A good bombing wing can be lethal to an Ishtar fleet, the pressure of them/their drones being bombed constantly coupled with fighting the enemy fleet would hurt.

Rather than resorting to nerf's, think of a counter instead. EVE is basically a giant game of rock-paper-scissors in space after all :P

This is the good solution, if we'd somehow reach the conclusion that there is a problem.

However, this "Ishtar issue" is nothing more than another installment in the never-ending series of "what the other guy is flying is always OP, CCP hjalp".

You know something is stupid when the counter to it is itself...

This is the good solution, if we'd somehow reach the conclusion that there is a problem.

However, this "Ishtar issue" is nothing more than another installment in the never-ending series of "what the other guy is flying is always OP, CCP hjalp".

No.


How can you not see how broken Ishtars are? It's been dissected and explained numerous times. You obviously don't PvP...or PvE as it's the go to ship for that as well.

I really believe some people simply cannot grasp the concept of balance.

No.


How can you not see how broken Ishtars are? It's been dissected and explained numerous times. You obviously don't PvP...or PvE as it's the go to ship for that as well.

I really believe some people simply cannot grasp the concept of balance.

This is exactly what I meant. You don't provide a single argument why it would be "op" in your opinion. You simply parrot other forum clowns, and in your cluelesness you start to believe in it if it's repeated enough.

You obviously don't PVP or PVE, or even log in, if all you see is Ishtars.

There are ships far, far more broken than what you claim the Ishtar to be. Most of them, however, are broken in the other direction. The Drake, for example, was nerfed so badly because of whiners like you that no one uses it anymore. Do us all a favor and post your lossmails so we can see why you're so hurt over the Ishtar.

LOL.

You are illustrating my point beautifully.

The old Drake was utterly overpowered. Why do you think 80% of the BC's in space were Drakes? Why were 3% of the BC's in space Prophecy's before teiricide? Balance man. It's Really, really simple. The drake is not un-useable, it's simply more in line with the others. Heavy missiles were what's broken anyway. HAM drakes are still good, though predictable.


And to Aiyshimin the fanboy (or woman, because you behave like a woman), there are literally hundreds of posts explaining exactly why the Ishtar is overpowered. I do not need to regurgitate information. So far I have not heard a single reasonable counter argument.

I also have first hand experience. Judging by your killboard you do not. Do not offer your opinion on the matter; it is worthless.

HACs: Cerberus/Eagle, Ishtar/Deimos, Munnin/Vagabond, Sacrilege/Zealot
Battleship Weapons: Cruise Missiles, Torpedoes, Large Railguns/Blasters/Artillery, Cannons/Autocannons/, Pulse Lasers/Beam Lasers, Sentry Drones

HACs that cannot use Battleship Weapon Systems: Cerberus/Eagle, Deimos, Munnin/Vagabond, Sacrilege/Zealot
HACs that can use Battleship Weapon Systems: Ishtar

I see a problem here

I'll purchase your beloved ishtar for a reasonable price post nerf. I'm sure if they remove it's riskaversyness you'll be more than willing to unload it. If it's a pve ishtar.... I'm only intersted in DED space fit ishtars.

I've reviewed your comments and "However, this "Ishtar issue" is nothing more than another installment in the never-ending series of "what the other guy is flying is always OP, CCP hjalp" seems to be your most 'valid' arguement for a non nerf. Stop throwing stones.

LOL.

You are illustrating my point beautifully.

The old Drake was utterly overpowered. Why do you think 80% of the BC's in space were Drakes? Why were 3% of the BC's in space Prophecy's before teiricide? Balance man. It's Really, really simple. The drake is not un-useable, it's simply more in line with the others. Heavy missiles were what's broken anyway. HAM drakes are still good, though predictable.


And to Aiyshimin the fanboy (or woman, because you behave like a woman), there are literally hundreds of posts explaining exactly why the Ishtar is overpowered. I do not need to regurgitate information. So far I have not heard a single reasonable counter argument.

I also have first hand experience. Judging by your killboard you do not. Do not offer your opinion on the matter; it is worthless.

Oh look, Ishtars are OP!!! There's no counter to be found!!!

Enough said.

so your counter is for an fc of ishtar fleet to go full ****** durring a fight check... once agian i feel so stupid for not thinking of that.

