Looks good, I count only seven hard points though... D:

Looks good, I count only seven hard points though... D:

A sight that will soon make ice miners quiver in terror.

Well, assuming the gankers are stupid and don't just use 10m worth of a few neo-Thrashers instead of a 50m isk battlecruiser.

I hear those thrashers can do 1200 dps?

Well, assuming the gankers are stupid and don't just use 10m worth of a few neo-Thrashers instead of a 50m isk battlecruiser.

How do you think it will fare against your Tornado?

Well it doesn't really look like gallente, I would have loved the Aquilon hull ingame.

How do you think it will fare against your Tornado?

Well it doesn't really look like gallente, I would have loved the Aquilon hull ingame.

Keyword: few. Few implies more than one. As in multiple. As in not one.

Three neo-Thrashers can output about 1500 DPS and hit a cruiser size ship a lot better.

this foreplay can only last so long... ]

You're assuming individual players are paying for the ships and not our alliance which is rich with Tech and throws away isk like it's ****.

I hear there's a cream that can help with that problem

Anyone else notice this little tidbit?

"especially with the hybrid rebalancing kicking in at the time of its birth."

Dev confirmation that the hybrid rebalance is coming this winter. Up to now, its just been coming Soon.

That is a pretty ship. How big's the drone bay, I wonder?

Given our military alliance with the gallente it would be undiplomatic of me to choose favourites. None the less we expect these two ships to be more than a match for there caldari and amarr counter parts. XD

How do you think it will fare against your Tornado?

Oh, so that's pretty much confirmation that the new BC's are turret slot heavy then?

*sigh*

I was so hoping they'd be limited to 5 or 6 to differentiate them more from BS's in a more obvious way rather than just having a PG/CPU limit imposed upon them.

o/ Pattern. Not sure If I ever thanked you for adding my ship to your collection, but if on some slim chance mine ends up being the Naga, I propose we have a duel! =)

Deviant art - Intrepid class

errr thats more of a concord ship than anything.

Well it doesn't really look like gallente, I would have loved the Aquilon hull ingame.

I don't want to be negative but It will die a horrible death while trying to get into blaster range. Also your drawing looks a thousand times better than the presented ship.

Ur art guys should have used this

The parts that don't look so gallente'ish are in fact similar to the megathron hull, both with the "in your face" gamestile.

I am not a fan of the looks of this ship. It looks like it has engines bolted on sideways to the top of the hull and the nose reminds me of a paper airplane.

Loved the Tornado. Do not love the Talos.

You're assuming individual players are paying for the ships and not our alliance which is rich with Tech and throws away isk like it's ****.

errr thats more of a concord ship than anything.

\0/ the amarr one is next. i cant wait to see what it looks like.

Reminds me a bit of the Vaygr battlecruiser in homeworld 2. Nice.

But the real meat will be in the devblog that describes their stats and their role.

The original design has MUCH better proportion. The remake has made it look too chunky and turned the overall shape into a blob.

The front isn't as defined, and the same with the rear of the ship. The nose is now too fat, the extra engines nacelles (four instead of two on the original) make the rear end too fat and heavy. The additional front mounting hardpoints are overdone, making the nose flat and pug-like (a horrible thing) compared to the original.

Please fix it. You followed the Tornado's original intent much more precisely. Do the same for the Talos.

The original design was also a very lightly armed destroyer/surveillance vessel.

The front logically would have to be thickened to support the over sized gun mounts (the original model had no hard points on the nose section). Thicker does not mean "pug-like". The same goes for the more powerful look of the rear and losing the (admittedly nice) wingy bits back there on the original.

For a design that took a fast Destroyer and scaled it up to a fast Battle Cruiser with over sized guns, I'd say the changes look pretty logical. Perhaps they should make it a point to emphasis that it is "based on" the original design, but scaled up to better fit it's role in game.

For a design that took a fast Destroyer and scaled it up to a fast Battle Cruiser with over sized guns, I'd say the changes look pretty logical.

