1393] - Quote Pinky Denmark wrote: You guys are nuts if you think comparing Amarr lowslot layouts with Caldari medslot layouts - especially when the total rebalance isn't done yet... However I am not that keen on 7 battlecruiser lowslots which I explained in an earlier post. I agree we all want more medslots but fact is the Ferox tanks fine with 5 and a resist bonus. However it will obviously stink in comparison if the Drake will have 6 and a resist bonus. Which is why I think CCP should consider making people happy with a more aggressive aproach on the Drake... Pinky, the comparison was not clear, appologies. What I was trying to show is that, as far as potential tank slots go, for Amarr, they have a 7 slot low slot ship, akin to say, a battleship, but naturally without the same sort of damage output and now very reliant on drones. Caldari Moa and Caldari Ferox both share 5 slots, and given the Ferox doesn't get a DPS bonus like the Moa, it DPS is practically identical, even with the extra guns. Basically the Ferox now, is a fatter, slower Moa, that still has to use a MWD to get in range when blaster fit, and frankly, for the small amount of EHP extra it gets, at a massive increase in signature, and at half the speed - I think the Ferox is basically not worth much. Why spend a lot more ISK, for basically a pretty similar boat? If anything, the Moa is better than the Ferox, because of its signature and speed. I'm not suggesting 7 mid slots for the Ferox, far from it, if you read my earlier post, I was asking for it to have 6 - the same as the Drake. You can suggest the Drake be more aggressively fit, but I believe that is the role the Naga fills, the Drake doesn't really do the DPS to allow it to really win in that role, given the explosion issues of HAMs, and the nerfs applied to Heavy Missiles. With 6 mid slots the Ferox would be a good step between a Moa and a Rokh - a role that it is basically supposed to fill. We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
Moonaura The Dead Rabbit Society 245	Posted - 2013.01.19 23:53:00 - [1394] - Quote Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: But Fozzie, 7.5% bonus to armor repair amount on both Gallente Battlecruisers?? But we all know how much active armor tanking sucks!! Whatever will you do about this dilemma..... I'll put my money on a Active Armor Tanking implant set. Do I win a prize? There better be a Shield EHP implant set at the same time. We all want 1 million EHP Command ships you know :) We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
Pinky Denmark The Cursed Navy 301	Posted - 2013.01.20 02:57:00 - [1395] - Quote Moa : 5 turrets x 1,25 dps bonus = 6,25 turrets Ferox : 7 turrets = 7,00 turrets Yes - Moa and Ferox has equal amounts of medslots and tanking potential (with more HP on Ferox), however with 5 lowslots compared to 3 lowslots on a Moa, the Ferox will be far able to do 2 more lowslot mods than the Moa. Whatever you do the difference is subtle but still very valuable... So dont judge the Ferox based on what other ships have or not. It still has at least 12% more dps, way more hitpoints and hopefully fitting for bigger guns. On top of this you get 2 lowslots to add either more dps, tracking, range or whatever your Moa might be missing. The only thing wrong with only having 5 medslots is the obvious lack of tackle that REALLY helps a gunship (mwd/web/scram as well as a strong tank) but that has always been difficult with Caldari ships and not something terrible once you get to live with it. Pinky PS. Pirate implants really ruin the experience for many people flying without - they should nerf the bonus to the half and maybe the results would be more in line with the rest of Eve. Anyway believing implants will fix active tanking is absurd...
Mund Richard 283	Posted - 2013.01.20 04:31:00 - [1396] - Quote Agreed that it's not pirate implants that fix tanking. Moa... it also has only half the signature of the Ferox, and quite a bit more speed. Quote: Yes - Moa and Ferox has equal amounts of medslots and tanking potential (with more HP on Ferox), however with 5 lowslots compared to 3 lowslots on a Moa, the Ferox will be far able to do 2 more lowslot mods than the Moa. Whatever you do the difference is subtle but still very valuable... The Moa has 4 now, so only 1 less. The Ferox will still beat a Moa on 1v1 ofc, but it is an easier to hit target as well, making the better tank needed. Wish there was a Rogue Drone Faction Battleship... Infested Domi! Including all the wiggly bits to tend to your swarm, droneboat role bonus, and ofc with turrets.
Diesel47 Bad Men Ltd. 459	Posted - 2013.01.20 06:34:00 - [1397] - Quote Tried the cyclone. It is literally worse than it was before. I'd like auto-cannons back on the cyclone personally. And more of em.
