I approve of this product and/or service.

decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.

decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.

Will hardly change anything and surely will not help battleships

Looks ok, but I don't think the Talos needs the drones.

they are slow and squishy enough as it is

Nerf Arties? oh look your corp is Deep Core Mining Inc. Typical Carebear here complaining about a Nado poping his retriever.

Mate all jokes aside, have you seen the rate of fire on arties, thats why they alpha so hard.


Now CCP Rise, why must you nerf these ships, more mass, less scan res, they are slow and squishy enough as it is

EDIT: Please bring back Torpedo Naga!!!

Nerf Arties? oh look your corp is Deep Core Mining Inc. Typical Carebear here complaining about a Nado poping his retriever.

Mate all jokes aside, have you seen the rate of fire on arties, thats why they alpha so hard.


Now CCP Rise, why must you nerf these ships, more mass, less scan res, they are slow and squishy enough as it is

EDIT: Please bring back Torpedo Naga!!!

decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.

Won't have much effect on BS vs ABC at a small scale (although any decrease in mobility will help some), but it should have more an effect at a large scale where things like align time and sig radius (probe time) make ABC very very strong.

It's hard to evaluate the precise impact of mass increases without having a modified fitting tool to hand, but at first glance these seem to be an extremely minor set of changes that won't have any noticeable effect on the current state of the metagame.

Also, I'm not sure why you're making a big deal about probe time, since anything on grid in a fight will be probed in a single cycle irrespective of its sig radius...

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.

Taken as a whole, it seems CCP want Odyssey to turn pvp into a one-dimensional armour brawl, since all the other fleet types are getting systematically nerfed.

*CCP nerfs the agility and sig radius of tier3 bc hard*

They are still bad ships for the metagame. They make battleships useless on most scenarios.


They need to loose 1 turret, unless you intend to boost battleships so that they can become more attractive .

Battleships larger HP pool do not pay off . They are far less mobile, lock much slower, are less agile, less top speed for same amount of firepower.

Most of the combat usages of battleships can be replaced by the attack BC. So the BC need a significative firepower nerf or the Battleships will need a significative boost of some sort.

EDIT: Please bring back Torpedo Naga!!!

enough with making this game for the n00bs...... stop killing solo pvp

They are still bad ships for the metagame. They make battleships useless on most scenarios.


They need to loose 1 turret, unless you intend to boost battleships so that they can become more attractive .

Battleships larger HP pool do not pay off . They are far less mobile, lock much slower, are less agile, less top speed for same amount of firepower.

Most of the combat usages of battleships can be replaced by the attack BC. So the BC need a significative firepower nerf or the Battleships will need a significative boost of some sort.

Grath, I'm not sure exactly what you mean about making room for the other BCs more. I feel like for the most part like combat BC have a very different role than attack BC, so one doesn't really tread hard on the other. Thats not always true, of course, but I wonder maybe what environment you're talking about and what sort of outcome you would be looking for?

NAGA:

Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75000km / 200 (-20) / 8

TALOS:

Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km / 210 (-20) / 6

Grath, I'm not sure exactly what you mean about making room for the other BCs more. I feel like for the most part like combat BC have a very different role than attack BC, so one doesn't really tread hard on the other. Thats not always true, of course, but I wonder maybe what environment you're talking about and what sort of outcome you would be looking for?

Another thing that could be done. Role penalty to ALL of them: weapons resolution 150%

should be 75 km

Well currently, if you can use large guns, there is no reason to fly a brutix over say a talos. Honestly theres no reason to fly a Vaga over a Talos the ship is (in its current form) so incredibly broken with its extreme agility and dps projection.

I think we're going to just have to agree to disagree here. In my experience you have several metrics that are all really important to what a ship is good at, and all the ships you mention have completely different allocation of those metrics. Combat BC EHP makes them a lot more ideal as tacklers/bait ships than attack BCs. So having a drake alongside your talos to hold points without getting killed is very valuable. HACs like the vaga generally are much more capable of dealing with small support. So having vaga (or deimos or zealot or even rupture) to support an attack BC by protecting it from tacklers is very valuable. Attack BC have the highest damage/projection so they are generally going to have a lot of value based on that.