[+] Talos
[+|n] bcLargeHybridTurretCPUNeedBonus
[+|n] bcLargeHybridTurretCapacitorNeedBonus
[+|n] bcLargeHybridTurretPowerNeedBonus
[+|n] leadershipCpuBonus
[+|n] massFactor
[+|n] shipHybridDamageBonusBC2
[+|n] shipStasisWebSpeedFactorBonusBC1
[+] agility: 0.56
[+] armorEmDamageResonance: 0.5
[+] armorExplosiveDamageResonance: 0.9
[+] armorHP: 2272.0
[+] armorKineticDamageResonance: 0.65
[+] armorThermalDamageResonance: 0.65
[+] armorUniformity: 0.75
[+] baseWarpSpeed: 1.0
[+] bcLargeTurretCPU: 0.5
[+] bcLargeTurretCap: 0.5
[+] bcLargeTurretPower: 0.05
[+] capacitorCapacity: 3100.0
[+] capacity: 600.0
[+] cpuLoad: 0
[+] cpuOutput: 400.0
[+] damage: 0
[+] droneBandwidth: 25.0
[+] droneCapacity: 25.0
[+] emDamageResonance: 1.0
[+] explosiveDamageResonance: 1.0
[+] fwLpKill: 200.0
[+] gfxBoosterID: 394.0
[+] heatAttenuationHi: 0.76
[+] heatAttenuationLow: 0.76
[+] heatAttenuationMed: 0.71
[+] heatCapacityHi: 100.0
[+] heatCapacityLow: 100.0
[+] heatCapacityMed: 100.0
[+] heatDissipationRateHi: 0.01
[+] heatDissipationRateLow: 0.01
[+] heatDissipationRateMed: 0.01
[+] heatGenerationMultiplier: 0.65
[+] hiSlots: 8.0
[+] hp: 2597.0
[+] kineticDamageResonance: 1.0
[+] launcherSlotsLeft: 0
[+] lowSlots: 5.0
[+] mainColor: 16777215.0
[+] mass: 12000000.0
[+] maxDirectionalVelocity: 2000.0
[+] maxLockedTargets: 7.0
[+] maxPassengers: 450.0
[+] maxTargetRange: 70000.0
[+] maxVelocity: 210.0
[+] medSlots: 4.0
[+] minTargetVelDmgMultiplier: 0.25
[+] powerLoad: 0
[+] powerOutput: 1150.0
[+] powerToSpeed: 1.0
[+] propulsionGraphicID: 394.0
[+] rechargeRate: 775000.0
[+] requiredSkill1: 3332.0
[+] requiredSkill1Level: 3.0
[+] requiredSkill2: 12099.0
[+] requiredSkill2Level: 3.0
[+] rigSize: 2.0
[+] rigSlots: 3.0
[+] scanGravimetricStrength: 0
[+] scanLadarStrength: 0
[+] scanMagnetometricStrength: 20.0
[+] scanRadarStrength: 0
[+] scanResolution: 230.0
[+] scanSpeed: 5500.0
[+] shieldCapacity: 2111.0
[+] shieldEmDamageResonance: 1.0
[+] shieldExplosiveDamageResonance: 0.5
[+] shieldKineticDamageResonance: 0.6
[+] shieldRechargeRate: 1400000.0
[+] shieldThermalDamageResonance: 0.8
[+] shieldUniformity: 0.75
[+] shipBonusBC1: 10.0
[+] shipBonusBC2: 5.0
[+] signatureRadius: 200.0
[+] structureUniformity: 0.75
[+] techLevel: 1.0
[+] thermalDamageResonance: 1.0
[+] turretSlotsLeft: 8.0
[+] typeColorScheme: 11331.0
[+] uniformity: 1.0
[+] upgradeCapacity: 400.0
[+] upgradeSlotsLeft: 3.0
[+] volume: 270000.0
[+] warpCapacitorNeed: 8.13e-07
[+] warpFactor: 0

For me, design logic does not equate to design beauty. It may "make sense" to have 5 large barrels lashed sideways to the top of the hull to accommodate the oversized weapon turrets. But that does not make it look pretty. It's like welding three fifty gallon drums to the hood of a Ferrari because of the increased fuel capacity necessitated by the larger engine...then saying it still looks good because it makes sense.

