The damnations damage has universally been pathetic. The Eos and Astarte would mow it down to kibble.

Damnation will still be the fleet brick. I'd like to start seeing some Eos/Ast fits now.

Maybe the they could all use just a little more dps,

Astarte is fine l2p

I'm also a bit surprised these have the same number of slots as combat battlecruisers. I'd expected them all to gain the 1 slot the sleip and claymore had over them, rather than the sleip and claymore loose a slot. Indeed, they have the same 10 mids+lows as most hacs now.

My mistake then. Rest of my post still stands, I completely agree with you about wing commmand, I agree that command procs are an issue and I don't think the HP or resist bonus is the way to go for all types of command ships, although I can definitely see why people would want it.

Not going to happen, most likely. They stated ages ago that CS were going to be made into 17 module slot ships. The point is to make you have to choose between a full rack of DPS and two links, or a full rack of three links and less DPS.

They just removed a high slot from most/all of them.

Just to suport the HP bonus crowed, the Eos, Vulture, and Claymore need HP bonuses added to their ships. need one tanky mid range command ship (damnation like) and one in your face command ship (Slepnir like)

Heck give all the in your face ones a active tank bonus just to get your active tank jollys off.

You are giving ships that are meant for fleets bonus to local boosts, nobody uses a local booster in a fleet. its a pointless bonus, and makes no sense. You need to give at least one of the Mimi and Gal a local resist bonus.

neuts use very little cpu.
1200dps + dual neut astarte with a viable armour tank? seems good.

Yeah thats kinda what I was getting at, I wanted to see what he was deeming as "viable".

+1

Not everyone wants to fly in a biggass blob and get vollied off the field.

What i find odd is that they think navy should have an extra slot when these CS need that extra high so they wouldn't need to remove so many turrets/launchers.

CCP is the most forthcoming about future changes of any game development company out there.

i dunno if its just me but i kinda like the new astarte

[Astarte, blaster boost]
Medium Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste
Medium Armor Repairer II
Damage Control II
Armor Explosive Hardener II
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane
Imperial Navy Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane

10MN Microwarpdrive II
Stasis Webifier II
Warp Scrambler II
Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Cap Booster 800

Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M
Small Energy Neutralizer II
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump I
Medium Auxiliary Nano Pump I


Hammerhead II x5
Warrior II x5

3) Remove +10 hp for Damnation and give it +5 rate of fire to missiles. Otherwise it won't be a combat ship.

There's almost no loss of dps, as far as I can tell a dual rep neutron fit drops only 43 dps (770 > 727, Void, Hammers, no dmg mods) but gains 100m/s speed, medium NOS (and link with fitting implants), and with the rep buffs also 250 hp/s tank. Astarte looks p good tbh.

As a curious hilarisoty (likely not a word), MAAR+MAR+RAH fit with T2 resist link and Standard Exile tanks 10719 dps against Kinetic missiles. 4324 against antimatter. Will fly.

You can easily make it gankier, that is low dps I agree and I just used that fit to compare the loss of dps. 52K EHP with Hype-like tank is quite enough for small gang work imho.

i just really really dont like this update... ******* over command ships damage is NOT something that needs to be done.

dont touch my nighthawk
or ill cut you..

i will allow you to give it more resists and +100 pg though.

could these ships to split into two roles?
like the original ones

fleet command ships should be tankier by a lot
maybe give them shield/armor hp bonuses
field command ships should be faster and push out more dps/ more drones

....and caught up with this thread.

Updates based on your feedback coming very soon.

ASAP. We actually had planned for them to already be on SISI but the build ran into some problems. We have our best people on it.

I thought we were doing away with split weapon bonuses? Why then is the Eos STILL stuck with a hybrid bonus when it was and is always has been, a drone boat?

I'm telling you, this tracking bonus would be PERFECT to turn into +10% Armor HP per level.

This has one problem though.

You are giving astarte 11 effective turret for damage.
But at the same time you are increasing its 7 turrets to 8 effective turrets considering cap and ammunition consumption. yet astarte has smaller cargohold than brutix with 6 effective turrets.

