While its true that the Scorpion stands out as the other major piece of asymmetry in EVE, there's 2 things that make it very different than the situation with the Iterons for me:

First, there is a significant difference between asymmetrical role assignment, and an actual difference in ship count. While the Scorp doesn't have disruption counterparts at the moment, at least it has SOME counterpart in the form of the additional ship in either combat or attack roles that each race other than Caldari gets. This is a big deal. If there was a Scorpion as the only disruption BS, but it was a 4th BS, and Caldari just had it as an extra compared to only 3 for the other races, I think people would be a lot less happy with it.

Second, and more importantly for me in this case, the Scorpion has an established and cherished place in the game. In comparison, the extra Iterons currently have no valuable contribution that we would be stripping away. They contribute flavor, which has value, but that's really all. If it were the other way around, that Gallente had always had unequal access to special bays for each extra Iteron, it would be a much bigger decision about whether we actually wanted to take something away that players had come to know and use over EVE's history. By the same token, imagine if in the battleship lines there had been only combat ships, and we randomly decided to give Caldari the only disruption BS. This would be much different (and much worse) than what actually happened, I think.

No its not =)

Sorry I'm asking this, but after playing so long, I still haven't figured (or just forgot) :
What's the point of the 5% velocity bonus anyways?

Can't it be integrated in some way to the base speed as it was done for Vigil so that there is a free bonus slot for something else more viable?

What I don't understand is doesn't this break into the roles of the T2? I mean they are the same way, stealth for cargo space and larger HP for +2 to warp core stabilization. Doesn't seem really worth it.

i expect there maybe people like myself that have invested in the itty 5 financially by buying blueprints etc based on the previous news that the skill requirements where changing for industrials. i think it would have been more transparent to have alluded to these new changes at the same time. and while i except that the isk cost of purchase and research time of the blueprints is not entirely wasted it does leave a bad taste in the mouth of those of us that rightly or wrongly tried to get ahead of the curve (or in this case wavy line). This maybe a contributing factor to some of the resistance you are seeing in this thread.

(up to 6au/tick instead of 4.5au/tick)

Or, take this opportunity to fix the warp acceleration problem so that warp speed bonuses matter more in general.

I've always hated how lazily ships warp -- even "fast" ships take 10 seconds to get off grid after they finish aligning, and another 10 seconds after appearing on grid to slowly cost to a stop. It'd be much snazzier if the transitions were more sudden. Imagine how exciting it looks when a fleet comes out of warp in other sci-fi universes, like Star Wars or even Star Trek: ships appear in the distance and close the gap in seconds, and then abruptly drop back to "normal space" speeds. Way cooler looking.