Or makes "cents". They could rename it "Sixty-five Dollars". I count 4 rolls of quarters and 5 rolls of dimes melded into the model.

We were going to put the blog out tomorrow...but why wait? Your favorite Community team brings you more news of another player created masterpiece jumping into the game in the upcoming Winter Expansion.

I can't wait to get into my very own Talos. How about you?

in your face glass cannon

Ret-¦rded car analogies are ret-¦rded.

Why not mount a minigun on that Ferrari?

Day 1, winter expansion.
Day 3, HulkaGeddon

A Ferrari with a minigun would look better than this paper airplane with barrels strapped to it. And if you don't like car analogies, why make another car analogy? Hyprocrite's reply is hypocritical.

Day 1, winter expansion.
Day 3, HulkaGeddon

Should have called it Gankos

"Gankos - The last word in suicide ganking - coming soon"

Third, actually

Large Blaster Specialization to V, anyone?

I hope-

Caldari Naga

or

Caldari Naga



but I still believe this will be the Oracle, as its the winner of the second contest!

as much as i do like the new talos i was kinda hoping it was gonna be this one!

even so it looks kinda similar-ish

i can see a modified version of this being a very likely contender for the amarr Oracle!

although my personal preference is this one Though it looks more like a battleship.

i reeeeeeeeaaaaalllly like this for the caldari Naga... u really HAVE to look at that 1 close up! its very caldari! and very lush!



ohh btw get rid of the web bonus on the Talos... all your doing is throwing yet another gal ship into the overflowing basket of lowsec-only gallente gank ships!

Gallente need a viable fleet pvp ship.

I like both ships, they share a similar quality, they both look kinda like their race design philosophies , and yet slightly off, as if influenced by new tech/ideas.

I hope some nice story elements can be incorporated into their launch, some common tech, based on capacitor and or hull advances. Anyway I am more curious about the Oracle I really hope it is going to be the Mentor model, or perhaps another awesome looking ship... and so far nobody has any idea what the Caldari one will look like!

You do realize that all baster ships are a bit more agile and less massive now right?
And that blaster range has been addressed.

And secondly both drawings of are of the same ship, I dont see why you're comparing oranges to oranges.

as much as i do like the new talos i was kinda hoping it was gonna be this one!

even so it looks kinda similar-ish

i can see a modified version of this being a very likely contender for the amarr Oracle!

although my personal preference is this one Though it looks more like a battleship.

i reeeeeeeeaaaaalllly like this for the caldari Naga... u really HAVE to look at that 1 close up! its very caldari! and very lush!



ohh btw get rid of the web bonus on the Talos... all your doing is throwing yet another gal ship into the overflowing basket of lowsec-only gallente gank ships!

Gallente need a viable fleet pvp ship.

You guys need to show the pics from behind, I don't like the nose of the ship...

Slightly at odds with the Gallente design philosophy but very sexy !!!

Third, actually

Large Blaster Specialization to V, anyone?

You do realize that all baster ships are a bit more agile and less massive now right?
And that blaster range has been addressed.

And secondly both drawings of are of the same ship, I dont see why you're comparing oranges to oranges.

Can anyone confirm this please?

Day 2, ???

So 90% aren't overpowered anymore. huh? What's changed?

CCP actually played her own game and realized that the blaster vents had a good point 3 years ago?

I think the talos is neither gallente nor pretty and dear ccp do not put that web bonus on there DO NOT!
that bonus is much too powerful for such a cheap and expendable ship and should be reserved for ships much more expensive

also I think it would just be out of balance to give only this ship a bonus to e-war that essentially allows it to negate all the negative offensive bonuses of its ship class (bad tracking of large guns) which is supposed to balance the ship over battleships

further I think those ships should get their own class and not be battle cruisers they will be referred to tier 3 battle cruisers other ways anyway rather then battle cruisers

Let us wait the expansion on TQ and see who is who. I hope that theese attributes that we have on Sisi are not final, and they will be improved (or balanced ? =) ) on the upcoming masstests.