The prevalence of each role shifts based on a lot of things, but I don't see a direct tension between them. You don't get read for a roam and say - which ship has the most damage, lets take only those. At least thats been my experience.

Also why do the talos and nado have so much more mass than the naga and oracle?

To get the desired speeds and align times.

Also why do the talos and nado have so much more mass than the naga and oracle?

They way their mass vs agility was setup originally is definitely unusual, but there didn't seem to be a good reason to rework it all at this point.

And why is it desirable that the ships used by small gangs get more mass than the mass nagas fielded by everyone?

Here is an idea: Just stop the ships from fitting the large long range weapon systems.

Here is an idea: Just stop the ships from fitting the large long range weapon systems.

Here is an idea: Just stop the ships from fitting the large long range weapon systems.

That is a bad idea

Why? The main problem is artynado and rail naga fleets

Why do you think that mass in itself is a meaningful statistic? Try looking at speeds and align times.

How are they problems?

Do you realize that the most overpowered rig in eve history was the POlycarbon that used to do what? REDUCE mass!!

MAss affects exponentially the gain of speed under MWD .

What fleets of tr3s do you see? You see artynados and railnagas. They can kill stuff from 200km away. They have extremely high alpha. 2 nagas on a gatecamp make it pretty much non-engageble in a cruiser, since they will kill a well tanked cruiser in about 30s (maybe up to 60s if they dont trust their tackle and do it from 200km instead of 100km), and can do this from almost anywhere on grid.

Is your argument that because people fly it, it needs nerfing? And that battlecruisers can kill cruisers?

Well hot damn son, colour me shocked.

spoiler: you might need to learn how to do things other than just burn at things with your mwd on

Are you trying to demonstrate what hyperbole is?

Im saying people fly them because they are overpowered and take far more effort to deal with than to use.

And bcs killing cruisers is fine. Killing them in seconds from 200k is not.

If their scan res were reduced, it would give lighter fleets the opportunity to warp off when a sniper tier 3 BC fleets landed at range. Other than that, I don't see a big deal. Attack BCs sniping BSs and/or caps from long range looks like working as intended to me.

So your proposed counter to a rail naga blob is "run"?

So your proposed counter to a rail naga blob is "run"?

Seriously, you appear to be arguing that a Naga shouldn't be able to hit a cruiser as it approaches from 200 km. Actually it probably can't if you'd bothered to bring the right tool for the job - TDs or RSDs.

Single T1 cruiser 200 km off a Naga gang? Yes, run like hell.

Seriously, you appear to be arguing that a Naga shouldn't be able to hit a cruiser as it approaches from 200 km. Actually it probably can't if you'd bothered to bring the right tool for the job - TDs or RSDs.

A caracal cant damp or TD a naga from 100km

Try fitting a sensor booster. Gives ~50% chance of a TD hit, or ~78% of a RSD hit, at 110 km.

@CCP Rise, I'm curious to see if you feel there is any need to bring the power levels on these down at all to make the other BC's more ....whats the word i'm looking for? Used?

Used doesn't feel right but its kind of in the spirit of what I'm looking for, as right now theres no real reason to use any other BC over the Talos except for not being trained enough to use its guns.

I am completely unimpressed to be honest. This change will hurt close range fits of Tier3 BCs that overwhelmed other BC in this role and it is good. But it will have almost non-existent impact on most popular sniper formats where they completely removed BS from roaming gangs and midscale PVP. It is just not right when Tier 3 BC will have larger Range and DPS than corresponding BS,

I think we're going to just have to agree to disagree here. In my experience you have several metrics that are all really important to what a ship is good at, and all the ships you mention have completely different allocation of those metrics. Combat BC EHP makes them a lot more ideal as tacklers/bait ships than attack BCs. So having a drake alongside your talos to hold points without getting killed is very valuable. HACs like the vaga generally are much more capable of dealing with small support. So having vaga (or deimos or zealot or even rupture) to support an attack BC by protecting it from tacklers is very valuable. Attack BC have the highest damage/projection so they are generally going to have a lot of value based on that.

