Quick Naglfar Comments ::

Ok, so you still get the double dps bonus for the Nag hull, correct?

On a separate note on the Nag...

There was a fringe case using the Naglfar, because it had 5 high slots... and that the launchers weren't actually bonused... you could drop one launcher, and lets say... use a Neut, or a NOS or something else.

Would you be interested in doing -1 high slot, and leaving the utility slot on the Naglfar - something that Minmatar hulls do have a tendency of having anyways?

What about the Moros doing a ton more DPS than the others?

What about the Phoenix's split weapon system? It can only use a single unbonused turret - it has to jam pointless citadel launchers into the other two highslots.

Because blasters?

Citadel Torps are amazing at anti-structure and anti-capital warfare. They just suck for blapping.

We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.

I don't have anything to comment about frigate changes, but the way you fixed the issue with Naglfar seems like just hiding stuff under the carpet to me. Of course, it would be perfect if Naglfar had 3 turret slot like all other dreads. Are your graphical designers too lazy to change the ship's model to accomodate this? But you changed the Megathron model some time ago, even though it wasn't an ugly ship.

If I remember, didn't the T1 Minmatar ships shields used to get a SLIGHT EM resist of like 5-10%? Whatever happened to that? Or am I delusional?

For the Naglfar could you consider biasing the armor/shields towards armor and/or adding an additional low slot.

I ask this because it cannot have escaped your notice that shield capitals in pvp are on the verge of going the way of the dodo - probably already deceased in your former alma mater. There are enough pilots and ships to impose doctrines to this - and as armor based capitals have had the best stats (armor and damage versus shield and ????) the doctrine will be armor based. The current best use for a Nidhoggur is in triage, repping a POS.

A Naglfar without an armor tank will be as welcome in a capital fleet as a Mael would be in an Abbadon fleet irrespective of the changes you are making here.

Yes to the double damage bonus, the skill bonuses are not changing.

As for the utility high, we think the ship will be quite competitive with the three highs and the damage bonus. We did consider leaving a utility high on it but decided to keep it more in line with its peers.

Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.

Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.

Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Hmm do you mean the

Incoming 5% ROF 5% dmg of Nag? : http://serpentinelogic.wordpress.com/author/serpentinelogic/


Okay so

New Nag: 5% ROF 5% dmg per level

Current Moros: 5% ROF 5% dmg per level

Current Revelation: 10% cap 5% dmg per level


Would Moros and Nag out-dps Rev a little bit too much?
How about give Reva fixed bonus (-40% or -50% cap usage), and 5% ROF 5% dmg per level as well?
or 10% cap 7.5%~10%dmg per level? (ROF is little better than flat dmg, right?)

Me no dread pilot though.

Hmm do you mean the

Incoming 5% ROF 5% dmg of Nag? : http://serpentinelogic.wordpress.com/author/serpentinelogic/


Okay so

New Nag: 5% ROF 5% dmg per level

Current Moros: 5% ROF 5% dmg per level

Current Revelation: 10% cap 5% dmg per level


Would Moros and Nag out-dps Rev a little bit too much?
How about give Reva fixed bonus (-40% or -50% cap usage), and 5% ROF 5% dmg per level as well?
or 10% cap 7.5%~10%dmg per level? (ROF is little better than flat dmg, right?)

Me no dread pilot though.

Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

I understand, I'm just tackling the discussion that you're obviously hinting at...

Unless you expect me to focus only on the +50 hull bonus?

I'm sure we could have a long night of alcohol induced debate and in-depth mathematical invocations over the pros and cons value of +50 hull...

Or we can talk about how we can address the next issue at hand.

Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.

Incoming nerf to light missile range? It would make sense considering how overwhelmingly powerful Talwars are currently.

Ok - so somewhat happier about the Nag now .. but again, lets not get too excited. Overall, its shield doctrine that makes Minnie and Caldari suck somehwhat, but as a change its fine. Turret damage? Rev has damn good range and tracking, with no reloads. It doesnt need more damage imho. Blasters get the DPS but range is their issue at max damage, and the midpoint is Projectile with falloff.

Of course, I wasted skillpoints on Capital Missiles .. if only the changes came with a chance to shift them specifically to Cap Projectiles.

Quick Naglfar Comments ::

Ok, so you still get the double dps bonus for the Nag hull, correct?

On a separate note on the Nag...

There was a fringe case using the Naglfar, because it had 5 high slots... and that the launchers weren't actually bonused... you could drop one launcher, and lets say... use a Neut, or a NOS or something else.

Would you be interested in doing -1 high slot, and leaving the utility slot on the Naglfar - something that Minmatar hulls do have a tendency of having anyways?

fitting a third capital turret on the hull was too problematic and held up the idea.

Didn't the art department just crank out 4 brand-spanking new ships?
Didn't a fellow from the art department just do a Q&A and said they could easily do it?

I was under the impression the act of modifying a model to have another hardpoint was something that was along the lines of "old ccp" thinking.