I'm very happy that CCP paid attention to gallente's problems. But oh my brain! - More tracking for blasters, less pg reqiurements for them - is good, but main problem is still here - inbalance between gall's speed and fire range.
Simple example - brutix vs hurricane: 1st can't do anything (except a bit drone damage) to kite'ing cane, which have higher speed and longer range. The same with Mega and Tempest.

In my view this has one good solution: a bonus to range of stasis web for brutix (and other blaster boats) that will make the ranges of web and disruptor equal.

This will not give serious advantage to Brutix especially against another Brutix =) But in case with kite'ing hurricane it will help somehow to go closer (~10km when a huri have a web too, but w/o such bonus), where cold shine of blasters already seen and become a reason of enemy's feet tremor .)

The only negative effect of this bonus is one, imho: it will be more problematic for frig-size tackers to keep such brutix from warpout. But I think it is possible to make this range bonus NOT WORK on frig-size (only on frig-size!).


Please, write your ideas about this, I'm always ready for constructive critics =)


P.S. I wish good luck to CCP in realization of their big plans this winter, and wish they rebalance not a single weapons but a whole ships as integral self-sufficient entity on a battlefield.

Can anyone confirm this please?

Nova Fox is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Blaster boats are getting their speed boosted, their agility nerfed (bigger number = less agile).

Blasters themselves are getting a tracking boost (it's either 20% or 30%). Railguns are getting 10% better volley damage. Most hybrid turrets are getting reduced pg and cpu need, and they're all getting a reduction to capacitor use.

In other words, Gallente hybrid platforms are still underpowered in every combat scenario, except for that tiny niche which only exists in fantasy.

(And no, ganks and docking games are not 'combat')

In other words, Gallente hybrid platforms are still underpowered in every combat scenario, except for that tiny niche which only exists in fantasy.

Ok, I agree w/ Crazy KSK that web range bonus will lead to overposted with on-gate-kills KBs.
Then I see 3 another ways (more or less bad):
- balancing the sensor dampening technology (to give no chance for that Hurri to shoot Brut at distance >10km) [rather good way]
- balancing speeds of gallente-s [so-so]
- increasing the range of blasters [the worst scenario]

Some more thoughts? )

So the Tornado was first in contest and was selected as the new t3 bc.

This was second place for gallente ship http://baranha.deviantart.com/art/Naru-Kami-Final-179403464 and its totaly different from the one in devblog however both were in same competition? Just trying to make sense out of it.

Day 1, winter expansion.
Day 3, HulkaGeddon

Naru-Kami would have made an awesome battleship.

paint over
http://burhtun.com/bs/talos.jpg

Nova Fox is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Blaster boats are getting slightly better speed, and are becoming slightly less agile (bigger number = less agile).

Blasters themselves are getting a tracking boost (it's either 20% or 30%). Railguns are getting 10% better volley damage. Most hybrid turrets are getting reduced pg and cpu need, and they're all getting a reduction to capacitor use.

The changes on the Chaos build are welcome, but they still don't go far enough to address blasters' critical flaw - their lack of versatility. Blasters still have no answer to ubiquitous Minmatar kiting tactics in skirmishes (even on the edge of web range), and rails are still outdone by pulse lasers with Scorch in full-on fleet slugfests.

Until blasters get better damage projection and rails get better DPS (a 10% buff just isn't enough), the weaknesses in hybrids still don't come close to compensating for Gallente hybrid platforms' fragility, sluggishness, resist profile and fat-ass signatures. The defining concept of Gallente boats - their up close and personal facemelting potential - just doesn't have a real application in modern PVP.

Unless CCP buffs hybrids further, or starts from scratch with a whole new Gallente combat philosophy that actually works, Gallente blaster boats will still be underpowered in every combat scenario* except for a tiny niche which only exists in fantasy.