Any plan to compensate?

The Astarte did get a nice buff, I'm pretty happy where it is except for the fact it along with all other commandships are missing a slot they deserve
To reiterate
T1 bc. 17 slots
Faction. 18 slots
T2 bc. 17. Slots

All other t2 ships get extra slots, so why don't commandships? I'd like to know why they didn't give the proper slot layout to these ships...

Even with nice damage bonuses (which t1 battle cruisers and maybe some cruisers have) it doesn't compensate for the loss of slots... And in the eos' case it gets standard drone dps bonus and nothing more, then they take a further slot away
If they had gun dps bonuses that last part would make sense for the eos, but they don't

I'd rather have the eos's unique bonus lineup with the proper 18 (+ rigs) slot layout than going for a more standard drone and gun damage bonus eos with 17 slots

You guys did a good job figuring out what active armor tankers need to work, look at the Hyperion 7/5/7
The mid/low slot layout is what the eos needs

Give the eos a. 6/5/7 slot layout with current bonuses
Or if you refuse to give the eos the 18th slot make it 5/5/7 with 4 guns and integrate a damage bonus into the mht tracking bonus

Other commandships should get their slots to where they need it
Damnation +1 high/launcher
Astarte +1 low
Nighthawk +1 mid +more pwg
Abso +1 mid seems like the consensus
The others I don't know enough about them

The only bad thing about the Astarte is the weak tank, even with the rep bonus, to get anywhere with the dps it has to murder it's tank, tho I have not done extensive eft warrioring, but if not a low perhaps a mid, but the Astarte is in a pretty good shape along with (what seems to be) the claymore and sleipnir

The eos, vulture, nighthawk, absolution, and damnation each seem to have a problem here or there
Most of which a slot (or two for the eos) will fix
Vulture seems to be lacking enough dps and nighthawk needs a mid and pwg

The concern I have with the Astarte in terms of lows is active vs passive tank along with its nice dps
6 lows means a very weak tank either way, 7 lows means nice balance for dps and active tank, but might be too much passive tank, but without a resist bonus maybe not....

Part of the reason this is the case is how it can fit battleship plates but cruiser armor reps... (Imnot saying lets change that) but we need to take cruiser reps into consideration

Remove command bonuses from command ships entirely. Only Titans get the command bonus. Disallow off-grid boosting.

command ships are ugly,nighthawk looks sexy,but the rest are just meh.

also claymore bonuses are bad,fozzie needs to change either one of them to hm and ham damage instead of rof.otherwise it will fire very fast for very little damage,and thats always dissapoint.

remember
T1 bc. 17 slots
Faction. 18 slots
T2 bc. 17. Slots

The previous post bring up a good point, T2 ships usually has more slots than its t1 counterparts.

Its a laughable joke that T1 and Navy ships have more slots than T2.

Have you ever used the live eos? Have you seen anyone use the live eos?

...which means that a bad ship, such as the live eos, would get improved yes?

Drones are not short range.
Please compare to a rail astarte.

For the record, I tend to fly gallente. It means I have to pick my fights and set them up carefully, but if I do my preparation and don't miss something, I tend to win - mostly.

Yes I have used the current eos in small gangs, it's bad :p

But yes it deserves the 7th low, it gets a single standard bonus to drone damage, while other ships are getting things like double 10% damage and 7.5% damage and rof

With 1 magstab the Astarte does over 1k dps, with a single drone damage amp, an eos does less dps than an Astarte with no mag stabs... Lol? With drones meant for hitting bs's and bc's

Astarte with full tank, no magstabs with 2 hams an void neutrons gets 870 dps
1 magstab 1012
2 magstab 1166
3 magstab 1277

Eos with 4 void neutrons and 5 ogre 2's
702 dps
1 dda 812
2 dda 929
3 dda 1021

That is not balanced, especially when u realize the eos can only use 2 flights of heavies and nothing else, destroy them and lol
It's a good step in the right direction but the eos needs another low
5/5/7. Move a high to a mid and add a low
Leave the current bonuses and gun slots
Make it interesting compared to the others while being balanced

Just waiting for the first triplerep-Eos to show the world what a myrmidon always wanted to be.