This is a constructive question, in that in my limited knowledge of modeling and others' more advanced knowledge, that adding a hardpoint shouldn't be too difficult.

In fact, I believe a hardpoint on a ship was just recently modified. I'll take a minute to look up which ship that was.


From the latest patch notes::

I'll start us off with the Nag change. Many of you know that in the past CCP has expressed a desire to remove the outdated and very annoying split weapon systems on the Naglfar Dreadnaught, but that fitting a third capital turret on the hull was too problematic and held up the idea. Instead of requiring a complete redesign of the classic Naglfar hull to do our rebalancing, or waiting until our comprehensive Dread rebalance to touch this most glaring flaw, CCP Ytterbium decided that we'd get the job done using the tools available to us.

What about the Moros doing a ton more DPS than the others?

They gotta keep the art department happy Blood. Can't demand anything too drastic like adding a turret hardpoint. A utility slot would be cool, but I don't see myself nos-ing much other than tackle, and we all know dreads that can take on tackle is OP.

One some ships its a lot easier than others. On the Ferox they were able to do it without too much trouble for Retri 1.1. For the Nag we evaluated the cost-benefit of changing the model vs adding the role bonus and decided the role bonus was the better stewardship of the time we have available.

It comes down to the fact that if we make the most efficient use of the time we have available we can make the best product possible for you all.

Edit: (and the Enyo as well)

What about the Moros doing a ton more DPS than the others?

Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

[quote=AyayaPanda]
Moros does more damage, Revelation doesn't use ammo. Rev also has better base resists, so you can sacrifice a tank mod for a cap mod, leaving you with a ship that can exit siege, after shooting, at around jump cap (unlike the Moros). There is a good trade off between the two ships.

One word : lazy.

What about the new nag not needing cap to pew and having access to tracking-bonus ammos ?
'Not saying that the nag is becoming the new OP dread, but people needs to remember that the moros is the most cap-hungry dread of the game (yes, worst than a reve).

I think the new nag is fine. But a better solution would be to... change some numbers with the cap missiles. Explosion radius buff, explosion velocity buff, the nag model/stats don't need any modification and the phoenix/levie are playable.

Don't be lazy.

the massively superior damage and tracking at any given range (yes, ANY) the chances of finishing your job in one siege cycle less are much much better anyway, while the Revelation is more likely to derp around for extended periods. Also you are assuming a case where you are never being shot or neuted at. Pretty weak to use the "I can gtfo if nobody looks at me" argument here.

The only 3 advantages the Revelation has are:

It's pretty.
It's not as crappy as the Nag or Phoenix at the moment.
It does not use much ammo.

And these are not worth sacrificing much needed tracking and a whopping 60% damage at point black, and 25-30% damage at any comparable optimal/falloff over the Revelation.

But I have trust in Fozzies infinite wisdom - Moros will probably receive a significant nerf. Hopefully in terms of optimal range, since that's what the Blasters downside should be.

Confirming you are lying. The resist profile are practically the same, and in fact the Moros has a slightly better profile. Why? Well. Higher kinetic resistance because - guess what - ANTI MOROS.

In addition, if you really wanted to sacrifice a tank mod, it would the Moros. Why? Because with the massively superior damage and tracking at any given range (yes, ANY) the chances of finishing your job in one siege cycle less are much much better anyway, while the Revelation is more likely to derp around for extended periods. Also you are assuming a case where you are never being shot or neuted at. Pretty weak to use the "I can gtfo if nobody looks at me" argument here.

The only 3 advantages the Revelation has are:

It's pretty.
It's not as crappy as the Nag or Phoenix at the moment.
It does not use much ammo.

And these are not worth sacrificing much needed tracking and a whopping 60% damage at point black, and 25-30% damage at any comparable optimal/falloff over the Revelation.

But I have trust in Fozzies infinite wisdom - Moros will probably receive a significant nerf. Hopefully in terms of optimal range, since that's what the Blasters downside should be.

[notadreadpilot]

The new naglfar looks significantly better, but capital missiles are currently complete rubbish. They're useless as a POS module due to the CPU requirement, and on a Phoenix it can be speed-tanked by an armor BS or even a triage carrier that's getting bumps from a fleetmate. Citadel missiles need an exp radius buff (not sure what happenned with increasing it in the last rebalance), an exp. velocity buff so that they could hit a non-triaged Archon for at least 85% damage and a reduced time of flight/increased velocity so that it could actually hit the primary target. The Phoenix really ought to get selectable damage types, and in addition to having the velocity/radius penalty removed from the siege module, should have sieged/unsieged changes handles like a Stealth Bomber cloaking, not hitting for for 0 damage regardless.

[/notadreadpilot]

this just leaves the phoenix as the only pure and utter **** dread

It's not complete crap, it's very good against sieged caps as long as they're stationary, and has an amazing tank.