HAC's that can project damage without Battleship Weapons: Cerberus/Eagle, Deimos, Munnin/Vagabond, Sacrilege/Zealot
Hac's that cannot have their primary weapon system be destroyed by the enemy: Cerberus/Eagle, Deimos, Munnin/Vagabond, Sacrilege/Zealot

HAC's that can have their weapon system destroyed by an enemy, and only have one size of effective weaponry: Ishtars.

I too see a problem here.

Lets not just gloss over all the downsides and pretend that removing sentries will somehow make them "balanced"

How can you not see how broken Ishtars are? It's been dissected and explained numerous times. You obviously don't PvP...or PvE as it's the go to ship for that as well.

I really believe some people simply cannot grasp the concept of balance.

Just a thought, perhaps he, like me and many others that have posted here have experienced this "Ishtar online" phenomenon and like me and the others we simply doe not believe you. Both sides are opinions and those opinions are based on our in game experiences, because we view this differently than you do does not make us wrong and it does not make us blind anymore than you are.


Let me deal with the "there are no counters to Ishtar online" theory with a few things that I have personally seen work extremely well. I do have another character that is in a low sec corp and we routinely face Ishtar fleets, granted nothing in the hundreds of ships size that nul sec players are reporting but I see no reason why these would not be effective even there.

First ignore the Ishtar and deal with the drones, and yes it really is that easy unless you care more about the Ishtar kill than driving the enemy out of your territory.

Any ship that can fit cruise missiles can be particularly deadly to a drones ship. They can warp in at ranges that have the sentries deep into fall off so they are not hitting particularly well which minimizes the damage you take. And in the ultimate PvP no no we have found that slightly modified mission fits and their active tanks are the most useful as it minimizes the need for reps, leaving more pilots for dps roles. Drones vanish quickly and the Ishtars warp off because they have nothing left to shoot with. But hey we miss the kills so if you care more about the kills then this is a fail procedure. But then based on the comments here you are failing anyway so what do you have to lose?

Hard tanked fast assault is another tactic that works particularly well. Small fast ships can get in close enough and move fast enough that the sentry drones simply cannot hit them. This forces the Ishtar pilots into a decision, leave sentries out that are dying but cannot hit anything, or move back in to recall the sentries and risk the swarms of fast attack ships. Definitely more risk in this one vs the long range above but it is still effective and we even get Ishtar kills out of it. The major drawback here is you must have a decent set of cloaky scouts to set up warp ins so the fast attacks do not die trying to get in tight. But what the hell if a group of retreaded carebears can pull this off it should be easy for you "serious" PvP pilots.

We have used various combinations of these two extremes as well and they are just as effective.

No these will not work for every group of players and they will not work in every situation but if you are willing to think and play out side your comfort zone you would probably find they are an effective counter in many if not most situations.

But I still go back to an earlier post as the best option for the first attempt at balancing that which you all seem to think is broken. Eliminate aggressive mode and the ability to assign drones to assist another ship and lets see what happens, then adjust as needed from there. To those who say no to this idea as it would affect their PvE play. The changes being discussed here and in other sections of these forums as well as the internet in general will have far more negative impacts than these simple changes will so it is a decent compromise that PvE players should be willing to endorse.

HAC's that can project damage without Battleship Weapons: Cerberus/Eagle, Deimos, Munnin/Vagabond, Sacrilege/Zealot
Hac's that cannot have their primary weapon system be destroyed by the enemy: Cerberus/Eagle, Deimos, Munnin/Vagabond, Sacrilege/Zealot

HAC's that can have their weapon system destroyed by an enemy, and only have one size of effective weaponry: Ishtars.

I too see a problem here.

Lets not just gloss over all the downsides and pretend that removing sentries will somehow make them "balanced"

A good bombing wing can be lethal to an Ishtar fleet, the pressure of them/their drones being bombed constantly coupled with fighting the enemy fleet would hurt.

Rather than resorting to nerf's, think of a counter instead. EVE is basically a giant game of rock-paper-scissors in space after all :P

The "drone ball" only exists because killing drones is barely practical even with bombers. If that is actually undertaken en mass, they just enter a long orbit and scatter the drones to the winds and killing them becomes beyond a bad idea.

I know this, because it's what we do when the enemy can only muster bombers and they try and bomb the drones. Then you're down to locking up and shooting individual sentries, whilst taking return fire. That is only going to end one way because if you can soak the fire in the first place, you're shooting the ishtars.

It's a nice idea on paper, only works in limited circumstance/vs poor or inexperienced FCs.