EVE Search - Sticky:[Carnyx] The Jackdaw

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Carnyx] The Jackdaw

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12744	Posted - 2015.05.09 20:51:33 - [1] - Quote Hello everyone! We're now ready to share our current designs for the Jackdaw-class Caldari Tactical Destroyer. You'll notice a few things when you see the stats: The Jackdaw is a missile ship with a potential 10 effective launchers, placing it between the Heretic and Flycatcher in raw DPS. It doesn't have a missile precision bonus, although it does get a big 66.6% missile velocity bonus when in Sharpshooter mode. The Propulsion mode bonuses on the Jackdaw provide a huge agility bonus and a smaller speed bonus, the opposite of the earlier T3Ds. When out of propulsion mode the Jackdaw turns like a slow cruiser, but when it enters propulsion mode it gets the agility of an extremely agile frigate. Powergrid is very tight for most fittings, but CPU is much more generous. Finally I'll point people to the mass, which is extremely low for a destroyer. This helps compensate for the low base speed, allowing the Jackdaw to gain above average benefits from frigate sized propulsion modules and below average benefits from oversized propulsion modules (although those are still usable with their own advantages and disadvantages). Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Shield Hitpoints 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Role Bonus: 50% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile damage 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements Additional bonuses are available when one of three Tactical Destroyer Modes are active. Modes may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is active Propulsion Mode: 33.3% bonus to max velocity while Propulsion Mode is active 66.6% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active Sharpshooter Mode: 66.6% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile velocity while Sharpshooter Mode is active 100% bonus to sensor strength, scan resolution and targeting range while Sharpshooter Mode is active Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers 3 Rig Slots, 400 Calibration Fittings: 56 PWG, 270 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 900 / 550 / 600 Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 60 / 55 / 50 Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 72.5 / 43.75 / 10 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 700 / 300s / 2.333 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 160 / 6.4 / 1,050,000 / 4.5 / 9.32s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 300 / 7 Sensor strength: 15 Gravimetric Signature radius: 70 Cargo capacity: 450 Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Discomanco We pooped on your lawn Resonance. 121	Posted - 2015.05.09 20:54:03 - [2] - Quote First :D ETA on Sisi?
Mizhir Matari Exodus The Camel Empire 74356	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:00:39 - [3] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers Is that intentional to leave it with 1 more than the rest of them? One Man Crew - Collective Solo PVP - Video is out!

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12745	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:01:23 - [4] - Quote Mizhir wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers Is that intentional to leave it with 1 more than the rest of them? Yup Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Faren Shalni Future Corps Sleeper Social Club 133	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:06:55 - [5] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Mizhir wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers Is that intentional to leave it with 1 more than the rest of them? Yup :( I liked the two spare slots on T3 dessies hoped it would continue So Much Space
Ao Kishuba Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 1	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:12:17 - [6] - Quote Thank you for removing the kinetic damage lock shown on earlier stats. Now just to remove it from the rest of the Caldari ships, and we'll be getting somewhere...
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 1120	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:12:33 - [7] - Quote Faren Shalni wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Mizhir wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers Is that intentional to leave it with 1 more than the rest of them? Yup :( I liked the two spare slots on T3 dessies hoped it would continue you can always take a gun off, it having more effective turrets than the other 2 T3Ds isn't a cause for complaint i think for the brawling version of this is going to be ridiculous when sitting in fwar beacons - i don't know what ship could possibly compete with landing 10km away from it when fit with rockets and 1mn abs due to the mids allowing you to double web scram and sit at keep range 9000 with 400 dps of rockets https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 1120	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:13:54 - [8] - Quote i do like how you skirted around it being a stupidly overpowered talwar though, i just think the brawling double web scram rocket version needs to be addressed for people in faction-war's sanity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
Ao Kishuba Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:37:29 - [9] - Quote Capqu wrote: stupidly overpowered Of course it's going to be stupidly overpowered. Have you seen the other D3s? They've gotta have the OP dessies so everybody can hurf blurf about how frig/dessie is best PVP, and anything bigger is for dirty blobbers in nullsec (unless, of course, you're doing solo PVP in a Marauder, which is okay).
Kashuken Farith Delusions of Granduer Two Drink Minimum 0	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:39:15 - [10] - Quote Capqu wrote: i do like how you skirted around it being a stupidly overpowered talwar though, i just think the brawling double web scram rocket version needs to be addressed for people in faction-war's sanity Nooooo shhhh, it's finally a rocket boat worth flying in FW! Been waiting for a decent rocket destroyer that's not damaged locked. Also with the 300 scan res kiters can get away before being scrammed/webed.

Ao Kishuba Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:42:03 - [11] - Quote Kashuken Farith wrote: decent rocket destroyer that's not damaged locked. Down with Caldari kinetic lock! Seriously, it's 2015... why is this still a thing?
Saerin Korvalu Scope Works 19	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:49:00 - [12] - Quote The main problem I'm seeing with the ship is the gimped PWG. It's ridiculously low. Less PWG than a Corax. -_-
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1734	Posted - 2015.05.09 21:51:55 - [13] - Quote The signature radius worries me, especially given that it won't be able to fit an oversized AB given both the low base speed and incredibly low PWG. So it will almost certainly be an MWD, which is rather sad given that an agility bonus really has an impact on 10mn ABs. But man I've got to admit, what an interesting ship! The whole bipolar agility thing sounds very interesting to fly and I'm glad it didn't end up damage locked as I feared. The range seems lacking and will probably force the sharpshooter mode for most engagements, but the DPS makes up for it. Overall my opinion on this ship is very positive, it has its upsides, it has its downsides... Good job! Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
Ao Kishuba Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:01:40 - [14] - Quote Altrue wrote: Caldaris should have two missile damage options just like the guristas. Not sure why the Guristas are damage locked too, but most of the DPS in their ships comes from drones anyway (which are not damage locked). Caldari missile boats should have all the damage types. Why limit them to just two? Are people sick of seeing all the Cerberus fleets in null, people can only rat in a Caracal Navy Issue because it's the best ship, people constantly asking CCP Please nerf missiles? In the current cruiser-based meta, is a kinetic damage lock the only thing stopping the Drake (a battlecruiser) from becoming the dominant ship in EVE? If that's the case, why aren't people flying Cyclones all over the place? No, no... remove the kinetic lock from the damage bonuses, let the missiles be free to use all damage types, like every other race gets.
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1735	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:16:59 - [15] - Quote Ao Kishuba wrote: Caldari missile boats should have all the damage types. Why limit them to just two? Well it was to adress a balance issue that would arise. Minmatar missile ships tend to do less dps but are omnidamage thanks to a RoF bonus. Currently, Caldari missile ships do more dps but are kinetic locked. If you just remove the kinetic lock, the dps might need to go down. So, by offering to reduce the damage lock instead of completely nuking it, the balance kind of remains in my point of view. About the PWG issue, I'd recommend following the other T3Ds pattern and moving to four launchers (with a better role bonus). It would enable two utility highs and ease the PWG pain a bit. The damage bonus required to put four launchers to the same dps than five launchers with a 50% dmg bonus is 87.5% Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
Alexis Nightwish 179	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:23:42 - [16] - Quote So the ship has no application bonus, but high paper DPS, so it'll be good at fighting cruisers, but not so much frigates. Okay. The ship is Caldari, so high sig radius. The ship is shield tanked, so higher sig radius. Only gets a range bonus in sharpshooter mode so will need MWD (PG way too low for 10MNAB) to have any chance of being in range, so even higher sig radius. Defense mode gives a laughable -33% reduction in sig radius which means it'll still take massive damage from the cruisers it was made to fight. Perfect. CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button
Gorski Car 605	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:25:31 - [17] - Quote P O W E R C R E E P B O I S Will edit soon Collect this post
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 1678	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:33:55 - [18] - Quote Looks cool! Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information. BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1072	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:41:50 - [19] - Quote Quote: Powergrid is very tight for most fittings, but CPU is much more generous. am I going to end up using best named (that means compact btw, your tiericide didn't work) launchers? sure am glad I trained LM spec 5 :(
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1735	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:43:00 - [20] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Quote: Powergrid is very tight for most fittings, but CPU is much more generous. am I going to end up using best named (that means compact btw, your tiericide didn't work) launchers? sure am glad I trained LM spec 5 :( You most certainly are going to if the PWG stays that way. I don't really get the whole effort on making the PWG so tight, there is really no need to sanction 10mn AB fits given that their speed will be laughable at best. Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr

TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1072	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:54:38 - [21] - Quote it would be helpful to include speeds with various prop mods. even the obviously broken ones that you think aren't broken.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1171	Posted - 2015.05.09 22:55:06 - [22] - Quote If you're doing a missile look-at in June too, you need to tell us now. Feedback is worthless without knowing this. I say this because it was mooted previously.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12940	Posted - 2015.05.09 23:00:21 - [23] - Quote With only two lowslots, you might as well just auto fit it with a Damage Control and a BCU. Two lowslots is not as crippling as two mids, but it's still really restrictive of potential fits. I'm holding out for the Hecate. [edit: I mean, it has enough mids to double web, so it slaughters frigates, but lots of things slaughter frigates. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Capqu Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 1120	Posted - 2015.05.09 23:18:29 - [24] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: With only two lowslots, you might as well just auto fit it with a Damage Control and a BCU. Two lowslots is not as crippling as two mids, but it's still really restrictive of potential fits. I'm holding out for the Hecate. [edit: I mean, it has enough mids to double web, so it slaughters frigates, but lots of things slaughter frigates. dude its already absolutely absurd with 2 lows nothing can fight this 1v1 in faction war you want it to be good with light missiles too? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPntjTPWgKE
Escobar Slim III YOLOSWAGHASHTAGDOLLARBILLZSWIMMINGPOOLICECREAMS 137	Posted - 2015.05.09 23:24:27 - [25] - Quote firts.
Baali Tekitsu AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse 769	Posted - 2015.05.09 23:40:13 - [26] - Quote Looks really interesting, looking forward to it! I will hold back with predictions regarding performance, but it will be a tanky ************ for sure! RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Snuffed Out 7970	Posted - 2015.05.09 23:42:57 - [27] - Quote Ao Kishuba wrote: seriously though please remove the kinetic lock. Caldari is the only of the four races with no selectable damage type for a main weapon. Incorrect. Ao Kishuba wrote: Minmatar get both projectiles and missiles, with no damage locks on any. They also operate primarily in falloff range... where you deal less than "on paper" damage. With the missile-centric boats... they get less launchers and deal less raw damage. Ao Kishuba wrote: Gallente get drones, which can do any type of damage. Theoretically, yes. But unless you are talking about sentry drones (where the EM sentries are actually decent)... almost any drone ship will utilize Thermal or Explosive drones... because the Thermal drones deal the most damage and Explosive drones are the fastest. EM and Kinetic drones are still not that good because they fall in-between these two "must have" stats. Ao Kishuba wrote: Amarr also have bonused drone ships, and a few Khanid missile ships with no damage locks. For drones... see Gallente. For the Khanid... they follow the same paradigm as the Minmatar missile slingers. So yeah... all the races are semi-locked into certain damage types. I don't see a problem with this. On topic: Interesting ship. I must admit... was expecting some kind of super-Garmur. But it's too early to tell. How did you Veterans start? The Skillpoint System and You
Onslaughtor Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems 123	Posted - 2015.05.09 23:51:21 - [28] - Quote ... honestly this is very disappointing. With only two lows there is no room for the fun and creative fits that made the other two so much fun, not counting the silliness that was the 10mn version(But we fixed those and we still can have fun fits like LSE svipuls with web and scram). I don't need 6 mids. Personally I would leave most the stats and just swap a mid to a low. 3-5-6 thats well balanced and keeps it in a different space than the other ships it has to compete against in its own missile using category. If I were to make more changes I would have strived for a different bonus for the missiles, like a 7.5% for rockets and a 5% for lights. But that can be fixed on the weapons themselves. The Propulsion bonus also feels very lackluster to the point where I really donGÇÖt see myself using it for much else than insta warping from gate to gate.
Maurice Shepard Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 1	Posted - 2015.05.09 23:56:49 - [29] - Quote Onslaughtor wrote: ... honestly this is very disappointing. With only two lows there is no room for the fun and creative fits that made the other two so much fun, not counting the silliness that was the 10mn version(But we fixed those and we still can have fun fits like LSE svipuls with web and scram). I don't need 6 mids. Personally I would leave most the stats and just swap a mid to a low. 3-5-6 thats well balanced and keeps it in a different space than the other ships it has to compete against in its own missile using category. If I were to make more changes I would have strived for a different bonus for the missiles, like a 7.5% for rockets and a 5% for lights. But that can be fixed on the weapons themselves. The Propulsion bonus also feels very lackluster to the point where I really donGÇÖt see myself using it for much else than insta warping from gate to gate. I completely agree with this. Also all the people above in this thread that are whining about the PG should probably stop comparing this thing to the pre-nerf extremely OP 10MN AB dual ASB I'm-gonna-moonwalk-out-of-here Svipul and think about why this thing has so little pg.
Theronth Valarax V0LTA Triumvirate. 86	Posted - 2015.05.10 00:05:49 - [30] - Quote I did some math with the stats we have atm and it seems like its gonna be way better as a brawler. Still, LML fit it gonna be proper cancerous. All those mids for ewar, yo. Check out my Youtube channel

Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 57	Posted - 2015.05.10 00:07:07 - [31] - Quote Maurice Shepard wrote: Onslaughtor wrote: ... honestly this is very disappointing. With only two lows there is no room for the fun and creative fits that made the other two so much fun, not counting the silliness that was the 10mn version(But we fixed those and we still can have fun fits like LSE svipuls with web and scram). I don't need 6 mids. Personally I would leave most the stats and just swap a mid to a low. 3-5-6 thats well balanced and keeps it in a different space than the other ships it has to compete against in its own missile using category. If I were to make more changes I would have strived for a different bonus for the missiles, like a 7.5% for rockets and a 5% for lights. But that can be fixed on the weapons themselves. The Propulsion bonus also feels very lackluster to the point where I really donGÇÖt see myself using it for much else than insta warping from gate to gate. I completely agree with this. Also all the people above in this thread that are whining about the PG should probably stop comparing this thing to the pre-nerf extremely OP 10MN AB dual ASB I'm-gonna-moonwalk-out-of-here Svipul and think about why this thing has so little pg. I said this ship was pre-nerfed and it is. Might have a few specific roles, but Svipul will still dominate the kills.
Maurice Shepard Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 1	Posted - 2015.05.10 00:07:32 - [32] - Quote Theronth Valarax wrote: I did some math with the stats we have atm and it seems like its gonna be way better as a brawler. Still, LML fit it gonna be proper cancerous. All those mids for ewar, yo. Kite fits possibly with 2 tracking disruptors or something, I don't know. Could be pretty OP.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12940	Posted - 2015.05.10 00:15:45 - [33] - Quote Onslaughtor wrote: But these things don't belong in small complexes and I think most of us can agree that we shouldn't be balancing ships around facwar alone. That's pretty much the gist of it. Yes, it is pain train against mostly commonly flown faction warfare ships, but otherwise I don't see a whole lot of use for it, and there are other things that already do that anyway. Like I said, I'm holding out for the Hecate. That thing will be obscene. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Onslaughtor Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems 124	Posted - 2015.05.10 00:35:01 - [34] - Quote Ok, now having taken the time to run some basic numbers I am even more upset. You are starting this thing very heavily postnerfed. With this slot layout and the power-grid there are only a very few ways to fit it. Nothing fun or creative to see here only a more powerful flycatcher with mode switching. There is way too little pwg as well, for anything. Taking my other post into account I would swap a mid to a low for a 3 -5- 6 set up and add maybe up to 4 power grid (so that it is in line with the others), and compress the bonuses for the guns so it can have 2 utility highs like everyone else. The reason for adding 4 powergrid is that unlike guns you cant change the pwg used by missiles. There is no better option when fitting them, only fitting less. Maybe this will make it overpowered with the silly prop bonus when people manage to squeeze on a 10mn ab, but really that bonus should be changed anyway because we can barely fit the ab that it was meant to fly with when you came up with it with the pre nerf T3Ds. The postnerf T3Ds with 10mns from what I have seen aren't very good, this would be no different if this thing was made to match. But we can be honest with that as well, it the stats do appear to be out of line or the ship is getting way more use than it needs once it is out, then scale it back. You werenGÇÖt heavy handed with the Ishtar why be so heavy handed with this? The Gila and Worm havenGÇÖt been touched yet and they are still silly strong. * Edit* I feel I should reiterate my earlier point, these things don't belong in small complexes and I think most of us can agree that we shouldn't be balancing ships around facwar alone.
Lev Ironwill World Burning 0	Posted - 2015.05.10 01:00:22 - [35] - Quote afkalt wrote: If you're doing a missile look-at in June too, you need to tell us now. Feedback is worthless without knowing this. I say this because it was mooted previously. This is what I would like to know as well, lasers and projectiles were both addressed with their respective T3D's so will missiles be getting a look with the Jackdaw? I would like to be exited for this new ship, I should be, but I'm hesitant to get my hopes up about a missile ship being more than niche.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12941	Posted - 2015.05.10 01:09:44 - [36] - Quote Lev Ironwill wrote: afkalt wrote: If you're doing a missile look-at in June too, you need to tell us now. Feedback is worthless without knowing this. I say this because it was mooted previously. This is what I would like to know as well, lasers and projectiles were both addressed with their respective T3D's so will missiles be getting a look with the Jackdaw? I would like to be exited for this new ship, I should be, but I'm hesitant to get my hopes up about a missile ship being more than niche. No, because that might possibly mean that Caldari would get buffed. Pretty sure that it's in the rules somewhere that they aren't allowed to buff Caldari. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Wild Things Mining Industry Exile Foundation Warlords of the Deep 27	Posted - 2015.05.10 02:05:00 - [37] - Quote I'm concerned about the possible large fleet application of these compared to the other T3D's. I'd really like to see the raw HP bonus reconsidered and possibly changed to a shield boost amount bonus if you're still keen on having it be extremely tanky. People complaining about it not having enough powergrid... christ. In this moment, I am euphoric.
Tiberian Deci Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore 131	Posted - 2015.05.10 03:36:36 - [38] - Quote Thank you for not kinetic locking the damage bonus.
Grm Makentor Oruze Cruise 29	Posted - 2015.05.10 03:53:43 - [39] - Quote On the whole, not that impressed. Huge sig + no room for 10mn is going to gimp it against anything larger than itself Low base speed, poor speed bonus means it can't LML kite anything smaller than itself Jackdaw is already basically consigned to insane rocket brawler that no-one will engage in FW space or en mass alpha strike gang, like an expensive overtanked talwar. I really cant see any other setups where it would be effective at all. Nothing about this ship makes me want to fly it or bring it to a gang to be honest
Dato Koppla Konvict Cartel The Asylum. 827	Posted - 2015.05.10 04:48:50 - [40] - Quote Because the first iteration of T3Ds were so broken with 10MN it seems people can't see past it anymore. 50% of this thread is "it can't fit 10MN therefore it's useless". Overall it looks pretty good, 6 mids is definitely powerful and can allow for some nice brawl fits. LML kite will probably be quite deadly especially with lots of defensive options like damps/defensive web/defensive scram etc.

elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 663	Posted - 2015.05.10 04:49:51 - [41] - Quote Weeeeh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111eleven I see what you did there and who wouldn't love a 94km missile range destroyer that volley tackle of the field so fast that linked interceptors just don't bother. I love her! /me wants to inject the book right now!!! Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Longdrinks Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 187	Posted - 2015.05.10 05:46:46 - [42] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Weeeeh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111eleven I see what you did there and who wouldn't love a 94km missile range destroyer that volley tackle of the field so fast that linked interceptors just don't bother. I love her! /me wants to inject the book right now!!! Thats called a talwar and unlike a talwar this ship cant shoot far and tank at the same time.
Tipa Riot Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 357	Posted - 2015.05.10 06:45:44 - [43] - Quote 10 effective launchers? If my math is not broken, a 50% damage role bonus applied to 5 launchers means 7.5 launchers ... I'm my own NPC alt.
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 107	Posted - 2015.05.10 07:04:01 - [44] - Quote Saerin Korvalu wrote: The main problem I'm seeing with the ship is the gimped PWG. It's ridiculously low. Less PWG than a Corax. -_- That jumps off the page for me as well. It's so low that I'm thinking you're essentially locked into rockets. Looking at things, it makes sense since you're getting a really nice damage bonus and, apparently, the agility of a frigate. Jackdaw is gonna be a brawler, and probably nothing more. In it's "sharpshooter" mode, which would seem to benefit Light Missiles the most, the powergrid appears incapable of supporting the full 5, plus any kind of tank and tackle. With only 2 lows, you can't put PG on it without sacrificing BCUs. I'm hoping the PG gets bumped at least a little, but time will tell.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2389	Posted - 2015.05.10 07:33:52 - [45] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: 10 effective launchers? If my math is not broken, a 50% damage role bonus applied to 5 launchers means 7.5 launchers ... caldari tactical destroyer 5% rof per level
NearNihil Jump Drive Appreciation Society Test Alliance Please Ignore 144	Posted - 2015.05.10 10:28:59 - [46] - Quote Does this thing do the same thing as the Golem when switching modes? As in, when you enter/exit bastion with a Golem, all missiles currently in flight will do no damage (not even a damage notification, they just go poof) - will this happen when switching to/from Sharpshooter mode in the Jackdaw?
Zappity Stay Frosty. A Band Apart. 2065	Posted - 2015.05.10 11:03:31 - [47] - Quote Got to admit that as a predominantly solo lowsec player I am getting more and more frustrated by each ship release. Garmur, Orthrus, T3Ds all OP and breaking a lowsec meta that was reasonably healthy. I understand that you want people to be excited about new ships but isn't the meta health also important? At first glance this looks like a double web rocket brawler that I'm just not going to be interested in fighting. Just like the Garmur is a ridiculous spec kiter that I am also not interested in fighting. Or the Worm which is just frustrating with those drones. Or the 10mn Svipul. Maybe I should just jump on the bandwagon and fly FOTM from now on. Or just leave lowsec. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
Rosal Milag Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2015.05.10 11:51:14 - [48] - Quote Onslaughtor wrote: ... honestly this is very disappointing. With only two lows there is no room for the fun and creative fits that made the other two so much fun, not counting the silliness that was the 10mn version(But we fixed those and we still can have fun fits like LSE svipuls with web and scram). I don't need 6 mids. Personally I would leave most the stats and just swap a mid to a low. 3-5-6 thats well balanced and keeps it in a different space than the other ships it has to compete against in its own missile using category. If I were to make more changes I would have strived for a different bonus for the missiles, like a 7.5% for rockets and a 5% for lights. But that can be fixed on the weapons themselves. The Propulsion bonus also feels very lackluster to the point where I really donGÇÖt see myself using it for much else than insta warping from gate to gate. Edit Thinking about this more I do agree with people that they would reap facwar as fast as a drifter. But these things don't belong in small complexes and I think most of us can agree that we shouldn't be balancing ships around facwar alone. Asks for more unique fits, yet wants to strip away unique fitting options.... Two highs will not increase choices, it homogenizes the t3 destroyer class. With 1 utility, you have to make much more meaningful decisions. Probe Launcher? Cloak? Neut? Nos? All correct options depending on your circumstances. Same with dropping a mid for a low. All a low does is give fitting space, damage, and maneuvering. A mid opens up dual prop, ewar, tank, sensor boosters, dual point, etc. A mid slot has so many more uses than a low for a shield ship. You say you want unique fits, yet your changes would remove that potential. Propulsion mode useless? So, orbiting at 500m, full speed mwd isn't something that you'd want? Especially with a rocket brawler? Please. Propulsion mode will make this ship the hardest t3 destroyer to deal with for large hulls. Additionally, with the quick align, you can bail from a fight gone sour in a heartbeat after shaking a point. Basically, in prop mode, the jackdaw wins any fights based on positioning, forcing the opponent to be perfect with cap use and point range. Which also leads into the two utility highs. Dual Neut brawlers would be able to disengage at their leisure if they can't win in prop mode. You don't have to be aligned, signaling your intentions. Just focus the neuts, flip to prop mod when the point drops and gtfo.
Gustav Mannfred Summer of Mumuit 109	Posted - 2015.05.10 13:03:15 - [49] - Quote Why is the Jackdaw slower than all cruisers and minmatar Bc's? I think, increasing the speed to about 220 m/s would be better than 160. I also propose a 6/5/3 slot layout, that it can fit more damage modules i'm REALY miss the old stuff.-á https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=24183
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1023	Posted - 2015.05.10 14:39:39 - [50] - Quote Thanks a lot for not introducing the lml-AB-RR-jackdaw fleet with 2 utility highs and 6 mids :D