Someone like you says it would be nice if there were a third turret because of the graphics.
A Naglfar pilot says "SWEET! My guns work better and only require half the ammo as before!"

Did you just say solo punisher? lol

So is tristan definitely not ever getting a useful second bonus and/or a 4th midslot or tanking bonus? Disappointed. How about some powergrid at least? It seriously has none.

I don't get why you hate split weapons so much. It's good if done right.

Done right means... ?

Since you're addressing the "Strengths of the Missile Speed fits"...

I really don't think they're that overpowered. The major issue is that people have to be ready to counter them. They're great guerrilla fleets, and they're very risky and very squishy in the long run.

We've lost a lot of Kessies in the last week running Kessie Kite fleets, but at the same time killed a lot in the face of overwhelming numbers. Does that seem unfair?

I don't think the issue is with LML snipers like Kestrels,Talwars, and Coraxes. Condors and Hookbills, with their extremely high speed (especially in conjunction with skirmish links) and dual Ewar, on the other hand, are very problematic in solo/small scale engagements.
---
I'm going to have to echo sentiments asking what the point of a lot of these tweaks are. I don't know anyone who says that what the Breacher, Kestrel, or Rifter really need is a minor EHP buff. Nor does the Tristan need to go faster.

Since you're addressing the "Strengths of the Missile Speed fits"...

I really don't think they're that overpowered. The major issue is that people have to be ready to counter them. They're great guerrilla fleets, and they're very risky and very squishy in the long run.

We've lost a lot of Kessies in the last week running Kessie Kite fleets, but at the same time killed a lot in the face of overwhelming numbers. Does that seem unfair?

Well.. no. One time there was a sniper Cormorant hitting at 70-100 that was giving us a REALLY bad time in actually hurting his buddies. The fight was, no joke, 25 v 3. We killed a Griffin and a slasher because they were separating themselves and getting arrogant, and we lost a kestrel. We kept getting forced off the field when they were in a pack because they had an actual COUNTER ready - the Cormorant. And that's what made it a fun engagement. We realized we needed to make some modifications to counter the counter, and even then still had to be aware of other problems.

The issue isn't the missile kites, it's that people have to be more adaptive to counters. This is forcing the exact thing we want to see in fleets, more diversity. Bring anti-frigate ships, bring anti-snipe ships, bring anti-xyz ships.

You want to be ready? Then commit resources to being ready for the counter on the field. Otherwise, sit in the back of the pack with the amateurs.

[Tormentor, Testbed]
Heat Sink II
Internal Force Field Array I
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
200mm Reinforced Steel Plates II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
'Langour' Drive Disruptor I
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I

Small Focused Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency S
Small Focused Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency S
Small Focused Pulse Laser II, Multifrequency S

Small Trimark Armor Pump I
Small Trimark Armor Pump I
Small Trimark Armor Pump I

Rolling out a collection of tier 2 dreads with the alternate weapon system for each race would likely even things up with the tank preferences for cap fleets.

did you just say coraxes go fast? possibly while using light missiles and not being totally paper fit?

Who cares about armour vs shield when we're talking about ships that can't receive incoming reps (unless they're being useless and not sieging).

or ridiculous 10% per level bonuses on Caldari gunships.

What matters is local tank, you are right.

However also depends on the usage of the ship at the time.

For example, an armor tanked moros sacrifices its armor tank to blap subcaps, and tank for cap warfare.

a phoenix, although unable to damage the broadside of a barn with the equiv of C4, puts dmage mods in lows and can use the mids for tank and cap.

So, given a dread's purpose at the time, the best tank for the dread comes into effect.


...let me tell you about a shield moros....

Also, Revelation has a 40% advantage over the Moros in optimal range. It is slightly tempered by the 18% decrease in falloff, but that is a rather impressive range advantage.



The Phoenix is superior, unless the target is moving. Phoenix can't even get full damage on a siege-coasting dread.

Good Idea man, they could do hybrids for caldari; missiles for minmatar; and like some sort of large drone like bigger then heavy drones for gallente and because they won't need their highs they could use them for logi, good idea, if only somebody thought of a ship like that sooner.

Will you reimburse the SP I sunk in Citadel torps and cruise missiles?

I basically love the rebalance work, but I hate the impact on my SPs. The BC skill change will leave me with a Gallente BC 5 I have zero use for (I trained Gallente cruiser for angel ships, I have zero hybrid skills) and now the Naglfar changes will leave me with even more completely useless SP, that will still count toward my (stupidly expensive) clone cost.

Kinda a crap deal that Gallente have an entire ship type (or two: carriers and supers) devoted to their second weapon type. While everyone else gets the one, and Caldari gets the weapon type that needs work.

No they won't. Don't even start this **** again, we're still getting threads from the damned Orca changes.

Assuming skills at level 5, no implants and 3 faction damage mods and regular faction ammo.