*ganks and docking games are not 'combat'

Or for players who don't want to translate;

Gallente - Talos
Skills required: Gallente Cruiser III, Battlecruisers II

Bonuses:
Role Bonus:
50% reduction to Large Hybrid Turret CPU requirements
50% reduction to Large Hybrid Turret cap usage
95% reduction to Large Hybrid Turret powergrid requirements

Battlecruisers skill bonus:
10% bonus to velocity factor of Stasis Webifiers per level
5% increase to Large Hybrid Turret damage per level

Shield HP: 2111.0
Resistances: EM/Ex/K/T 0/50/40/20
Armor HP: 2272.0
Resistances: EM/Ex/K/T 50/10/35/35
Structure HP: 2597.0 (of course, it's a Gallente ship)
Resistances: 0/0/0/0

Capacitor: 3100GJ
Cargohold: 600m3
Drone Bandwidth: 25Mbit/s
Drone Bay: 25m3
Max Locked targets: 7
Max Lock range: 70km
Max Velocity: 210m/s
Magnetometric Sensor strength: 20
Scan resolution: 230
Sig radius: 200

CPU: 400tf
Powergrid: 1150mW
High slots: 8.0
Turret Slots: 8.0
Medium slots: 4.0
Low slots: 5.0
400 Calibration and 3 rig slots

Completly disagree.

The usual flaw of Galente was'nt only in Hybrid gun.

First of all, armor tanking a ship who also have the worst range one of the worst base speed were completly off track. Now, CCP added speed, give a damage boost and tracking boost. What does this mean, is that if you are an intelligent person you'll fit tracking enhancer or scripted tracking computer w/optimal script. Why? Cause you have engouh DPS anyway and with tracking bonus, Hybrid become on top of best tracking gun. Blaster will have better tracking than autocannon, so the **ONLY** issue can be settled with some TE or scripted TC.

After wich you need to stop fitting of 3 armor rig and realize that 1 armor rig with 2 other (damage mod or whatever) are what could keep Gallente engough rapid to catch unexpected kitting vessel. Having tried that in PVP, I can confirm it's working and we are forced to believe it would be better with promised change.

as much as i do like the new talos i was kinda hoping it was gonna be this one!

even so it looks kinda similar-ish

i can see a modified version of this being a very likely contender for the amarr Oracle!

although my personal preference is this one Though it looks more like a battleship.

i reeeeeeeeaaaaalllly like this for the caldari Naga... u really HAVE to look at that 1 close up! its very caldari! and very lush!



ohh btw get rid of the web bonus on the Talos... all your doing is throwing yet another gal ship into the overflowing basket of lowsec-only gallente gank ships!

Gallente need a viable fleet pvp ship.

Third, actually

Large Blaster Specialization to V, anyone?

I HAVE TO SAY THAT I AM EXTREAMLY DISAPOINTED WIHT CCP CHOICE TO DO A WEBBER VELOCITY BONUS INSTEAD OF A FALL OFF BONUS...

UNFORTUANTLY CCP IS TAKING THE EASY ROUTE AND IF THIS IS A SIGN OF THE HYBRID BOOST THEN ALOT OF GALLENTE SHIPS WILL LOOSE A BONUS WHEN NOT USING BLASTERS...

A FALL OFF BONUS WOULD ATLEAST BE USEFULL TO BOTH BLASTERS AND RAILS...

Very nice indeed...I may need to be training up some Gallente skills just a bit.



Do you realize you look like a turd when you type in all caps? Is there any reason to type in all caps? Are you afraid nobody will read what you say without typing in all caps? Caps button stuck? Maybe the text is too small for you to read without using caps? Forget your meds this morning? Hyperactive? Spastic? Whatever it is...there is help. Seek it.

Well it doesn't really look like gallente, I would have loved the Aquilon hull ingame.

Just to remind all, CCP Devs have quite clearly stated that the stats that are floating around are from Sisi for ongoing testing and will most likely not be the stats on finished models.