Lura Zara Worlds Without Boundaries Special Forces 0	Posted - 2015.05.10 15:23:16 - [51] - Quote How are people getting these dps/fitting ideas? I cant find anything for EFT on it.
Uriam Khanid New Machinarium Corporation 2	Posted - 2015.05.10 16:10:23 - [52] - Quote before you start to criticize, post this: i am addicted for 10MN T3d. CCP, where my drug?
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 664	Posted - 2015.05.10 16:41:32 - [53] - Quote Gustav Mannfred wrote: Why is the Jackdaw slower than all cruisers and minmatar Bc's? I think, increasing the speed to about 220 m/s would be better than 160. I also propose a 6/5/3 slot layout, that it can fit more damage modules 160 x 1.25 = 200(m/s) with Navigation V. If you put a nano on you should be at 212m/s (guestimated). Pweese everyone, the values in the thread are the one without any skills applied to them. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Lidia Caderu Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 42	Posted - 2015.05.10 17:50:11 - [54] - Quote Why so slow? lol And only with 2 lows...
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 245	Posted - 2015.05.10 18:10:41 - [55] - Quote It gets ten effective launchers and uhh...whos complaining that it cant lml kite frigates? Arent you being a little bit silly right now?
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 245	Posted - 2015.05.10 18:21:40 - [56] - Quote Tipa Riot wrote: 10 effective launchers? If my math is not broken, a 50% damage role bonus applied to 5 launchers means 7.5 launchers ... Rate of fire bonus
Bob Shaftoes TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 47	Posted - 2015.05.10 18:35:06 - [57] - Quote Yeah this ship is going to be pretty worthless for kiting. If I am doing the math right it will do 1136 with navigation and acceleration control 5 , outside of speed mode
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 523	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:06:36 - [58] - Quote Capqu wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: With only two lowslots, you might as well just auto fit it with a Damage Control and a BCU. Two lowslots is not as crippling as two mids, but it's still really restrictive of potential fits. I'm holding out for the Hecate. [edit: I mean, it has enough mids to double web, so it slaughters frigates, but lots of things slaughter frigates. dude its already absolutely absurd with 2 lows nothing can fight this 1v1 in faction war you want it to be good with light missiles too? Yes, actually, we do. Being viable with lights is something the Corax falls flat on its face over compared to the Talwar, and the anemic powergrid certainly puts a wrench in it with that. Bumping up the powergrid and scan res would be very important since at this stage it would have quite a bit of difficulty fitting a full rack of light missiles and a normal tank on its mids without investing heavily in powergrid mods/rigs. I can safely say that a lot of us do NOT want to see a second Corax in terms of fitting options. We'd rather it be competitive with the Flycatcher, since aside from the extra mid slot and damage selectibility, the flycatcher would still kick the crap out of this in a 1v1 in any engagement. You cannot say the same for the minmatar and amarrian d3s vs their dictors.
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 523	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:17:22 - [59] - Quote Saerin Korvalu wrote: The main problem I'm seeing with the ship is the gimped PWG. It's ridiculously low. Less PWG than a Corax. -_- I find this infuriating. They shouldn't be locking it to one weapon system; it needs to have usability with light missiles without fitting a crapload of pg mods to even be passable with just a med extender and mwd. Hell, even the speed is wrong. If they're going to make it a strict brawler, it needs to be able to catch up and grab things; the flycatcher is wonderful for that. The hawk gets away with it since it has oodles of tank (and it's still faster than the jackdaw, I believe). Being slow is ONLY ok if you have good viability with light missiles. Give defensive mode a rep bonus instead of the bloody useless sig radius bonus; it only works on the Confessor since it's an armor boat. Bump up speed and powergrid significantly; you already have the 10mn problem fixed by the low mass so you don't need to worry as much about oversized fitting. I will repeat; you NEED to have light missile be the base for what it can fit normally. If you can't fit med extender, mwd, and all the other mids, lows and rigs without any assistance you're doing the build wrong. Please don't give us another Corax.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 245	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:26:09 - [60] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Saerin Korvalu wrote: The main problem I'm seeing with the ship is the gimped PWG. It's ridiculously low. Less PWG than a Corax. -_- I find this infuriating. They shouldn't be locking it to one weapon system; it needs to have usability with light missiles without fitting a crapload of pg mods to even be passable with just a med extender and mwd. Hell, even the speed is wrong. If they're going to make it a strict brawler, it needs to be able to catch up and grab things; the flycatcher is wonderful for that. The hawk gets away with it since it has oodles of tank (and it's still faster than the jackdaw, I believe). Being slow is ONLY ok if you have good viability with light missiles. Give defensive mode a rep bonus instead of the bloody useless sig radius bonus; it only works on the Confessor since it's an armor boat. Bump up speed and powergrid significantly; you already have the 10mn problem fixed by the low mass so you don't need to worry as much about oversized fitting. I will repeat; you NEED to have light missile be the base for what it can fit normally. If you can't fit med extender, mwd, and all the other mids, lows and rigs without any assistance you're doing the build wrong. Please don't give us another Corax. Dude. Flycatcher has 63 pwg and has to fit 7 launchers. This has 56 and only needs to fit 5. It has a built in extender. Calm down.

Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 523	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:29:48 - [61] - Quote Maurice Shepard wrote: Onslaughtor wrote: ... honestly this is very disappointing. With only two lows there is no room for the fun and creative fits that made the other two so much fun, not counting the silliness that was the 10mn version(But we fixed those and we still can have fun fits like LSE svipuls with web and scram). I don't need 6 mids. Personally I would leave most the stats and just swap a mid to a low. 3-5-6 thats well balanced and keeps it in a different space than the other ships it has to compete against in its own missile using category. If I were to make more changes I would have strived for a different bonus for the missiles, like a 7.5% for rockets and a 5% for lights. But that can be fixed on the weapons themselves. The Propulsion bonus also feels very lackluster to the point where I really donGÇÖt see myself using it for much else than insta warping from gate to gate. I completely agree with this. Also all the people above in this thread that are whining about the PG should probably stop comparing this thing to the pre-nerf extremely OP 10MN AB dual ASB I'm-gonna-moonwalk-out-of-here Svipul and think about why this thing has so little pg. For PG compare to the Corax. For light missile builds, it has 2 less launchers so at top skills that's around 19 more pg to work with than the Corax. Sounds great unil you realize that a corax with 7 launchers and a mwd doesn't even have 1 pg left over to play around with. It will need to fit a micro power core on the bottom in any case if you want to fit med extender and prop with the lights, and if you're like most out here who want to fit double extenders or even go with a LSE, that'll be nearly impossible due to anemic fitting space. What will likely be seen will be light missile Jackdaws with lots of damps or tracking disruptors. They'll be great for long range fire support in fleets with all that extra ewar, i do admit.
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 523	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:44:36 - [62] - Quote Altrue wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Quote: Powergrid is very tight for most fittings, but CPU is much more generous. am I going to end up using best named (that means compact btw, your tiericide didn't work) launchers? sure am glad I trained LM spec 5 :( You most certainly are going to if the PWG stays that way. I don't really get the whole effort on making the PWG so tight, there is really no need to sanction 10mn AB fits given that their speed will be laughable at best. they're going the same odd route with the corax with gimping light missile fits. I have no idea why this is the case since the Talwar, even post-patch, would have much less difficulty fitting arty on it than the jackdaw would have fitting light missile launchers.
Zavand Crendraven Rolling Static Gone Critical 18	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:46:37 - [63] - Quote Bob Shaftoes wrote: Yeah this ship is going to be pretty worthless for kiting. If I am doing the math right it will do 1136 with navigation and acceleration control 5 , outside of speed mode 1409m/s outside propulsion mode 160 * 1.25 * (1 + 6.25 * 1500000/1550000)
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 523	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:48:33 - [64] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: Saerin Korvalu wrote: The main problem I'm seeing with the ship is the gimped PWG. It's ridiculously low. Less PWG than a Corax. -_- I find this infuriating. They shouldn't be locking it to one weapon system; it needs to have usability with light missiles without fitting a crapload of pg mods to even be passable with just a med extender and mwd. Hell, even the speed is wrong. If they're going to make it a strict brawler, it needs to be able to catch up and grab things; the flycatcher is wonderful for that. The hawk gets away with it since it has oodles of tank (and it's still faster than the jackdaw, I believe). Being slow is ONLY ok if you have good viability with light missiles. Give defensive mode a rep bonus instead of the bloody useless sig radius bonus; it only works on the Confessor since it's an armor boat. Bump up speed and powergrid significantly; you already have the 10mn problem fixed by the low mass so you don't need to worry as much about oversized fitting. I will repeat; you NEED to have light missile be the base for what it can fit normally. If you can't fit med extender, mwd, and all the other mids, lows and rigs without any assistance you're doing the build wrong. Please don't give us another Corax. Dude. Flycatcher has 63 pwg and has to fit 7 launchers. This has 56 and only needs to fit 5. It has a built in extender. Calm down. Fair point, now that I've been able to compare it. Still very cautious about it, as the last really good thing that happened to caldari balance was the rail buff, and they had recently nerfed even though they didn't need to. Either way, it does hold great promise as an ewar platform; all those mids mean lots and lots of damps and TDs. Also, I would like to see a rep bonus on it if the Hecate is getting one for armor.
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 523	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:49:56 - [65] - Quote Zavand Crendraven wrote: Bob Shaftoes wrote: Yeah this ship is going to be pretty worthless for kiting. If I am doing the math right it will do 1136 with navigation and acceleration control 5 , outside of speed mode 1409m/s outside propulsion mode 160 * 1.25 * (1 + 6.25 * 1500000/1550000) speed def needs a buff. All of the d3s should be at minimum over 2km/s with mwd, even if this ends up being the slowest one at base stats.
Zavand Crendraven Rolling Static Gone Critical 19	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:53:57 - [66] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Zavand Crendraven wrote: Bob Shaftoes wrote: Yeah this ship is going to be pretty worthless for kiting. If I am doing the math right it will do 1136 with navigation and acceleration control 5 , outside of speed mode 1409m/s outside propulsion mode 160 * 1.25 * (1 + 6.25 * 1500000/1550000) speed def needs a buff. All of the d3s should be at minimum over 2km/s with mwd, even if this ends up being the slowest one at base stats. Actually the others arent that much better Svipul gets 1635m/s the prop mod is gonna be a lot slower thought cuz of the bonus
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 245	Posted - 2015.05.10 19:55:12 - [67] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Zavand Crendraven wrote: Bob Shaftoes wrote: Yeah this ship is going to be pretty worthless for kiting. If I am doing the math right it will do 1136 with navigation and acceleration control 5 , outside of speed mode 1409m/s outside propulsion mode 160 * 1.25 * (1 + 6.25 * 1500000/1550000) speed def needs a buff. All of the d3s should be at minimum over 2km/s with mwd, even if this ends up being the slowest one at base stats. Speed needs a slight buff but i hope everyone looking at speed remembers to compare with skills and with prop mode. The guy saying this was slower than minnie bcs made that mistake
Malcanis Vanishing Point. The Initiative. 16349	Posted - 2015.05.10 20:24:11 - [68] - Quote Ao Kishuba wrote: Kashuken Farith wrote: decent rocket destroyer that's not damaged locked. Down with Caldari kinetic lock! Seriously, it's 2015... why is this still a thing? Haven't you heard? Kinetic lock makes caldari ships interesting! "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his ISK/hr depends upon his not understanding it!"
Stitch Kaneland Trust Doesn't Rust Triumvirate. 232	Posted - 2015.05.10 21:30:53 - [69] - Quote Guys.. its a missile a boat. It doesn't need to be as fast as a svipul or confessor. Have we not learned what fast ships and missiles do? Look at the garmur/orthrus, those 2 ships have been a cancer on PvP since their introduction. It has no tracking to contend with. And it will have insane acceleration.. so if its fit with a 1mn MWD, it will still have the acceleration to slingshot most ships. Plus, a 66% bonus to missile velocity will mean even the kiters can't kite it when its fit with LML. Possible you could even get enough range for rockets to hit out to point range with a rig or 2. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1072	Posted - 2015.05.10 22:08:28 - [70] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Guys.. its a missile a boat. It doesn't need to be as fast as a svipul or confessor. Have we not learned what fast ships and missiles do? Look at the garmur/orthrus, those 2 ships have been a cancer on PvP since their introduction. It has no tracking to contend with. And it will have insane acceleration.. so if its fit with a 1mn MWD, it will still have the acceleration to slingshot most ships. Plus, a 66% bonus to missile velocity will mean even the kiters can't kite it when its fit with LML. Possible you could even get enough range for rockets to hit out to point range with a rig or 2. ravens, navy ospreys and breachers use missiles and go fast, but they aren't cancerous. it's the overpoweredness of lights/rapid lights and the tackle range bonuses and enormous damage bonuses that really cause the cancer. you cannot catch a kiting ship with a fast brawler (the kiting ship's counter) when the kiting ship has a 50% longer disruptor range for very long kiting (this destroys slingshotting), a 50% longer scram range (this extremely destroys slingshotting), and weapons with such long range that it doesn't have to make any investment in range to be able to hit at 60km, even though it's a frigate and that's crazy. if light missiles had less range and possiby alpha, and if mordu ships had no tackle range bonuses, and if their damage bonuses were split into some damage and some rof, and if links and snakes and rapid launchers didn't exist, and if the orthrus didn't effectively have 10 launchers and infinite fitting and a utility high and a dronebay, I'd really be ok with them.

Madeleine Brioche Bank Of Villore 0	Posted - 2015.05.10 23:09:55 - [71] - Quote Garmur and orthrus are made to be long point missile kiter, perhaps Orthrus has too much DPS, but garmur don't, specially with very fast fit. We don't see garmur and othrus everywhere, same for worm and gila that are more powerfull. Linked and snake mordus are hard to catch when you're not, what a surprise for a kiting boat..
Lura Zara Worlds Without Boundaries Special Forces 1	Posted - 2015.05.10 23:10:18 - [72] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Stitch Kaneland wrote: Guys.. its a missile a boat. It doesn't need to be as fast as a svipul or confessor. Have we not learned what fast ships and missiles do? Look at the garmur/orthrus, those 2 ships have been a cancer on PvP since their introduction. It has no tracking to contend with. And it will have insane acceleration.. so if its fit with a 1mn MWD, it will still have the acceleration to slingshot most ships. Plus, a 66% bonus to missile velocity will mean even the kiters can't kite it when its fit with LML. Possible you could even get enough range for rockets to hit out to point range with a rig or 2. ravens, navy ospreys and breachers use missiles and go fast, but they aren't cancerous. it's the overpoweredness of lights/rapid lights and the tackle range bonuses and enormous damage bonuses that really cause the cancer. you cannot catch a kiting ship with a fast brawler (the kiting ship's counter) when the kiting ship has a 50% longer disruptor range for very long kiting (this destroys slingshotting), a 50% longer scram range (this extremely destroys slingshotting), and weapons with such long range that it doesn't have to make any investment in range to be able to hit at 60km, even though it's a frigate and that's crazy. if light missiles had less range and possiby alpha, and if mordu ships had no tackle range bonuses, and if their damage bonuses were split into some damage and some rof, and if links and snakes and rapid launchers didn't exist, and if the orthrus didn't effectively have 10 launchers and infinite fitting and a utility high and a dronebay, I'd really be ok with them. In otherwords, Take away everything that makes the ship what it is, and replace it with compleatly different roles and bonuses. Take away links and the point of a commandship, Take away drugs. Then ill be okay with it so I can murder it with my little blap machine. Sorry but RLML may ruin your day, amung other things, but its the "Hard counter" to frigates and dessies that heavy missiles, HAMS and Normal light missile launchers on a cruiser could not even touch normally. You cant win all your fights, So pick different ones. If you cant out range them, Out speed them, If you cant out range or out speed them. Bait them. If you cant do all of those things, Jam them, If you cant jam them, damp them. EWAR screws over any mordu ship. Be it ECM/Damps, a 3 damp hookbill can make a garmur sit and sputter with his less than rocket distance targetting. Same with an orthrus. People are not original enough to try these things and when their cookie cutter fits fail, They ***** and moan. OP all day long.
Madeleine Brioche Bank Of Villore 0	Posted - 2015.05.10 23:20:40 - [73] - Quote double post
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 664	Posted - 2015.05.10 23:22:55 - [74] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Dude. Flycatcher has 63 pwg and has to fit 7 launchers. This has 56 and only needs to fit 5. It has a built in extender. Calm down. again, 56 x 1.25 = 70 with Engineering V. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Syrias Bizniz KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 399	Posted - 2015.05.10 23:41:05 - [75] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: it would be helpful to include speeds with various prop mods. even the obviously broken ones that you think aren't broken. Should be ~1850m/s with MWD and all V in Speedmode without any other velocity modifiers. ~690m/s with T2 AB in Speedmode. ~1300m/s on a Meta 10mn AB in Speedmode. Here's a Fit that should actually work as Rocket Brawler: [Jackdaw, Jackdaw Test] Ballistic Control System II Internal Force Field Array I Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I Medium Ancillary Shield Booster X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Medium Ancillary Shield Booster Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Small Auxillary Thrusters II ~1990m/s MWD Speedmode ~274 dps preheat with Rage rockets ~52m signature while MWD off and defensive mode Up to 300 Capbooster charges in cargo, 18 in modules, minus a few because ammo takes cargo, too. So around 33 full cycles of an ASB if you somehow miracously manage to not die in the half hour it will take to actually burn them. Fitting: CPU 336,8 of 337,5 used PG 62 of 70 used Resistances in Defense should be somewhere around the following: 77,9 EM 83,5 TH 81,4 KIN 79,4 EXP Which will net you around 320 dps Tank per heated ASB before imps / drugs / links To be honest, no clue on how to abuse the 5% shield bonus, as fitting MSEs would absolutely screw your PG and you'd have to throw in some fitting mods in your scarce lowslots. And probably run multiple ACR rigs. EDIT: If you'd tackle a Thorax, shut down it's MWD, enter defensive mode and turn off your own MWD, then web him without getting counterwebbed, you'd have a WHOPPING 65m/s advantage over it. Add in a Thorax Web, and the Thorax is already range controlling YOU. As in, your sig means nothing, you gon get nuked.
Syrias Bizniz KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 399	Posted - 2015.05.11 00:02:12 - [76] - Quote Max PG* you can get before Imps: Reasonably. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkkIwO_X4i4 70+ 2x 16,25 (Navy MAPC) 1,15 * 1,15 * 1,1 (2x T2 ACR, 1x T1) = 149,1 ---> Following Fit, still requiring a 1% PG Imp: [Jackdaw, Jackdaw LSE] Navy Micro Auxiliary Power Core Navy Micro Auxiliary Power Core Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I Stasis Webifier II Warp Scrambler II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Stasis Webifier II Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Scourge Rage Rocket Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router I Topping out at 4922 raw Shields. PG: 149,5 of 149,1 (Req. 1%)
Arya Regnar Darwins Right Hand 704	Posted - 2015.05.11 01:04:12 - [77] - Quote Is it just me or is this ship with dual mse em amp and links like 60k ehp Holy hell that brick, and that's without invulns so you can't even neut it. EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 953	Posted - 2015.05.11 03:55:17 - [78] - Quote Are people really complaining that you have a hard time fitting a Large Shield Extender on a destroyer hull? The Greatest Ship Ever. Credit to Shahfluffers.
Lura Zara Worlds Without Boundaries Special Forces 1	Posted - 2015.05.11 04:07:49 - [79] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Are people really complaining that you have a hard time fitting a Large Shield Extender on a destroyer hull? Yes, yes they are. They also complain about not fitting a 10mn AB to a dessy.
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 109	Posted - 2015.05.11 05:05:17 - [80] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Gustav Mannfred wrote: Why is the Jackdaw slower than all cruisers and minmatar Bc's? I think, increasing the speed to about 220 m/s would be better than 160. I also propose a 6/5/3 slot layout, that it can fit more damage modules 160 x 1.25 = 200(m/s) with Navigation V. If you put a nano on you should be at 212m/s (guestimated). Pweese everyone, the values in the thread are the one without any skills applied to them. It only has 2 lows, you propose using one of them on a nano... why? This is a 2 BCU bird. If 1 BCU gets gutted for anything, it'll be a Damage Control. Right now, it looks like a bait ship to me. Stupid massive brick tank, but lacking the PG to fit the offensive mods you need.

Iyacia Cyric'ai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 137	Posted - 2015.05.11 06:19:54 - [81] - Quote I understand that a speedy 10mn missile lobbing dessie would be overpowered, but 160 is beyond cruiser slow. Every cruiser in the game is literally faster than it by quite a bit and even 1 BC (the Hurricane at 165m/s) is faster than it. Surely it doesn't need to be THAT slow.
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 57	Posted - 2015.05.11 06:24:14 - [82] - Quote So basically it just does what the Corax does with more pshhh. And has the same issues with PG, hence limited fitting options. At least it is nimble, so you can align quickly while the other d3s are dancing around your oh-so-slowness. Please tell me you at least went back to the art department for a facelift?
Iyacia Cyric'ai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 137	Posted - 2015.05.11 06:31:56 - [83] - Quote Arya Regnar wrote: Is it just me or is this ship with dual mse em amp and links like 60k ehp Holy hell that brick, and that's without invulns so you can't even neut it. Yeah but you can fit a Maller to have over 100K EHP and it'll still go faster than this.
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 109	Posted - 2015.05.11 06:40:52 - [84] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: So basically it just does what the Corax does with more pshhh. And has the same issues with PG, hence limited fitting options. At least it is nimble, so you can align quickly while the other d3s are dancing around your oh-so-slowness. Please tell me you at least went back to the art department for a facelift? I don't mind the ugly factor. It fits with Caldari ship design in terms of being no-frills, aesthetically. Pointing out the Corax brings up a great point. The Jackdaw really does just feel like an souped up Corax - more tank, less speed, same fitting issues. Mind you, I think if the Jackdaw had the powergrid to fit it the way people wish they could, it would be beyond OP. But the current levels are a bit extreme. As it stands... it's an overpriced/undersized Drake with the apparent inability to fit the modules it seems to beg for. I see this thing as having 2 possible fits. Rocket brawler: Too slow to close. LML "sniper": Not enough PG to fit it.
Iyacia Cyric'ai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 137	Posted - 2015.05.11 06:44:31 - [85] - Quote Traejun DiSanctis wrote: Specia1 K wrote: So basically it just does what the Corax does with more pshhh. And has the same issues with PG, hence limited fitting options. At least it is nimble, so you can align quickly while the other d3s are dancing around your oh-so-slowness. Please tell me you at least went back to the art department for a facelift? I don't mind the ugly factor. It fits with Caldari ship design in terms of being no-frills, aesthetically. Pointing out the Corax brings up a great point. The Jackdaw really does just feel like an souped up Corax - more tank, less speed, same fitting issues. Mind you, I think if the Jackdaw had the powergrid to fit it the way people wish they could, it would be beyond OP. But the current levels are a bit extreme. As it stands... it's an overpriced/undersized Drake with the apparent inability to fit the modules it seems to beg for. I see this thing as having 2 possible fits. Rocket brawler: Too slow to close. LML "sniper": Not enough PG to fit it. Corax has damage application bonus so true to its destroyer role, it can roflstomp frigates that get into its range. The currently proposed Jackdaw on the otherhand... why would anyone fly this over a RLML Caracal?
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 109	Posted - 2015.05.11 07:01:19 - [86] - Quote Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote: Traejun DiSanctis wrote: Specia1 K wrote: So basically it just does what the Corax does with more pshhh. And has the same issues with PG, hence limited fitting options. At least it is nimble, so you can align quickly while the other d3s are dancing around your oh-so-slowness. Please tell me you at least went back to the art department for a facelift? I don't mind the ugly factor. It fits with Caldari ship design in terms of being no-frills, aesthetically. Pointing out the Corax brings up a great point. The Jackdaw really does just feel like an souped up Corax - more tank, less speed, same fitting issues. Mind you, I think if the Jackdaw had the powergrid to fit it the way people wish they could, it would be beyond OP. But the current levels are a bit extreme. As it stands... it's an overpriced/undersized Drake with the apparent inability to fit the modules it seems to beg for. I see this thing as having 2 possible fits. Rocket brawler: Too slow to close. LML "sniper": Not enough PG to fit it. Corax has damage application bonus so true to its destroyer role, it can roflstomp frigates that get into its range. The currently proposed Jackdaw on the otherhand... why would anyone fly this over a RLML Caracal? Other than the massively inflated brick tank, there doesn't look like a reason. Also, bait. I'm sure there will be plenty of poorly-informed PvP'ers that will see this thing as a nice, juicy target and a way to pad their killboard. I can see this thing getting a lot of people in trouble.
Noobsprayer Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.05.11 10:29:45 - [87] - Quote Uriam Khanid wrote: before you start to criticize, post this: i am addicted for 10MN T3d. CCP, where my drug? You got that one wrong. It is not about addiction. It is about me being terrible at flying my ship. So bad that just links and high-grades won't do the trick for me. So I expected that ship to be another option to my list of granted pwnage. Now it turns out to require some piloting skills ...
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 150	Posted - 2015.05.11 10:32:31 - [88] - Quote Bob Shaftoes wrote: Yeah this ship is going to be pretty worthless for kiting. If I am doing the math right it will do 1136 with navigation and acceleration control 5 , outside of speed mode 1136 with an MWD? I hope that's wrong
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1072	Posted - 2015.05.11 10:40:39 - [89] - Quote Syrias Bizniz wrote: Medium Ancillary Shield Booster oh boy I sure do love having to scour the region for miniature navy cap boosters after every fight, and being unable to ever loot anything. sure is fun. the speed looks reasonable though.
Syrias Bizniz KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 399	Posted - 2015.05.11 12:56:23 - [90] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Syrias Bizniz wrote: Medium Ancillary Shield Booster oh boy I sure do love having to scour the region for miniature navy cap boosters after every fight, and being unable to ever loot anything. sure is fun. the speed looks reasonable though. The charges should last you for around 20 minutes of permanently cycling your ASBs. Which is probably half a day of roaming in it. Also, FW Losec should be stocked with this ****, not sure where you are around these days though.

elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 664	Posted - 2015.05.11 13:07:17 - [91] - Quote Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote: I understand that a speedy 10mn missile lobbing dessie would be overpowered, but 160 is beyond cruiser slow. Every cruiser in the game is literally faster than it by quite a bit and even 1 CBC (the Hurricane at 165m/s) is faster than it. Surely it doesn't need to be THAT slow. I mean this thing is about 50% slower than a Corax. What is its role/niche exactly? We already have POS missile turrets. 160 x 1.25 = 200m/s with Navigation V. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Torei Dutalis IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic 24	Posted - 2015.05.11 13:33:37 - [92] - Quote Please tell me that 160 base speed is a typo. The machariel base speed is faster than this ship. When you say this ship will handle like a slow cruiser out of prop mode I think you left out the prefix "battle". This ship should be able to reach interdictor speeds while in prop mode, which would be in the 2300 range for a microwarpdrive fit. Six midslots is also ridiculous. We already know how silly the hawk is with 5 mid slots. This ship will surely be a menace in any sort of 1v1 brawling scenario, but people will also know that and blob it like crazy as it has no real means of escaping from a fight. I feel that this ship is the exact opposite of what a t3 is supposed to be. It is not flexible at all. It is a dumb shield brick, with potential for fleet action due to a large shield buffer. I was honestly expecting something a little more innovative for this ship. Like many people I am disappointed with this current proposal for this ship, but I am not surprised with the design. The development cycle is relatively predictable with strong ships followed by weak ones and vice versa. Just make sure to tone down that ridiculous triple tank bonus that you guys proposed for the hecate at fanfest before it comes out.
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 527	Posted - 2015.05.11 14:00:48 - [93] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Guys.. its a missile a boat. It doesn't need to be as fast as a svipul or confessor. Have we not learned what fast ships and missiles do? Look at the garmur/orthrus, those 2 ships have been a cancer on PvP since their introduction. It has no tracking to contend with. And it will have insane acceleration.. so if its fit with a 1mn MWD, it will still have the acceleration to slingshot most ships. Plus, a 66% bonus to missile velocity will mean even the kiters can't kite it when its fit with LML. Possible you could even get enough range for rockets to hit out to point range with a rig or 2. Why do you think I want it to go faster?
erg cz Tribal Core 244	Posted - 2015.05.11 14:17:21 - [94] - Quote It is a perfect Caldari ship. CCP please do not buff it. Players please stop whine or they will buff it. 10 effective missile is must have and ship is so nice, that everyone and his grandma will fly it. Now serios... I am very, very much afraid what CCP will do with Hecate now... :(
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1779	Posted - 2015.05.11 14:33:56 - [95] - Quote Any of you fitting brain can tell what it looks like if you take some logi support for granted since it seems to fall around the speed of logi frigs or maybe T1 cruisers?
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 528	Posted - 2015.05.11 14:36:07 - [96] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Any of you fitting brain can tell what it looks like if you take some logi support for granted since it seems to fall around the speed of logi frigs or maybe T1 cruisers? Assuming the fitting space isn't as bad as I'm dreading it could be, the jackdaw would be hilarious with bantam backup.
Edward Olmops DUST Expeditionary Team Good Sax 308	Posted - 2015.05.11 14:37:05 - [97] - Quote I don't think that the PG is too low. Slightly disencouraging 10MN ABs is certainly not bad. 5 LM launchers take just 35 MW, add a MWD for 15 and there is still room. Only if you want to fit a Medium Extender, a dual Prop or the 10MN AB you will run into trouble. I think this ship is definitely promising. It just fills a slightly different role than the other 2 T3Ds. But that's what makes EVE interesting, isn't it? And while we are at it: PLEASE buff the Corax (power grid, eventually damage).
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1272	Posted - 2015.05.11 15:00:56 - [98] - Quote Ao Kishuba wrote: Thank you for removing the kinetic damage lock shown on earlier stats. Now just to remove it from the rest of the Caldari ships, and we'll be getting somewhere... edit: seriously though please remove the kinetic lock. Caldari is the only of the four races with no selectable damage type for a main weapon. Minmatar get both projectiles and missiles, with no damage locks on any. Gallente get drones, which can do any type of damage. Amarr also have bonused drone ships, and a few Khanid missile ships with no damage locks. Caldari have... kinetic and thermal, for the most part, with only a few exceptions (mostly battleships and others which are rarely used, though I will concede the Caracal is popular. Gratz, Caldari have one popular missile boat). Why is it that the Caldari, the race who are supposed to be all about missiles, have the worst missile boats? Rails are locked at 55% kinetic and 45% thermal. Blaster are locked at 55% Thermal and 45% kinetic. Lasers are mostly EM with some thermal. So that covers 50% of Caldari, 50% of Gallente, and most of Amarr ships. Also, Caldari have the best missile boats. Its just that they are also shield ships. And shields generally are less desirable than armor for pvp. So we (TEST) see less of them. That being said, I am also glad to see the Jackdaw is not locked into kinetic. I see the Jackdaw being used similarly to the Confessor, since it gets all its damage bonuses from the base hull bonuses and not from its modes. Meanwhile its modes grant either a useful range bonus or two useful tanking bonuses. This should make it a tough nugget at close range. With 6 mid slots, an HP bonus, a resist bonus, and a sig bonus, it should be an active tanking beast. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Solj RichPopolous Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 125	Posted - 2015.05.11 15:36:49 - [99] - Quote Altrue wrote: The signature radius worries me, especially given that it won't be able to fit an oversized AB given both the low base speed and incredibly low PWG. So it will almost certainly be an MWD, which is rather sad given that an agility bonus really has an impact on 10mn ABs. I will find a way to 10MN AB it or I won't have one simple as that. Fitting a MWD is just downright suicidal.
Jenn aSide Smokin Aces. 10939	Posted - 2015.05.11 15:40:42 - [100] - Quote Ima gonna rat with it.

Pine Marten Viziam Amarr Empire 90	Posted - 2015.05.11 15:42:17 - [101] - Quote The base speed doesn't make any sense. Jackdaw: 160 ms
Elenahina Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 543	Posted - 2015.05.11 15:53:02 - [102] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Lev Ironwill wrote: afkalt wrote: If you're doing a missile look-at in June too, you need to tell us now. Feedback is worthless without knowing this. I say this because it was mooted previously. This is what I would like to know as well, lasers and projectiles were both addressed with their respective T3D's so will missiles be getting a look with the Jackdaw? I would like to be exited for this new ship, I should be, but I'm hesitant to get my hopes up about a missile ship being more than niche. No, because that might possibly mean that Caldari would get buffed. Pretty sure that it's in the rules somewhere that they aren't allowed to buff Caldari. Recent excavations in Iceland revealed the existence of a small clay tablet, thought to date back to the first settlers on the island. Once it was translated, it was found to contain the following, cryptic, message. Thou shalt not buff Caldari. Ever. Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
Lura Zara Worlds Without Boundaries Special Forces 7	Posted - 2015.05.11 16:01:14 - [103] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Ima gonna rat with it. I actually was going to do the same, Its a gorgeous looking PVE ship, Despite everything in this thread being about PVP so far. I'm betting i could make mine as is run a Haven/Sanctum. Maybe not the best isk/hour but it would be fun!
Elenahina Agony Unleashed Agony Empire 543	Posted - 2015.05.11 16:05:40 - [104] - Quote I'm liking it. Agony Unleashed is Recruiting - Small Gang PvP in Null Sec
Solj RichPopolous Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 125	Posted - 2015.05.11 16:08:56 - [105] - Quote Jenn aSide wrote: Ima gonna rat with it. Seems thats what it was made for honestly cause this: 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements Too slow and limited for PVP use.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 296	Posted - 2015.05.11 16:45:19 - [106] - Quote I'm seeing this as an even more tanky fleet-capable sniper. Shall be interesting to see if this will beat my fessor's 800:3 efficiency ratio
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 151	Posted - 2015.05.11 18:08:07 - [107] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: I'm seeing this as an even more tanky fleet-capable sniper. 220dps with faction light missiles and a bcu is so much lower than the other two, and even lower than most t1 destroyers no speed to keep range so you won't be sniping for long delayed dps means much of your already low dps will be wasted big sig radius and low speed will make it easy for cruisers to hit I know people will try to make this work because of the tank, but it will only work as a sniper doctrine if you can get a blob of t1 frigates to engage it. For solo the only option is scram kiting but it sounds like it's too slow to control range against other brawlers even with dual webs, it's a sitting duck against kiters, and the other t3's will certainly wipe the floor with it especially with an oversize ab fitted. I was hoping for a big hookbill, but looks more like a baby drake.
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 112	Posted - 2015.05.11 19:08:44 - [108] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: I'm seeing this as an even more tanky fleet-capable sniper. 220dps with faction light missiles and a bcu is so much lower than the other two, and even lower than most t1 destroyers no speed to keep range so you won't be sniping for long delayed dps means much of your already low dps will be wasted big sig radius and low speed will make it easy for cruisers to hit I know people will try to make this work because of the tank, but it will only work as a sniper doctrine if you can get a blob of t1 frigates to engage it. For solo the only option is scram kiting but it sounds like it's too slow to control range against other brawlers even with dual webs, it's a sitting duck against kiters, and the other t3's will certainly wipe the floor with it especially with an oversize ab fitted. I was hoping for a big hookbill, but looks more like a baby drake. EDIT: Actually it might be good for gangs gate camping. with fast lock fit and tank for gate guns The LML build is unlikely to work due to fitting issues and lack of speed to maintain range. The Rocket brawler is where this thing is going to live. Provided I can actually fit it with T2 RLs and suitable tank, this thing will probably be scary as a sponge/tank in small gangs. The main issue it will face is when it get's 1v1'd and kited by some shitfit frigate with long-point.
Lisa Sophie d'Elancourt Empusa. 10	Posted - 2015.05.11 19:49:13 - [109] - Quote I like general concept of this ship. I like 6+6+2 layout slot, which to my mind opens much more interesting choices than 6+5+3. I can deal with tight PG and I understand reasons you want to prevent oversized AB fitting. As well as I understand jackdaw been designed as the slowest T3 dessie. However I don't understand this ricidulous 160 velocity (confessor 235, svipul 230). That's just terrible and seems to be a sad joke.
Leonardo Adami Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 7	Posted - 2015.05.11 19:54:56 - [110] - Quote Jesus 90% of this thread is a bunch of whining. Either post constructive feedback so they can make positive changes or stfu with all the crying.

OHONA Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2015.05.11 19:56:03 - [111] - Quote this stupid t3 destroyers ruined all the t1 destroyers and all aslt frigs.. i dont understand what ccp actually wants .all these t3 are faster than aslt frigs and t1 destroyer.. why dont u just remove aslt frigs whats the point having them ???
Leonardo Adami Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 7	Posted - 2015.05.11 20:02:27 - [112] - Quote OHONA wrote: this stupid t3 destroyers ruined all the t1 destroyers and all aslt frigs.. i dont understand what ccp actually wants .all these t3 are faster than aslt frigs and t1 destroyer.. why dont u just remove aslt frigs whats the point having them ??? Exactly what I'm talking about
Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1448	Posted - 2015.05.11 20:46:55 - [113] - Quote The strong variance in mass seems like it's really throwing off base speeds at this point. This has half the mass of the confessor if I'm looking at the right numbers, meaning under prop mods it likely might be faster, but it gets rather difficult to compare when balanced like this.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 152	Posted - 2015.05.11 20:57:25 - [114] - Quote double post
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 152	Posted - 2015.05.11 20:59:59 - [115] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Here's a few of the inconsistencies: Minmattar: 50% Dmg bonus, 50% dmg bonus Amarr: 50% Dmg bonus, 50% dmg bonus Caldari: 25% ROF Bonus, 50% Damage bonus. This means the Jackdaw needs to fit an extra launcher just to achieve the same results and we lose a utility high. the net effect is -1 utility high Base speed and agility: even if you waste a low slot by fitting nano you still don't get nearly as much speed and agility as the other two. -1 low slot to achieve lower base speed/agility ftw The reversed propulsion bonuses: the other two can already fit oversized prop mods + more base speed and agility is there really any need to nerf the speed even more? I could be wrong but it looks like the jackdaw isn't even capable of controlling range against them in a brawl with an extra web fitted. So that a Jackdaw in prop mode with a T2 afterbuner +1 Scram +1 Nano +2 webs can't hold point on a svipul with an oversized AB even if the fight starts at zero ffs (that's 5 fitting slots used on range control and tackle vs two for the svipul, a prop mod and a long point). More restricted fitting options means it's definitely going to be the most predictable of the three, so people will already have a good idea before the fight starts what your fit is, and it's the only one that can be kited to death by a shitfit condor with no hope of escape: a frigate doing 3500m/s at 18km orbit will outrun javelin rockets with ease even after the velocity bonus for missiles is counted. A few other nerfs thrown in for good measure: slower lock time, less cap per second, and nearly double the sig radius. This is by far the worst of the three so far, it's not even in the same class. It should have the best agility and base speed out of the three to make up for the fact that it doesn't get the huge speed boost from prop mode, and it should have the same high slot layout and bonuses as the others aswell.
Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1448	Posted - 2015.05.11 21:04:44 - [116] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Here's a few of the inconsistencies: Minmattar: 50% Dmg bonus, 50% dmg bonus Amarr: 50% Dmg bonus, 50% dmg bonus Caldari: 25% ROF Bonus, 50% Damage bonus. This means the Jackdaw needs to fit an extra launcher just to achieve the same results and we lose a utility high. the net effect is -1 utility high Base speed and agility: even if you waste a low slot by fitting nano you still don't get nearly as much speed and agility as the other two. -1 low slot to achieve lower base speed/agility ftw This is not quite accurate. The Jackdaw gets an effective 10 launchers against the 9 effective turrets of the other 2 destroyers. It's also about in the middle ad far as speed is concerned under the effects of a prop mod due to having just over half the confessors mass and 2/3rds of the Svipul's.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 152	Posted - 2015.05.11 21:11:57 - [117] - Quote Tyberius Franklin wrote: Fourteen Maken wrote: Here's a few of the inconsistencies: Minmattar: 50% Dmg bonus, 50% dmg bonus Amarr: 50% Dmg bonus, 50% dmg bonus Caldari: 25% ROF Bonus, 50% Damage bonus. This means the Jackdaw needs to fit an extra launcher just to achieve the same results and we lose a utility high. the net effect is -1 utility high Base speed and agility: even if you waste a low slot by fitting nano you still don't get nearly as much speed and agility as the other two. -1 low slot to achieve lower base speed/agility ftw This is not quite accurate. The Jackdaw gets an effective 10 launchers against the 9 effective turrets of the other 2 destroyers. It's also about in the middle ad far as speed is concerned under the effects of a prop mod due to having just over half the confessors mass and 2/3rds of the Svipul's. I could be wrong because I don't know how to work that out I'm just going on what other players have said so we'll see when it hits the test server, but if it's going to be a 70mil isk punisher he can shove it.
Tyberius Franklin Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 1448	Posted - 2015.05.11 21:16:21 - [118] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Tyberius Franklin wrote: Fourteen Maken wrote: Here's a few of the inconsistencies: Minmattar: 50% Dmg bonus, 50% dmg bonus Amarr: 50% Dmg bonus, 50% dmg bonus Caldari: 25% ROF Bonus, 50% Damage bonus. This means the Jackdaw needs to fit an extra launcher just to achieve the same results and we lose a utility high. the net effect is -1 utility high Base speed and agility: even if you waste a low slot by fitting nano you still don't get nearly as much speed and agility as the other two. -1 low slot to achieve lower base speed/agility ftw This is not quite accurate. The Jackdaw gets an effective 10 launchers against the 9 effective turrets of the other 2 destroyers. It's also about in the middle ad far as speed is concerned under the effects of a prop mod due to having just over half the confessors mass and 2/3rds of the Svipul's. I could be wrong because I don't know how to work that out I'm just going on what other players have said so we'll see when it hits the test server, but if it's going to be a 70mil isk punisher he can shove it. Actually I had the math on the speed wrong, it's actually the slowest (assuming I didn't mess up again), but not by nearly what the base speed alone would suggest.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 23	Posted - 2015.05.11 21:34:56 - [119] - Quote Okay it needs the 5 launchers because it can fit a max of 2 damage mods. Also, tight PG fitting, but I think it will work out okay, need to run some numbers of some fits. So that balances out. But the speed! Ouch. A 1MN AB fit is gonna be slow. And a 1MN MWD fit with a 70 sig is gonna be fat. Can't be in defense mode and prop mode at the same time. So I don't see the slow base speed as working. I applaud the smaller velocity bonus from the prop mode, but the base speed is gonna really be a disadvantage for a brawler or a kiter. Please, please, please up the base speed.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 648	Posted - 2015.05.11 23:04:27 - [120] - Quote The PG is a skosh lower than I would like to see. A buff of 2 PG lets you rock a full t2 setup like thus Highs Light Missile launcher II Light Missile launcher II Light Missile launcher II Light Missile launcher II Light Missile launcher II Mid slots Medium shield extender II 1MN Micro-warpdrive II Adaptive Invulnerability field II Stasis webifier II Warp Scrambler II Small shield extender II Low slots Ballistic control system II Damage control II Rig slots Ancillery Current Router I Em Screen reinforcer II Core defense field extender II Without any implants, that should fit with all skills 5, with 1.5 PG and .5 CPU Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp

Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 530	Posted - 2015.05.11 23:38:29 - [121] - Quote I'd like to second the opinion about this seeing more usage as a pve boat. The potential for passive tanking on this ship is absolutely monumental, especially if it's a PVE fit completely devoted to that. I can see a strong LM 1mn ab fit in defensive mode running lowsec anoms quite handily, and be affordable and compact enough for most people to use regularly. It's a pocket tengu!
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 530	Posted - 2015.05.11 23:46:07 - [122] - Quote Also, after comparing its fitting options to the Svipul, I think while it won't be quite as bad as my initial impression would have indicated. While it will still be a bit tight on CPU, I think its fitting will be closer to the Flycatcher, which can fairly easily support a double MSE build with lights. CPU might be a little tight since it has 6 mids and 10 less CPU than the flycatcher, but the effective powergrid rating is actually better than the Flycatcher with lights, since it has 2 less fitted launchers. The extra low slot should work well enough; I'm thinking a Power Diagnostic and a BCU will be standard on the lows for double MSE passive tanked builds for PvE. Hell, I'd probably put a cal navy PDS on there just to make sure everything's rounded out properly. Should be fun running anoms in it.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 247	Posted - 2015.05.11 23:48:21 - [123] - Quote So if you go with a MicroAux and BCU in the lows, are there any crazy things you can pull out of this ship?
Iyacia Cyric'ai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 145	Posted - 2015.05.12 00:42:07 - [124] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote: I understand that a speedy 10mn missile lobbing dessie would be overpowered, but 160 is beyond cruiser slow. Every cruiser in the game is literally faster than it by quite a bit and even 1 CBC (the Hurricane at 165m/s) is faster than it. Surely it doesn't need to be THAT slow. I mean this thing is about 50% slower than a Corax. What is its role/niche exactly? We already have POS missile turrets. 160 x 1.25 = 200m/s with Navigation V. Thanks? All the values I used were base speed so my statement remains completely unchanged...
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 650	Posted - 2015.05.12 01:12:36 - [125] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: So if you go with a MicroAux and BCU in the lows, are there any crazy things you can pull out of this ship? Lets find out..... Will be working on this for a bit, expect a couple asinine but amusing fits. Concepts I will be trying for: LSE - Not without implants, which I'm not willing to muck with when hand hacking the spreadsheet for this. Not even dual MAPC, with 2x t2 ACR 10mn AB - Rockets, yes! especially post propmod tieracide. Can even do 10mn + MSEII with an ACRI and a navy aux core. Comes out with ~3PG and 30CPU with all 5s and no implants with the soon to exist compact and a navy power core. Till then, a cheap 3% for PG should make it work. Would need to drop the MSE to get it with LMLs. LASB- Also a practical no. Might be just barely possible with implants. MWD + 2x MASB - yes, without fitting mods, and with a BCS for rockets. MWD + 2x MSE - Op success. nearly perfectly eats the PG difference between 10mn compact AB and t2 1mn MWD 10mn AB + MSE fit Highs Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Mid slots Medium shield extender II 10MN Compact AB Adaptive Invulnerability field II Stasis webifier II Warp Scrambler II Stasis webifier II Low slots Navy Micro Auxillary power core Damage control II Rig slots Ancillery Current Router II Em Screen reinforcer II Core defense field extender II 1mn MWD + dual MSE fit Highs Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Mid slots Medium shield extender II 1MN MWD Adaptive Invulnerability field II Stasis webifier II Warp Scrambler II Medium shield extender II Low slots Navy Micro Auxillary power core Damage control II Rig slots Ancillery Current Router II Em Screen reinforcer II Core defense field extender II 1MN MWD + dual MASB Highs Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Rocket launcher II Mid slots Medium Ancillery shield Booster I 1MN MWD II Adaptive Invulnerability field II Stasis webifier II Warp Scrambler II Stasis webifier II Medium Ancillery shield Booster I Low slots Nanofiber internal structure II Damage control II Rig slots Small Rigor Catalyst II Em Screen reinforcer II Core defense field extender II Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Justin Cody Tri-gun 263	Posted - 2015.05.12 01:14:12 - [126] - Quote Altrue wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Quote: Powergrid is very tight for most fittings, but CPU is much more generous. am I going to end up using best named (that means compact btw, your tiericide didn't work) launchers? sure am glad I trained LM spec 5 :( You most certainly are going to if the PWG stays that way. I don't really get the whole effort on making the PWG so tight, there is really no need to sanction 10mn AB fits given that their speed will be laughable at best. Caldari - Now Issued with CCPreNerf Protection PlanGäóNever Patch Without It [*] (Restrictions Apply Only to Caldari - The rest get a free pass because screw you that's why)
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 650	Posted - 2015.05.12 01:17:23 - [127] - Quote Justin Cody wrote: Altrue wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Quote: Powergrid is very tight for most fittings, but CPU is much more generous. am I going to end up using best named (that means compact btw, your tiericide didn't work) launchers? sure am glad I trained LM spec 5 :( You most certainly are going to if the PWG stays that way. I don't really get the whole effort on making the PWG so tight, there is really no need to sanction 10mn AB fits given that their speed will be laughable at best. Caldari - Now Issued with CCPreNerf Protection PlanGäó Never Patch Without It (Restrictions Apply Only to Caldari - The rest get a free pass because screw you that's why) It has several viable, if not excessively great, LML fits. The t2 LMLs only eat 43.4% of the grid at all skills 5..... So, whats the problem? Arty svipul has t2 280s eat 63.4%, and Beam confessor drops 60% of the PG on t2 small focused beams. Of the 3, after filling the hardpoints with the biggest longrange weapon it has, it has the most PG left over. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 58	Posted - 2015.05.12 02:36:36 - [128] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Justin Cody wrote: Altrue wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Quote: Powergrid is very tight for most fittings, but CPU is much more generous. am I going to end up using best named (that means compact btw, your tiericide didn't work) launchers? sure am glad I trained LM spec 5 :( You most certainly are going to if the PWG stays that way. I don't really get the whole effort on making the PWG so tight, there is really no need to sanction 10mn AB fits given that their speed will be laughable at best. Caldari - Now Issued with CCPreNerf Protection PlanGäó Never Patch Without It (Restrictions Apply Only to Caldari - The rest get a free pass because screw you that's why) It has several viable, if not excessively great, LML fits. The t2 LMLs only eat 43.4% of the grid at all skills 5..... So, whats the problem? Arty svipul has t2 280s eat 63.4%, and Beam confessor drops 60% of the PG on t2 small focused beams. Of the 3, after filling the hardpoints with the biggest longrange weapon it has, it has the most PG left over. Thanks for doing some of the necessary calcs on fits. You might want to look at a sebo or targeting rig. That extra tank (and sig radius) you have is going to be eating away while you watch your targeting circle spinning on your opponent.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 657	Posted - 2015.05.12 02:41:06 - [129] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: Thanks for doing some of the necessary calcs on fits. You might want to look at a sebo or targeting rig. That extra tank (and sig radius) you have is going to be eating away while you watch your targeting circle spinning on your opponent. I am so used to battleships that it doesn't bug me. Mostly fly either solo bastionades, shield vigilants or incursion battleships, so waiting for things to lock isn't something I think about alot. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Iyacia Cyric'ai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 145	Posted - 2015.05.12 02:50:50 - [130] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: So if you go with a MicroAux and BCU in the lows, are there any crazy things you can pull out of this ship? 10mn AB - Rockets, yes! especially post propmod tieracide. Can even do 10mn + MSEII with an ACRI and a navy aux core. Comes out with ~3PG and 30CPU with all 5s and no implants with the soon to exist compact and a navy power core. Till then, a cheap 3% for PG should make it work. Would need to drop the MSE to get it with LMLs. I 10mn AB isn't that exciting when you realise that you'll be going about as fast as a 1mn AB fitted on a frigate since the base speed of this thing is so slow. It's basically a hookbill with bait level tank. I.e. it'll be the same as flying a hookbill (i.e no one brawls you because they suspect double webs and everyone kites you, and you're too slow to catch anything that doesn't want to fight you).

Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 58	Posted - 2015.05.12 02:52:02 - [131] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Specia1 K wrote: Thanks for doing some of the necessary calcs on fits. You might want to look at a sebo or targeting rig. That extra tank (and sig radius) you have is going to be eating away while you watch your targeting circle spinning on your opponent. I am so used to battleships that it doesn't bug me. Mostly fly either solo bastionades, shield vigilants or incursion battleships, so waiting for things to lock isn't something I think about alot. Heh. I'm thinking that this ship is going to need to apply damage quickly to succeed. Nobody is going to stay around to brawl it out with those webs.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 657	Posted - 2015.05.12 03:13:10 - [132] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: James Baboli wrote: Specia1 K wrote: Thanks for doing some of the necessary calcs on fits. You might want to look at a sebo or targeting rig. That extra tank (and sig radius) you have is going to be eating away while you watch your targeting circle spinning on your opponent. I am so used to battleships that it doesn't bug me. Mostly fly either solo bastionades, shield vigilants or incursion battleships, so waiting for things to lock isn't something I think about alot. Heh. I'm thinking that this ship is going to need to apply damage quickly to succeed. Nobody is going to stay around to brawl it out with those webs. edit. Was hoping for more viable LM fits, just to mix up the meta. If everyone can guess your setup and you are slow, you are not going to do well. Agree that this should be a decent PVE ship though. A couple more points of PG and I could resign my opposing views... Oh, it can be made a 10mn AB LML fit, but you sacrifice the MSE for it, and I was happy with a 10mn fit to prove it is possible. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 563	Posted - 2015.05.12 05:37:22 - [133] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! We're now ready to share our current designs for the Jackdaw-class Caldari Tactical Destroyer. Hi. Quote: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Shield Hitpoints 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules No. You didn't. No, tell me you didn't. Confessor gets a crap turret Activation cost hull bonus, that it needs to merely function. Svipul gets Optimal range hull bonus that nanufagets all day long in Propulsion. Now Jackdaw with this. Can't wait for the Gallente one with Sentry drones no doubt. Quote: Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is active Same as the Confessor. So much for flavour. Increased shield regeneration rate is an option, if you look into the innate hull bonus issue. Decreased Shield Booster activation cost is also an option. Quote: The Propulsion mode bonuses on the Jackdaw provide a huge agility bonus and a smaller speed bonus, the opposite of the earlier T3Ds. When out of propulsion mode the Jackdaw turns like a slow cruiser, but when it enters propulsion mode it gets the agility of an extremely agile frigate. Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 160 / 6.4 / 1,050,000 / 4.5 / 9.32s 200 m/s * (1 + (6.25 * (1,500,000 / (1,050,000 kg + 500,000 MWD mass kg))) = 1409 m/s / 2114 m/s OH and in Propulsion mode 1873 / 2810 m/s OH. 10MN AB: 200 * (1 + (1.575 * (15,000,000 / (1,050,000 + 5,000,000))) = 980 / 1471 OH and 1303 / 1955 m/s OH. Pre-tiericide propulsion modules, of course. Quote: Signature radius: 70 GOOD. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 112	Posted - 2015.05.12 05:42:22 - [134] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! We're now ready to share our current designs for the Jackdaw-class Caldari Tactical Destroyer. Hi. Quote: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Shield Hitpoints 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Can't wait for the Gallente one with Sentry drones no doubt. Oh god, please not another Gallente sentry powerhouse. Isn't the Ishtar enough for you afk'ers?
erg cz Tribal Core 245	Posted - 2015.05.12 07:01:57 - [135] - Quote James Baboli wrote: The PG is a skosh lower than I would like to see. A buff of 2 PG lets you rock a full t2 setup like thus ... Small shield extender II Without any implants, that should fit with all skills 5, with .5 PG and .5 CPU if you give it said buff Drop that Small shield extender and you are ok with current PG.
Ix Method Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 450	Posted - 2015.05.12 09:54:12 - [136] - Quote It would be beautiful if you'd release the EFT files or whatever you use for us to play with when you rebalance/release ships. Colour me lazy but it'd probably improve the standard of feedback you receive. Travelling at the speed of love.
Theronth Valarax V0LTA Triumvirate. 86	Posted - 2015.05.12 11:12:19 - [137] - Quote Ix Method wrote: It would be beautiful if you'd release the EFT files or whatever you use for us to play with when you rebalance/release ships. Colour me lazy but it'd probably improve the standard of feedback you receive. EFT and PYFA are developed by player 3rd party and CCP has nothing to do with them. Having said that the stats are in the first post, if you don't want to wait for creators of said applications to update their software I suggest grabbing a calculator, a pen and doing calculations by yourself. All speed/tank/dps formulas are avaible in web. Check out my Youtube channel
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 660	Posted - 2015.05.12 13:07:09 - [138] - Quote Theronth Valarax wrote: Ix Method wrote: It would be beautiful if you'd release the EFT files or whatever you use for us to play with when you rebalance/release ships. Colour me lazy but it'd probably improve the standard of feedback you receive. EFT and PYFA are developed by player 3rd party and CCP has nothing to do with them. Having said that the stats are in the first post, if you don't want to wait for creators of said applications to update their software I suggest grabbing a calculator, a pen and doing calculations by yourself. All speed/tank/dps formulas are avaible in web. Though I still have yet to find peak recharge for capacitor expressed well. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 247	Posted - 2015.05.12 13:45:12 - [139] - Quote Theronth Valarax wrote: Ix Method wrote: It would be beautiful if you'd release the EFT files or whatever you use for us to play with when you rebalance/release ships. Colour me lazy but it'd probably improve the standard of feedback you receive. EFT and PYFA are developed by player 3rd party and CCP has nothing to do with them. Having said that the stats are in the first post, if you don't want to wait for creators of said applications to update their software I suggest grabbing a calculator, a pen and doing calculations by yourself. All speed/tank/dps formulas are avaible in web. I feel like they should just list the stats with 'all V' when they post, just so peoplebwho forget skills exist, will stop cluttering the thread with trash.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 23	Posted - 2015.05.12 13:45:40 - [140] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: So if you go with a MicroAux and BCU in the lows, are there any crazy things you can pull out of this ship? Lets find out..... Will be working on this for a bit, expect a couple asinine but amusing fits. Concepts I will be trying for: LSE - Not without implants, which I'm not willing to muck with when hand hacking the spreadsheet for this. Not even dual MAPC, with 2x t2 ACR 10mn AB - Rockets, yes! especially post propmod tieracide. Can even do 10mn + MSEII with an ACRI and a navy aux core. Comes out with ~3PG and 30CPU with all 5s and no implants with the soon to exist compact and a navy power core. Till then, a cheap 3% for PG should make it work. Would need to drop the MSE to get it with LMLs. LASB- Also a practical no. Might be just barely possible with implants. MWD + 2x MASB - yes, without fitting mods, and with a BCS for rockets. MWD + 2x MSE - Op success. nearly perfectly eats the PG difference between 10mn compact AB and t2 1mn MWD Yeah but with only 2 lows and you not using any BCUs or DPS rigs your at about 223 DPS with T2 Ammo, faction ammo drops you down to around 185 DPS. A little low for today's T3Ds. Swap a low for a BCU and you are up to 274 T2 and 227 faction which is much better, but you are giving up a lot of tank dropping the DCU or fitting for the MAPC. Your third fit could drop the speed mod, but you are already using a 1MN prop and the base speed is ridiculously low. I like the good design which causes choices but the base speed and dps of this T3D is so far the weakest of the 3.

Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 23	Posted - 2015.05.12 13:57:16 - [141] - Quote Traejun DiSanctis wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! We're now ready to share our current designs for the Jackdaw-class Caldari Tactical Destroyer. Hi. Quote: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Shield Hitpoints 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Can't wait for the Gallente one with Sentry drones no doubt. Oh god, please not another Gallente sentry powerhouse. Isn't the Ishtar enough for you afk'ers? Wow, hate drones much? Okay, it was already announced it will be a Hybrid Gun ship, so you can stand down.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 660	Posted - 2015.05.12 14:03:30 - [142] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: Yeah but with only 2 lows and you not using any BCUs or DPS rigs your at about 223 DPS with T2 Ammo, faction ammo drops you down to around 185 DPS. A little low for today's T3Ds. Swap a low for a BCU and you are up to 274 T2 and 227 faction which is much better, but you are giving up a lot of tank dropping the DCU or fitting for the MAPC. Your third fit could drop the speed mod, but you are already using a 1MN prop and the base speed is ridiculously low. I like the good design which causes choices but the base speed and dps of this T3D is so far the weakest of the 3. No argument here. Moving one mid to a low, or giving it 2-5 more base grid would really help to bring this up closer to par. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 247	Posted - 2015.05.12 14:05:20 - [143] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: James Baboli wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: So if you go with a MicroAux and BCU in the lows, are there any crazy things you can pull out of this ship? Lets find out..... Will be working on this for a bit, expect a couple asinine but amusing fits. Concepts I will be trying for: LSE - Not without implants, which I'm not willing to muck with when hand hacking the spreadsheet for this. Not even dual MAPC, with 2x t2 ACR 10mn AB - Rockets, yes! especially post propmod tieracide. Can even do 10mn + MSEII with an ACRI and a navy aux core. Comes out with ~3PG and 30CPU with all 5s and no implants with the soon to exist compact and a navy power core. Till then, a cheap 3% for PG should make it work. Would need to drop the MSE to get it with LMLs. LASB- Also a practical no. Might be just barely possible with implants. MWD + 2x MASB - yes, without fitting mods, and with a BCS for rockets. MWD + 2x MSE - Op success. nearly perfectly eats the PG difference between 10mn compact AB and t2 1mn MWD Yeah but with only 2 lows and you not using any BCUs or DPS rigs your at about 223 DPS with T2 Ammo, faction ammo drops you down to around 185 DPS. A little low for today's T3Ds. Swap a low for a BCU and you are up to 274 T2 and 227 faction which is much better, but you are giving up a lot of tank dropping the DCU or fitting for the MAPC. Your third fit could drop the speed mod, but you are already using a 1MN prop and the base speed is ridiculously low. I like the good design which causes choices but the base speed and dps of this T3D is so far the weakest of the 3. Well light missiles are a low dps weapon after all. This is why they have 31 km range base compared to say scorch pulse which has 11. Spike has 30 km but does even less damage. You would be correct though in that no bcu is always wrong. I would consider putting all the brick in shield and dropping the dcu if you must put a microaux on it.
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 59	Posted - 2015.05.12 14:07:26 - [144] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Terra Chrall wrote: Yeah but with only 2 lows and you not using any BCUs or DPS rigs your at about 223 DPS with T2 Ammo, faction ammo drops you down to around 185 DPS. A little low for today's T3Ds. Swap a low for a BCU and you are up to 274 T2 and 227 faction which is much better, but you are giving up a lot of tank dropping the DCU or fitting for the MAPC. Your third fit could drop the speed mod, but you are already using a 1MN prop and the base speed is ridiculously low. I like the good design which causes choices but the base speed and dps of this T3D is so far the weakest of the 3. No argument here. Moving one mid to a low, or giving it 2-5 more base grid would really help to bring this up closer to par. Doubtful the slot layout will change, so just add a few points of PG and lets roll with it.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 662	Posted - 2015.05.12 14:08:21 - [145] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Well light missiles are a low dps weapon after all. This is why they have 31 km range base compared to say scorch pulse which has 11. Spike has 30 km but does even less damage. You would be correct though in that no bcu is always wrong. I would consider putting all the brick in shield and dropping the dcu if you must put a microaux on it. Fits posted were built purely based on the numbers that I knew off the top of my head, and to check feasability of various kinds of fits. They aren't nearly what I would consider polished or correct, just proof of concept pre-release. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 23	Posted - 2015.05.12 14:33:25 - [146] - Quote My biggest issue with this ship is the speed using the intended 1MN sized afterburner. I understand the need for trade offs but having AB speed outside of prop mode be worse than a cruiser bothers me. Even in prop mode it only becomes average. I would like to see an increase in base speed. What if you added to the prop mode an additional AB speed bonus? This would at least make prop mode with a 1mn AB have the feel of a special role/mode boost. I think a T3D with an AB, in prop mode, should be close to an AB frigate excluding interceptors, of course. Compare this T3D to the Caldari missile Assault Frigate. The Hawk has more speed, smaller sig, better resists, better scan res, active tank, 50% reduced MWD penalty, and 50% missile velocity while having 1 less launcher, 1 less mid, and kinetic lock. The Jackdaw has to go into Def mode to have the resists and sig, has to go into prop mode and is still slower, has to go into sniper mode to get 16% more missile velocity, much better targeting range, and still have less scan res. I was excited when the Jackdaw was announced because I thought it would be hands down better than a Hawk. But the Hawk is better than Prop mode; with its active tank, T2 resists, and smaller sig, might be better than Defensive mode; and is competitive vs sniper mode, though the Jackdaw wins here. My hope is there can be some small tweaks to make the Jackdaw as good as the Hawk while in a given mode. With, as I have stated, speed being the biggest limitation. The biggest draw for me to use the Jackdaw over a hawk right now is the damage selection and the high/mid slot. But that seems a little underwhelming compared to the other T3Ds. All that said, I still am excited for T3Ds in general and appreciate the hard work CCP has put into bringing us a new ship class.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 247	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:08:09 - [147] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: My biggest issue with this ship is the speed using the intended 1MN sized afterburner. I understand the need for trade offs but having AB speed outside of prop mode be worse than a cruiser bothers me. Even in prop mode it only becomes average. I would like to see an increase in base speed. What if you added to the prop mode an additional AB speed bonus? This would at least make prop mode with a 1mn AB have the feel of a special role/mode boost. I think a T3D with an AB, in prop mode, should be close to an AB frigate excluding interceptors, of course. Compare this T3D to the Caldari missile Assault Frigate. The Hawk has more speed, smaller sig, better resists, better scan res, active tank, 50% reduced MWD penalty, and 50% missile velocity while having 1 less launcher, 1 less mid, and kinetic lock. The Jackdaw has to go into Def mode to have the resists and sig, has to go into prop mode and is still slower, has to go into sniper mode to get 16% more missile velocity, much better targeting range, and still have less scan res. I was excited when the Jackdaw was announced because I thought it would be hands down better than a Hawk. But the Hawk is better than Prop mode; with its active tank, T2 resists, and smaller sig, might be better than Defensive mode; and is competitive vs sniper mode, though the Jackdaw wins here. My hope is there can be some small tweaks to make the Jackdaw as good as the Hawk while in a given mode. With, as I have stated, speed being the biggest limitation. The biggest draw for me to use the Jackdaw over a hawk right now is the damage selection and the high/mid slot. But that seems a little underwhelming compared to the other T3Ds. All that said, I still am excited for T3Ds in general and appreciate the hard work CCP has put into bringing us a new ship class. You still forgot the fact the jackdaw has the buffer of a bricky cruiser. And ten effective unlocked launchers to the hawks locked eight.
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 112	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:17:02 - [148] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: Traejun DiSanctis wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hello everyone! We're now ready to share our current designs for the Jackdaw-class Caldari Tactical Destroyer. Hi. Quote: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Shield Hitpoints 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Can't wait for the Gallente one with Sentry drones no doubt. Oh god, please not another Gallente sentry powerhouse. Isn't the Ishtar enough for you afk'ers? Wow, hate drones much? Okay, it was already announced it will be a Hybrid Gun ship, so you can stand down. Nah, I don't hate drones. I hate when a particular race's ships all end up the same. I hated Caldari = Kinetic. I'd hate if every Gallente ship ended up being a Sentry boat.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 564	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:29:27 - [149] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Theronth Valarax wrote: Ix Method wrote: It would be beautiful if you'd release the EFT files or whatever you use for us to play with when you rebalance/release ships. Colour me lazy but it'd probably improve the standard of feedback you receive. EFT and PYFA are developed by player 3rd party and CCP has nothing to do with them. Having said that the stats are in the first post, if you don't want to wait for creators of said applications to update their software I suggest grabbing a calculator, a pen and doing calculations by yourself. All speed/tank/dps formulas are avaible in web. I feel like they should just list the stats with 'all V' when they post, just so peoplebwho forget skills exist, will stop cluttering the thread with trash. Every single ship and module is balanced against All V skills. Hakaari Inkuran wrote: To clarify this is really an issue of some people comparing apples, unskilled stats, to oranges, skilled stats. Some people are fine when they compare apples to apples. By listing all v stats, ccp will cause everyone to talk in oranges instead of mixing them. I think that made sense. Your calculator doesn't multiply by 1.25? Further logic following this decision would be to remove all the skills! It's merely an inconvenience, killing any flavour in the game. Quote: Maybe im just crazy You are. Have a nice day. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 23	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:31:58 - [150] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Terra Chrall wrote: My biggest issue with this ship is the speed using the intended 1MN sized afterburner. I understand the need for trade offs but having AB speed outside of prop mode be worse than a cruiser bothers me. Even in prop mode it only becomes average. I would like to see an increase in base speed. What if you added to the prop mode an additional AB speed bonus? This would at least make prop mode with a 1mn AB have the feel of a special role/mode boost. I think a T3D with an AB, in prop mode, should be close to an AB frigate excluding interceptors, of course. Compare this T3D to the Caldari missile Assault Frigate. The Hawk has more speed, smaller sig, better resists, better scan res, active tank, 50% reduced MWD penalty, and 50% missile velocity while having 1 less launcher, 1 less mid, and kinetic lock. The Jackdaw has to go into Def mode to have the resists and sig, has to go into prop mode and is still slower, has to go into sniper mode to get 16% more missile velocity, much better targeting range, and still have less scan res. I was excited when the Jackdaw was announced because I thought it would be hands down better than a Hawk. But the Hawk is better than Prop mode; with its active tank, T2 resists, and smaller sig, might be better than Defensive mode; and is competitive vs sniper mode, though the Jackdaw wins here. My hope is there can be some small tweaks to make the Jackdaw as good as the Hawk while in a given mode. With, as I have stated, speed being the biggest limitation. The biggest draw for me to use the Jackdaw over a hawk right now is the damage selection and the high/mid slot. But that seems a little underwhelming compared to the other T3Ds. All that said, I still am excited for T3Ds in general and appreciate the hard work CCP has put into bringing us a new ship class. You still forgot the fact the jackdaw has the buffer of a bricky cruiser. And ten effective unlocked launchers to the hawks locked eight. No I glossed over the buffer tank, because I have not run numbers on it, so didn't have much to comment. And depending on incoming DPS the Hawk's bonused active tank with T2 resists is quite strong so I see it as competitive. I did mention the extra launcher and the damage selection being one of the few attractions I do have.

James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 662	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:31:58 - [151] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Theronth Valarax wrote: Ix Method wrote: It would be beautiful if you'd release the EFT files or whatever you use for us to play with when you rebalance/release ships. Colour me lazy but it'd probably improve the standard of feedback you receive. EFT and PYFA are developed by player 3rd party and CCP has nothing to do with them. Having said that the stats are in the first post, if you don't want to wait for creators of said applications to update their software I suggest grabbing a calculator, a pen and doing calculations by yourself. All speed/tank/dps formulas are avaible in web. I feel like they should just list the stats with 'all V' when they post, just so peoplebwho forget skills exist, will stop cluttering the thread with trash. Every single ship and module is balanced against All V skills. Have a nice day. It's also very easy to make a spreadsheet to do the initial calcs if you worry so much about them. The only stats that aren't ridiculously simple to acquire final values are the derived stats, like peak recharge or align time. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 23	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:39:59 - [152] - Quote Traejun DiSanctis wrote: Nah, I don't hate drones. I hate when a particular race's ships all end up the same. I hated Caldari = Kinetic. I'd hate if every Gallente ship ended up being a Sentry boat. Fair enough, but your language choices indicated some spite. Plus Galente are pretty balanced having plenty of Hybrid gun choices, Atron, Incursus, Taranis, Enyo, Catalyst, Deimos, Proteus, etc etc etc. They are spit pretty well between Drones and Hybrids, and people are already looking forward to the blaster Hectate. EDIT : Formatting quote...
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 565	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:41:33 - [153] - Quote There are formulas for the everything out in the public. Peak shield recharge is shield hp / shield recharge time * 2.4 Align is -ln(0.25) +ù Mass_kg +ù Agility / 1000000, i.e: in(0.25) * negate it * 13,500,000 kg * 0.95 / 1,000,000 = 17.77 seconds. Woo, ask the community. pâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ëpâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ëpâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ë // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 247	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:42:09 - [154] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Theronth Valarax wrote: EFT and PYFA are developed by player 3rd party and CCP has nothing to do with them. Having said that the stats are in the first post, if you don't want to wait for creators of said applications to update their software I suggest grabbing a calculator, a pen and doing calculations by yourself. All speed/tank/dps formulas are avaible in web. I feel like they should just list the stats with 'all V' when they post, just so peoplebwho forget skills exist, will stop cluttering the thread with trash. Every single ship and module is balanced against All V skills. Hakaari Inkuran wrote: To clarify this is really an issue of some people comparing apples, unskilled stats, to oranges, skilled stats. Some people are fine when they compare apples to apples. By listing all v stats, ccp will cause everyone to talk in oranges instead of mixing them. I think that made sense. Your calculator doesn't multiply by 1.25? Further logic following this decision would be to remove all the skills! It's merely an inconvenience, killing any flavour in the game. Quote: Maybe im just crazy You are. Have a nice day. are you dense? Im complaining about OTHER people posting incorrectly and proposing an easy solution that would stop them from being as incorrect as they currently are. Get off your moronic high horse.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 565	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:44:54 - [155] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: I feel like they should just list the stats with 'all V' when they post, just so peoplebwho forget skills exist, will stop cluttering the thread with trash. Every single ship and module is balanced against All V skills. Hakaari Inkuran wrote: To clarify this is really an issue of some people comparing apples, unskilled stats, to oranges, skilled stats. Some people are fine when they compare apples to apples. By listing all v stats, ccp will cause everyone to talk in oranges instead of mixing them. I think that made sense. Your calculator doesn't multiply by 1.25? Further logic following this decision would be to remove all the skills! It's merely an inconvenience, killing any flavour in the game. Quote: Maybe im just crazy You are. Have a nice day. are you dense? Im complaining about OTHER people posting incorrectly and proposing an easy solution that would stop them from being as incorrect as they currently are. Get off your moronic high horse. Real spaceship stats would get lose in time. Craay // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 23	Posted - 2015.05.12 15:59:45 - [156] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: are you dense? Im complaining about OTHER people posting incorrectly and proposing an easy solution that would stop them from being as incorrect as they currently are. Get off your moronic high horse. Two problems. 1. The issue with posting stats all Vs is people without perfect skills, would be disappointed when it did not perform as advertised. 2. People would still quote unskilled stats because why else would they be comparing skilled and unskilled now? It is either for their own agenda or they don't check the source. Having CCP no longer list unskilled base stats would confuse the issue for more people than it would solve.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 662	Posted - 2015.05.12 16:02:50 - [157] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: There are formulas for the everything out in the public. Peak shield recharge is shield hp / shield recharge time * 2.4 Align is -ln(0.25) +ù Mass_kg +ù Agility / 1000000, i.e for a Bestower: in(0.25) * negate it * 13,500,000 kg * 0.95 / 1,000,000 = 17.77 seconds. Woo, ask the community. pâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ëpâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ëpâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ë Got peak capacitor recharge? It would be useful for another of my projects.... Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 566	Posted - 2015.05.12 16:10:49 - [158] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: There are formulas for the everything out in the public. Peak shield recharge is shield hp / shield recharge time * 2.4 Align is -ln(0.25) +ù Mass_kg +ù Agility / 1000000, i.e for a Bestower: in(0.25) * negate it * 13,500,000 kg * 0.95 / 1,000,000 = 17.77 seconds. Woo, ask the community. pâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ëpâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ëpâ+a++a¦ê+ä-£a¦êa++n+ë Got peak capacitor recharge? It would be useful for another of my projects.... http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Capacitor_Recharge_Rate Appears to be the same 2.4-2.5 multiplier, i.e. for a Maller 1625 cap / 465 sec = 3.49 cap/sec * 2.5 = 8.73 peak cap/sec. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 663	Posted - 2015.05.12 16:14:35 - [159] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: snipped, the good stuff Appears to be the same 2.4-2.5 multiplier, i.e. for a Maller 1625 cap / 465 sec = 3.49 cap/sec * 2.5 = 8.73 peak cap/sec. Sweet. Had seen that, but parsing it well enough to spreadsheet never happened, as I only ever got around to that after the quafe and frentix, partying with my fedo and some dancers, maybe even the damsel. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 663	Posted - 2015.05.12 16:33:31 - [160] - Quote Wow. Wish the recharge rate for the shields was posted. It might be really mean as a passive tank, as a dual MSEII + CDFEII fit gets 5625 shield HP; With a base 800s time, (equal to the svipul) it would pull in a rocking 23 raw HP/s passive tank. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp

Kines Pavelovna POS Party Low-Class 4	Posted - 2015.05.12 16:59:13 - [161] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Wow. Wish the recharge rate for the shields was posted. It might be really mean as a passive tank, as a dual MSEII + CDFEII fit gets 5625 shield HP; With a base 800s time, (equal to the svipul) it would pull in a rocking 23 raw HP/s passive tank. Try it with a Fly Catchers regen, small purgers and a Beta in the low. I ran a calc with 1 MSEII 3 purgers and 650 regen and got around 22 raw HP/s. Depending on what the regen comes in at it a passive 1mn ab with lmls could be pretty beefy.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1157	Posted - 2015.05.12 17:16:56 - [162] - Quote 6 mids is excessive ... why do these T3 dessies have sooooo much better slot layout than all other small ships in the game? alongside the crazy high bonuses on the modes and the high base resists on top of that?? these need toning down... Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 665	Posted - 2015.05.12 17:34:11 - [163] - Quote Harvey James wrote: 6 mids is excessive ... why do these T3 dessies have sooooo much better slot layout than all other small ships in the game? alongside the crazy high bonuses on the modes and the high base resists on top of that?? these need toning down... Because they are A: Not actually that great of base stats B: Can only use one mode at a time C: Are t3, with all the production hassle that implies D: Are potentially designed to fight up against cruisers, rather than slaughter down. Kines Pavelovna wrote: Depending on what the regen comes in at it a passive 1mn ab with lmls could be pretty beefy. Best I can do from spreadsheeting (assuming the 800s recharge time holds) is about 33 raw hp/s pre-implants/links, but can't get a prop on that without implants and I'm not working with a spreadsheet fitting system to make implants or links happen, nor resist math. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 24	Posted - 2015.05.12 18:28:32 - [164] - Quote Harvey James wrote: 6 mids is excessive ... why do these T3 dessies have sooooo much better slot layout than all other small ships in the game? alongside the crazy high bonuses on the modes and the high base resists on top of that?? these need toning down... It's not much different than a Hawk. It get's one more launcher and 1 more mid. The prop mode is slower than a Hawk and a Hawk gets MWD radius bloom bonus; the defense mode brings its resists up but a Hawk has a T2 resists and smaller sig to start with plus a bonused active tank; the sniper mode adds more targeting range, a little more missile velocity\range (66% vs 50%), and less sensor strength. So in the end the Jackdaw does more DPS with selectable damage, 1 more mid slot, and has to change modes to compete with other ships that can do well without changing modes. Hardly overpowering nor in need of toning down.
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1274	Posted - 2015.05.12 18:41:18 - [165] - Quote Stitch Kaneland wrote: Guys.. its a missile a boat. It doesn't need to be as fast as a svipul or confessor. Have we not learned what fast ships and missiles do? Look at the garmur/orthrus, those 2 ships have been a cancer on PvP since their introduction. It has no tracking to contend with. And it will have insane acceleration.. so if its fit with a 1mn MWD, it will still have the acceleration to slingshot most ships. Plus, a 66% bonus to missile velocity will mean even the kiters can't kite it when its fit with LML. Possible you could even get enough range for rockets to hit out to point range with a rig or 2. LR rocket range is about 22km in sharpshooter mode. More if you're burning away from the target. Or you can just turn around, slingshot in prop mode and say "toodles!" http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Advenat Bedala Facehoof Out of Sight. 2	Posted - 2015.05.12 19:11:45 - [166] - Quote Ok Fozzy I know you have to read this ;) Some my thoughts 1) T3 destroers have to dominate frig-size becouse they are 1. destroers 2. T3 2) forse of svipul is much in possibilyty to use only 1 mode (propulsion) all time 3) Scan rezolution, lock range, sensor str looks strange for sharpshooter mode 4) 10 AB can be nerfed in more interesting way 5) Good agility and low mass (mostly low mass) is not a Caldary My idea: Place role bonus +50% to damage to sharpshooter mode (and rename sharpshooter mode) What this will do: T3 destroers will have to trade dps for tank or speed and switch modes. And jackdaw can be a Caldary one (no need for mass nerf (not this word)).
Leonardo Adami Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 7	Posted - 2015.05.12 19:14:31 - [167] - Quote Saw Zaqq streaming on SiSi playing with this. It's gonna be nerfed for sure. You can fit a full rack of rockets, mwd, point, web , msb, masb, small cap booster, dc, ballistic and rigs. Throw drugs and mid grade crystal set you have a 1500 dps tank with great brawling damage. So stop whining and get ready for the nerf bat.
Enya Sparhawk Black Tea and Talons 54	Posted - 2015.05.12 21:41:16 - [168] - Quote LOL Why'd you call it a "Jackdaw" That probably would have been a better name for a Gurista ship. Quote: John Gay, in his Beggar's Opera, notes that "A covetous fellow, like a jackdaw, steals what he was never made to enjoy, for the sake of hiding it". It just seemed like an odd name for a ship that doesn't really steal anything... Wikipedia wrote: The western jackdaw is one of a very small number of birds that it is legal to use as a decoy or to trap in a cage in the United Kingdom. The other pest species that can be controlled by trapping are the crow, jay, magpie and rook. An authorised person must comply with the requirements of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and does not need to show that the birds were a nuisance before trapping them.[113] As of 2003 the western jackdaw was listed as a potential species for targeted hunting in the European Union Birds Directive, and hunting has been encouraged by German hunting associations.[112] Permission to shoot western jackdaws in spring and summer exists in Cyprus as they are thought (incorrectly) to prey on gamebirds. Jackdaw LOL Still, there's one good use for these birds I guess, Let them eat crow... Fíorghrá: Grá na fírinne Déan gáire...Tiocfaidh ár lá
Khan Wrenth Hedion University Amarr Empire 138	Posted - 2015.05.12 22:44:50 - [169] - Quote Enya Sparhawk wrote: stuff about the name... For the bird-naming-race's 3-in-1 destroyer, I still say the name should be "Turducken". Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 59	Posted - 2015.05.12 23:08:22 - [170] - Quote Enya Sparhawk wrote: LOL Why'd you call it a "Jackdaw" That probably would have been a better name for a Gurista ship. Quote: John Gay, in his Beggar's Opera, notes that "A covetous fellow, like a jackdaw, steals what he was never made to enjoy, for the sake of hiding it". It just seemed like an odd name for a ship that doesn't really steal anything... Wikipedia wrote: The western jackdaw is one of a very small number of birds that it is legal to use as a decoy or to trap in a cage in the United Kingdom. The other pest species that can be controlled by trapping are the crow, jay, magpie and rook. An authorised person must comply with the requirements of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and does not need to show that the birds were a nuisance before trapping them.[113] As of 2003 the western jackdaw was listed as a potential species for targeted hunting in the European Union Birds Directive, and hunting has been encouraged by German hunting associations.[112] Permission to shoot western jackdaws in spring and summer exists in Cyprus as they are thought (incorrectly) to prey on gamebirds. Jackdaw LOL Still, there's one good use for these birds I guess, Let them eat crow... Nope not going there... I'll stick with the attributes of the ship.

elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 669	Posted - 2015.05.12 23:46:15 - [171] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Wow. Wish the recharge rate for the shields was posted. It might be really mean as a passive tank, as a dual MSEII + CDFEII fit gets 5625 shield HP; With a base 800s time, (equal to the svipul) it would pull in a rocking 23 raw HP/s passive tank. Just to take out some suspence that fit gets 6750hp shield with 28hp regen and the base speed in propulsion mode is 266,66m/s and 702,15 with tech2 1mn afterburner. In defence mode and with the damage control on the fitting screen say it's 24.555hp and a signature of 62m. Oh, and 273.7dps with rage rockets, no heat, no implants, no links. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
prolix travail Blue Mountain Trails 29	Posted - 2015.05.13 00:54:33 - [172] - Quote For people who haven't been on SISI yet, here's some shield resist figures: Tac Destroyer 5 / no links other modes defense mode no resist mods em 0% thrm 60% kin 55% exp 50% em 34% thrm 74% kin 70% exp 67% dcu II only em 13% thrm 65% kin 61% exp 57% em 42% thrm 77% kin 74% exp 71% invul II only em 30% thrm 73% kin 69% exp 65% em 54% thrm 82% kin 79% exp 77% dcu II + invul II em 39% thrm 76% kin 73% exp 70% em 60% thrm 84% kin 82% exp 80% 1 x em II rig em 35% thrm 60% kin 55% exp 50% em 57% thrm 74% kin 70% exp 67% 1 x em II rig + dcu II em 44% thrm 65% kin 61% exp 57% em 63% thrm 77% kin 74% exp 71% 1 x em II rig + dcu II + invul em 58% thrm 76% kin 73% exp 70% em 72% thrm 84% kin 82% exp 80% 2 x em II rig em 55% thrm 60% kin 55% exp 50% em 70% thrm 74% kin 70% exp 67% 2 x em II rig + dcu II em 61% thrm 65% kin 61% exp 57% em 74% thrm 77% kin 74% exp 71% 2 x em II rig + dcu II + invul em 68% thrm 76% kin 73% exp 70% em 79% thrm 84% kin 82% exp 80% As you can see its pretty impressive and with 6 mids there's room for any kind of shield tank you would want. You can fit a 10mn AB easier than on other t3 destroyers but there's not much point, even in speed mode you only get the same speed as a normal t2 ab frig. For feedback I would say nerf the resist bonus. Damage, speed, sig, cap all seem good.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 579	Posted - 2015.05.13 01:57:57 - [173] - Quote One invul does that. Nothing to see here, move along. The innate hull shield hp amount bonus will be balanced. Etc, etc // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Pestilen Ratte Artimus Ratte 18	Posted - 2015.05.13 05:02:13 - [174] - Quote God knows the Caldari militia need all the help they can get. Mind you, they will **** and moan because you can only fit two stabs on this thing. Maybe it needs a +2 warp core role bonus, so the squid can fit i8t into their fleet doctrines? The tradegy of this ship is that it plays to Caldari cultural weaknesses, and seek to push them further down the path of losing engagements. It has a big tank...... but can't dictate range... so it needs it. It has easy to use weapons systems..... that do low damage as a trade off. It is a solo ratters dream..... but does not fit at all well within squad in a specialized role. All the T3 destroyers are basically solo ratting ships, or for hunting solo ratters. We have found that 3 tech 1 frigs can stand and fight a t3 and take it down for the loss of 1 or maybe 2 ships. This makes them a massive ISK loser on the battelfield, and that reality means t3s are no longer willing to stand and fight in a real battle, where attrition is a fact because teams stand and fight. Psychologically, this dawning reality must harm the pilots who seek solo boats, and make them demand even more OP ships. If we cater too much to this misguided desire to be all things to all men in a solo ship, we end up with the Garmur and Orthrus, ships so ridiculously capable on their own that they make a mockery of balance in Eve. In essence, if you want to please the solo fighters who can't handle attritional warfare or team work, they will not be satisfied until they can fly one ship, badly, which can destroy an infinite number of cheaper t1 ships and never lose. Then the game will be entirely broken, and the t3 princess brigade will condemn the very people who gave them what the demanded: invunerability for isk, and the supremacy of the individual over the team. The Garmur is a ship without honour, for pilots who fail to grasp the realities of war. In war, men die. Ships are lost. The dead litter the field. Your weapon is made by the lowest bidder, and those who stay the course and stick by their comrades generally win the day. There are no princesses in real war.
Lura Zara Worlds Without Boundaries Special Forces 8	Posted - 2015.05.13 06:03:33 - [175] - Quote Pestilen Ratte wrote: Snip out the salty Frankly this post was so long and drawn out and full of salt I forgot what your point was... But I fully agree about the mordu ships. So far Checks out good for PVE As far as PVP goes, It looks like a support ship. Using EWAR such as damps and target painters for larger ships. Staying at long range for safety and fire support. While its teammates lock down the target. So Yeah, It looks perfect the way it is to me. Rather than a brawler like the other T3's its a support oriented ship. And the garmur/orthrus have a extreme weakness that most people forget. Short lock range. Fit some damps, make them have to bump you rather than kite you. I remember being in a FW fleet where two garmurs could not do anything because of a pair of damp hookbill playing with them in a cruel game of damp roulette. The special snowflakes I see are the ones who complain about the 10mn AB not working and the cookie cutter dual ancil/large shield extenders. Heres some pros offhand. This is the first Caldari ship with a shield HP bonus per level. This is going to make a good support ship in gangs. [Damps/Painters/Firesupport.] No damage type lock [thank god.] Good PVE potential and Gang warfare potential. Decent looking tank. Cons. Needs good skills to fit out. Missile delay to target. Primarily support oriented rather than solo. All in all, not bad, I look forward to it.
Fergus Runkle Truth and Reconciliation Council 56	Posted - 2015.05.13 08:58:53 - [176] - Quote Seriously, more powergrid required (unless of course you want to force people to fit rockets all the time?) 5 t2 lml with a t2 ab and you have 25.5pg left. Not enough to fit even the storyline MSE.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1029	Posted - 2015.05.13 09:33:47 - [177] - Quote Fergus Runkle wrote: Seriously, more powergrid required (unless of course you want to force people to fit rockets all the time?) 5 t2 lml with a t2 ab and you have 25.5pg left. Not enough to fit even the storyline MSE. The fitting downsides and compromises that need to be made are fairly awesome on this ship. While the jackdaw is certainly strong, it has it's terrible footprint to bear (high sig, low speed) and actually even with a mwd+nano, you're only looking at 2km/s cold in prop mode. I fooled around on SiSI yesterday to look for what seems like a comfort fit, and right now it's something like LML, 2MSE, point+web, fitting mods and more resists for about 18k ehp ingame. It's a little podla drake with combats.
Rek Seven Probe Patrol Low-Class 1974	Posted - 2015.05.13 11:33:12 - [178] - Quote 2 low slots +1
Marian Devers Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities 65	Posted - 2015.05.13 13:53:42 - [179] - Quote Just a heads up CCP, no one will fly a ship that flies 1800m/s in prop mode.
Phaade Perimeter Defense Systems Templis CALSF 343	Posted - 2015.05.13 14:22:01 - [180] - Quote Justin Cody wrote: Altrue wrote: TrouserDeagle wrote: Quote: Powergrid is very tight for most fittings, but CPU is much more generous. am I going to end up using best named (that means compact btw, your tiericide didn't work) launchers? sure am glad I trained LM spec 5 :( You most certainly are going to if the PWG stays that way. I don't really get the whole effort on making the PWG so tight, there is really no need to sanction 10mn AB fits given that their speed will be laughable at best. Caldari - Now Issued with CCPreNerf Protection PlanGäó Never Patch Without It (Restrictions Apply Only to Caldari - The rest get a free pass because screw you that's why) A lot of people would pay a lot of isk for such a plan....

Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 25	Posted - 2015.05.13 15:23:15 - [181] - Quote prolix travail wrote: As you can see its pretty impressive and with 6 mids there's room for any kind of shield tank you would want. You can fit a 10mn AB easier than on other t3 destroyers but there's not much point, even in speed mode you only get the same speed as a normal t2 ab frig. For feedback I would say nerf the resist bonus. Damage, speed, sig, cap all seem good. The resists are in line with the other T3Ds. Right now I see where they went with this one, they wanted a slow, tanky destroyer. Of course to make the most of the tank you are giving up DPS slots in the form of Rigs and 1/2 the low slots . Also to get the strong tank requires you to be in Defense mode which means you are really slow with anything other than a MWD which is blooming your signature significantly. So, I have to disagree and say it is pretty balanced looking. Personally I would prefer it was a faster, if that meant a little less tank, that might be a fair trade.
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1748	Posted - 2015.05.13 15:35:02 - [182] - Quote Okay so, I've tried it on sisi for quite some time now. Some issues are less important than I expected, but the speed and agility is definitely an issue. The tight powergrid also doesn't help either. I can safely say these are its two most important flaws: Speed and PWG. I don't think there needs to be like a huge change or anything, but PWG could definitely use a few extra points, especially since it has so few low slots for fitting mods, AND one turret more than the other T3 dessies. As for the speed, you've got to do something, its twice as slow as other dessies, and has twice the inertia... Seriously I do not share the opinion of some here that its a "tanky" destroyer.. Not with that sig radius. Its like flying a mini-sun :D I'm sure the extra sensors aren't there to help it target things, but rather to prevent its own sig radius from blinding its own sensors :p Consider it for a second, the Scimitar has less base sig radius than the jackdaw xD Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1029	Posted - 2015.05.13 15:48:13 - [183] - Quote Altrue wrote: Okay so, I've tried it on sisi for quite some time now. Some issues are less important than I expected, but the speed and agility is definitely an issue. The tight powergrid also doesn't help either. I can safely say these are its two most important flaws: Speed and PWG. I don't think there needs to be like a huge change or anything, but PWG could definitely use a few extra points, especially since it has so few low slots for fitting mods, AND one turret more than the other T3 dessies. As for the speed, you've got to do something, its twice as slow as other dessies, and has twice the inertia... Seriously Even the stuff I just threw together yesterday on two toons with caldari tac II has been a whole lot of fun. Combat probes, mwd, point, web, light missiles with supposedly 250+dps at V and already 18k ehp just make it a very versatile ship. Fitting compromises pay off immensly for this ship, simply being able to podla around nigh capstable with mwd/invuln/point running on a destroyer is awesome. They will clearly be less proficient at 1v1 compared to confessor and svipul, but for anything skirmishy, they are promising The speed is quite low, but with a nano and links you're still looking at 2.7-2.8km/s cold. Couple that with LMLs, a 31km point and you really got something. Regarding the feel of flying one or boxing two, this is by far the best T3D till now. It's versatile and most certainly not OP, and till now flying two or three of them in a gang seems very beasty since only one of them has to burn close to point, while the others can keep projecting from 50+. The sigradius though: True to that. Atleast put a mwd-sigrad reduction into the defensive mode.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 25	Posted - 2015.05.13 16:44:59 - [184] - Quote Fergus Runkle wrote: Seriously, more powergrid required (unless of course you want to force people to fit rockets all the time?) 5 t2 lml with a t2 ab and you have 25.5pg left. Not enough to fit even the storyline MSE. Are you taking into account skills that raise overall PG and reduce weapon and shield PG use? When I use V skills I get 70 PG to use and 6.3 per LML II and 23.25 for a MSE II all fitting and leaving 4.25 PG. Which is not much either considering 7 open slots (1H 4M 2L). You can save 2.25 PG is you drop to a Meta 4 MSE and shave off 1 more if you go with a meta AB or upgrade to a Deadspace Coreli. That will get you to 7.5 free enough to fit 7x 1 PG mods. Which will let you fit a resist mod, Sensor Damp, web, scram, BCU, DCU, +3 rigs. Not too bad, though you are slow with an AB and T2 mods would be better here. Now if you want to fit a MWD you need to find another 5-7PG so you have to either add a fitting mod, or drop the shield. Down grading the LMLs gains you 4.5 so you would come in at 0 PG to spare with PERFECT skills. And that is to fit 5x meta LML with mostly meta shield and prop. Previously I had been focused on Rocket builds but now that I am running some LML I see how much that PG hurts. In my opinion you should at least be able to fit a LML T2 config with 1 meta MSE and a MWD without requiring a fitting mod. So with 70PG - 5x LML IIs (31.5) - 1x MSE Meta4 (21) - Meta MWD (15) = 2.5 PG free. To fill the remaining 7 slots would require an additional 4.5 PG if CCP rolled the damage into 4 launchers instead of 5 that save 6.3 PG leaving 1.8PG free. If they then bumped the PG by 0.2 you could fit a T2 MWD also. That would seem pretty reasonable. Clearly the restrictions on PG are there because of what stupid things people could do with fitting mods and not what you can do natively without them. The way I see it the average pilot wanting a T2 LML fit will need 1 ACR rig to do the job. If that is what it takes, well that is what it takes. But it would be nice to fit a T3 ship with basic T2 modules without needing fitting.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 667	Posted - 2015.05.13 16:54:06 - [185] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: The way I see it the average pilot wanting a T2 LML fit will need 1 ACR rig to do the job. If that is what it takes, well that is what it takes. But it would be nice to fit a T3 ship with basic T2 modules without needing fitting. or, you know, a cheap 1-2 % PG implant with good skills. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1158	Posted - 2015.05.13 16:54:31 - [186] - Quote Altrue wrote: Okay so, I've tried it on sisi for quite some time now. Some issues are less important than I expected, but the speed and agility is definitely an issue. The tight powergrid also doesn't help either. I can safely say these are its two most important flaws: Speed and PWG. I don't think there needs to be like a huge change or anything, but PWG could definitely use a few extra points, especially since it has so few low slots for fitting mods, AND one turret more than the other T3 dessies. As for the speed, you've got to do something, its twice as slow as other dessies, and has twice the inertia... Seriously I do not share the opinion of some here that its a "tanky" destroyer.. Not with that sig radius. Its like flying a mini-sun :D I'm sure the extra sensors aren't there to help it target things, but rather to prevent its own sig radius from blinding its own sensors :p Consider it for a second, the Scimitar has less base sig radius than the jackdaw xD a cruiser with a lower sig than a dessie.. that is madness.. Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1782	Posted - 2015.05.13 17:02:54 - [187] - Quote So since it's supposed to be slow as people have said, I guess we got a tanky, delayed damage gate camper in our hands. Sniper mode will let you get fast locks I guess...
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 667	Posted - 2015.05.13 17:19:12 - [188] - Quote Would rather see it release underpowered than overpowered, and buff slightly in 6 weeks depending on the problems with them in real world. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Solarus Explorer The Church of Awesome Heiian Conglomerate 5	Posted - 2015.05.13 17:21:36 - [189] - Quote Also it looks like its going to be slower than all t1 attack cruisers, even in speed mode with 1mn mwd. Isn't that kindof...... too slow for a t3 dessie in "speed mode"? Or maybe the cruisers need a speed nerf, those orthrus, cynabals, stabber fleets, omen navies, omens, stabbers etc...... are all as fast or faster than the t3ds nowdays.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 667	Posted - 2015.05.13 17:24:08 - [190] - Quote Solarus Explorer wrote: Also it looks like its going to be slower than all t1 attack cruisers, even in speed mode with 1mn mwd. Isn't that kindof...... too slow for a t3 dessie in "speed mode"? Or maybe the cruisers need a speed nerf, those orthrus, cynabals, stabber fleets, omen navies, omens, stabbers etc...... are all as fast or faster than the t3ds nowdays. leave cyna and stabber at about parity, then nerf the rest more harshly. After all, their hat is speed. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp

Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 25	Posted - 2015.05.13 18:01:08 - [191] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Would rather see it release underpowered than overpowered, and buff slightly in 6 weeks depending on the problems with them in real world. I was thinking the same thing really. I am voicing the areas I see might need attention, but I am not demanding that changes be made prior to release. Hopefully a couple weeks after release they will have a feel for it balance and can tweak it favorably. Or as it gets some SISI use, they might make small tweaks before final release and then see if more small tweaks are needed. I kinda got the feeling they went more conservative here, with the expectation that they would tweak it upwards. It's win win for them. If they leave it, no one yells nerf. If the tweak it upwards no one yells nerf.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 668	Posted - 2015.05.13 18:13:09 - [192] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: James Baboli wrote: Would rather see it release underpowered than overpowered, and buff slightly in 6 weeks depending on the problems with them in real world. I was thinking the same thing really. I am voicing the areas I see might need attention, but I am not demanding that changes be made prior to release. Hopefully a couple weeks after release they will have a feel for it balance and can tweak it favorably. Or as it gets some SISI use, they might make small tweaks before final release and then see if more small tweaks are needed. I kinda got the feeling they went more conservative here, with the expectation that they would tweak it upwards. It's win win for them. If they leave it, no one yells nerf. If the tweak it upwards no one yells nerf. And if people were calling for buffs, and it turns out to be cancerously OP as some people claimed, they can make a tiny nerf (-1 PG would make most of the cooler fits require rigs or implants even with perfect skills) and people call it well balanced and thought out/ Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Leonardo Adami Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 8	Posted - 2015.05.13 18:25:54 - [193] - Quote Solarus Explorer wrote: Also it looks like its going to be slower than all t1 attack cruisers, even in speed mode with 1mn mwd. Isn't that kindof...... too slow for a t3 dessie in "speed mode"? Or maybe the cruisers need a speed nerf, those orthrus, cynabals, stabber fleets, omen navies, omens, stabbers etc...... are all as fast or faster than the t3ds nowdays. You comparing Apple's and Hamburgers, they're nothing at all alike. You can't compare T3 destroyers to cruisers, honestly I'm glad you did though because doing so invalidates any point or arguement you may have had.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 668	Posted - 2015.05.13 18:54:45 - [194] - Quote Leonardo Adami wrote: Solarus Explorer wrote: Also it looks like its going to be slower than all t1 attack cruisers, even in speed mode with 1mn mwd. Isn't that kindof...... too slow for a t3 dessie in "speed mode"? Or maybe the cruisers need a speed nerf, those orthrus, cynabals, stabber fleets, omen navies, omens, stabbers etc...... are all as fast or faster than the t3ds nowdays. You comparing Apple's and Hamburgers, they're nothing at all alike. You can't compare T3 destroyers to cruisers, honestly I'm glad you did though because doing so invalidates any point or arguement you may have had. Not really. He's comparing two different classes of ships on a metric which is an absolute. If he was trying to directly compare PG with naked fits, it would be an apple and orange comparison. Speed though, is comparing between any ship in eve, as they all move in the same scale. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 581	Posted - 2015.05.13 19:28:57 - [195] - Quote Marian Devers wrote: Just a heads up CCP, no one will fly a ship that flies 1800m/s in prop mode. Cancer era is coming to a close. Just you wait and see. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
prolix travail Blue Mountain Trails 30	Posted - 2015.05.13 19:41:58 - [196] - Quote The resists may be in-line with other t3 destroyers but that's something that's wrong with the whole group tbh. If they nerfed resists in oher modes and compensated for them by increasing the bonus in defense then they might be a little less overpowered.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 27	Posted - 2015.05.13 20:28:08 - [197] - Quote prolix travail wrote: The resists may be in-line with other t3 destroyers but that's something that's wrong with the whole group tbh. If they nerfed resists in oher modes and compensated for them by increasing the bonus in defense then they might be a little less overpowered. Okay, but they don't start with resists like AF and HAC resists, they start with somewhere between T1 and T2 HAC/AF. The Hawk and Cerberus start with 0 / 80 / 70 / 50 Jackdaw starts with 0 / 60 / 55 / 50. So outside of Def mode they are weaker than T2 Assault ships. Most T2 assault ships can have a very strong resist profile with just a couple mods/rigs just like the T3Ds. You add the same mods/rigs on the AF/HAC and the resist profile is going to be close. The only difference is that the T2 need to fill the EM better vs defense mode. Out of defense mode the T2 ships should have a better resist profile. Hence the tactical mode of the destroyer where it is weaker outside of the mode but potentially better in it. You can't look at the ship in each mode and say how it is better than other ships. You have to weigh what you are giving up not being in another mode at the same time. Going beyond resists and looking at these 3 ship types: Are T3D a good replacement for T2 Frigates? Yes, in many cases. Does that make it broken? No. It is a ship class and tier up. Does a HAC beat out T1/T2 destroyers? Yes. Of course T2D are special use ships, but the pattern holds. Now, a T3D should not hands down beat HACs, they should be competitive with each other though. Most HACs have more DPS and Tank than T3D. T3D have more mobility and speed... well they did, they got brought down a notch, and the Jackdaw will be slower than some cruisers but a more competitive tank. I just don't see the gross imbalance you do with the current ships in the game prior to T3D. Are T3D flavor of the month, and finding good success? Yes. But new ships and ship classes tend to get used more. Things will settle down eventually. People will get used to pros and cons of the T3D and be better equipped to counter them. One poster brought up that 3 T1 frigates for a fraction of the cost of a T3D can beat a T3D. Don't expect to bring out any T1/T2 Frig/Des, 1 on 1 and expect to have the upper hand against a T3D of similar human pilot skills. That is the game. If you want to take down an equally skilled pilot you will need to be better in the moment or bring a better ship. If that means you have to ship up to a HAC or Pirate cruiser to gain the advantage well, again, that is the game. If anything I would say the the T3D is best in class for the price. So either match the T3D with a T3D or up class to more expensive cruiser. Or bring 2 friends in cheap ships and enjoy the isk ratio win.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 153	Posted - 2015.05.13 21:09:28 - [198] - Quote All it needs is to have the base speed brought up so it's in line with the other t3's and we have a good scram kiter for solo and a good gang sniper for fleets that will see plenty of use without being the insta locking, high alpha, instant dps, cancer that is svipul.
Solj RichPopolous Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 126	Posted - 2015.05.13 21:24:18 - [199] - Quote Just tried this on SiSi. Confirmed 2728ms 10mn AB (1 overdrive ,skirm link, HG snakes). The agility is amazing can pull off a 5km orbit at ~1700ms and only slings me out to about 9000m. Scram, Web, injector, 1 EM hard, and medium active booster. I welcome this new addition to my hangar of viable meaningful ships come patch date. Thank you CCP.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1179	Posted - 2015.05.13 22:52:43 - [200] - Quote Solj RichPopolous wrote: Just tried this on SiSi. Confirmed 2728ms 10mn AB (1 overdrive ,skirm link, HG snakes. Corelum C-type AB will probably move this up to an A-type after patch to get more speed). The agility is amazing can pull off a 5km orbit at ~1700ms and only slings me out to about 9000m. Scram, Web, injector, 1 EM hard, and medium active booster. I welcome this new addition to my hangar of viable meaningful ships come patch date. Thank you CCP. Skirmish links, dead space kit, HG implants to get it moderately threatening doesn't exactly fill me with confidence for those actually using it in real fights...