Multifreq: 25.8+12.5 @ 10320 DPS
Plutonium: 25.8+18.8 @ 13007 DPS

Gamma: 32.2+12.5 @ 9460 DPS
Uranium: 30.9+18.8 @ 11825 DPS

X-Ray: 38.7+12.5 @ 8600 DPS
Thorium: 36.1+18.8 @ 10642 DPS

... ... ...

And for the upper end let's assume you run some optimal scripted tracking computers, since that's what you'll most likely do at sniping ranges:
Microwave: 102+24 @ 5160 DPS
Iron: 93.1+36 @ 5912 DPS
Radio: 116+24 @ 4300 DPS

Ontop of that the Moros gets 33% more tracking too. And a slot layout that allows for even better tracking speed, for hitting battleships even easier.


What Range advantage were you talking about again?

I think you're a Moros pilot and just don't your toy taken away.

:Edit:
The only range advantage you get from Revelation is if you're hitting deep in falloff of Radio. Yeah. That always happens.

Yeah, frankly I'm quite disappointed that the Phoenix wasn't even given a single nod. CCP Fozzie HAS to know just how terrible citadel missiles are...

And the Rev could use a look too.

Yeah, you'll only get the SP back if you can persuade CCP to remove citadel missiles entirely. Which might not be the worst idea in the world...

We could try starting a "Hybrids for the Phoenixes" charity and see how much traction we can get?

more like they could just undo the range increase on capital blasters

did you just say coraxes go fast? possibly while using light missiles and not being totally paper fit?

How will the new Nag affect the current sov warfare meta? Aka cap blobs. Since:

(...) A Nag fleet as small as 40-50 alpha nags (...) If the hostiles escalated with supers and titans the Arty nags could theoretically blap a super or titan in 3-5 volleys. (...)

I'm not a cap pilot so this is obviously theoretical.

Let me correct this:

Assuming null sec and my area of space, if the we escalate with supers and titans the Arty nags will die to the DDs of 40-50 titans and the rest will die to the supers, soon after.

Not trying to derail, but I've said "new utility high slots" 2x in this thread, so I'm going to shoot a few out that I think are realistic to implement in game mechanics terms as long as we have CCP Fozzies attention...


Ideas for new Utility High Slots ::

Anti-Missile Laser System :: Replaces old defender missiles. Automatically zots incoming missiles. Can be target assigned to defend one target (self, or another targeted ship.) Might come in Small/Large size.

Fortified Ultra-relativistic Kinetic Counter Electronic-Counter-Measure. (FUKC ECM)
Targeting System :: Allows you to keep a lock on ONE target THROUGH ANY ECM effects. Hard counter to ECM, takes a high slot, so it's a pretty important sacrifice vs Neuts, etc.

Revamped Auto-Targeting System Module :: Can be scripted to act as a Sensor Booster, ECCM or Additional Targets. Uses lots of capacitor and fitting than a normal ECCM/SB/etc. Somewhat of an "all-in-one", but MUST be scripted... so it's a take it or leave it with drawbacks. Auto Target module is all but useless except for fringe cases... might as well make it useful.

Target Lockbreaker - Forces one target to break its lock on all its targets. ECM chance for success, as other lockbreakers. does NOT cause a 20 sec jam to happen.

Signature Distortion Module
Using Stealth Technology, activating this module reduces the Signature Radius of a ship.

Not trying to derail, but I've said "new utility high slots" 2x in this thread, so I'm going to shoot a few out that I think are realistic to implement in game mechanics terms as long as we have CCP Fozzies attention...

Also High Slot Target Painter.

TORMENTOR:
+1 PWG
+50 Armor
+25 Capacitor
+12.5 Cap Recharge Time
Cap/s unchanged
+15 Velocity
+0.05 Agility
-100000 Mass
-0.24s Align time


Entire ship stats:

TORMENTOR:
Frigate skill bonuses: +5% to small energy turret damage and -10% to small energy turret capacitor use per level
Slot layout: 3H, 3M, 4L; 3 turrets, 0 launchers.
Fittings: 50 (+1) PWG, 130 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 350 / 500 (+50) / 400
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 425 (+25) / 212.5 s (+12.5) / 2
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 335 (+15) / 3.1 (+0.05) / 1080000 (-100000) / 3.13 s (-0.24)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 10 / 10
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 40km / 620 / 4
Sensor strength: 9 Radar
Signature radius: 35

We could try starting a "Hybrids for the Phoenixes" charity and see how much traction we can get?

Firstly, I think the nag change is lazy. How hard can it be to change a missile hardpoint into a turret hardpoint?

A more important point though is the order of ship balancing. The phoenix is in a worse position than the nag right now because it can't be used to counter battleship fleets (which every other dread can). The phoenix really needs some attention (for example the tracking enhancer affecting missiles).

On an unrelated point, why do dreads do more damage than titans? It's ridiculous when you think about it. Give one of them higher damage and very long lock times (or 1 locked target maximum) and give the other more tracking, more targets but less damage.