Jorma Morkkis State War Academy Caldari State 384	Posted - 2013.01.20 09:38:00 - [1398] - Quote Moonaura wrote: Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: But Fozzie, 7.5% bonus to armor repair amount on both Gallente Battlecruisers?? But we all know how much active armor tanking sucks!! Whatever will you do about this dilemma..... I'll put my money on a Active Armor Tanking implant set. Do I win a prize? There better be a Shield EHP implant set at the same time. We all want 1 million EHP Command ships you know :) You forgot that shield recharges over time, armor doesn't. That would be way to make shield tanking even more OP.
Diesel47 Bad Men Ltd. 459	Posted - 2013.01.20 10:53:00 - [1399] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: The Cyclone is swapping its projectile bonus for a missile RoF bonus, giving it the ability to spew missile of any damage type desired. This should help provide more variety of ships to Minmatar pilots who enjoy Breacher/Talwar/Bellicose gameplay and want to go bigger. These pilots do not exist.
Gypsio III Questionable Ethics. Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork 500	Posted - 2013.01.20 11:24:00 - [1400] - Quote Marko box wrote: So i guess any criticism is too late now with changes allready on sisi? But ill post this anyways. That agility nerf and mass increase on drake is totally unnesesery nerf to any kind of kiting fit and basicly limits the ship to a close range brawler. TBH if you want a kitey T1 HM/HAM ship, you should be flying a Caracal. BCs obsoleting cruisers has long been a serious problem and I'm glad that some sort of separation between the classes is opening up.

elitatwo Congregatio 60	Posted - 2013.01.20 11:24:00 - [1401] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Just a quick note guys, Sisi is up and running with a working market now. This build has the BC versions from the OP. They are going to change somewhat in the version I'm working on now, but your feedback on this iteration is still valuable. Now that I had the chance to take a look at the battlecruiser changes I have a feeling on how they would do on TQ. So my first impressions in no perticular order, The Drake: I tried both HML and HAM fits and with the loss of a high slot came a little help in the fitting department and both launchers fit with ease. She is still an awesome kiter or a scary brawling boat with up to 600 dps! I like The Ferox: Now I can see what you did there . I tried active and buffer fits with heavy ion blaster II's and Null M this sturdy little boat feels like a slower Adrestia at least in the range department. I'm afraid she still feels like is a little heavy when you take 180-¦ turns but you can dish out blaster ammo until the edge of a long point. I like The Myrmidon: My poor Myrmidon what hath they done to you?? She feels like a terrible bigger Vexor both can't perfom on either the blaster or the drone department. You can active armor tank or buffer tank, both will make her just terrible slow and with the speed bonus from armor rigs just not capable of doing what she likes - closing in a brawl. The Vexor will still outperform the Myrmidon in the speed damage department. I don't know what a solution would be? Either make the Myrmidon faster or remove the armor rig "speed bonus" to reach a zero speed gimp at armor rigging V. I can't say I like it but yet I would have liked my Myrmidon to be a tankier Vexor capable of doing things either with 5 guns or drones and omg-solo-bbq-pwn-style with the both of them combined. The Brutix: My dear Brutix and her bigger sister both got the short straw in the upcoming changes and like the Myrmidon she just can't get in close to beat someone like the gallente do. She is another too slow battlecruiser who cannot get in range and active or buffer armor tanking make it even worse. One the damage department she is still the Brutix we all know - best to stay out of her way. On a sidenote a tiny bit offtopic, if armor tanking would not make a skirmish boat slower, they could. I even proposed a change for the active repair modules cycle time to be reduced so you my not need those rigs to perfom well. Another thing and please accept my apologies in advance because I still need some time before I can fly amarr boats but I like to say a few things about them too. In New Eden not everything that is bigger means that it is better and on that note it puzzles me why it is not possible to fit larger guns on larger ships. When I use my eft or pyfa to setup ships I find it difficult to fit a full rack of neutron blasters or heavy pulse lasers on gallete or amarr boats. Amarr ships tend to be very tight on cpu and powergrid and god forbid they take other guns then focussed medium pulses. The same goes for gallente ships not capable of fitting neutron blasters, except for the Talos. Dear CCP Fozzie, a very common pvp setup for a ship looks like this, - guns in the highs, a neut if you can - mwd, point or scram, web if you can, cap injector if you can and ewar if you can - damage mod, tracking enhacer, damage controll II If you manage to fit the above, you have a pvp boat ready to go but you still need to fit a tank of your liking on them if you have slots to put them into. Sadly armor repair modules need more powergrid altogether since you need at least two of those to compete with one shield booster, so be generous with grid please at least for gallente and amarr ships, matar don't need powergrid.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 116	Posted - 2013.01.20 13:06:00 - [1402] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Just a quick note guys, Sisi is up and running with a working market now. This build has the BC versions from the OP. They are going to change somewhat in the version I'm working on now, but your feedback on this iteration is still valuable. What's going to happen with tier 3s?