The prevalence of each role shifts based on a lot of things, but I don't see a direct tension between them. You don't get read for a roam and say - which ship has the most damage, lets take only those. At least thats been my experience.

Talos just does outclass every BC in a gang situation full stop.

This is the reason for all those talos doctrines you see.

So CCP Rise slowed down 2 battlecruisers and made them take longer to turn

How much does CCP pay you?


I was really worried that CCP might NERF attack battlecruisers alot more. I guess we don't have much to worry about with CCP Rise on the job


- killz

EdAWT: Naga is z BEST. I would say armor Oracles would be about the same. Atleast in fleets. Otherwise, for solo I would say Talos and Oracle.

Cool. No reason to fly BC's anymore.

I too like flying un-agile garbage ships because I too like to get scrammed and then piled on by lamer pubbies who can't even consider flying without support.

Frigs it is.

Cool. No reason to fly BC's anymore.

I too like flying un-agile garbage ships because I too like to get scrammed and then piled on by lamer pubbies who can't even consider flying without support.

Frigs it is.

The sig radius increase is unnecessary imo, what's the reasoning behind it?

Tier3s need to be able to only fit their respective short-range versions of guns.

Nagas and Tornados are way to strong with rails/artys and can only be countered by a bigger fleet or a good warpin. And even with the later one they are often able to just burn out or warp because of their good agility/speed.

The big problem with tier3s is not their speed or tank, its their awesome damage projection (in combination with the speed ofc, as it helps to minimize transversal) up to very long ranges without beeing overly vulnerable to smaller/faster ships.

This proposed changes wont do anything to the big dominance of tier3s as fleetdoctrines for large entities but it will hurt the small skirmish pvp even more.
(Nagas/Nados will just fit sensor boosters or have them fitted anyways.)

Please list cruisers that can lock to 200km that commonly appear in roaming gangs.

decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.

Tier3s need to be able to only fit their respective short-range versions of guns.

Nagas and Tornados are way to strong with rails/artys and can only be countered by a bigger fleet or a good warpin. And even with the later one they are often able to just burn out or warp because of their good agility/speed.

The big problem with tier3s is not their speed or tank, its their awesome damage projection (in combination with the speed ofc, as it helps to minimize transversal) up to very long ranges without beeing overly vulnerable to smaller/faster ships.

This proposed changes wont do anything to the big dominance of tier3s as fleetdoctrines for large entities but it will hurt the small skirmish pvp even more.
(Nagas/Nados will just fit sensor boosters or have them fitted anyways.)

Make sure that base scan resolution is low enough that my Arazu is not instalpopped before I lock a tier3 battlecruisers as it jumps in from a gate.

I Am sad as it is that the fire power of tier3 battlecruisers makes the job of a recon pointless (pun intended) when camping gates and so on. Before any sensor boosters are used. A tier3 battlecruisers can lock and fire before any recon ship. And in Lowsec. You can't use frigs for tackling on gates (well you can use an enyo if you can afford the silly fit with legon boosts) due to gate guns and so on. So you would use a cruiser or a recon for that job. But since the tier3 battlecruisers came along. There is no need for that role/job any more. tier3 battlecruisers can lock and pop any target before it even has a chance to warp (fittings depending). My job as an Arazu pilot was not needed any more.

Anyway. Rant over

As i said several times. Attack BC are bad for the metagame. They were knee jerk reaction to make players happy back at the incarna fiasco results.

Now we are paying the price of ships made to be extra awesome, instead of being good to the metagame.

Hopefully the end result is that they are slightly more vulnerable to... bombing

Cool. No reason to fly BC's anymore.

I too like flying un-agile garbage ships because I too like to get scrammed and then piled on by lamer pubbies who can't even consider flying without support.