Let me correct this:

Assuming null sec and my area of space, if the we escalate with supers and titans the Arty nags will die to the DDs of 40-50 titans and the rest will die to the supers, soon after.

Please could you expand on why the 10% optimal bonus is ridiculous on the Ferox?

Lol, I can see that happening. But again, with the relatively short hop for any alpha mael pilot to get into an alpha nag and with as much isk as some null coalitions have, what happens when they drop a whole alphafleet of 150+ Arty Nags? Goons or Test certainly could. Then you're getting close to the nags being able to 1-2 shot supers and titans. Even if you DD a quarter of them off the field the Titans are then stuck there for 10 minutes while the remaining nags fire off 10million damage alphas every 15 seconds.

I'm not a fan of the blob but this seems like a scary and effective tactic for the groups with the numbers and isk.

10% range bonuses.

Thanks for the reply. I don't really have many strong feelings on it, except that in general if there is a problem, then it's with specific ships (Cormorant?) rather than the 10% bonus as a whole. It may also be a problem restricted to artificial scenarios such as FW warp-in beacons, but if so that's a problem trivially countered by ewar. Certainly there's nothing wrong with the Ferox, Naga or Rokh having optimal bonuses, IMO.

That is my problem with the 10% range bonuses CCP gives Caldari ships. These are already the longest range weapons. It creates role exclusivity. Not only that though but as I pointed out those bonuses actually aid viable short range weapon systems on Caldari ships. Now it might not be so bad if some range bonuses were distributed to other races as well. Then while Caldari might be the best at it, they would not be so far out in front as to make it ludicrous to try to fit other races of ships for that role.

why do you define anything less than Caldari Gunship engagement ranges as something that doesn't count as sniping? Sure, a beam Coercer can't hit out to 100km, but it can sure hit out to 50km and is a damn sight more competitive at closer ranges than the Corm is. Talwars and Coraxes with LMs can hit out to 60km. Why does that not count? Is that not enough? Close-range Frigate-sized weapon systems are normally lucky to hit out to 20km (pretty much limited to range-bonused pulse lasers).


Ranged combat is not a Caldari gunship trait. Of course, Caldari can snipe at longer ranges than other races can, but that's not role exclusivity, that's just a benefit of flying Caldari. It's like complaining that you want to have an alpha-oriented fleet without using Minmatar ships.

edit 2 - and why are those optimal bonuses on the caldari gun boats always 10%? Noone esle is getting 10% range bonuses assuming they are even lucky enough to get range bonuses.

If you're referring to the Apoc's 7.5% bonus, well, when people flew sniper BS they normally flew Apocs instead of Rokhs, because the 7.5% bonus meant that the Apoc did more damage at the selected range. That left the Rokh without a role entirely...

Fortified Ultra-relativistic Kinetic Counter-Electronic-Counter-Measure. (FUKC ECM)

Yes it is role exclusivity. There is a huge difference between 100km and 50km. How long is that 50km Coercer going to kite and fire before fast frigs start getting in tackle range and under the tracking of the long range guns. Do you have any characters that fly FW or some other pvp where they use these ships? As for missles yes you see Coraxes doing the snipey kitey tactic. It actually works quite well because of the volley delay (i.e. frig doesn't realize the next volley will take him down). Don't really see it with Talwars. But then what's the common denominator of Coraxs and Cormorants? Yep. And no, I don't see packs of 50km Coercers kiting and sniping. Why don't you convice a bunch of guys to try it with you and tell us all how it goes.

What could I do in order to have the Rifter receive an extra +1 or +2 GJ/s cap recharge? :3

Ideas for new Utility High Slots ::

Anti-Missile Laser System :: Replaces old defender missiles. Automatically zots incoming missiles. Can be target assigned to defend one target (self, or another targeted ship.) Might come in Small/Large size.

Fortified Ultra-relativistic Kinetic Counter Electronic-Counter-Measure. (FUKC ECM)
Targeting System :: Allows you to keep a lock on ONE target THROUGH ANY ECM effects. Hard counter to ECM, takes a high slot, so it's a pretty important sacrifice vs Neuts, etc.

Revamped Auto-Targeting System Module :: Can be scripted to act as a Sensor Booster, ECCM or Additional Targets. Uses lots of capacitor and fitting than a normal ECCM/SB/etc. Somewhat of an "all-in-one", but MUST be scripted... so it's a take it or leave it with drawbacks. Auto Target module is all but useless except for fringe cases... might as well make it useful.

Target Lockbreaker - Forces one target to break its lock on all its targets. ECM chance for success, as other lockbreakers. does NOT cause a 20 sec jam to happen.

Signature Distortion Module
Using Stealth Technology, activating this module reduces the Signature Radius of a ship.

Beam lasers do significantly better DPS and have significantly better tracking than rails, and ammo can be swapped instantly. Fast tackle trying to get in range of a pack of coercers would be vaporized really, really fast.