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld 32	Posted - 2013.01.20 13:12:00 - [1403] - Quote Jorma Morkkis wrote: If you use more than 3 midslots for tank on Ferox/Drake you're overtanking. "Bu... but I have to use at least 2 LSEs to be competitive." And you forgot that lowslots are shared between tank (suitcase is of them too!), TEs, signal amps, damage mods, overdrives, nanos, various fitting mods... Could you also show us shield tanked Harbinger/Prophecy with MWD+LSE+at least one resist mod+point+web+paint+cap booster. I think Jorma is trying for a staff position at CCP...
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld 32	Posted - 2013.01.20 13:46:00 - [1404] - Quote Also it doesn't make any sense that the Drake and Ferox have smaller signatures than the Brutix and Myrmidon. We all know that ship signature is heavily influenced by shield size, the caldari ships have bigger shields (as they should) but have smaller signatures. Perhaps I am reading it wrong, but this doesn't seem right.
DJWiggles Eve Radio Corporation 35	Posted - 2013.01.20 14:03:00 - [1405] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Just a quick note guys, Sisi is up and running with a working market now. This build has the BC versions from the OP. They are going to change somewhat in the version I'm working on now, but your feedback on this iteration is still valuable. What's going to happen with tier 3s? Nothing atm Live on Eve Radio Wednesdays 20:00 GMT with me & friends blabbering on about Eve and stuff-áFollow me on twitter http://twitter.com/WigglesGRN, like me on facebook http://facebook.com/wigglesGRN or check out my blog http://wiggles.gamingradio.net/blog
Moonaura The Dead Rabbit Society 250	Posted - 2013.01.20 14:05:00 - [1406] - Quote Jorma Morkkis wrote: Moonaura wrote: Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: But Fozzie, 7.5% bonus to armor repair amount on both Gallente Battlecruisers?? But we all know how much active armor tanking sucks!! Whatever will you do about this dilemma..... I'll put my money on a Active Armor Tanking implant set. Do I win a prize? There better be a Shield EHP implant set at the same time. We all want 1 million EHP Command ships you know :) You forgot that shield recharges over time, armor doesn't. That would be way to make shield tanking even more OP. Well, lets see, there is the million EHP Damnation - entirely passive tank, compared to the Vulture which has to overload its hardeners to reach at best, 400,000 EHP. Given the way the shield recharge works - it only hits peak recharge around 25%, and only offers about say, a 100-150 at most in terms of actual hp back a second, then yeah, of course, 600,000 EHP less and a far larger signature is a bonus for us! lol Lets not even talk about the difference for Titan's overall EHP when it comes to shields, where the numbers are even more painful for shield pilots. We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
Jorma Morkkis State War Academy Caldari State 384	Posted - 2013.01.20 14:12:00 - [1407] - Quote Moonaura wrote: Jorma Morkkis wrote: Moonaura wrote: Hans Jagerblitzen wrote: But Fozzie, 7.5% bonus to armor repair amount on both Gallente Battlecruisers?? But we all know how much active armor tanking sucks!! Whatever will you do about this dilemma..... I'll put my money on a Active Armor Tanking implant set. Do I win a prize? There better be a Shield EHP implant set at the same time. We all want 1 million EHP Command ships you know :) You forgot that shield recharges over time, armor doesn't. That would be way to make shield tanking even more OP. Well, lets see, there is the million EHP Damnation - entirely passive tank, compared to the Vulture which has to overload its hardeners to reach at best, 400,000 EHP. Given the way the shield recharge works - it only hits peak recharge around 25%, and only offers about say, a 100-150 at most in terms of actual hp back a second, then yeah, of course, 600,000 EHP less and a far larger signature is a bonus for us! lol Lets not even talk about the difference for Titan's overall EHP when it comes to shields, where the numbers are even more painful for shield pilots. How much Damnation's armor recharges per second? Oh, and comparing officer fit vs T2 fit isn't smart.