Frigs it is.

Gah, still no Cruise Naga ... Disapointing.

Gah, still no Cruise Naga ... Disapointing.

decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.

It's not enough. Nerf them harder, this isn't going to do anything. Do something big like dropping highslot or making them as slow as combat BCs.

Hmmm, a few thoughts:
- The TE nerf is going to brutalize damage projection on the Talos and Tornado. I don't think that the Talos will remain workable, but the Oracle should remain ok on that front. The Tornado was never my favorite, but it'll probably remain workable if I'm in the mood for it.
- The Talos's mobility nerf is pretty brutal, but it wasn't going to be viable after the TE nerf anyway.
- The Tornado's mobility nerf is also pretty brutal but it had enough that it'll probably make it out alive on the strength of the dual web slot layout. At the very worst you can still use it for Arty gate camping.
- The Naga wasn't useful at all because it's mobility was ******* terrible. The Oracle now has it's ******* terrible mobility, which will probably kill the Oracle for me.

I guess I probably won't fly Tier 3s anymore, but there's enough other options that I'll be fine.

-Liang

Making armor boats more agile & faster with honeycomb & no speed reduction on active armor rigs

..then nerfing Tracking Enhancers by 30%


enough with making this game for the n00bs...... stop killing solo pvp


Keep this up and it will be the WOW player base with the higher IQ


and remember this, the hardcore gamers have been around the longest & stay the longest! This casual market you're opening your game to won't have people playing for the 10years, they stay here for a few months then move on to the next latest game - do not turn your back on the old players & hardcore ones

want to know why eve lasted so long? it's because hard games (like Chess) can last a life time - dont mess that up!!

making this game for the n00bs...... stop killing solo pvp

This is exactly what I feel

Jesus christ man you act like the TE nerf is cutting the total range of the Talos by 33%,

Its not


Its losing 4km of fall off, and 1km of optimal, its not crippling the ship in anyway at all, it can still fight in exactly the same ranges it fought in before.

EDIT:

Pre Nerf Talos - 16+29

Post Nerf Talos - 15+25


Stop the presses and scrap the ship its totally fuc...oh wait. Damn thats still totally functional isn't it, oh well. Carry on crying about the sky falling.

EDIT: And if you think slowing it by 50 m/s and making it align 0.4 seconds slower is brutal then theres probably no hope for you.

Its losing 4km of fall off, and 1km of optimal, its not crippling the ship in anyway at all, it can still fight in exactly the same ranges it fought in before.

EDIT: And if you think slowing it by 50 m/s and making it align 0.4 seconds slower is brutal then theres probably no hope for you.

I approve of this product and/or service.

Grath, you've seen me post for a really long time. Can you trust me to know what I'm talking about when I actually bother to speak anymore? I'm not against the TE nerf - I'm simply stating a fact. The Talos is no longer going to be useful to me because 4km is a really big deal to the kind of kiting Talos I fly.

Personally, and i can speak for many others, I do not fly any of the other BC's Tier 3 only, their indtroduction made all others irrelevant, and that is the cause for most of peoples complaints, no matter how shallow it was. It eliminated the need to bring a battleship, because you can do 1000 dps in a talos, why bring a Mega Etc.

Fundamentally it was a cool idea to have these ships in the game, but in the end it made things very cheesy. I havent flown a hurricane in about a year, because after the introduction of the tornado it made the hurricane completely irrelevant and also due to the fact it was nerfed so hard it basically has no use left in the game.

I digress...T3 bc's are cool, and they made most other BC choices irrelevant.

People have to generally foam at the mouth for ship changes to be good. So they either don't realize what effect these changes are going to have on the ships or you need to do a couple more passes.

Really this change and TE change are only hurting people who are bad at eve since it makes mistakes more costly. you will definitely see who are the bads in t3 fleets when you get dropped on and half the fleet wasn't already aligned. The ship itself won't be able to compensate for bad piloting anymore.