No matter how you look at it, the eos is just gorgeuos.

+1

(i did ask for response why nighthawk was made slower but fozzie sadly didnt respond.
i can see no reason to make the nh slower)

So most CMs have their dps increased but the Astarte loses more than one effective turret? Wait what?

Perhaps give a double bonus, replacing the hybrid tracking with another 7.5% to Heavy Drone speed and perhaps RoF?

Haven't seen a bonus for drone RoF, so it'd be something new at least :p

No, I'm not asking for them to be left alone completely. Right now there's about as much reason to fly a command ship as a HAC. T3 do better links and are better at surviving with a decent fit.

The astarte *just about* out-tanks a dual ASB sleipnir when the astarte pilot is in a fleet with gang links and the sleipnir is not.

Anticipating the gaping EM hole on a 6-low armour ship, I looked for Faction EMP on the market prior but it had not been seeded.

I have to be honest, I'm beginning to calm down about the 2 gallente command ships as skirmish leaders. It looks like they'll do OK in a small gang, as long as they don't meet a larger one.

The Astarte has to be the preferred choice, as before. The Eos just can't get enough damage down, and those drones are so vulnerable...

I am loving the new deimos. It's gone from being a lightweight retreat ship to a real heavy assault ship. A swarm of these will be deadly.

Its 785 v 702.
You need links in the fits to be taken seriously.

FOZZIE !!!

are you still reading this or what??

cargobays need sorting out..

^^ Taken from the links thread
I take this to mean that while it won't happen in this patch the commands we are talking about the balance of here are going to be required to be on grid to link in the near future.

Keep up the test server testing guys, thanks for the feedback so far. We'll be keeping an eye on things like the Astarte and Eos on the test server but my feeling at this point is that the balance between them is pretty good. The blaster Astarte will do more damage at 500m, but the Eos is less vulnerable to TDs, ECM, Neuts, can hit smaller targets more effectively and can choose damage types.

The 400m3 on the Astarte and Eos was a conscious decision, yes. It's possible we might change it but we don't automatically give ships every feature their "parent" has.
The giant cargobays on the Damnation and Nighthawk I mostly left in place because there wasn't a good enough reason to drop them down and overloading players holds on patch day isn't something we want to do without a good reason.

I honestly think my eos is going to be degraded to 'guristas ratting' duty. If it can't do that reasonably then it will be replaced with an ishtar.

Hurray for turret tracking bonus.

A single rep c-type LAR domi with EANM, DC and RAH will tank all sanctums while doing something like 900dps, and this was before the armour repair buff. I can't imagine why I would embarrass the crew of a T2 ship with this kind of work...

Incidentally, Sisi seems to have a bug that prevents the nighthawk from activating more than one siege module at a time. Since I'm the first to mention it, I presume I'm the first to actually fit up a ship before complaining?

Why not remove the 10% hitpoint bonus from the damnation (replacing it with a ROF bonus), so it can be PVE viable, then add a 50% hitpoint role bonus to all command ships?

Just guessing but I think he was alluding to the fact that faction Invulns offer a higher resist bonus than a faction EANM. Which closes the eHP gap between shield CS's and the Damnation.

As of now there's no reason to use te eos over an Astarte unless u can't use t2 blasters but u can use t2 ogres
Anything the eos can do the Astarte can do better without te fear of getting your (very) limited supply of drones killed
And I've mentioned how the eos has -1 slot, which is standard blah blah but the other drone boats are comparable to their turret based counterparts, unlike the eos
The eos IS lacking
Not by an outrageous amount but it is lacking

But with everything from sov doctrines and ship balancing done using all level 5 skills as the base, anyone with less than 50 to 70 mil SP becomes kill board fodder .