With no damage or range mods, a Coercer with SFBL and Aurora has 40.5 + 5km range, 126 DPS, and 33% superior tracking to a 150mm Corm which has 105 DPS at 73km range. The corm gets a modest increase in range in exchange for a modest decrease in damage and tracking.

I fail to see the imbalance or exclusivity here.

A hundred points for minnie not to have to train 3 capital weapon systems, minus a thousand for making the sp invested in the 2 wasted. And dont say it isnt wasted, because what else is a minnie cap pilot going to use those missiles for?

Yes to the double damage bonus, the skill bonuses are not changing.

As for the utility high, we think the ship will be quite competitive with the three highs and the damage bonus. We did consider leaving a utility high on it but decided to keep it more in line with its peers.

Firstly, I think the nag change is lazy. How hard can it be to change a missile hardpoint into a turret hardpoint?

A more important point though is the order of ship balancing. The phoenix is in a worse position than the nag right now because it can't be used to counter battleship fleets (which every other dread can). The phoenix really needs some attention (for example the tracking enhancer affecting missiles).

Well I already answered this in my previous post. I'm not seeing cercers being used this way though. They are usually pulse fit and brawling.

If you think 40.5km (maybe 50km with some range mods) optimal is sufficient to use a group of coercers to kite other and probably faster ships in a similar manner as a group of 100km cormorants then have at it. I think you will find that that 50km differnce has a huge practical effect on the length of time you can engage in the tactic, or even survive with it.

I don't give a damn about what you see, because your point of view is only one perspective. On my end I see far more beam coercers than rail cormorants. In fact, I've seen a grand total of maybe two of the latter, ever, mostly used to drive out long-ranged plexers.

not every possible battle is a group of sniper destroyers being chased by a group of other stuff and having to inflict X damage before being tackled. Poorer damage means that it will be harder to kill something before it just warps out, unless you're working with closer-range tackle in which case poorer damage means that the tackle is likely to die before you can do anything about it.

The locations of turrets on an Enyo have been changed to display properly.

No they won't. Don't even start this **** again, we're still getting threads from the damned Orca changes.

Also, in case anyone missed the point of my response:

NO. They are not reimbursing skill points for skills that still exist in game (even if you, personally, no longer need them). They never have and (hopefully) they never will. The only time skill reimbursements are done (based on CCP statements and past precedents) is when one of the following two criteria are met:

1. The skill (and it's underlying mechanic are removed from the game) - Learning Skills
2. There is a fluke that results in the character having skills trained which no longer have any in game benefit. (Not sure this one has ever happened, but the planned destroyer/battlecruiser reimbursements fall into this category, according to the Dev Blog from Ytterbium.)

This change meets neither of the two requirements above - the skill obviously will still exist, and it will have an in game benefit (just not to you any more).

Rifter needs more buff IMO. Rest is good.

lol i don't give a damn about your perceptions either because they are only one perspective as well

If things were less skewed one might actually see that.

Thing is though, how would you make it different to the Moros, yet still make both useful? Bonuses to damage and optimal maybe? Or damage and shield resists?

Because blasters?

Well I already answered this in my previous post. I'm not seeing cercers being used this way though. They are usually pulse fit and brawling.

If you think 40.5km (maybe 50km with some range mods) optimal is sufficient to use a group of coercers to kite other and probably faster ships in a similar manner as a group of 100km cormorants then have at it. I think you will find that that 50km differnce has a huge practical effect on the length of time you can engage in the tactic, or even survive with it.

Don't really see it with Talwars. But then what's the common denominator of Coraxs and Cormorants? Yep. And no, I don't see packs of 50km Coercers kiting and sniping. Why don't you convice a bunch of guys to try it with you and tell us all how it goes.

no, +50 armor will fix everything.

I want to see this happen.

I still think that ewar needs to be looked at. Kiting TD meta is a bit broken, especially in t1 frigate land.

what it needs is more distintion from the slasher which has the same bonuses, number of turrets and a lot more speed.

Hello gentlepilots! It's once again time to start soliciting feedback on more ship balance changes! We'll be starting off our Summer lineup gently with some proposed tweaks to a few of the previously adjusted T1 frigates and a change to the Naglfar that was frankly a long time coming (and that I didn't want to create a whole new sticky for).

Naglfar
Instead of requiring a complete redesign of the classic Naglfar hull to do our rebalancing, or waiting until our comprehensive Dread rebalance to touch this most glaring flaw, CCP Ytterbium decided that we'd get the job done using the tools available to us.

So we're removing both the two launcher hardpoints from the Nag (and two highs), and replacing them with a fixed +50% Capital Projectile Weapon damage role bonus that puts the two-turreted Nag on roughly equal footing with its three turret peers.

Rolling out a collection of tier 2 dreads with the alternate weapon system for each race would likely even things up with the tank preferences for cap fleets.

Yup. The main problems with ewar atm are

1) It costs too little cap. Like WAY too little cap.