So no need to get upset..........yet!

I HAVE TO SAY THAT I AM EXTREAMLY DISAPOINTED WIHT CCP CHOICE TO DO A WEBBER VELOCITY BONUS INSTEAD OF A FALL OFF BONUS...

UNFORTUANTLY CCP IS TAKING THE EASY ROUTE AND IF THIS IS A SIGN OF THE HYBRID BOOST THEN ALOT OF GALLENTE SHIPS WILL LOOSE A BONUS WHEN NOT USING BLASTERS...

A FALL OFF BONUS WOULD ATLEAST BE USEFULL TO BOTH BLASTERS AND RAILS...

Wouldn't that just make it a slower tornado with a smaller engagement window?

true enough... plus rails have low falloff so an increase to it might have been presumptious of me...

a bonus i have been complemplating is a reduction in the mass addition of propulsion mods... which would make gal ships fitted with mwd or ab faster and more agile...

could you please link some of those clear statements ?
all ive seen so far is a confirmation that it is indeed official data but not final

also its not sisi its chaos they took that from , a non public testing server

CCP seems to be pushing Gallente further into 2 opposite niche fighting styles, super long range or 0 range. that being the case there are not alot of weapon bonuses that will apply well to both. Your suggestion of an agility affecting bonus seems much more useful to the intended nature of the ship. I'd gladly go with that.

I get the feeling most Gallente pilots just wish they were Minmatar.

My suggestion, do what everyone else does and cross train if you don't like the role Gal ships fill.

The webber bonus is going to be devastating and I'm looking forward to it. It will assist in breaking away from losing fights to ships that could otherwise keep you pinned down and conversely it will keep ships dying to you under your thumb where they otherwise might have escaped.

There really isn't much reason to wish you were flying Gallente. The versatility of energy and projectile weapons in comparison to hybrids, combined with the drawbacks of the platforms makes sure that there are very few scenarios in which thees truly niche weapons systems can shine, and even then the tide can easily turn against you. What has been seen of the blaster buff may make them deadly enough to be actually desired in their effective combat window, but it won't make them more desirable outside those isolated conditions.

Your speaking from opinion. There is a role. Like I said, if you don't appreciate the role which you so obviously don't then train up another ship.

What is your proposed alternative? Making all the turrets the same? HOW FUN!
I don't want to play Vanilla Online and I don't think anyone else who understands this game does either.

Fly what ships fit the combat roles you enjoy but don't cry that gallente can't do what amarr or caldari or minnie can do. Each have their niche and each niche has a counter.

Even without the hybrid changes coming, I know plenty of pilots that absolutely pwn with blasters and non-frig rails are the only weap sys that absolutely require a boost. We are getting a welcome boost to both.

You complain that they are crap 'outside of those isolated conditions' as if 'absolutely pwning and raping faces' inside of those isolated conditions should be dismissed.

Your speaking from opinion. There is a role. Like I said, if you don't appreciate the role which you so obviously don't then train up another ship.

What is your proposed alternative? Making all the turrets the same? HOW FUN!
I don't want to play Vanilla Online and I don't think anyone else who understands this game does either.

Fly what ships fit the combat roles you enjoy but don't cry that gallente can't do what amarr or caldari or minnie can do. Each have their niche and each niche has a counter.

Even without the hybrid changes coming, I know plenty of pilots that absolutely pwn with blasters and non-frig rails are the only weap sys that absolutely require a boost. We are getting a welcome boost to both.

You complain that they are crap 'outside of those isolated conditions' as if 'absolutely pwning and raping faces' inside of those isolated conditions should be dismissed.

CCP Please tell me these stats are all wrong because this is depressing. The tracking bonus is long overdue but no increase to blaster range? Really? Less agile than the armored pigs already are? Let me see, warp in, even at zero on a fast moving target which is hard to achieve, and then by the time you lock and slowly accelerate the enemy is out of scram/web/gun range. This sucks. Plus when its time to GTFO since blaster boats can't fight aligned well due to range of guns, good luck getting out with a slow align time with this worse agility. Plus in orbit the increase in speed will be negated by the inability to hold the orbit due to worse agility.

