This "Ishtar has bonuses to battleship weapons" line that keeps coming up is interesting. We talked about it some earlier here. There's parts of it that we can agree about but it's also something that makes drones interesting across all drone using/bonused ships. You could use the same argument to say that Dominix's shouldn't get bonuses to light drones or that Vexors shouldn't be able to use lights or heavies or sentries.

We feel that in general it's an interesting and positive part of drone design that they aren't fixed to ship sizes nearly as strictly as other weapon types. We just need to find ways to have balanced ships as well.

Well, the Ishtar needs a nerfhammer like never seen before. This coming out of a dude in alliance flying almost nothing but ishtars on alliance level fleets.

Happy now?

This.

I suspect many of the posters here haven't been in a scrap with...let's call it 30+ Ishtars.

"Pop the drones" - There are 150 all over the place, good luck with that. And they have spares.
"Drones are static" - Great so we have 30 ishtars doing turns for 2km/s burning away from their drones with reduced MWD sig. Because, you know, that's easy to stop or hold them down. And they'll totally not pull you into drone optimals.


The counter to a modestly sized ishtar fleet is to utterly, utterly blob them to death (and perhaps/probably depending on how heavy you blob still lose on isk) or bring more ishtars.

The armageddon with it's neut bonus's was a stroke of genius. You should perhaps consider giving other BS's some ewar bonus's. Perhaps give the minny BS's a web or paint role bonus, the gallente a point/scram range bonus. The caldari and amarr both have ewar BS's.

And the whoel concept of the drone goes down the drain.

Peopel need to stop with hatred ideas. Simply making somethign removed from game is nto the solution.

And no one cares if it doe snto affect PVE. PVE doe snot need balance as much as PVP does.

I would jsut accept hat sicen sentry drones are static and can take advantage on tracking issues because of that, they should have their tracking HALVED.

And again, big boys of ye olde nullsec did use battleships because
a) there were no bombers,
b) they had no MJD which only distracts pilot attention and is useless otherwise,
c) the grass was greener.

FYI, bombers can wipe fleets of Tengus and even Mighty Ishtars.
Yet, those ships are still in use.

Hello

I was out of the office yesterday but I did get caught up here finally. I don't have a lot to add for the moment. We are still leaning towards more gradual changes for this particular pass but I'm going to get folks together once vacations are over and have a larger conversation about sentries and drone balance overall. I definitely agree that being destructible doesn't end up being an actual drawback for sentry drones in almost all situations. We could expose that weakness more by changing things like drone bay or drone HP but the August release is too close for that kind of change so I'll just get the conversation started and we'll see how things look for the following release.

I don't doubt that the Ishtar will still be strong, and we could definitely remove it from the meta by attacking the sentry use more directly, but we want to try and reach some middle ground before going that route.

One small addition - I'm going to even out the cargo capacity on HACs some in this release, the Zealot's very sad 260 cargo was very annoying.

A point I would like to make. More than being destructable.. the real drawback is being FORGETTABLE. The fact tat is you need to make a tactical warp you lose them. That is far far more relevant than the drones possibility of being popped.

Gardes are the counter part to Blasters, Curators for Mega Pulse Laser, Bouncer for 800mm Autos and Wardens for 425 mm guns. Only Warden are real long range weapon analogs. So, unless you want to make all Sentries long range analogs and introduces a short range sentry variation (or the other way around), your suggestion is not feasible.

The Ishtar fills a niche no other HAC does. If anything I suggest a buff of the Eagle. Can we also define BS level DPS?

So where do Command Ships fall into this? If I'm not mistaken an Eos can out DPS an Ishtar.

Do you have the fits to go with the pretty graphs?

No gun systems? The Eos does receive tracking bonuses for those also. Let's no forget the Command Links.

This is just silly. I thought the "battlship level DPS" meant DPS numbers obtained from a battleship. Not DPS to 90k. An Eos with Heavys and Blasters and produce Battleship level DPS while providing links.

An Eos with blasters and heavy drone applies more DPS in optimal than an Ishtar with sentries. A Dominix with heavies and blasters applies more DPS in optimal than the Eos. See how that progresses.

[Most importantly please define high DPS and other factors you think is relevant when it comes to balance.

They are though. However, an Eagle works better.
The reason I mentioned the different advantages is because some people are trying to use the Ishtars advantages as a gauge to determine if it is OP. That's stacking the deck.

2xMag Stab
1xDCU2
1xPower Diagnostics System
2xLSE
2xInvul Field
1x EM Ward
1x10mn Afterburner
5x250mm Rail
2x Medium Core Field Extender

With the proposed changes the Eagle will be faster with smaller sig radius.

I'm going to assume it is to prevent from being alpha hit off the field. That is not my fit btw. All it takes is a scram and the Ishtar is no longer faster.

The numbers show that sentries are right in the middle. Gardens are doing low end Battleship damage, only slightly more than the best medium turret, and at medium turret ranges. The rest are doing mid range medium damage at large ranges.

Add in the lack of implants and boosters, and there is still no passive low slot tracking/range module, and that you can shoot them, and that much of their range is wasted unless you fit a lot of drone control modules, and they don't compare too badly. They are a bit weak at the BS level, and strong at the cruiser/battlecruiser level.

I see my mistake. You are right on the tank, sig and more cap stable. The loss of a sentry would be bad for an Ishtar just for the fact the Stratios would be so similar. In fact, I think I might have talked myself into selling the Ishtar and buying a Stratios. That Cover Ops cloak is huge.

I assume you mean damage when factored against range and application?

And to a lesser extent ship manoeuvrability?

Interceptors and ABCs have been called OP quite often. They just perform their roles well and people assume they are OP because of it. Do I believe an Ishtar should be an overall better ship than a T2 frig and T1 BC? Yes. It doesn't necessarily need to be nerfed(especially to the degree some wish it would be) to balance it accordingly to the other HACs. I believe the other HACs need more defined roles and slight buffs.

3x T2 Damage in Lows.
1x 10MN Experi MWD to exacerbate fittings.
EMP, MF, AM, Scourge for ammo
Where drones are significant (5x HH2 = 158dps, 5x Hor 2 = 100dps)

CCP why don't you spend more time to create balance by releasing new ships more than nerfing existing one?

Power creep is not a great end goal in itself, but neither is power slide or a race to the bottom.

If a ship is out of balance, ask CCP to create an effective counter to it, then you get more choice and a wider range of possibilities and a richer more enjoyable game..

Of course alternatively, nerf Drake, Nerf Heavy missiles, nerf ishtar, always works out so well doesn't it.......

There was one at the title of this thread and half the thread is about it. ANd a gameplay shoudl not be a niche that happens 5 times per year.

You realize that the original tittle of the thread was balance of HAcs and Tempest.. and I am not talking about the hyperion? Arrive late and yet expect to sit at the window?