Another small set of changes based on what we're hearing from the Sisi feedback:

Nighthawk:
+100 PWG
+10 CPU

Sleipnir:
+50 CPU

Why does every single CS have the same cap recharge? Pretty sure the Absolution should have a higher recharge than a Sleipnir given, oh I don't know, the fact that lasers take a **** ton of cap, projectiles and ASB's require ZERO. But hey, call me crazy.

And why does a T2 BC have less recharge than a T2 Cruiser?

Have you even flown a beam absolution... I suggest you try it in small fleet or large fleet formation before saying that ship needs a range boost.

If the absolution got a range boost, it would quite possibly be the best sub-capital platform in game.

Fozzie, if your really basing these small changes on player feedback, PLEASE 7 highs, 6 mids, 4 lows for the nighthawk.

I think the price movements in TQ probably represent the quiet 'smart' money folk who have seen this truth, while others have an uninformed whinge here in the forums.

Simple,

The Abso is a focused turret ship, always has been
The EOS's guns are actually it secondary weapon, the drones are primary

just for a laugh, yesterday I fitted up a max-alpha-resist vulture with a-types, links and mind link.

then I overheated the invulnerability fields.

Guess how much EHP it had?

spoiler below....




~650K ehp

Specifically, the claim that 20 tornados would alpha any command ship. It's just not true.

Have you considered that the command ships just might have utility highs for oh, I dunno, command links or something?

Fozzie, why the hell does every ship have the same capacitor recharge rate (4.5cap/sec) ? The Absolution NEEDS!!! I repeat NEEDS!!! An increased cap recharge rate or an extra midslot. In its Current state it's nothing more than a gimped astarte, which does more DPS and has superior cap stability. Infact i would say its the weakest CS in the game. Are you really that blind to see the obvious jeeze

If i'm not mistaken, that was the old name, and the new one is "energy transfer array", but sisi still thinks it goes by the old name

how did sisi manage to go through 3 patches with the new name without it hitting live yet? doesn't it only get patched once every few months??

Not as evil as the horrible developer giving skills and modules ridiculous childish names. I just can't get past this. I spend hours of my life living in the scientific wonderland of Eve and now they're giving all my stuff play-school names?

spaceship piloting? A pilot is a noun. It's a ship or light for providing guidance. It's not a verb. The verb is "command", "control", "guide", "operate", even "fly". It should be "starship command" or "spaceship (at a push) command".

"capacitor transferer"? Do me a favour and f*ck right off! "Energy Transfer Array" is the correct name.

Someone in CCP needs to take a long, hard shamefaced look at themselves, and then pick up a book and educate themselves.

Cap is a word used by the player base to describe the content of a ships capacitor.

No one say I'm running out of energy please send me some.
No they say I'm running out of cap please send me some.
or my ship ran out of cap
or I didn't have enough cap to activate my guns.
etc
etc


I don't think I have ever heard anyone on comms describe cap as energy in years.


So cap transferer seems a better name, its now in line with other engineering modules that directly affect cap.

(10.00 effective guns vs 11.6667), and losing that 8th slot really hurts it's utility at the same time.

So true... Really wish the basecap for the abso wouldn't be so terribly weak. Flew a Zealot, pewed a lot - went for an abso... meeeeeeeeh.

Reading all posts here - i've strong opinion that the absolution is nearly perfect ship. Like most others amarrians ships. Mb we should nerf it a little bit? Tnk you CCP

As Fozzie pointed out, the majority of hulls in Eve right now have the same base cap regen with differing recharge time and max capacitor. We just didn't notice. The HACs are currently the exception to this.

So I'm guessing the Command Ship model changes aren't going to be ready for 1.1 then, since nothing has been said about them

I 100% agree with you, unfortunately trying to change Fozzie's mind on the abso is like try to change a leopards spots, it won't happen

Just here to verify that all your suggestions, recommendations, complaints, and common sense ideas (valid or not) have been ignored as usual. CS are now destined to stay in the screwed up condition that we have arrived at today. Cheers!

It also showed that Gallente ships are quite imbalanced and CCP is planning to buff them further (hello Astrate). I don't want EVE where everyone is flying gallente...