Don't forget about resists, which - for some weird reason (if any) - are lower than those of hacs, tech3 cruisers etc. It's just stupid.

The hell with the asstart, give the Eos a 125mb drone bandwidth again! It doesn't make sense to have a t2 drone boat that can use heavies.

Resists being slightly lower is ok imo, but they should really get another slot (-sleip) and NH should either get a mid + grid or a high + launcher slot + grid.

If OK means "one can live with that" then yes, it's ok. As for extra guns/launchers, I don't think it's a good idea. What field command ships really lack is the ability to use gank-links without gimping their damage/tank, which is plain wrong - why bother lowering these precious values at a command ship when you can tune down a mere Drake with the same gang-boosting effect? Thus each command ship should have a better role bonus (lowering PG requirements, too) and 1 additional utility high-slot.

That's the way number 1.

Surely it's also acceptable to just give them more slots (in med/low racks) - and that's the way number 2.

Either will be welcome. CCP just has to decide what they think field CS are intended for and act accordingly.

There's nothing wrong with damage output of NH. It already outdamages Abso at basically any distance (bare 0-7.5 km I guess). Heavy missiles are already very potent and there's just no need to boost ships in this regard even further.

We'd better fix tier2 BC instead, which deal way too much damage for their class.

None command ship can fit gang-link with ease - it always comes with a cost of downgrading guns or something alike. It is as stupid as asking covert recons to drop something to utilize their cloak. 50 CPU and 200 PG - that's just too harsh.

Its dead, Jim.

+1ing an additional role bonus for reduced fitting on ganglinks and for additional slots on every field CS but the Sleipnir.

Bump

I somewhat understand your frustration with field command ships, but what about fleet command ships?

I mean fleet command ships are only useful as offgrid with a full high rack of ganglinks, they 99% of the time never utilize their weapon systems.

Not to mention they're outclassed by T3s (with the exception that they can fit 1 more link than a t3 - Claymore can fit 8 on a l33t fit)

/shrug

I somewhat understand your frustration with field command ships, but what about fleet command ships?

I mean fleet command ships are only useful as offgrid with a full high rack of ganglinks, they 99% of the time never utilize their weapon systems.

Not to mention they're outclassed by T3s (with the exception that they can fit 1 more link than a t3 - Claymore can fit 8 on a l33t fit)

/shrug

There's something wrong with the field command ships?

Maybe the fix then should be the removal of offgrid boosting? In pvp, get one person sending out probes, and either you are on the offensive so they have poses, or they need to keep in warp and cannot boost anyways. Majority of the time, a fleet command outdoes the T3 for functional boosting. Field commands, the same way. In combat situations, a link boosting field command does excellent damage, much more than a T1 does.