So 90% webs aren't overpowered anymore. huh? What's changed?

I hate the nose of this ship.

There not joking when they say...
"The Talos excels as an GÇ£in your face glass cannonGÇ¥"
" Think of it as a smaller, more expendable Vindicator"

and with the stats as quoted
Shield HP: 2111.0
Resistances: EM/Ex/K/T 0/50/40/20
Armor HP: 2272.0
Resistances: EM/Ex/K/T 50/10/35/35
Structure HP: 2597.0 (of course, it's a Gallente ship)

Tell me those stat's aren't right, that's only half HP of the Brutix and that last's about 2 secs once it's been primaried.
There wont even be time to cycle those guns once, before coming home in your pod.

Think of it as a larger, more expensive Catalyst

Your speaking from opinion. There is a role. Like I said, if you don't appreciate the role which you so obviously don't then train up another ship.

What is your proposed alternative? Making all the turrets the same? HOW FUN!
I don't want to play Vanilla Online and I don't think anyone else who understands this game does either.

Fly what ships fit the combat roles you enjoy but don't cry that gallente can't do what amarr or caldari or minnie can do. Each have their niche and each niche has a counter.

Even without the hybrid changes coming, I know plenty of pilots that absolutely pwn with blasters and non-frig rails are the only weap sys that absolutely require a boost. We are getting a welcome boost to both.

You complain that they are crap 'outside of those isolated conditions' as if 'absolutely pwning and raping faces' inside of those isolated conditions should be dismissed.

Allot of people are complaining about the Talos's web bonus, but I think the main reason they gave it a web bonus is that they wanted to help its tracking without making it another mega, or making the bonus same as the caldari blaster fit one. The amarr ships is also suposidly getting a tracking bonus, so most of them are getting help with making their over sized guns more useful. it may be better if they only gave it a 5% bonus rather than a 10% tho.

Other than that love the ship, as a pure gallent pilot im looking forward to it.

I think that bonus is too much of the good since it makes that talos able to even kill frigates if it gets in range (and not dies before that)

I think it should get a ROF bonus as its second bonus to boost its dps into the viable spectrum
since it probably arrives at its target in halve armor and then has to catch up

I think that bonus is too much of the good since it makes that talos able to even kill frigates if it gets in range (and not dies before that)

I think it should get a ROF bonus as its second bonus to boost its dps into the viable spectrum
since it probably arrives at its target in halve armor and then has to catch up

it dose enough dps, it dosent need a ROF bonus, tho I do think 90% webs is a bit much we they will likely be able to fit 2 of those webs. maybe a reduction to a 5% bonus to webs would be better.

Or for players who don't want to translate;

Gallente - Talos
Skills required: Gallente Cruiser III, Battlecruisers II

Bonuses:
Role Bonus:
50% reduction to Large Hybrid Turret CPU requirements
50% reduction to Large Hybrid Turret cap usage
95% reduction to Large Hybrid Turret powergrid requirements

Battlecruisers skill bonus:
10% bonus to velocity factor of Stasis Webifiers per level
5% increase to Large Hybrid Turret damage per level

Shield HP: 2111.0
Resistances: EM/Ex/K/T 0/50/40/20
Armor HP: 2272.0
Resistances: EM/Ex/K/T 50/10/35/35
Structure HP: 2597.0 (of course, it's a Gallente ship)
Resistances: 0/0/0/0

Capacitor: 3100GJ
Cargohold: 600m3
Drone Bandwidth: 25Mbit/s
Drone Bay: 25m3
Max Locked targets: 7
Max Lock range: 70km
Max Velocity: 210m/s
Magnetometric Sensor strength: 20
Scan resolution: 230
Sig radius: 200

CPU: 400tf
Powergrid: 1150mW
High slots: 8.0
Turret Slots: 8.0
Medium slots: 4.0
Low slots: 5.0
400 Calibration and 3 rig slots