I still think those cs changes are very weird, cant even understand why are you doing this...thought making fleets more viable is good...but u nerfing boosts and taking the fleet -giving ship away.

Of two cs each race u make like one.

Your quoting Burst tank for the Claymore.
Sustainable tank = Burst Tank / 105 * 45

Sustainable Tank for Clay with your numbers is actually 154hp/s

I take it you used 2xT2 rigs to get that 360 ?
So your going to need 1 x cpu in low ( with Meta4 fit ) or ( 2 x cpu in low to go t2 launchers ) and also an injector

5 slots for armor
5/6 slots for shield
160 reps for the armor
154 reps for the shield

Sounds pretty balanced to me.

+1
But cap requirements would have to be reduced for armour reps.... but then they need to do that anyway... although it would mean AAR's would run out much quicker of nanite paste ... but they need to improve AAR's anyway less nanite paste consumption would be needed and allowing nanite skills to affect AAR's would be nice .. also change the reload times of AAR's or use an inject system so you can still rep at 75% whilst you wait for nanites to inject 15-20 secs.

Rather than add more +50% Hp bonuses to the command ships we're starting down the path that will allow us to remove that bonus from the Damnation and get them all into better balance.

stuffs

You see if he nerfs boosting hard enough then logistics will become useless, and fleets will turn into DPS vs EHP which is a lot easier to balance. It's all about eliminating variables from an equation.

We understand boosting is good, too good atm. Which is why it is being toned down, and I dont think anyone has any issues with this. Boosting needs to be fixed. But for the love of the Amarr empire we need some tools to survive more then 2 seconds on grid.

The EOS would tank gurista sanctums with one arm tied behind it's back, while singing Bohemian Rhapsody and performing a pole dance.

If I saw it there though, I'd feel compelled to put it out of its misery...

Kind of surprised that CCP are actually intending for people to fit XLASBs on things that aren't battleships. I thought them being able to fit at all was just an unfortunate oversight. Being able to put the equivalent of about 5 LSEs in a single slot, without even the lol sig penalty, kind of crazy. WTB capless large armour repairer for my myrmidon.

Nerf plx, ASBs are stupid.

Rather than add more +50% Hp bonuses to the command ships we're starting down the path that will allow us to remove that bonus from the Damnation and get them all into better balance.

ok so it will be useless as on grid command ship. Can i now have a sweet fleet amour HAM brawler since the new Sacri will fail at that role? +5 rate of fire to missiles? Please? No crappy bonuses? Please again?

A command ship is a fleet boostin specialist variant. It should never be as strong in combat as a navy battlecruiser. A regular battlecruiser ability is even pushing it, because the links have the potential of making a single ship worth a dozen in fleets.

The changes look good for all purposes except the tankability/gank ratio. Build the 50% hp bonuses into all ships and remove one or two effective turrets in compensation. EoS can live with 100 bandwidth. Reinforce CS as what they have become: a tough nut to crack whose boosts make you take a decision whether to kill it first or not. Don't have them compete in damage dealing with hac, BC, BS and other damage focused roles.

A command ship is a fleet boostin specialist variant. It should never be as strong in combat as a navy battlecruiser. A regular battlecruiser ability is even pushing it, because the links have the potential of making a single ship worth a dozen in fleets.

The changes look good for all purposes except the tankability/gank ratio. Build the 50% hp bonuses into all ships and remove one or two effective turrets in compensation. EoS can live with 100 bandwidth. Reinforce CS as what they have become: a tough nut to crack whose boosts make you take a decision whether to kill it first or not. Don't have them compete in damage dealing with hac, BC, BS and other damage focused roles.

@ CCP Fozzie

Why is the damnation so weak?

The damnation can be out DPSed by what is supposed to be the ship directly below it, The Sacrilege.

There is no way a AHAC should be able to out DPS its CS counterpart.

I think the damnation needs to be a full brawler so loose the Velocity to missiles and add it 7.5% RoF and change the damage down to 7.5%.
Maybe give it 200-500 more base armour and take the hit point bonus down to 5% to compensate for this change


Currently with its bonuses the way they are this ship is still only gona fill one main role in a fleet. that would bring it to a closer par with the other ships

I agree with this, However I would remove the 10% hit point bonus instead. this would put the damnation on par with other CS and would remove any disparity between them. Either give all command ships a 10% hit point buffer, or remove it completely, simple as that.

Edit: No one likes flying a brick that does jack DPS :(

I think the answer to that is that the design team perceive that the game is a better one when players must make trade-offs in their decision making.

I happen to agree here.

If you make a CS more powerful than a navy BC in all respects, there's no reason to choose a navy BC once you can fly a CS, which obsoletes a whole line of ships.

As it stands, if you want good tank and fleet boosts, you choose a CS. If you want ultra-dps at the cost of tank and links, you choose a navy BC.

is it just me that wants the sleipnir to be armour tanked with armour link?
There are plenty of minmatar ships that are armour tanked so why not represent this correctly in the command ships?

FOZZIE

Come on the Fleet bc is a cane and the sleipnir is going to be a cane when you change them so why not make the change?
Or are you expecting people to have to use the Loki for bonused armour links?

Sleipnir:
Minmatar Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage (was 5% RoF)
5% Armour hitpoints
Command Ships skill bonuses:
10%(+5) bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret falloff
3% bonus to strength of Armoured Warfare and Skirmish Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H (-1), 4 M(-1), 6 L(+1), 5 turrets (-2), 2 Launchers (-1)
Fittings: 1300 PWG (-160), 425 CPU (-50)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 4500(+176) / 5000(+1166) / 3500(+137)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 75(+12.5) / 60(+10) / 40 / 50
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 90(+5) / 67.5(+8.13) / 25 / 10
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2625 / 583s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 165 / 0.704 / 12800000(+300000) / 12.49s (+0.3)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25(-15) / 25(-15)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km (+25) / 220 / 7(+1)
Sensor strength: 20 Ladar (+4)
Signature radius: 240
Cargo capacity: 475

I agree with this, However I would remove the 10% hit point bonus instead. this would put the damnation on par with other CS and would remove any disparity between them. Either give all command ships a 10% hit point buffer, or remove it completely, simple as that.

Edit: No one likes flying a brick that does jack DPS :(

Oh god.
Must be a troll. A really bad one. I just lost faith in humanity.

But dedicating 4 months of training in addition to the BC skills should grant you a ship more powerful than any BC.


you mean if you want paper tank and ultra DPS you fly the Teir 3 BC, after all that's what they were designed for.