However, I still feel they are too strong. Nerfing agility and mass is the right direction but as grath said these are always going to be preferable to other bc's in small gang because it doesn't matter how much ehp you have if you can't outrun a larger group and with cruisers being viable and t3s combination of speed+damage projection the other bcs are getting completely outclassed in this area.

p.s. torp naga never forget o7

p.s.s fix railguns pls

Can I ask why you guys seam to be nerfing scan res on all the ships you touch? I see it as making it even harder to get fights or catch people.

Grath, you've seen me post for a really long time. Can you trust me to know what I'm talking about when I actually bother to speak anymore? I'm not against the TE nerf - I'm simply stating a fact. The Talos is no longer going to be useful to me because 4km is a really big deal to the kind of kiting Talos I fly.



See above. :)

-Liang

Correct. Tier 3 BC nullified an iconic class, the battleships for MOST of the possible scenarios. That means they are unhealthy for the metagame. In fact they have MORE firepower than some battleships.

its top unheated mwd speed goes from 1.6 km/s to 1.53 km/s and its prop-active align time goes from 8.2s to 8.65s.

kind of agree, gives talos too much advantage over other attack bcs

- The mass increase for the Talos and Tornado means that they can no longer be flown through a C1 WH with a 10MN prop mod active. This makes me sad...I liked using Talosi to close wormholes. Would be nice if it was 15mil or under, but I guess I'll just need to switch to another ship :(

- There's still no missile attack BC. Missiles are finally starting to be treated as a first-class option for primary weapon up there with the three types of guns; there needs to be an attack BC that can use missiles. Due to the inherent problems of missiles hitting smaller targets, a missile ABC will by its nature not be as OP against smaller targets as the gun ones currently are.

Some of us still like to fly solo, and don't use attack BCs just for ganking. The Talos is the only attack BC which has any sort of defense against smaller ships which can't be hit by the large guns.

I'd like to see the other attack BCs get some sort of defense against smaller ships, too, although I'm opposed to just adding drones to every ship.

i dont get it they are not nerfing the condor...

So yea, while you normally post like you have a clue, if you can't show me how this ship fails with actual realistic examples due to that 4km range loss I'm calling shenanigans.

I'll pull up the numbers tonight after GDC.

-Liang

Disagree.

Some of us still like to fly solo, and don't use attack BCs just for ganking. The Talos is the only attack BC which has any sort of defense against smaller ships which can't be hit by the large guns.

I'd like to see the other attack BCs get some sort of defense against smaller ships, too, although I'm opposed to just adding drones to every ship.

Perhaps, adding a bonus to small guns, too, so they can be used more effectively as point defense (although I admit to a dislike of sacrificing high slots just to fit the small guns)? Or maybe a new mid/low-slot point defense module that can only be used on BCs and larger ships?

You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

I still want to see what REALISTIC scenarios you are justified into bringing a tempest instead of a tornado.

You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

That is really interesting and well, kind of ridiculous. Either all of them should be able to get in or none of them no?

Design flaws are meant to be fixed eventually.

Design flaws are meant to be fixed eventually.

That "the Talos is the only ABC which has any sort of defense against smaller ships" is precisely why it should have them removed. As Grath already noted:


This was stated very clearly when they were introduced and as I recall the Talos first made it to the test server without a drone bay but it was added against better judgement in response to the "It's gallente, it should have drones" argument without regard to the impact on balance.

Looks ok, but I don't think the Talos needs the drones.

It's the one thing they said made it competitive with the Naga, leave it alone

It seems to me the Tracking bonus on the Talos really makes it blap other cruisers and battlecruisers - even smaller ships - so I cannot see why it MUST have 5 light drones. I could perhaps accept 2 or 3 but I really don't think they are required for making Talos equally usefull compared to the Naga.