2) Scripts are too powerful. They should be -75/+50 instead of -100/+100

3) They are too easy to fit

Rifter needs more buff IMO. Rest is good.

Can we cool it on the frigs already. I imagine this isn't all the changes but there are a lot more ships in order and if we keep doing summer sults on "already balanced ships" mad players will remain mad players. Maybe the whole "lets keep things a secret and surprise them" with t2 cruiser fixes isn't ideal. Tell us and people will stop complaining and come flocking back from ship spinning.

Rebalancing is never a done deal, and as someone from CCP has said the days of balance and forget are over (I can't find the exact words or who said it though).

How will the new Nag affect the current sov warfare meta? Aka cap blobs. Since:

a) most of null can fly alpha maels already and the skill req for dreads is being lowered to Racial BS4 there's a loooooot of people not too far off from flying an alpha nag.

b) Arty Nags with the new damage bonus and only a t2 fit with faction ammo easily put out ~100,000 damage alphas.

A Nag fleet as small as 40-50 alpha nags can hit siege and alpha a slowcat every 15 seconds at up to about 100km(70+168 for a ganky fit). Reps basically being ignored. If the hostiles escalated with supers and titans the Arty nags could theoretically blap a super or titan in 3-5 volleys. Smart target calling and target switching would play havoc on carriers trying to provide logi. Obviously it would be a war of attrition but an ArtyNag fleet could easily win the isk war.

I'm not a cap pilot so this is obviously theoretical.

CCP fozzie, the gap between frigates and T II frigates became so small that you would only fly a TII if you really want to spend monney... In some cases like the gallente EAF the T1 version is still better for fleet (have 3 more drones).... so How is the Tecnetium rebalance going? Can we expect it soon? It has been almost a yer since CCP talked about it in the fanfest!

I Personally like the idea of the Nag only having 2 guns.
Makes it cheaper to fit
Means you can overload the guns for a little over a minute longer than the rest of the dreads.
And its vertical and useful now.
America leads the way.

Silly ideas. EWAR is already nearly useless on unbonused hull and besides web, scram and TP, CPU cost is insane.

Oh come on. TPs pfft. It's the TDs that are appearing on so many unbonused ships. TDs on 5 midslot Hookbills or other midslot blessed frigs are pretty common. Those midslot heavy frigs have plenty of cpu to fit them and they are very (too) effective at neutering turret boats.

TDs should get a nerf tbh, and then the ships specialized for TDs get a compensatory raise on their bonus. This will be even more necessary once the TC/TE/TD effects on missiles get implemented. Otherwise TDs will become the I-win button on any ship that has a larger number of mids, and those ships with only 2 or 3 mids may be SOL.

Oh come on. TPs pfft. It's the TDs that are appearing on so many unbonused ships. TDs on 5 midslot Hookbills or other midslot blessed frigs are pretty common. Those midslot heavy frigs have plenty of cpu to fit them and they are very (too) effective at neutering turret boats.

TDs should get a nerf tbh, and then the ships specialized for TDs get a compensatory raise on their bonus. This will be even more necessary once the TC/TE/TD effects on missiles get implemented. Otherwise TDs will become the I-win button on any ship that has a larger number of mids, and those ships with only 2 or 3 mids may be SOL.

That would work great for Caldari and Minmatar, but Drone boat Dreads for Amarr and Gallente?

TD are not overpowered, not more than a shield extender in fact. If any, small missiles are OP, because they have almost no counters, but that's not a problem of TD. Any kiting ship taken at close range will blow up in a few seconds, no matter how many TD he have.

The problem people have with TD is the same than with ECM or EWAR in general : they need to specificaly fit against it if they want to kill a ship using it, and that mean being weaker against ships who don't do it.

[...] in the past CCP has expressed a desire to remove the outdated and very annoying split weapon systems on the Naglfar Dreadnaught [...]

So we're removing both the two launcher hardpoints from the Nag (and two highs), and replacing them with a fixed +50% Capital Projectile Weapon damage role bonus that puts the two-turreted Nag on roughly equal footing with its three turret peers.

Well, I'm affraid that after fixing Nag you will take long, long rest and poor Phoenix with all screwed missile system will wait till X-mas 2015.

Any chance that I'm wrong ?
Any chance that you will fix uterly broken missiles ?
Skilling tree is broken (to long skilling times to have completed all missiles - JUST ONE WEAPON BRANCH takes almost so long as three other weapon systems in total, isn't that stupid ? Long range small missiles are takeing 2 times more time than long range small turret ...)
All launchers/ammo above heavy is broken... heavy assaults are still underperforming (faction or fury and forget useless precisions)

I know that this was the plan to polish t1 frigs, but there are more important things requiring fixing.

For the Naglfar could you consider biasing the armor/shields towards armor and/or adding an additional low slot.

I ask this because it cannot have escaped your notice that shield capitals in pvp are on the verge of going the way of the dodo - probably already deceased in your former alma mater.

