The Incursus is already not sane when dual reped.

That said, it would seem you simply reduced it to the standard 7.5% bonus instead of actually doing the math of what you would need to reduce it by to keep it as powerful.

This is a huge nerf to the one of the few ships new players could use for pvp and still have a chance of winning a fight.

Always found the speed argument... odd. Ships are in space. Armor ships should have the same speeds as shield.

I can see them being less agile, and taking more time to get to full speed or stop however.


Just a random thought. ;)

A few updates:

We're switching the AAR to use nanite repair paste instead of cap boosters. What we're looking at now is for them to hold 8 reps worth of paste, with the smalls eating 1 per cycle, the mediums eating 5 and the larges eating 10.

I'm also investigating our options for reducing the base powergrid need for medium and large armor reps a bit.

We're aiming to have all of this on Sisi before the weekend. Please note that just because things are on Sisi doesn't mean they can no longer change. It just means we want to give people a chance to try it out in the game client.

Well, if you ask questions about racial differences, how about I ask you about what you wrote...
Why do the Gallente ships have so much hull? As if they would plan to lose.
Why should the guys favoring the shortest range weapon system in game also be the slowest?

Armor tankers having more hull than shield tankers makes sense: if you get repairs (external or internal), every time damage seeps over, you get closer to your own shiny explosion, while shields are irrelevant for you.
If you take amarr resistance bonuses into account, they are best off with as much armor as they can get, for each point is worth more on a bonused hull.

Gallente need hull more than armor until they get their average resistance above the DC's level, as that is the safety net of their active tanking bonus. Though fitting for a buffer that is not your primary makes your primary tank weaker... "Luckily", stacking penalty makes DC a better choice compared to T2 at a point (magical three, ofc deadspace modules scale differently and DC has none of that).
Of course, if you can fit more than 60% avg resist to your ship, it suddenly makes less sense. Such as,as if we had amodule that shifts your average resistance to where it's needed the most, at best putting you over 60% (kinetic only missiles for instance) by itself. Going with the luck sentence just a moment ago, sure would be less lucky if these two were penalized the same way. Well, if a third one isn't likely, it wouldn't be TOO bad.

A step in the right direction.
Now if only you would reduce cap boster charge size.

So you'd have nothing against cruisers fitting 3-4 1600mm plates for an absolutely absurd amount of HP?

" Add a new skill to the game called Armor Upgrades. This skill reduces the mass penalty of all armor plates by 5% per level. (Int/Mem, rank 3, requires Mechanics 3) This skill affects all plates (including 1600mm) and is separate from the stat change listed below."

MAKE IT RANK 1 . I'm not asking. It's straight forward demand. I'm one of new players. But i can already tell you there is enough to train. Making it rank 3 is pain for training. It's like we train skill that shield tanking people don't need at all. There is no need to for it be rank 3 , not at all. Fix. Thanks.

It was originally to be field by cap charges, just like ASBs. The player base put forward a valid argument that with the need for cap charges to run boosters already, Armour ships would be at a disadvantage with balancing charges for tank, cap
and ammo.

Nanite paste was suggested and many people agreed, barely anyone, (if at all,) complained.

Good evening. A reminder that, as we announced in the news update from last week, Retribution 1.1. with these changes will be releasing Feb 19th, as opposed to the earlier scheduled Feb 12th.

I also want to let you all know that at this point we will only be making changes for critical defects, and the design for the Armor changes as currently listed in the OP will be releasing with 1.1.

As I said before, this is not the end of our work on tanking in EVE, but I believe it will be a useful step forward and I hope you all enjoy it once it hits on the 19th.