Pinky

It's the one thing they said made it competitive with the Naga, leave it alone

I think we're going to just have to agree to disagree here. In my experience you have several metrics that are all really important to what a ship is good at, and all the ships you mention have completely different allocation of those metrics. Combat BC EHP makes them a lot more ideal as tacklers/bait ships than attack BCs. So having a drake alongside your talos to hold points without getting killed is very valuable. HACs like the vaga generally are much more capable of dealing with small support. So having vaga (or deimos or zealot or even rupture) to support an attack BC by protecting it from tacklers is very valuable. Attack BC have the highest damage/projection so they are generally going to have a lot of value based on that.

The prevalence of each role shifts based on a lot of things, but I don't see a direct tension between them. You don't get read for a roam and say - which ship has the most damage, lets take only those. At least thats been my experience.

decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.

Don't forget that TEs will get serious balancing. This will affect Tornado. Yes alpha remains but you will get problems getting the same falloff and even alpha to long range.

I don't understand - right now it takes 7 bombers to kill a Attack BC Fleet. What is the point of increasing the signature radius?

I don't understand - right now it takes 7 bombers to kill a Attack BC Fleet. What is the point of increasing the signature radius?

You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flawgoal?

You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

You'd think CCP Rise was clear enough. In case you missed the line in original post:

slightly more vulnerable to probing

They probe just fine as it is.

If you want to make a ship more vulnerable to probing, you decrease sensor strength, to which no changes were made. However, if you want to make a ship vulnerable to probing AND stealth bombers, you decrease sensor strength and increase signature radius. The fact that only the signature radius was touched means that the main priority was "more vulnerable to stealth bombers", and "more vulnerable to probing out" secondary.

So the question still stands - why is this a priority?

i still have hopes the raging feedback against the TE re-balance will mean the these don't get double nerfed.

not against the talos getting nerfed for instance, just saying that you don't have to nerf half the ships in the game to fix the talos.

REMOVE TALOS's DRONE BAY - COMPLETELY
REMOVE TALOS's DRONE BAY - COMPLETELY
REMOVE TALOS's DRONE BAY - COMPLETELY
REMOVE TALOS's DRONE BAY - COMPLETELY
REMOVE TALOS's DRONE BAY - COMPLETELY
REMOVE TALOS's DRONE BAY - COMPLETELY

or

fix noobish ecm-drones

I had great "fight" today. Talos and manticore from EvoKe was belting in other system, so I undock with my hero merlin, tackled Talos and start killing him easily. Then Talos launched his MIGHTY IMBA NOOBISH ec-hornets.

First cycle : nothing (5 drones)
Second cycle: jam (3 drones)
Third cycle: jam (3 drones)

And then talos ran away.

I understand you (CCP) just cant fix drones, but for god's sake remove noob ecm drones from Talos=remove drone bay.

CCP pls, DONT suppport COWARDS like Tribun Auronus (Talos pilot).

i would be completly happy with removing tier3s at all tbh.

Peopel really come here with this kind of expectation? Wtf people? get a grasp of reality.

Can someone actually explain why this would have been such an bad idea and wouldn't have worked with maybe less launcher slots?

Cruise and Siege missiles are pretty underwhelming in PVP. I was told they might have worked well in PVE but I dont know.

If the Naga was able to use missile. Then why not make the Talo a drone ship? In anycase. The Naga is one of the best vessels for fleet engagements. What more could a Caldari pilot ask for?

Cruise and Siege missiles are pretty underwhelming in PVP. I was told they might have worked well in PVE but I dont know.

If the Naga was able to use missile. Then why not make the Talo a drone ship? In anycase. The Naga is one of the best vessels for fleet engagements. What more could a Caldari pilot ask for?

So because cruises and torpedoes are crap for pvp then instead of those getting fixed and made viable they just entirely ignore them and use another weapon system? I don't know, to me Talos and Naga are just a bit too similar in their roles... and now i guess i made someone angry...

decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.

Cruise and Siege missiles are pretty underwhelming in PVP. I was told they might have worked well in PVE but I dont know.

If the Naga was able to use missile. Then why not make the Talo a drone ship? In anycase. The Naga is one of the best vessels for fleet engagements. What more could a Caldari pilot ask for?