How so?

Oh, and I certainly see drones and hull being mentioned thereGǪ

it takes circumstantial hypotheticals and makes broad sweeping generalizations. that's how so

It's hilarious with Tachyons.

I'm curious as to whether the requirements for the T2 Triage and Siege will be IV or V.

But the thing is, you didn't really address any of his pointsGǪ

212km optimal and 520 dps with paper-thin Tach sniper fit and Aurora.

Not sure it's really practical when today's "long range" is 80km, however.

What would be the benefit in me doing so? What exactly should I elaborate on here?

I didn't say he was wrong in his microscopic selective analysis, just that he's using a tiny set of data points to make broad sweeping conclusions.

It would make it a contender to the Cerb's old anti-support/anti-ECM role (which admittedly sees less use these days), only with instant damageGǪ

What would be the benefit in me doing so? What exactly should I elaborate on here?

I didn't say he was wrong in his microscopic selective analysis, just that he's using a tiny set of data points (in an isolated 1v1 scenario, I might add.... again) to make broad sweeping conclusions.

What part of this are you failing to understand? I'd be happy to explain it a 4th time.

Data from early test builds is always very likely to change. But that's no reason not to discuss possibilities.

At some point soon we'll publish a dev blog to tell you what we're thinking and to get feedback from you.

Eventually some version of these stats will also make its way to SiSi for you to test and play around with.

10 m/s is good? For escape?
Hybrids are fine, but gallentes ships need way more speed, for what is now looks more like a nerf.

This will add even more love to CCP:
http://img573.imageshack.us/img573/3701/eveuiscaling.png

Indeed, yet another piece of awesomeness.

In regards to Gallente, I do not possess intricate knowledge to eve game mechanics as some people do, but from what I see it doesn't look like Gallente are buffed enough yet to be compared to minmatar. Need more love. Changes to blasters seem fine but propably not enough for people want to fly gallente.

I like the concept of making gallente ships fast in a straight line but have less agility though. I think they propably still wont be fast enough.

ps. No ship should exist with only one midslot.

How about discussing how/why he's wrong about the effects when we move into larger groups and disprove or at least present a solid case against his claim that the Tornado is unquestionably superior for the reasons he mention?

The benefit of this would be to make you seem able to hold a rational discussion.

It's just that you're reasoning, based on "you can't speak about 1v1", is wrong, at least when similar sizes, roles and costs are concerned.

If ship A is better than ship B in 1v1, then a fleet of 50 ships A will also be better than a fleet of 50 ships B.

It's interesting how everybody's worried about buffing blasters to the point they start stepping into AC role, yet we can see AC's step into blasters role better than blasters can. I think keeping the ships speed is fine, its their thing, but nerf the weapon damage of AC's IMO, its just too high at face-range where gallente should have a clear advantage - the fact that they can stay out of face-range easily enough makes this unecessary.

I read from EN24 that this info was reverse-engineered from CCP's internal test server somehow by someone naughty.

Indeed, yet another piece of awesomeness.

In regards to Gallente, I do not possess intricate knowledge to eve game mechanics as some people do, but from what I see it doesn't look like Gallente are buffed enough yet to be compared to minmatar. Need more love. Changes to blasters seem fine but propably not enough for people want to fly gallente.

I like the concept of making gallente ships fast in a straight line but have less agility though. I think they propably still wont be fast enough.

ps. No ship should exist with only one midslot.

Rational discussion? Pot and Kettle much? If I was going to play your card, I could just say "well prove me wrong, where did you prove me wrong?"

This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.

This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.

While i understand most of you are excited about those new changes would't it be prudent just to wait till the definite stats and other changes are in a dev blog , Othererwise alot of you will be very dissapointed when CCPdecides to change some numbers at the last moment

This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.

I don't know if you've played this game, but there is RARELY a fleet of identical ships fit identically vs 50 of another. It's an impractical and unrealistic hypothetical.

Check in on ships and modules sometime. A 1v1 scenario never works (nor for that matter a 50v50 or 100v100), the fact you're going to say that it does is evidence of your ineptitude.

The game is more complex than that. We're writing off web bonus' based on another ship having falloff, somehow concluding that ship A having less dps than ship B makes ship A better?!?

The argument is asinine at worst, uneducated and completely inapplicable to any in-game scenario at best.

This winter is going to be so ******* awesome.

To fix gallante ships just lower the base mass of the ship, then adding the armor plates has less of an effect.

Blasters need a damage boost. Also check the hybrid ammo: currently is not worth it to use anything than AM and long range T2. Blaster ships could receive a MWD speed bonus too.