We're increasing the standard cargo holds on all the DSTs

They don't need it. It'd make blockade runners useless since you might as well run the same blockade cloak warping with a DST hauling four times as much cargo.

Can we get some feedback on the bubble immunity thing for DSTs? Obviously it's a dumb idea for Blockade Runners, but replacing the DST warp core stability bonus with bubble immunity makes a lot of sense and isn't anywhere near as strong as it is on Interceptors / T3 cruisers.

Was the idea considered?

Hey everyone. Allowing launching and scooping of structures from fleet hangars is something that needs more investigation, so we're increasing the standard cargo holds on all the DSTs so they can easily deploy and scoop structures.

We are also increasing the assembled volumes of the DSTs a bit, to keep the balance surrounding DSTs hauling cargo in ship maintenance bays.

We have discussed the questions surrounding hauling of battleships into C1 wormholes with the CSM and internally, and decided that we are ok with this function at this time. Using a DST to get a battleship into a C1 siege still requires the attackers to have their own starbase set up in the system for disassembly.

Blockade runners would still be better for low-sec and covert ops work. DSTs would ignore bubbles but be vulnerable to infini-points, making them preferable for null-sec and wormholes.

You can use infinite points in 0.0 too. The point I'm making is that it's pointless to have BRs if DSTs have bubble immunity, because it's just as easy to cloak warp DSTs as it is to warp a BR and hit the cloak button.

That's an issue with MWD cloak warping being a bullshit borderline exploit, though.

Fozzie Can we fill the Fleet Hanger and place these ships in SMA's in cap ships, or will the Ammo only rule still apply?

Thanks

The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.

The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.

The idea was considered and rejected as it would make DSTs too difficult to catch in nullsec and (especially) wormhole space and wouldn't provide much interesting gameplay.

The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.

The idea was considered and rejected as it would make DSTs too difficult to catch in nullsec and (especially) wormhole space and wouldn't provide much interesting gameplay.

I highly disagree.

Your stats show the align times of around 25-27 seconds, before mods and skills. Offhand, i beleive this makes for about a 15 second align time and I do not know about the align time with an MWD cycle. That said, with a normal cruiser it should take about 3.3 seconds to target a 165 sig. This would give people 12 seconds to get in range and point them if they are stationary, the lock, then approach if needed to point them. In which case they would only need a long point.

An MMJD may save them, may, but as i posted in the MMJD thread, I think it should be 50km jump range and a lower cooldown.

This first case is far more balanced than the interceptors or T3s and I cant see how you and your team trashed it.

The second case: Actual use in Null.

Who is going to fly a hauler in nullsec without a scout? no one is going to be daft enough to do that or if they do they deserve to die.

The align time for the DSTs is the same as for any other ship that can fit an MWD

I've tweaked the assembled volume up a bit further, so they are all above 500k and no more than one can be fit in the SMA of a carrier or rorqual.

I've tweaked the assembled volume up a bit further, so they are all above 500k and no more than one can be fit in the SMA of a carrier or rorqual.

I've tweaked the assembled volume up a bit further, so they are all above 500k and no more than one can be fit in the SMA of a carrier or rorqual.

Overheat modules, double tank, mega repairs, reisstance, fleet hangers. Its almost a tanky Orca.

The ammo only rule does not apply to fleet hangars.

I've tweaked the assembled volume up a bit further, so they are all above 500k and no more than one can be fit in the SMA of a carrier or rorqual.