Also, your opinion of Heavy Assault missiles is... unique. I'm fine with them as they are, but most people believe they need a healthy nerf.

All of these changes are important. Let CCP prioritize them in a way that makes sense for the Dev team workflow.

Well, I don't understand why nerf ...
They are defined as short range weapon. They are exactly that.
Attributes of one are short range huge DPS. They can do that using rage ammo (apologize for mistake in prev post).
However precisions are useless. Tested them with friends and they can't hit a t1 frigate orbiting a ship.
Something is wrong there I think ...


Well, I agree with that. However. still if CCP has time to implement changes let they don't waste time
polishing what works well (T1 frigs and cruisers are great now with really minor problems i.e.rifter is total crap.)
They could spent it roughly correcting what badly needs fix. Well, they do that looking at Nidhogur fix.
Sad that they don't touch worst of all dreads - Phoenix. Ppl don't bother even to research BPO for it.
Doesn't it sounds like signal of really big problem with that ship ?

I think that it would be nice to have Nid "twoarmed" 50% bonus to both launchers and turrets and same for Phoenix.
That would at least temporarily fix them while still leaving a stream of capital launchers feedback and not
wipeing that type of weapon from this class of ships.

I believe you agree that this would be healthy for community and will not leave one ship far, far, far, far, far behind others.
The only reasonable use of Phoenix seems to be POS destroyer. But who needs such specialized ship fo such amount
of ISK and so big SP investment ?

Cheers,

What about the Phoenix's split weapon system? It can only use a single unbonused turret - it has to jam pointless citadel launchers into the other two highslots.

Do you and the other "OMG lowering the BS requirement to 4 is going to lead to massive capital proliferation" realize what a small part of a proper capital train the BS5 skill really is? Heck it's probably one of the least painful parts since it benefits you when flying something other than a capital. Trust me it's not BS5 that's the real impediment to people getting into capitals, it's the 3-4 months of support skills particularly the jump skills.

As for me I applaud the Nag changes, sounds like I my Nag pilot might actually get to see some use in the future, even better It'll save me a few hundred million when I eventually lose it when I don't have to replace 4 capital weapons. Oh and it now joins the blap dread team.

CCP please dont touch my Phoenix i like the way it is :)

Not sure if stupid, or just really stupid.

Silly ideas. EWAR is already nearly useless on unbonused hull and besides web, scram and TP, CPU cost is insane.

please explain, if you think the phoenix is crap you make me lol

The Rifter could use some love, but of course, I am biased here; I fly Minmatar. The Rifter is not terrible, but it isnt exactly good. I will leave discussion of "what it needs" for people not quite so attached to it, I think.

If all you want to do is shoot POSes that have a large kinetic hole, then sure, it's great.

Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.

Seriously?

2 TDs on condors are "nearly useless"? Three RSDs on the hookbill? What, do you want them to be able to be as horribly annoying as they are now with only 1 of these modules fitted?

Seriously?

Michael hit at the core of the issue here; ewar, and its ability to be run perpetually, at the frig level. Why the hell can the condor run MWD, point, plus two TDs, forever, exactly?

If CPU cost is so "insane", how come so many ships seem to fit and run them with no problems? Hookbills and Condors are of course the worst offenders here, but any form of ewar is crippling at the frigate level, and that just compounds the issue of more midslot ships being nearly universally better than ships with less mids. Add to this the fact that shield tanks are simply faster than armor tanks, and that shield tanks naturally work better with more mids (ofc) and the problem grows even more noticeable.

A ship with a 3/4/2 layout is simply better than a ship with a 3/2/4 layout (edit here, AT THE T1 FRIG LEVEL!) Period. With so many hulls being revamped to be useful, it only grows harder to balance them correctly. It almost feels like CCP should try to correctly balance 1 or 2 frigs per race and get them actually working right BEFORE trying to add or change more.

The Rifter could use some love, but of course, I am biased here; I fly Minmatar. The Rifter is not terrible, but it isnt exactly good. I will leave discussion of "what it needs" for people not quite so attached to it, I think.

Nice to see that Naglfar will be useful. I wish you would fix Phoenix too because it's a hardly can be called a Dreadnought.

And a Falloff slasher 4/3/3 maybe could not work as I imagined (tracking issues per example), I don't know.

Tristan needs more fittings, then it would be ok (although the useless bonus is kinda meh)

Punisher is going to be **** no matter what you do with it unless its completely redesigned.

Rifter pretty much the same.



As for the breacher, i don't think its bad at all but w/e

Nah, it just happens to be that a punisher sucks at 1v1s. It's a better fleet ship. Best fast(ish) T1 tackle frig out there! It's tank will allow it to take that 1-2 more volleys so that the slower tackle ships can get their point/web on.

Edit: with a standard AB fit, the thing can pack on a T2 400mm plate and get 9.5K EHP, and with a MWD, 8.9K ehp. Not shabby for a shi*** frigate.