Moonaura The Dead Rabbit Society 250	Posted - 2013.01.20 15:02:00 - [1408] - Quote Jorma Morkkis wrote: How much Damnation's armor recharges per second? Oh, and comparing officer fit vs T2 fit isn't smart. Fair call. But the Damnation doesn't need to go above T2 to completely own in the Command Ship department. [Damnation, T2 Damnation] 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I 1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II Damage Control II Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Small Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 25 X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Armored Warfare Link - Damage Control II Armored Warfare Link - Passive Defense II Armored Warfare Link - Rapid Repair II Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Fury Light Missile Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Fury Light Missile Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Fury Light Missile Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Mjolnir Fury Light Missile Medium Trimark Armor Pump II Medium Trimark Armor Pump II Hobgoblin II x5 [Vulture, T2 Vulture] Damage Control II Power Diagnostic System II Power Diagnostic System II Power Diagnostic System II EM Ward Field II Large Shield Extender II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Small Capacitor Booster II, Cap Booster 25 Large Shield Extender II 10MN Microwarpdrive II Siege Warfare Link - Active Shielding II Siege Warfare Link - Shield Efficiency II Siege Warfare Link - Shield Harmonizing II 250mm Railgun II, Javelin M 250mm Railgun II, Javelin M 250mm Railgun II, Javelin M 250mm Railgun II, Javelin M Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Medium Core Defense Field Extender II Hobgoblin II x5 Notes: The reason you need a small cap booster on both fits - is that the best way to disable a command ships gang links is to cap drain it. This helps negate this issue, and is considered best practice as a lack of gang links is generally considered, a bad thing. So, the Damnation with slaves hits: 556,093 EHP with a signature of 265 The Vulture with halo set (The best thing currently for a shield buffer fleet fit like this) hits: 214,547 with a signature of 291 Spot the difference? Now, the passive recharge which, you think makes the Vulture somehow awesome. Well again - its not constant - it is only that figure around 25% - comes in at 594 a second. This equates to, 35640 over a minute - if - and somehow magically - the enemy keeps it at 25% perfectly, for 10 minutes - then... finally, you could argue about how awesome that somehow the Vulture is better. When you reach titan level, the difference can be as much as 20 million EHP between say, the Erebus, and the Leviathan when being boosted. And agreed, passive shield recharge is a factor, albeit nowhere near as powerful as you make out. But it would be very easy for CCP to release a shield EHP implant set, that also nerfed shield recharge time. Easy. But shields should always have less EHP than Armor, but not quite as dramatic a difference as this. The reason is that the armor tanks only activate at the end of the cycle, rather than shields that activate at the start. Which is a factor in logistics backed fights. The calls for a buffer implant for shields is an entirely fair one, and one of the biggest imbalances in the current game. Anyway. I am on the test server and will be posting some numbers for the Ferox in all its glory lol compared to say, the Prophecy. We are recruiting talented pilots for innovative small gang PvP https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=175061
Jorma Morkkis State War Academy Caldari State 384	Posted - 2013.01.20 15:29:00 - [1409] - Quote Yeah, implant set for shield buffer and decrease shield recharge time.
Mund Richard 284	Posted - 2013.01.20 15:35:00 - [1410] - Quote Moonaura wrote: Jorma Morkkis wrote: How much Damnation's armor recharges per second? Oh, and comparing officer fit vs T2 fit isn't smart. Fair call. But the Damnation doesn't need to go above T2 to completely own in the Command Ship department. Compared two ships with 6 possible tank slots, while reducing one's to five, instead of saying "it's dependent on cap transfer". Then you bring in slave set (worth more than the ship I believe) for T2 fits, knowing shield has nothing similar. And you compare a ship with two tanking bonuses to another that has only one. I'm not saying the Vulture doesn't need help, hell even without the first two I mentioned, the Damnation still has a good 50% more EHP on a fit I just threw together from yours, and I didn't even put T2 plates on it! Then again... notice how that 50% more EHP is somewhat like as much armor the Damnation gets from Command Ships skill? Wish there was a Rogue Drone Faction Battleship... Infested Domi! Including all the wiggly bits to tend to your swarm, droneboat role bonus, and ofc with turrets.



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 86 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.