Solj RichPopolous Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 126	Posted - 2015.05.13 23:16:32 - [201] - Quote afkalt wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: Just tried this on SiSi. Confirmed 2728ms 10mn AB (1 overdrive ,skirm link, HG snakes. Corelum C-type AB will probably move this up to an A-type after patch to get more speed). The agility is amazing can pull off a 5km orbit at ~1700ms and only slings me out to about 9000m. Scram, Web, injector, 1 EM hard, and medium active booster. I welcome this new addition to my hangar of viable meaningful ships come patch date. Thank you CCP. Skirmish links, dead space kit, HG implants to get it moderately threatening doesn't exactly fill me with confidence for those actually using it in real fights... Check my very rare losses. I do use this stuff in real fights. I use about 5 diff ships they are always oversized prop Gist X or Core X other deadspace/faction mods to pull the fits off and make it perform the way I want. My last real loss was in 12/29/13. I lost an expensive garmur as well in november but I chalk that up to the broken wrecking rates of Geckos. (5 Wrecking shots in less than 1 minute at ranges of over 20km ya rite). Granted most people won't do this so the jackdaw will be a subpar piece of trash. I've killed a few on Sisi today witht he fit I've described above. They were lackluster jokes going about 2km/s on MWD lulz.
Aglais Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 525	Posted - 2015.05.14 00:00:47 - [202] - Quote I am very, very disappointed with the Jackdaw in it's current iteration. It's velocity is utterly laughable, even in "propulsion mode" (I wouldn't call it that). It's base speed in general is horrific, it handles like a paralyzed manatee on a frozen pond, and unlike the Confessor and Svipul it is forced to rely on a MWD for "speed" (don't make me laugh; 2km/s with a 1mn MWD vs. nearly 3km/s with a 10mn AB on the other two? What a joke, those two aren't even affected by points, the Jackdaw is and it's so much slower!) Powergrid feels unreasonably tight, and there is so much CPU I literally don't know how I could possibly fill all of it meaningfully. Signature radius is enough that it's increased tank doesn't feel like it means very much at all. Only one option for a utility high instead of two. Significantly lower DPS than the other two T3 destroyers as well with close-range weapons. Cripes. Literally the only positive thing you've given this ship is what I personally think is a very aesthetically pleasing hull design. You really weren't kidding when you said "a slow cruiser"- feels like a quick/average battlecruiser to me outside of propulsion mode. I cannot state clear enough my disappointment with this thing. I can't help but imagine as it limps out of station and tries it's hardest to turn outside of propulsion mode that it is begging me to be merciful and drive it into the sun, ending its misery. Please- make it faster and more agile, if you do nothing else to its stats. It cannot hold a candle to the other two T3 destroyers in this state- it is a joke.
Khan Wrenth Hedion University Amarr Empire 142	Posted - 2015.05.14 00:29:13 - [203] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Would rather see it release underpowered than overpowered, and buff slightly in 6 weeks depending on the problems with them in real world. Would like to see this be the general rule of thumb with all new content. Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 671	Posted - 2015.05.14 00:32:58 - [204] - Quote Khan Wrenth wrote: James Baboli wrote: Would rather see it release underpowered than overpowered, and buff slightly in 6 weeks depending on the problems with them in real world. Would like to see this be the general rule of thumb with all new content. It would make for a more sustainable game. Release stuff that is just a hair under where it should be balanced, then see how the community breaks it just for being the new shiny, and push it up a tad in the next release, based on whatever leaves it flavored as intended but makes it perform at parity. For example, release this as is. If speed or PG are as big an issue as people think it will be, a small speed buff (10-20m/s) and 1 or 2 PG in the next patch. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 535	Posted - 2015.05.14 01:58:46 - [205] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Shield Hitpoints 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Role Bonus: 50% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile damage 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements Additional bonuses are available when one of three Tactical Destroyer Modes are active. Modes may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is active Propulsion Mode: 33.3% bonus to max velocity while Propulsion Mode is active 66.6% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active Sharpshooter Mode: 66.6% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile velocity while Sharpshooter Mode is active 100% bonus to sensor strength, scan resolution and targeting range while Sharpshooter Mode is active Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers 3 Rig Slots, 400 Calibration Fittings: 56 PWG, 270 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 900 / 550 / 600 Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 60 / 55 / 50 Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 72.5 / 43.75 / 10 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 700 / 300s / 2.333 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 160 / 6.4 / 1,050,000 / 4.5 / 9.32s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 300 / 7 Sensor strength: 15 Gravimetric Signature radius: 70 Cargo capacity: 450 Stats when compared to flycatcher same shield/armour resist profile, 50gj more cap 10 less cpu 350,000kg less mass (-23%) 155m/s slower (-49%) 5km less targeting range 175less scan res (-37%) 50hp more shield (+6%) 10 sigres less (-12.5%) 7grid less (-11%) Not feeling very impressed. This thing is super super slow and in a meta where speed dominates I think this ship risks woefully underperforming. I don't know what kind of role this thing is trying to fill and I don't know what role it should have either. I was really looking forwards to this but now I can't understand why. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 536	Posted - 2015.05.14 04:29:53 - [206] - Quote Solj RichPopolous wrote: afkalt wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: Just tried this on SiSi. Confirmed 2728ms 10mn AB (1 overdrive ,skirm link, HG snakes. Corelum C-type AB will probably move this up to an A-type after patch to get more speed). The agility is amazing can pull off a 5km orbit at ~1700ms and only slings me out to about 9000m. Scram, Web, injector, 1 EM hard, and medium active booster. I welcome this new addition to my hangar of viable meaningful ships come patch date. Thank you CCP. Skirmish links, dead space kit, HG implants to get it moderately threatening doesn't exactly fill me with confidence for those actually using it in real fights... Check my very rare losses. I do use this stuff in real fights. I use about 5 diff ships they are always oversized prop Gist X or Core X other deadspace/faction mods to pull the fits off and make it perform the way I want. My last real loss was in 12/29/13. I lost an expensive garmur as well in november but I chalk that up to the broken wrecking rates of Geckos. (5 Wrecking shots in less than 1 minute at ranges of over 20km ya rite). Granted most people won't do this so the jackdaw will be a subpar piece of trash. I've killed a few on Sisi today while testing the fit I've described above. They were lackluster jokes going about 2km/s on MWD lulz. I guess it is fair to balance a ship around it's absolute maximum peformance because if that is your balancing point then you will never have anyone going above your design specs. It has to be said so the common rabble understand is that t2 is not the yard stick by which all ships are measured, pirate and officer is. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 117	Posted - 2015.05.14 05:17:15 - [207] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: afkalt wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: Just tried this on SiSi. Confirmed 2728ms 10mn AB (1 overdrive ,skirm link, HG snakes. Corelum C-type AB will probably move this up to an A-type after patch to get more speed). The agility is amazing can pull off a 5km orbit at ~1700ms and only slings me out to about 9000m. Scram, Web, injector, 1 EM hard, and medium active booster. I welcome this new addition to my hangar of viable meaningful ships come patch date. Thank you CCP. Skirmish links, dead space kit, HG implants to get it moderately threatening doesn't exactly fill me with confidence for those actually using it in real fights... Check my very rare losses. I do use this stuff in real fights. I use about 5 diff ships they are always oversized prop Gist X or Core X other deadspace/faction mods to pull the fits off and make it perform the way I want. My last real loss was in 12/29/13. I lost an expensive garmur as well in november but I chalk that up to the broken wrecking rates of Geckos. (5 Wrecking shots in less than 1 minute at ranges of over 20km ya rite). Granted most people won't do this so the jackdaw will be a subpar piece of trash. I've killed a few on Sisi today while testing the fit I've described above. They were lackluster jokes going about 2km/s on MWD lulz. I guess it is fair to balance a ship around it's absolute maximum peformance because if that is your balancing point then you will never have anyone going above your design specs. It has to be said so the common rabble understand is that t2 is not the yard stick by which all ships are measured, pirate and officer is. It depends what you're doing in it. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be PvP'ing with officer and deadspace modules on my Jackdaw if I could help it. In fact, for PvP, T2 is generally where you start and stop. As for PvE... you probably wouldn't choose to do it in this.
Elisk Skyforge 74	Posted - 2015.05.14 05:52:25 - [208] - Quote The speed/agility on this ship is so bad, none of destroyer class ships are this slow. Or maybe it is intended for it to be the least used of the 4 T3 destroyers?
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 118	Posted - 2015.05.14 06:14:23 - [209] - Quote Elisk Skyforge wrote: The speed/agility on this ship is so bad, none of destroyer class ships are this slow. Or maybe it is intended for it to be the least used of the 4 T3 destroyers? Speed is god awful, but the agility is going to be very nice when in propulsion mode. As for the last bit... it's Caldari stuff, CCP save the extra step and gave it to us pre-nerfed.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1179	Posted - 2015.05.14 06:56:14 - [210] - Quote Traejun DiSanctis wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: afkalt wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: Just tried this on SiSi. Confirmed 2728ms 10mn AB (1 overdrive ,skirm link, HG snakes. Corelum C-type AB will probably move this up to an A-type after patch to get more speed). The agility is amazing can pull off a 5km orbit at ~1700ms and only slings me out to about 9000m. Scram, Web, injector, 1 EM hard, and medium active booster. I welcome this new addition to my hangar of viable meaningful ships come patch date. Thank you CCP. Skirmish links, dead space kit, HG implants to get it moderately threatening doesn't exactly fill me with confidence for those actually using it in real fights... Check my very rare losses. I do use this stuff in real fights. I use about 5 diff ships they are always oversized prop Gist X or Core X other deadspace/faction mods to pull the fits off and make it perform the way I want. My last real loss was in 12/29/13. I lost an expensive garmur as well in november but I chalk that up to the broken wrecking rates of Geckos. (5 Wrecking shots in less than 1 minute at ranges of over 20km ya rite). Granted most people won't do this so the jackdaw will be a subpar piece of trash. I've killed a few on Sisi today while testing the fit I've described above. They were lackluster jokes going about 2km/s on MWD lulz. I guess it is fair to balance a ship around it's absolute maximum peformance because if that is your balancing point then you will never have anyone going above your design specs. It has to be said so the common rabble understand is that t2 is not the yard stick by which all ships are measured, pirate and officer is. It depends what you're doing in it. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be PvP'ing with officer and deadspace modules on my Jackdaw if I could help it. In fact, for PvP, T2 is generally where you start and stop. As for PvE... you probably wouldn't choose to do it in this. Exactly. The fit in these quotes are the purview of eft warriors and high sec 'PvPers'. Meanwhile, in the real world the ship is meh.

Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1031	Posted - 2015.05.14 11:36:51 - [211] - Quote Anything with snakes and links is amazing, even my Draek.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.14 13:09:37 - [212] - Quote afkalt wrote: Exactly. The fit in these quotes are the purview of eft warriors and high sec 'PvPers'. Meanwhile, in the real world the ship is meh. The ship isn't amazing yeah. On sisi I saw one kill a confessor but with sisi it's practically impossible to determine who has links or not. ...... Eh. I just can't get hyped any more. Probably cancel my sub at this rate. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1182	Posted - 2015.05.14 13:43:21 - [213] - Quote Well, it depends on the larger meta plans from CCP. If a few other outliers are battered back into line, it will be just fine. Likewise if missiles are being reviewed here, it may make more sense. But we lack sufficient information as to the future so can only base on the known data today.
Torei Dutalis IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic 24	Posted - 2015.05.14 13:58:58 - [214] - Quote As it stands, this will be the only t3 destroyer to not receive a 66% speed boost (assuming the hecate retains its slated bonuses). That alone is troubling to me. However, that fact coupled with the incredibly prenerfed, and I do not use that term lightly, base speed (and to a lesser degree it has prenerfed agility) this ship is really a joke in speed mode. With a MWD in speed mode this ship does align with incredible ease, no doubt about it, no complaints. However, the agility is largely irrelevant due to this ship being slower than anything it will ever engage _period_dot_com_. Tooling around with the ship on sisi I think the fitting is more than ample for what I would consider "reasonable" fittings. The dps does tend to be a bit low in general however, which is somewhat annoying as this ship is relegated to brawling, where dps is much more important. Seeing a larger damage bonus on the base hull (5% damage _and_ rate of fire). Double BCU with rage rockets is barely topping 320 dps. Your garden variety arty svipul does slightly less (about 30) dps, and a beam confessor dwarfs this ship's dps with around 430 dps with multifrequency _cold_. To top it off, both of those ships would outrange a rage fitted jackdaw, and would be significantly faster regardless of the prop mod they chose to fit. Just because the svipul is still the most popular ship in the game, and still does too much dps doesn't mean the jackdaw should be punished for it. The fitting on the jackdaw is fine. It needs more speed _or_ more damage but not both. Six mid slots is still silly. Is this ship supposed to always fit 2 webs to make up for its low speed?
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.14 14:29:11 - [215] - Quote It could probably get a point range bonus instead or something. That would help it. 12km scram + faction web or 28km t2 longpoint. It could then possibly scram kite some things. The thing about EVE is an agility bonus just isn't that useful unless you're trying to run away. It helps with oversize prop mods but this ship came predesigned as not being able to really benefit from those. I'd rather fly my flycatcher tbh at least that thing hauls ass when it has to. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 581	Posted - 2015.05.14 14:47:54 - [216] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Shield Hitpoints 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Role Bonus: 50% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile damage 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements Additional bonuses are available when one of three Tactical Destroyer Modes are active. Modes may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is active Propulsion Mode: 33.3% bonus to max velocity while Propulsion Mode is active 66.6% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active Sharpshooter Mode: 66.6% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile velocity while Sharpshooter Mode is active 100% bonus to sensor strength, scan resolution and targeting range while Sharpshooter Mode is active Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers 3 Rig Slots, 400 Calibration Fittings: 56 PWG, 270 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 900 / 550 / 600 Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 60 / 55 / 50 Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 72.5 / 43.75 / 10 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 700 / 300s / 2.333 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 160 / 6.4 / 1,050,000 / 4.5 / 9.32s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 300 / 7 Sensor strength: 15 Gravimetric Signature radius: 70 Cargo capacity: 450 Stats when compared to flycatcher same shield/armour resist profile, 50gj more cap 10 less cpu 350,000kg less mass (-23%) 155m/s slower (-49%) 5km less targeting range 175less scan res (-37%) 50hp more shield (+6%) 10 sigres less (-12.5%) 7grid less (-11%) Not feeling very impressed. This thing is super super slow and in a meta where speed dominates I think this ship risks woefully underperforming. I don't know what kind of role this thing is trying to fill and I don't know what role it should have either. I was really looking forwards to this but now I can't understand why. http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/8742/1/Shiptech_1920.jpg Oh look! Just pretend that Tech 3 cruisers don't exist and everything will be fine, and nevermind dem three buttan Modes. Mark my words, the Propulsion mode bonuses on the Confessor and Svipul will be reviewed before long. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1790	Posted - 2015.05.14 14:55:32 - [217] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: It could probably get a point range bonus instead or something. That would help it. 12km scram + faction web or 28km t2 longpoint. It could then possibly scram kite some things. The thing about EVE is an agility bonus just isn't that useful unless you're trying to run away. It helps with oversize prop mods but this ship came predesigned as not being able to really benefit from those. I'd rather fly my flycatcher tbh at least that thing hauls ass when it has to. I think the problem is everybody was and is still hoping for a solo boat and CCP didn't deliver that. The 2 previous T3D set the tone for what these were all going to be and the jackdaw then is out of the mold. Everybody was expecting a confessor/svipul hibrid spewing missiles instead of laser/projectiles. The tank was obvioulsy aimed toward shield and more than likely a resist bonus and not active reps. It's racially fitting (buffer shield tank, missiles as main weapon) but feels at an odd place within it's ship class.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 248	Posted - 2015.05.14 15:20:08 - [218] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher rate of fire 5% bonus to Shield Hitpoints 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Role Bonus: 50% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile damage 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements Additional bonuses are available when one of three Tactical Destroyer Modes are active. Modes may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is active Propulsion Mode: 33.3% bonus to max velocity while Propulsion Mode is active 66.6% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active Sharpshooter Mode: 66.6% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile velocity while Sharpshooter Mode is active 100% bonus to sensor strength, scan resolution and targeting range while Sharpshooter Mode is active Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers 3 Rig Slots, 400 Calibration Fittings: 56 PWG, 270 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 900 / 550 / 600 Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 60 / 55 / 50 Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 72.5 / 43.75 / 10 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 700 / 300s / 2.333 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 160 / 6.4 / 1,050,000 / 4.5 / 9.32s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 300 / 7 Sensor strength: 15 Gravimetric Signature radius: 70 Cargo capacity: 450 Stats when compared to flycatcher same shield/armour resist profile, 50gj more cap 10 less cpu 350,000kg less mass (-23%) 155m/s slower (-49%) 5km less targeting range 175less scan res (-37%) 50hp more shield (+6%) 10 sigres less (-12.5%) 7grid less (-11%) Not feeling very impressed. This thing is super super slow and in a meta where speed dominates I think this ship risks woefully underperforming. I don't know what kind of role this thing is trying to fill and I don't know what role it should have either. I was really looking forwards to this but now I can't understand why. sure if you want to ignore the actual shield hp role bonus this ship has thats always on and boosts all extenders by 50 percent and the fact it fits fewer launchers so comes out beating the flycatcher on powergrid.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1159	Posted - 2015.05.14 15:27:09 - [219] - Quote and all the extra mids it has ofc.. Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 585	Posted - 2015.05.14 15:39:02 - [220] - Quote Seeing as this is the default T3D thread now, I propose the following: Reduce the velocity bonus in Propulsion mode on both the Svipul and the Confessor from, Propulsion Mode: 66.6% bonus to maximum velocity while Propulsion Mode is active to Propulsion Mode: 50% bonus to maximum velocity while Propulsion Mode is active And then adjust the Inertia one on the Jackdaw to reflect it, Propulsion Mode: 33.3% bonus to max velocity while Propulsion Mode is active 66.6% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active to Propulsion Mode: 33.3% bonus to max velocity while Propulsion Mode is active 50% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active On balance, Jackdaw will remain slower by some 100 m/s against the Confessor and around 450 m/s slower than the Svipul with an MWD, all the while reducing cancer. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]

Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1032	Posted - 2015.05.14 15:41:53 - [221] - Quote I really don't see the jackdaw being as bad as people make it out to be. Most certainly it is underwhelming compared to the other T3Ds, but a small gang of them have terrifying application to that range and volley. One decent cookie cutter I ran across had mwd, 2 MSEs, an EM ward, point and web, with a BCS+nano in the lows and LMLs and combat probes in the highs. Two ACRs and a missile speed rig. Three of them easily push your collective volley towards 5k. Then in Propmode, you burn closer to or further from something you want to point. Then you switch to defensive mode and soak up roughly 15k ehp before you go into propmode again, pull range and switch over to sharpshooter for 55km fury and 80km CN range, while one of your mates takes over tackle and you wait for your shields to come up again. In a mixed gang, the jackdaw does a variation of the svipuls job. It too can combat probe things, but instead of clinching a target, you can zip around and screen heavier ships while applying dps to primaries half across the grid. In short: Jackdaw is underwhelming compared to T3Ds, but feels superfluffy and caldari and actually is a decent ship in a small gang.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1183	Posted - 2015.05.14 16:03:48 - [222] - Quote Tbh given the cost, I'd be more inclined to just run a bunch of caracals to achieve the same thing, but without needing to retreat to address shields. I mean, they're ok and all but just lack a certain....pizzazz* and niche. That's where I really struggle - finding a niche to put them in. There are a couple, but they are so narrow I'm left wondering why. Note this doesn't need to be a "power" thing, just some more style. For example I'd have liked to see them test out making them more alpha based, perhaps with negatives to RoF to compensate. You know, something different*,
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1159	Posted - 2015.05.14 16:53:09 - [223] - Quote afkalt wrote: Tbh given the cost, I'd be more inclined to just run a bunch of caracals to achieve the same thing, but without needing to retreat to address shields. I mean, they're ok and all but just lack a certain....pizzazz* and niche. That's where I really struggle - finding a niche to put them in. There are a couple, but they are so narrow I'm left wondering why. Note this doesn't need to be a "power" thing, just some more style. For example I'd have liked to see them test out making them more alpha based, perhaps with negatives to RoF to compensate. You know, something different*, the whole point of T3 is too avoid a specific niche entirely .. instead offers versatility and adaptability.. atm though all T3's are just plain better than the current niche ships (T2 ships) Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 669	Posted - 2015.05.14 17:14:12 - [224] - Quote The last two days I was trying to figure this boat out but for the live of me it wasn't successful. The bullet points have been covered by now and only little comes to mind. The shield hp bonus feels out of place on that ship and unvoluntarly forces the ship into a pre-fit kind of fitting and flying the ship in a pre-set fit in the mind of the creator. Yeah, we get it you don't like missiles so why not make the blueprint have the buffer fit preassembled when the ship comes out of the bakery so the more than obvious weaknesses get masked in a shiney package? The Confessor and that minmatar thing make fun of the Jackdaw or leave whenever they think they don't like to be there anymore, every time. If you were to engage something like three Tristans in lowsec they will dismantle the Jackdaw so quickly that the unlucky pilot doesn't even know what's happening all the while the Confessor and that minmatar monstrocity would have made jokes about 'only three of them'. It was already mentioned that one medslot could move in the lows and I would suggest baking the inertia bonus into the hull and increase the base speed of the Jackdaw by 33% in propulsion mode instead. And while we are talking about missiles, we should talk rockets a bit. Rockets have been a joke since the day I joined and maybe they deserve to be made into a proper small missiles instead for once. So a renaming would go a long way in public relations in favor of the rockets and when they have a cool name like 'small or light attack missile' and they would definately need an increase of base damage by 25%. No hold your breath for a minute and let this sink in. On the first look 25% sounds like a ton and I already hear the outcry of OP on comms later today already. In any case an example should put your minds at ease and 25% of 100 isn't that much all of a sudden anymore. (And in case of the Jackdaw with one tech2 ballistic control one rocket volley would go from 460hp to 575hp damage rage rocket damage flying 8434 meters into the void hitting or not a shield or armor layer with 50% or less % of that 575hp every 1.8 seconds or 2 server ticks.) Keep in mind that missiles do not really work in terms of dps and not all dps that your fitting screen shows is the same as the other dps and if people would finally realize and memorize it until the end of time some of our lifes would be much easier. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
d0cTeR9 Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 163	Posted - 2015.05.14 17:28:22 - [225] - Quote Fun ship, but compared to the other two that are out... it's a joke.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1159	Posted - 2015.05.14 17:58:58 - [226] - Quote the HP bonus is out of place on a T3 ship its supposed to offer versatility and adaptability, thus the modes if you want the extra tank , mobility etc.. having hp baked in violates this theme, tracking or even just run with 1 bonus is the logical choice here. Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 586	Posted - 2015.05.14 18:01:53 - [227] - Quote Harvey James wrote: the HP bonus is out of place on a T3 ship its supposed to offer versatility and adaptability, thus the modes if you want the extra tank , mobility etc.. having hp baked in violates this theme, tracking or even just run with 1 bonus is the logical choice here. You mean like the Svipul? * * * The Sig radius reduction in Defensive mode is identical to the Confessor, and could be replaced with Increased shield regeneration rate if it is balanced through high base hull shield recharge time, or Decreased Shield Booster activation cost is also an option. Gÿæ Not a gimmick Gÿæ Not OP Gÿæ Adds variety Talk to us CCP. (Gò»-¦Gûí-¦n+ëGò» // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Solarus Explorer The Church of Awesome Heiian Conglomerate 5	Posted - 2015.05.14 18:19:04 - [228] - Quote I think the devs slightly underestimate the importance of speed in the current meta. There is a reason the garmur and orthrus are totally OP..... the ability to completely dictate range via speed and manouverability..... alongwith the ability to point and apply dps at that range. The confessor and svipul will be superior boats to this ship, they have more speed and manouverability as well as significantly higher dps (though they have a lesser tank). Frankly, tank is irrelevant if u cant catch anything and everything else in the game can catch you when it wants to, cause it will be prepared when it does...... and then it will kill you irrespective of your tank.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 587	Posted - 2015.05.14 18:38:35 - [229] - Quote Therefore, we need less cancer, not more cancer. Reduce the 66.6% Velocity bonus in Prop mode for the Confessor and Svipul to 50%, and Jackdaw's Inertial modifier bonus from 66.6% to 50% = They become only 110-450 m/s faster than the Jackdaw, instead of 350-800 m/s right now. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Solarus Explorer The Church of Awesome Heiian Conglomerate 5	Posted - 2015.05.14 18:40:53 - [230] - Quote Honestly, IMO the cancer reduction should start from bringing over-speeding cruisers back in line, and reigning in the garmur and orthrus. They are already faster than the current t3ds. Just my 2 cents.....

Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 248	Posted - 2015.05.14 18:47:52 - [231] - Quote Solarus Explorer wrote: Honestly, IMO the cancer reduction should start from bringing over-speeding cruisers back in line, and reigning in the garmur and orthrus. They are already faster than the current t3ds. Just my 2 cents..... In the same patch they then kill offgrid boosting forever. Assuming brain in a box is working.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 592	Posted - 2015.05.14 20:17:31 - [232] - Quote Solarus Explorer wrote: Honestly, IMO the cancer reduction should start from bringing over-speeding cruisers back in line, and reigning in the garmur and orthrus. They are already faster than the current t3ds. Just my 2 cents..... On average, they are equal and slightly slower than T3Ds in Propulsion mode, with few notable exceptions like the Nomen, Orthus and most Matari boats. But I see your point. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5740082#post5740082 HopeGäó // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 669	Posted - 2015.05.14 22:59:15 - [233] - Quote CCP Larrikin wrote: Dual prop (or even triple prop fits) can be incredibly powerful, combining speed & signature tanking. And yes, over-fitting is another interesting choice. Getting back a chunk of the speed but loosing agility. A 'choice' that the Jackdaw cannot make anymore by 'design'. Maybe it escapes the drawing board but a regular web will pin down the Jackdaw so hard the buffer tank only buys you a few more seconds to watch your boat go boom. 728m/s with a tech2 1mn afterburner doesn't feel 'propelled' at all and with a mwd the signature of that boat is a slower Naga. So either make it immune to stasis webs or give them a Sansha like small ab speed bonus. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.15 04:57:01 - [234] - Quote elitatwo wrote: CCP Larrikin wrote: Dual prop (or even triple prop fits) can be incredibly powerful, combining speed & signature tanking. And yes, over-fitting is another interesting choice. Getting back a chunk of the speed but loosing agility. A 'choice' that the Jackdaw cannot make anymore by 'design'. Maybe it escapes the drawing board but a regular web will pin down the Jackdaw so hard the buffer tank only buys you a few more seconds to watch your boat go boom. 728m/s with a tech2 1mn afterburner doesn't feel 'propelled' at all and with a mwd the signature of that boat is a slower Naga. So either make it immune to stasis webs or give them a Sansha like small ab speed bonus. When someone figures out what the jackdaw is supposed to do let me know. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 153	Posted - 2015.05.15 06:06:44 - [235] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: When someone figures out what the jackdaw is supposed to do let me know. It's a stealth buff for heavy missiles, finally there's something they can shoot at besides npc's.
Duchess Starbuckington Starbuckington Manor 338	Posted - 2015.05.15 08:40:33 - [236] - Quote Ahh this is some funny stuff. First CCP learn absolutely no lessons from the broken mess that is T3 cruisers, implement a second arbitrarily overpowered line of ships - but make an exception on the OPness for the Caldari one because of their standard "**** Caldari" doctrine. This is of course assuming the Gallente one is going to follow the trend of the first two and will be a hilariously overpowered pwnmobile that obsoletes T1. If not, well at least they're picking on two races and not just their usual buttmonkey.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.15 08:45:47 - [237] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: When someone figures out what the jackdaw is supposed to do let me know. It's a stealth buff for heavy missiles, finally there's something they can shoot at besides npc's. I was being sincere. Fwiw a jackdaw with active reps and a strong blue doesn't do toooooo bad. Even if the blue fires and you get a hp nerf it's still only 5% less than base stats which isnt too shabby when you take in to account the resist bonus. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Heinrich Rotwang Zentralrat deutscher Fliesentischbesitzer e.V. 65	Posted - 2015.05.15 08:57:32 - [238] - Quote If this ship has got a winning fit, it is well hidden.
Arla Sarain 446	Posted - 2015.05.15 09:50:15 - [239] - Quote ITs pretty much exclusively either a rocket fit with dual webs for rage rockets, which WILL apply full damage, and then racks of resist amps and an invuln field. Or a LML fit with TPs, TDs and damps. The sig bonus is useless. The ship has a 70m sig radius.
Marian Devers Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities 66	Posted - 2015.05.15 10:42:22 - [240] - Quote You can always bet on a caldari thread to have the wittiest comments! =)

Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1161	Posted - 2015.05.15 11:46:56 - [241] - Quote the sig is too high .. dessies sig needs too be lower than logi cruisers sig .. that and logi sig rad should be higher too. Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Janeway84 Def Squadron Pride Before Fall 165	Posted - 2015.05.15 11:51:15 - [242] - Quote Meh I can imagine using this as a fast attack dessy like i have a seboed corax for jumping on unsuspecting hacking frigates or sloppy cov op frigates Does it get any decent scan res with a t2 sebo and in the right mode? Otherwise it could perhaps work as a more exciting C1 wh pve boat than cerberus / caracal with its low hp tank
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 602	Posted - 2015.05.15 11:59:58 - [243] - Quote Scan res is 300 base * 1.25 Skill = 375 and 750 in Sharpshooter mode. Svipul has 375 base, with 940 in SS. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1038	Posted - 2015.05.15 16:34:57 - [244] - Quote With proper skills, getting about those sigs: 2MSE - mwd - LML: 83m sig 2MASB - dp - rockets: 74m sig An MSE-svipul sits at 64m. An active tanked svipul sits at around 55m. Since the svipul is about twice as fast out of propulsion, and ~50% faster in propulsion mode, this is quite some huge discrepancy. To add to that, the jackdaw is not really moving or sigtanking anything in defensive mode, being just a tad faster than a cane. So propmode is several times tankier compared to defensive when AB'ing. The big hit to the nuts here: Sigtanking is made worse by making it slow. But since that's not enough yet, better give it a huge sig, too. The ship is still capable to do things, but when flying the jackdaw it really raises the question why you put up with this and not take a svipul instead.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 27	Posted - 2015.05.15 17:34:28 - [245] - Quote Harvey James wrote: the HP bonus is out of place on a T3 ship its supposed to offer versatility and adaptability, thus the modes if you want the extra tank , mobility etc.. having hp baked in violates this theme, tracking or even just run with 1 bonus is the logical choice here. No it is baked in so they can justify low power grid. People might cry "I can't fit enough shield extenders" and they would say "yeah but we made each SE more effective so you don't need as many." Also we don't want cookie cutter bonuses. Having something different is nice for a change.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 27	Posted - 2015.05.15 17:38:43 - [246] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: I really don't see the jackdaw being as bad as people make it out to be. Most certainly it is underwhelming compared to the other T3Ds, but a small gang of them have terrifying application to that range and volley. Then in Propmode, you burn closer to or further from something you want to point. ... pull range and switch over to sharpshooter ..., while one of your mates takes over tackle ... instead of clinching a target, you can zip around and screen heavier ships while applying dps to primaries half across the grid. What are the targets in this scenario, Battle Cruiser and up? Cause almost anything else can prevent you zipping in or out on them.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 249	Posted - 2015.05.15 18:16:15 - [247] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: With proper skills, getting about those sigs: 2MSE - mwd - LML: 83m sig 2MASB - dp - rockets: 74m sig An MSE-svipul sits at 64m. An active tanked svipul sits at around 55m. Since the svipul is about twice as fast out of propulsion, and ~50% faster in propulsion mode, this is quite some huge discrepancy. To add to that, the jackdaw is not really moving or sigtanking anything in defensive mode, being just a tad faster than a cane. So propmode is several times tankier compared to defensive when AB'ing. The big hit to the nuts here: Sigtanking is made worse by making it slow. But since that's not enough yet, better give it a huge sig, too. The ship is still capable to do things, but when flying the jackdaw it really raises the question why you put up with this and not take a svipul instead. The only big hit to the nuts is the one svipul deserves. It ought to be gutted to the jackdaw level and then buffed a little if it stops seeing any usage after that. Theres been too many ships released in a cancerous state in the past year.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 27	Posted - 2015.05.15 18:24:35 - [248] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: With proper skills, getting about those sigs: 2MSE - mwd - LML: 83m sig 2MASB - dp - rockets: 74m sig An MSE-svipul sits at 64m. An active tanked svipul sits at around 55m. Since the svipul is about twice as fast out of propulsion, and ~50% faster in propulsion mode, this is quite some huge discrepancy. To add to that, the jackdaw is not really moving or sigtanking anything in defensive mode, being just a tad faster than a cane. So propmode is several times tankier compared to defensive when AB'ing. The big hit to the nuts here: Sigtanking is made worse by making it slow. But since that's not enough yet, better give it a huge sig, too. The ship is still capable to do things, but when flying the jackdaw it really raises the question why you put up with this and not take a svipul instead. I get the feeling that they went with the base stats to be really lack luster so that no tactical mode would be overpowered. Unfortunately this make performance while not in those modes kinda bad. I mean to use Sharpshooter or Defense, you are going to be not just be slow but lack agility too. Align time while not in prop mode is over 9 seconds, 10 ticks. It is like they made it worse than it should be so that the mode buff was not too much. I would rather have a smaller agility buff and better base agility while having the same max agility while in prop mode. My feeling on the base stats- Defense: average, Propulsion: below average, Offense: average. And then the modes take it to: Defense: above average, Propulsion: average, Offense: above average Which makes it feel underwhelming, since you are never really good at any one thing, can only be good at 1 thing at a time, and in prop mode you are just average at everything. I would like to see 2x average 1x above average as the base. So that in any mode you are good at that role and in one mode very good while average in the other areas. If this is supposed to be a slow tanky ship then: Offense should remain about the same: Base>Average, Mode>Above Average. Deffense should be buffed: Base>Above Average, Mode>Excellent Propulsion buffed: Base>Average, Mode>Above Average I think what holds overall defense back is the signature coupled with the need for a MWD for any reasonable speed. I think if the sig was dropped to 60, base speed increased to 190, and better base inertia that could make up a lot of the shortcomings without making it OP.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 249	Posted - 2015.05.15 18:38:16 - [249] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: With proper skills, getting about those sigs: 2MSE - mwd - LML: 83m sig 2MASB - dp - rockets: 74m sig An MSE-svipul sits at 64m. An active tanked svipul sits at around 55m. Since the svipul is about twice as fast out of propulsion, and ~50% faster in propulsion mode, this is quite some huge discrepancy. To add to that, the jackdaw is not really moving or sigtanking anything in defensive mode, being just a tad faster than a cane. So propmode is several times tankier compared to defensive when AB'ing. The big hit to the nuts here: Sigtanking is made worse by making it slow. But since that's not enough yet, better give it a huge sig, too. The ship is still capable to do things, but when flying the jackdaw it really raises the question why you put up with this and not take a svipul instead. I get the feeling that they went with the base stats to be really lack luster so that no tactical mode would be overpowered. Unfortunately this make performance while not in those modes kinda bad. I mean to use Sharpshooter or Defense, you are going to be not just be slow but lack agility too. Align time while not in prop mode is over 9 seconds, 10 ticks. It is like they made it worse than it should be so that the mode buff was not too much. I would rather have a smaller agility buff and better base agility while having the same max agility while in prop mode. My feeling on the base stats- Defense: average, Propulsion: below average, Offense: average. And then the modes take it to: Defense: above average, Propulsion: average, Offense: above average Which makes it feel underwhelming, since you are never really good at any one thing, can only be good at 1 thing at a time, and in prop mode you are just average at everything. I would like to see 2x average 1x above average as the base. So that in any mode you are good at that role and in one mode very good while average in the other areas. If this is supposed to be a slow tanky ship then: Offense should remain about the same: Base>Average, Mode>Above Average. Deffense should be buffed: Base>Above Average, Mode>Excellent Propulsion buffed: Base>Average, Mode>Above Average I think what holds overall defense back is the signature coupled with the need for a MWD for any reasonable speed. I think if the sig was dropped to 60, base speed increased to 190, and better base inertia that could make up a lot of the shortcomings without making it OP. It has above average defense against its own weight class and smaller, and thats before you take defensive mode into account. I cant see why people expect a hull to be amazing at fighting frigates dessies and cruisers all at the same time.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 27	Posted - 2015.05.15 21:30:15 - [250] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Terra Chrall wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: With proper skills, getting about those sigs: 2MSE - mwd - LML: 83m sig 2MASB - dp - rockets: 74m sig An MSE-svipul sits at 64m. An active tanked svipul sits at around 55m. Since the svipul is about twice as fast out of propulsion, and ~50% faster in propulsion mode, this is quite some huge discrepancy. To add to that, the jackdaw is not really moving or sigtanking anything in defensive mode, being just a tad faster than a cane. So propmode is several times tankier compared to defensive when AB'ing. The big hit to the nuts here: Sigtanking is made worse by making it slow. But since that's not enough yet, better give it a huge sig, too. The ship is still capable to do things, but when flying the jackdaw it really raises the question why you put up with this and not take a svipul instead. I get the feeling that they went with the base stats to be really lack luster so that no tactical mode would be overpowered. Unfortunately this make performance while not in those modes kinda bad. I mean to use Sharpshooter or Defense, you are going to be not just be slow but lack agility too. Align time while not in prop mode is over 9 seconds, 10 ticks. It is like they made it worse than it should be so that the mode buff was not too much. I would rather have a smaller agility buff and better base agility while having the same max agility while in prop mode. My feeling on the base stats- Defense: average, Propulsion: below average, Offense: average. And then the modes take it to: Defense: above average, Propulsion: average, Offense: above average Which makes it feel underwhelming, since you are never really good at any one thing, can only be good at 1 thing at a time, and in prop mode you are just average at everything. I would like to see 2x average 1x above average as the base. So that in any mode you are good at that role and in one mode very good while average in the other areas. If this is supposed to be a slow tanky ship then: Offense should remain about the same: Base>Average, Mode>Above Average. Deffense should be buffed: Base>Above Average, Mode>Excellent Propulsion buffed: Base>Average, Mode>Above Average I think what holds overall defense back is the signature coupled with the need for a MWD for any reasonable speed. I think if the sig was dropped to 60, base speed increased to 190, and better base inertia that could make up a lot of the shortcomings without making it OP. It has above average defense against its own weight class and smaller, and thats before you take defensive mode into account. I cant see why people expect a hull to be amazing at fighting frigates dessies and cruisers all at the same time. The shield tank is above average, but the signature and lack of speed is bellow average. Which makes its overall defense just average in my view. My complaint is, that on paper, it does not look "amazing at fighting frigates dessies and cruisers all at the same time." It looks like a ship that will require a lot of skill to compete against T2 frigates and cruisers. It will probably be very strong against T1 cruiser and down. Is it so slow that frigates will dictate range and kiting frigates will be a real threat. The speed, DPS, and small signatures of the other T3D, and AF should allow them to brawl against the Jackdaw effectively. Scram range kiting cruisers are a real threat as the Jack will be hard pressed to escape a web+sram. And I don't see the Jackdaw being any better than a T2 HAC and will need to constantly shift modes to have a chance against a competent pilot in a HAC. So I don't want it to be amazing. I want it to have a chance at being good. Missile ships rely on rigs to change the application of their missile. So a Jackdaw will have to choose if it wants damage, application, range, tank, or fitting rigs. The velocity bonus of sharpshooter mode only lets the missile catch the target, it does not help apply damage. So most frigates with a prop mods are taking a significant reduction in damage before resists. The fitting of the Jackdaw will determine what it is really good at. I want it to be at least average in the areas that it is not really good at. It is supposed to be a versatile T3 ship that uses its modes to switch what it is good at. And for it to achieve that goal, that means not starting with such low base numbers that it is actually bad at something while not in a that mode. The speed, agility, scan res are all worse than a T1 Destroyer. The signature is at the high end but not the worst. I'd like to see stats that are a little closer to T1 levels and bonuses in tactical mode that make them strong in that mode not just a little better. Of the stats the shield tank with T3 resists is the best thing it has. Now bring it up slightly in some other areas to make that mean something and we have a worthwhile T3D. You can fit the Jack to be amazing at range in sharpshooter mode or to have amazing tank in or out of defense mode, but it will never have amazing dps or speed and to make it amazing at any thing you make it lacking in most other areas. You won't be able to fit it to be amazing at multiple jobs at the same time. But it should be able to be amazing at something in one of the modes without making so sub par in the others.

Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 160	Posted - 2015.05.16 00:08:17 - [251] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: It has above average defense against its own weight class and smaller, and thats before you take defensive mode into account. I cant see why people expect a hull to be amazing at fighting frigates dessies and cruisers all at the same time. Maybe because a benchmark has already been set by the other two and this one is hardcoded by the designer to be weaker in every way? The jackdaw will have to use fitting slots just to achieve the base stats of the others, if you want the same lock speed you need to fit an extra sebo, if you want range control you need to fit 1 or 2 extra webs, if you want the same dps you need to fit an extra bcu, you need to fit em hardeners because of the em hole as well. Whereas the other two start with all this goodness designed into the hull.
Squid Cake Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 0	Posted - 2015.05.16 00:14:34 - [252] - Quote Solj RichPopolous wrote: Altrue wrote: The signature radius worries me, especially given that it won't be able to fit an oversized AB given both the low base speed and incredibly low PWG. So it will almost certainly be an MWD, which is rather sad given that an agility bonus really has an impact on 10mn ABs. I will find a way to 10MN AB it or I won't buy the ship, simple as that. I've been waiting awhile for this ship hoping I could finally add something to my very small collection of viable ships in the game, guess its not going to happen . looks at your KB, last 3 losses Garmur, Tengu Checks recent, has flown nothing but Gila and Svipul Now understand what it is you want Sorry, looks you aren't getting another lowrisk OP missile boat. Guess you'll just have to make do with the other "viable" ships you currently use. The tantrums in this thread are ridiculous.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1042	Posted - 2015.05.16 02:56:45 - [253] - Quote The fitting I've been trying most had (linked) about 6k shield hp with 75% resists in defensive mode and a 40m sig I believe. So with some help, you can get those useful numbers. It had a nano and no dcu. Been running with empty head and my TQ-links with skirmish mindlink. In propmode, you make about 290m/s boatin and 2.5km/s with mwd, with the agility of a crow and a cap stable point. A bit awkward is the stacking of velocity modifiers, defensive mode still makes ~1.9k but the agility takes a massive hit, it's however useful if you got to pilot manually anyways and benefit from resists and sig while working around your turn rate, retaining most of the raw speed. If you do something like rockets, pith c-type med and c-type 10mn AB, you get about 1500m/s defensive, 2km/s propmode with links. You can actually accelerate to ~1.6k in prop and then switch. With HG snkaes, speeds with no mindlink have been 2km/s defensive and 2.4km/s in prop. Again the weird stacking. Defensive+links got a 36m sig with that speed as an argument, and rockets are solid at applying damage. But that's just snakes+links+any ship. The lml fit though, it's very tanky and very much not able to break serious tanks on its own. If you take a few or more though, their range and tank starts to matter a lot more.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 612	Posted - 2015.05.16 03:34:57 - [254] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: With proper skills, getting about those sigs: 2MSE - mwd - LML: 83m sig 2MASB - dp - rockets: 74m sig An MSE-svipul sits at 64m. An active tanked svipul sits at around 55m. Since the svipul is about twice as fast out of propulsion, and ~50% faster in propulsion mode, this is quite some huge discrepancy. To add to that, the jackdaw is not really moving or sigtanking anything in defensive mode, being just a tad faster than a cane. So propmode is several times tankier compared to defensive when AB'ing. The big hit to the nuts here: Sigtanking is made worse by making it slow. But since that's not enough yet, better give it a huge sig, too. The ship is still capable to do things, but when flying the jackdaw it really raises the question why you put up with this and not take a svipul instead. I get the feeling that they went with the base stats to be really lack luster so that no tactical mode would be overpowered. That is exactly the case - Confessor employs all 3 modes to even function properly. Quote: Unfortunately this make performance while not in those modes kinda bad. That's the whole point of T3 generalisation. Svipul in non-stop Propulsion mode notwithstanding. The only thing that needs to happen now is: Reduce both the Confessor's and Svipul's Prop mode velocity bonus from 66.6% to 50%. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Kaldi Tsukaya Deveron Shipyards and Technology 84	Posted - 2015.05.16 04:39:43 - [255] - Quote Only 2 lowslots? Where am I supposed to put the armor for the EWAR fitting... On a more serious note, I like the ship and would like it more with a tad bit more PG. Less reliance on the rigs for anything non-missile related. I can live with slow-pokey if this thing hits hard. Otherwise I ain't gonna live long in it. Now if the Hecate gets released without these kind of tight fitting restrictions...
Saerin Korvalu Scope Works 21	Posted - 2015.05.16 09:50:57 - [256] - Quote When T3 destroyers were announced, it was said that they'd be a different take on Tech 3 versatility and unpredictability, hence the 'Tactical Destroyer' class. Now we're seeing these 'Tactical' destroyers being placed into specific niches rather than what they were originally intended for. I understand that the Jackdaw is supposed to be the slowest T3 destroyer, but having the native speed on the level of battlecruisers? This eliminates the Jackdaw's viability as a kiting ship, and nudges the ship towards brawling. As I've stated before, these ships are meant to be versatile and unpredictable. The Confessor and Svipul have the ability to kite (and based on rough concept of stats given by CCP, the Hecate) unlike the Jackdaw. You'd need to go far out of your way to make this a viable kiting vessel to the point that switching from propulsion mode would be a death sentence. Even when you make the ship a brawling vessel, it still doesn't hold a candle to the abilities of the Confessor and Svipul. In short: Why fly the Jackdaw when the other T3 destroyers outclass it in almost every way?
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1076	Posted - 2015.05.16 10:20:38 - [257] - Quote Saerin Korvalu wrote: When T3 destroyers were announced, it was said that they'd be a different take on Tech 3 versatility and unpredictability, hence the 'Tactical Destroyer' class. Now we're seeing these 'Tactical' destroyers being placed into specific niches rather than what they were originally intended for. I understand that the Jackdaw is supposed to be the slowest T3 destroyer, but having the native speed on the level of battlecruisers? This eliminates the Jackdaw's viability as a kiting ship, and nudges the ship towards brawling. As I've stated before, these ships are meant to be versatile and unpredictable. The Confessor and Svipul have the ability to kite (and based on rough concept of stats given by CCP, the Hecate) unlike the Jackdaw. You'd need to go far out of your way to make this a viable kiting vessel to the point that switching from propulsion mode would be a death sentence. Even when you make the ship a brawling vessel, it still doesn't hold a candle to the abilities of the Confessor and Svipul. In short: Why fly the Jackdaw when the other T3 destroyers outclass it in almost every way? I don't think that matters. the mode thing is supposed to be actual flexibility on the field, not the less interesting 'you can use any fit you like' type. the confessor and svipul only brawl better because CCP still have their heads up their asses regarding oversized prop mods.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.16 10:41:59 - [258] - Quote One thing I noticed on the jackdaw is a 137km lock range in sniper mode. But you'd only hit about 100km with t2 velocity rigs so I'm at a loss? Why even give ships that can't benefit from so much range that much range to start with? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1076	Posted - 2015.05.16 10:49:38 - [259] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: One thing I noticed on the jackdaw is a 137km lock range in sniper mode. But you'd only hit about 100km with t2 velocity rigs so I'm at a loss? Why even give ships that can't benefit from so much range that much range to start with? I think it's their dumb way of giving resistance to damps. they did it with recon ships. pilgrim had 12km range, but like 150km lock range.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.16 11:03:34 - [260] - Quote I see. It would be sad if dual-damp condors started killing off t3d's after all, not that someone won't get killed like that anyway. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.

Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.16 12:55:25 - [261] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: I see. It would be sad if dual-damp condors started killing off t3d's after all, not that someone won't get killed like that anyway. I've managed to find a fit that kind of works. Currently 7 kills no losses, victims so far are 3x jackdaws, 2xsvipul, dragoon, confessor. I'll post the fit here when it dies. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 254	Posted - 2015.05.16 13:16:19 - [262] - Quote Saerin Korvalu wrote: When T3 destroyers were announced, it was said that they'd be a different take on Tech 3 versatility and unpredictability, hence the 'Tactical Destroyer' class. Now we're seeing these 'Tactical' destroyers being placed into specific niches rather than what they were originally intended for. I understand that the Jackdaw is supposed to be the slowest T3 destroyer, but having the native speed on the level of battlecruisers? This eliminates the Jackdaw's viability as a kiting ship, and nudges the ship towards brawling. As I've stated before, these ships are meant to be versatile and unpredictable. The Confessor and Svipul have the ability to kite (and based on rough concept of stats given by CCP, the Hecate) unlike the Jackdaw. You'd need to go far out of your way to make this a viable kiting vessel to the point that switching from propulsion mode would be a death sentence. Even when you make the ship a brawling vessel, it still doesn't hold a candle to the abilities of the Confessor and Svipul. In short: Why fly the Jackdaw when the other T3 destroyers outclass it in almost every way? Because the others need another nerf and the jackdaw is a fine ship as it stands.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.16 13:27:34 - [263] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Saerin Korvalu wrote: When T3 destroyers were announced, it was said that they'd be a different take on Tech 3 versatility and unpredictability, hence the 'Tactical Destroyer' class. Even when you make the ship a brawling vessel, it still doesn't hold a candle to the abilities of the Confessor and Svipul. In short: Why fly the Jackdaw when the other T3 destroyers outclass it in almost every way? Because the others need another nerf and the jackdaw is a fine ship as it stands. I don't necessarily think the ship is fine but it sure isn't great. Anything with more speed will be able to beat this ship. It's not a revelation to point that out but I don't think cruisers should be able to catch and kill it. If a small ship has to sacrifice so much speed then it should be compensated accordingly and in this case I don't think it has. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 255	Posted - 2015.05.16 13:31:56 - [264] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Saerin Korvalu wrote: When T3 destroyers were announced, it was said that they'd be a different take on Tech 3 versatility and unpredictability, hence the 'Tactical Destroyer' class. Even when you make the ship a brawling vessel, it still doesn't hold a candle to the abilities of the Confessor and Svipul. In short: Why fly the Jackdaw when the other T3 destroyers outclass it in almost every way? Because the others need another nerf and the jackdaw is a fine ship as it stands. I don't necessarily think the ship is fine but it sure isn't great. Anything with more speed will be able to beat this ship. It's not a revelation to point that out but I don't think cruisers should be able to catch and kill it. If a small ship has to sacrifice so much speed then it should be compensated accordingly and in this case I don't think it has. And how will that ship break this brick tank before it dies to ten launchers?
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1076	Posted - 2015.05.16 13:57:18 - [265] - Quote pretty amazing how long destroyers have been slower than cruisers for. it makes no sense whatsoever. if it's ok for dictors to go as fast as they do, it should be ok for T1s to go that fast. I'm not saying it is though - sensible gaps between classes would be nice, without just buffing everything.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.16 14:11:27 - [266] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Saerin Korvalu wrote: When T3 destroyers were announced, it was said that they'd be a different take on Tech 3 versatility and unpredictability, hence the 'Tactical Destroyer' class. Even when you make the ship a brawling vessel, it still doesn't hold a candle to the abilities of the Confessor and Svipul. In short: Why fly the Jackdaw when the other T3 destroyers outclass it in almost every way? Because the others need another nerf and the jackdaw is a fine ship as it stands. I don't necessarily think the ship is fine but it sure isn't great. Anything with more speed will be able to beat this ship. It's not a revelation to point that out but I don't think cruisers should be able to catch and kill it. If a small ship has to sacrifice so much speed then it should be compensated accordingly and in this case I don't think it has. And how will that ship break this brick tank before it dies to ten launchers? Breaking 24k brick tank? You mean by using like your superior dps and cap pool? T1 cruisers might find themselves challenged by T3D but really no with double the dps available and a much larger cap pool I just don't see it being a problem. Gonna jump on sisi right now and see if I can't Caracal a jackdaw to death Thorax a jackdaw Rupture Omen This is what 64 mil sp in combat skills nets me, the ability to fly just about anything I like and to test for myself. I'll return with the results. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Solarus Explorer The Church of Awesome Heiian Conglomerate 6	Posted - 2015.05.16 18:00:18 - [267] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: pretty amazing how long destroyers have been slower than cruisers for. it makes no sense whatsoever. if it's ok for dictors to go as fast as they do, it should be ok for T1s to go that fast. I'm not saying it is though - sensible gaps between classes would be nice, without just buffing everything. ^ What this guy said..... dessies should be faster than cruisers. It makes no sense for a bigger ship to be able to outrun and catch smaller ships.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 28	Posted - 2015.05.16 18:45:39 - [268] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Saerin Korvalu wrote: When T3 destroyers were announced, it was said that they'd be a different take on Tech 3 versatility and unpredictability, hence the 'Tactical Destroyer' class. Even when you make the ship a brawling vessel, it still doesn't hold a candle to the abilities of the Confessor and Svipul. In short: Why fly the Jackdaw when the other T3 destroyers outclass it in almost every way? Because the others need another nerf and the jackdaw is a fine ship as it stands. I don't necessarily think the ship is fine but it sure isn't great. Anything with more speed will be able to beat this ship. It's not a revelation to point that out but I don't think cruisers should be able to catch and kill it. If a small ship has to sacrifice so much speed then it should be compensated accordingly and in this case I don't think it has. And how will that ship break this brick tank before it dies to ten launchers? Ten lights on a tank fit Jack is gonna be well less than 300DPS. That is not too scary for a cruiser with some tank fit. Many cruisers will be able to exceed that DPS and tank. Plus be faster too. Ten rockets will be a little better DPS but need close range and most MWD fit cruisesr will be able to stay out of range. And if the cruiser is a brawler with a scram it will be straight race of DPS vs tank. And many cruisers should have a fair shot at winning that race.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 257	Posted - 2015.05.16 19:29:35 - [269] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Saerin Korvalu wrote: When T3 destroyers were announced, it was said that they'd be a different take on Tech 3 versatility and unpredictability, hence the 'Tactical Destroyer' class. Even when you make the ship a brawling vessel, it still doesn't hold a candle to the abilities of the Confessor and Svipul. In short: Why fly the Jackdaw when the other T3 destroyers outclass it in almost every way? Because the others need another nerf and the jackdaw is a fine ship as it stands. I don't necessarily think the ship is fine but it sure isn't great. Anything with more speed will be able to beat this ship. It's not a revelation to point that out but I don't think cruisers should be able to catch and kill it. If a small ship has to sacrifice so much speed then it should be compensated accordingly and in this case I don't think it has. And how will that ship break this brick tank before it dies to ten launchers? Breaking 24k brick tank? You mean by using like your superior dps and cap pool? T1 cruisers might find themselves challenged by T3D but really no with double the dps available and a much larger cap pool I just don't see it being a problem. Gonna jump on sisi right now and see if I can't Caracal a jackdaw to death Thorax a jackdaw Rupture Omen This is what 64 mil sp in combat skills nets me, the ability to fly just about anything I like and to test for myself. I'll return with the results. But did you try flying the Jackdaw?
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2170	Posted - 2015.05.16 20:32:24 - [270] - Quote Solarus Explorer wrote: ^ What this guy said..... dessies should be faster than cruisers. It makes no sense for a bigger ship to be able to outrun and catch smaller ships. Just as much sense as Destroyers having more DPS than most Cruisers...... You can't have everything.

Aglais Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 527	Posted - 2015.05.17 00:50:23 - [271] - Quote Right. So. Let's talk opportunity costs, given that tactical destroyers are a ship class based around choice. What is it that you give up, like, really give up, when you choose a certain configuration? Propulsion Mode Arguably, this mode has the lowest opportunity cost (ie. you give up the least when you're in it). You are "fast" (hahahaha watch almost anything either kite you or shut off your MWD (because you can't fit a 10mn AB due to grid constraints and have the ship function otherwise)). The sole reason is that it makes you roughly as agile as the other two T3 destroyers feel outside of their propulsion mode. So you can align to a celestial and run away as soon as anything that could kill you is on grid, which let's be honest, is most things, despite your "tank". Which you have less of in propulsion mode anyways. Leaving this mode is probably suicide. Who am I kidding, flying this ship over a Svipul is suicide. Defense Mode There's less of a reason to use this configuration. Why? Well, for one thing, you now turn like a battlecruiser, and are roughly the same speed as one too. But if you've kitted out the Jackdaw with the only fittings that really make sense at first glance, your signature radius has exploded, and the reduction bonus doesn't really bring it back in line because again- the thing's slow. And takes roughly ten seconds to align, with good skills. But at least you've got those shield resistances boosted, right? Well, since you're slow, something can just pin you down and call in more of their friends to kill you. All it does is extend the time in which it takes before you see the Jackdaw explode. Sharpshooter Mode Don't use it. The opportunity cost of switching into sharpshooter mode is high enough that it might as well not even be part of the ship. You lose the "speed boost" and increased agility, giving you battlecruiser handling. You also do not have the shield resistance bonus nor the signature radius bonus of defense mode. So the Jackdaw in sharpshooter mode is slow, made of paper in comparison to things that can catch it (which is what matters), and gets a paltry missile range bonus that doesn't really matter in the long run because the benefit of having it is small compared to the cost of even considering utilizing it. So what is the problem with this ship? It honestly seems to me like "flavour" has usurped "sense" in terms of the design of this ship. In an attempt to be "Caldari" it was given all of the stereotypical (and BAD) traits of Caldari ships in past that have made them either less effective or flat out unviable for PvP, relegating them to nothing but shameful PvE ships that nobody would fly over anything else if they have a gram of sense (you know, like before ship Tiericide, when there was absolutely not point to fly a Kestrel over a Rifter even if you liked missiles; you were shafted. Train minmatar, scrublord.) It is very clear however, that in attempting to promote the Jackdaw's "flavour", stats have been assigned that conflict with the role of tactical destroyers. They're quick adaptable ships, if the Confessor and Jackdaw are anything to consider, with a variety of fitting options. The Jackdaw is railroaded by awful stats into being a shield brawler, but is given so little speed that anything it could kill can just kite it instead, or dance away from the engagement altogether if they didn't feel like flopping their turrets all over the "brick tank" this ship claims to offer. The "choice" you are offered with the Jackdaw's current stat layout and bonuses is either you are in speed mode, or you are dead. The only difference between defense and sharpshooter mode is how quickly you die. So how can this travesty be repaired? 1. Why is it so slow? Place it's speed somewhere NEAR the Confessor and Svipul. Either between them or just under the Confessor, I don't care. That speed has to go up. 1519m/s outside of propulsion mode. 2019m/s in it. (inb4 "scrub get pirate implants and boosts like a real PvPer"). Molasses. 2. A destroyer handling like a battlecruiser is unacceptable. If you want to go with "well it has less speed and agility by default than the others" then do so- but make it a reasonable amount less. This is not a reasonable amount, if you can compare it's align time to "a slow cruiser". As with speed, make it outside of propulsion mode less agile than the Svipul and Confessor. But not to the point where you can describe it as "a slow cruiser"! That is ludicrous! 3. Increase the damage bonus to rockets. In my opinion the Jackdaw's close range DPS is piddly- I'm aware of the whole "well you can't have it all" thing, but the Jackdaw has nothing in it's current iteration. Furthermore, the Jackdaw has five hardpoints, whereas the others do not. While still having six high slots. If it is going to trade off utility in that way, it must have something in place to act as a benefit, a reason why you'd choose to make that tradeoff in the first place. 4. That awful lack of power grid, and the alleged baked in shield extender. This is a Hobson's Choice. With this, you either fit a 1mn (soon to be 5mn) MWD, or you go without a prop mod, and you still travel at literally two thirds the speed of the other T3 destroyers (in propulsion mode- its half outside of it)- and in fact, are going at a pace such that a great deal of cruisers, who are more heavily armed and roughly just as tanky as you, can catch your Jackdaw. I'm completely fine with losing tank on this ship if it means it'll be able to mitigate damage through speed even just a little bit better than the others (while perhaps still having just a bit more tank by default to make up for it's lesser velocity). Right now, you don't have that. Also, getting above-average benefits from frigate prop mods isn't enough if other T3 destroyers get full benefits from attempting oversize fits. The Jackdaw's benefits are not great enough.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.17 04:06:16 - [272] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Caracal a jackdaw to death Thorax a jackdaw Rupture Omen This is what 64 mil sp in combat skills nets me, the ability to fly just about anything I like and to test for myself. I'll return with the results. Edit: Oh yes you did. Honestly, those cruisers that are faster tend to have about half the HP and maybe 30% more DPS if that. These are fights that can go both ways but it seems to me the jackdaw is good as it is, it has power without overwhelming everything one class below and one class above the way svipuls still do. Hulls are not meant to be overpowered. Edit:also noticed your jackdaw fit is still missing, indicating it did not blow up yet :D My Jackdaw did die to a gangbang but last night it managed to solo another 2 jackdaws, another svipul and an RLML cerberus. The cerb pilot had fit active tank and a 100mn AB. In trying to run away he just capped himself out and then had the gall to whine that he didn't instapop me. Honestly I don't see how a cerb could lose to a jackdaw but in this case it did. FWIW until my jackdaw blows up in a 1v1 the fit shall die with this mirror of Sisi. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 621	Posted - 2015.05.17 06:32:32 - [273] - Quote Cry me a river, Need for Speed ain't gonna happen. If anything, Confessor/Svipul velocity bonus in Prop mode will get cut from 66.6% to 50%, which still makes them faster than the Jackdaw. Then take a look at Tech 1 cruiser speeds. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.17 07:32:15 - [274] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Cry me a river, Need for Speed ain't gonna happen. If anything, Confessor/Svipul velocity bonus in Prop mode will get cut from 66.6% to 50%, which still makes them faster than the Jackdaw. Then take a look at Tech 1 cruiser speeds. Who the hell are you even talking to? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 621	Posted - 2015.05.17 07:38:45 - [275] - Quote To the God Almighty and the peasants below. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 673	Posted - 2015.05.17 10:23:31 - [276] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Cry me a river, Need for Speed ain't gonna happen. If anything, Confessor/Svipul velocity bonus in Prop mode will get cut from 66.6% to 50%, which still makes them faster than the Jackdaw. Then take a look at Tech 1 cruiser speeds. No. It doesn't have anything to do with need for speed but need for mobility. I think it would be a good idea to give the Jack 10 points more powergrid and increase the base speed to 240m/s in propulsion mode and 192m/s in the other two. Then give it the explosion velocity bonus of the Flycatch in sharpshooter mode and bake some of the agility into the hull and lower the agility bonus into the currenty value of the propulsion mode to stay the same in propulsion mode. Divide the missile speed bonus in 2x 25%, as in 25% goes into the role bonus and the other 25% go into the sharpshooter mode. Put a 50% recharge time into the defence mode so goes down from 600 to 300 seconds in defence mode. That should make a good tactical destroyer. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 537	Posted - 2015.05.17 10:27:57 - [277] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: To the God Almighty and the peasants below. An empty can rattles the most. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1043	Posted - 2015.05.17 11:17:45 - [278] - Quote elitatwo wrote: [...] mobility [...] Jack(daw) [...] Those words, same paragraph. You did see the jackdaw's rolemodel?
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 630	Posted - 2015.05.17 11:34:08 - [279] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: To the God Almighty and the peasants below. An empty can rattles the most. You mean the T3D can? Ten MN afterburner did make a good sound in that can. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 631	Posted - 2015.05.17 11:45:24 - [280] - Quote elitatwo wrote: No. It doesn't have anything to do with need for speed but need for mobility. Mobility = not speed inherently then? All the people rattling, asking for more speed, are not asking for moar Need for Speed, no? Logic, woman! Quote: I think it would be a good idea to give the Jack 10 points more powergrid and increase the base speed to 240m/s in propulsion mode and 192m/s in the other two. Why? Everything fits as is, even 10MN AB. Oh, you want triple MSE? HAHAHA. HAHAHAHA. HAHA. Quote: 1) bake some of the agility into the hull and lower the agility bonus into the currenty value of the propulsion mode to stay the same in propulsion mode. 2) ]Divide the missile speed bonus in 2x 25%, as in 25% goes into the role bonus and the other 25% go into the sharpshooter mode. 1) And further reduce the concept. 2) And further reduce the T3D concept; the missile velocity bonus is 66.6%. Quote: Put a 50% recharge time into the defence mode so goes down from 600 to 300 seconds in defence mode. What the recharge time bonus would replace, then? The signature reduction bonus, or would you like a third one in there, darling? Some fits and metrics would be helpful in trying to determine whether that is balanced. We await eagerly. Quote: That should make a good tactical destroyer. Yeah, just delete everything non-T3D below T1 cruisers from the game. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]

elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 673	Posted - 2015.05.17 13:13:05 - [281] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: elitatwo wrote: No. It doesn't have anything to do with need for speed but need for mobility. Mobility = not speed inherently then? All the people rattling, asking for more speed, are not asking for moar Need for Speed, no? Logic, woman! Quote: I think it would be a good idea to give the Jack 10 points more powergrid and increase the base speed to 240m/s in propulsion mode and 192m/s in the other two. Why? Everything fits as is, even 10MN AB. Oh, you want triple MSE? HAHAHA. HAHAHAHA. HAHA. I don't understand. How would you fit three medium extenders and a 10mn afterburner on the same hull? Magic? I said mobility, as in turn around speed. Right now the Jack has the turn around speed of a Crow. This is fine but the maximum velocity that comes with it is too low. So it would feel great on the Jack to have some of that agility in the other modes and the current maximum agility in propulsion mode. My Rokh can make a 180-¦ turn quicker than the Jack can and has the same singature radius (532m). While you believe it is awesome to per-nerf all Caldari ships and better make them auto-explode when they undock, some of us may want to fly with them first and not die upon undocking. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 634	Posted - 2015.05.17 13:41:45 - [282] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Mobility = not speed inherently then? All the people rattling, asking for more speed, are not asking for moar Need for Speed, no? Logic, woman! Quote: I think it would be a good idea to give the Jack 10 points more powergrid and increase the base speed to 240m/s in propulsion mode and 192m/s in the other two. Why? Everything fits as is, even 10MN AB. Oh, you want triple MSE? HAHAHA. HAHAHAHA. HAHA. I don't understand. How would you fit three medium extenders and a 10mn afterburner on the same hull? Who said anything about 10MN with 3 MSEs? MACP II and an Ancillary Current Router II rig seals the deal. The percentage increase, then, from Field Extender rigs is simply horrendous on top of the base shield HP hull bonus. Quote: I said mobility, as in turn around speed. Right now the Jack has the turn around speed of a Crow. This is fine but the maximum velocity that comes with it is too low. That's great, lets fix the T3Ds, not spread speed space cancer. Quote: So it would feel great on the Jack to have some of that agility in the other modes and the current maximum agility in propulsion mode. My Rokh can make a 180-¦ turn quicker than the Jack can Base 6.4 inertia modifier may be a little excessive, yes, but nothing needs to change apart from reducing the base stat by, say, 10%. Another option is to have the base inertia improved, then increase Propulsion Velocity bonus to 50% from 33.3% and Inertia from 66.6% to 50%. Base hull speed may need to be reduced as a result. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.17 16:22:20 - [283] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Caracal a jackdaw to death Thorax a jackdaw Rupture Omen This is what 64 mil sp in combat skills nets me, the ability to fly just about anything I like and to test for myself. I'll return with the results. Edit: Oh yes you did. Honestly, those cruisers that are faster tend to have about half the HP and maybe 30% more DPS if that. These are fights that can go both ways but it seems to me the jackdaw is good as it is, it has power without overwhelming everything one class below and one class above the way svipuls still do. Hulls are not meant to be overpowered. Edit:also noticed your jackdaw fit is still missing, indicating it did not blow up yet :D OK so testing tonight was somewhat fruitful with caracal vs jackdaw. In a fight that ended when we got dropped by a navy exequror http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j293/MrBenis/jackdaw%20vs%20caracal_zpspt1mm3zc.png I had him at like 15% structure and 20% shields at the end, with me dipping in to armour a bit here and there to bait him in to frying his guns. I was tanking him quite easily otherwise. A few things I've noticed: he had 143 charges left. This is ridiculous. I really genuinely believe the MASB should consume larger charges as fuel because storing 200 or 300 of them for a fight is just CRAZY. I was able to fit a total of 17x 800s in my cargo hold. 17x 800 = 15600 cap = 15600/125gj per boost = 124 boosts vs his 200+? I don't presume that my fit would survive against a cruiser but I'm fairly confident it could kill anything destroyer and under. Provided they aren't running dual MASB and have a cargo of 450m3 with t2 resists. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 636	Posted - 2015.05.17 16:25:51 - [284] - Quote A 27.3k damage taken against a RLML Caracal - totally useless ship, c/d? // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 260	Posted - 2015.05.17 16:44:02 - [285] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Caracal a jackdaw to death Thorax a jackdaw Rupture Omen This is what 64 mil sp in combat skills nets me, the ability to fly just about anything I like and to test for myself. I'll return with the results. Edit: Oh yes you did. Honestly, those cruisers that are faster tend to have about half the HP and maybe 30% more DPS if that. These are fights that can go both ways but it seems to me the jackdaw is good as it is, it has power without overwhelming everything one class below and one class above the way svipuls still do. Hulls are not meant to be overpowered. Edit:also noticed your jackdaw fit is still missing, indicating it did not blow up yet :D OK so testing tonight was somewhat fruitful with caracal vs jackdaw. In a fight that ended when we got dropped by a navy exequror http://i83.photobucket.com/albums/j293/MrBenis/jackdaw%20vs%20caracal_zpspt1mm3zc.png I had him at like 15% structure and 20% shields at the end, with me dipping in to armour a bit here and there to bait him in to frying his guns. I was tanking him quite easily otherwise. A few things I've noticed: he had 143 charges left. This is ridiculous. I really genuinely believe the MASB should consume larger charges as fuel because storing 200 or 300 of them for a fight is just CRAZY. I was able to fit a total of 17x 800s in my cargo hold. 17x 800 = 15600 cap = 15600/125gj per boost = 124 boosts vs his 200+? I don't presume that my fit would survive against a cruiser but I'm fairly confident it could kill anything destroyer and under. Provided they aren't running dual MASB and have a cargo of 450m3 with t2 resists. scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 637	Posted - 2015.05.17 16:52:38 - [286] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU Two MASBs. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.17 17:11:14 - [287] - Quote ** svipuls with 10mn AB. full rack of arty and 10mn ok sure. I thought this ** was dealt with. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 673	Posted - 2015.05.17 17:48:35 - [288] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: P. S. A Rokh may turn quicker on the spot at zero velocity, it does not align, accelerate, nor decelerate quicker: -in(0.25) * 105,300,000 * 0.136 inertia * 0.9 * 0.75 / 1,000,000 = 13.4 seconds. Jackdaw's mass-inertia ratio is 4.536e6 to 9.666e6 of the Rokh - the former is naturally 2.13 times more agile, and 6.38 times in Propulsion mode. This also applies while using MWDs, as the ratio of ship mass to module mass added is practically the same - 2.1 vs 2.106. The time to reach 10% of respective top speed is 1.018 sec for the Rokh, and 0.47 for the Jackdaw. Did it ever occur to you that I was comparing two very different hull sizes for a reason? I didn't run any calculations I was comparing experience on flying both ships. If you fit a 1mn afterburner your 'unholy' maximum speed in that sooper propulsion mode does not propel anything, it is the base speed of a linked dramiel without propulsion mod. When you change into the 'defence mode' on the Jack with that 1mn afterburner and someone put one regular web on you, your speed with afterburner is 113m/s. In that 'defence mode' that only thing you can defend against is a freighter. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 639	Posted - 2015.05.17 18:11:10 - [289] - Quote elitatwo wrote: If you fit a 1mn afterburner your 'unholy' maximum speed in that sooper propulsion mode does not propel anything, it is the base speed of a linked dramiel without propulsion mod. Napkin math: 200 * 1.333 * (1 + (1.68 * (1,500,000 / (1,050,000 + 500,000))) = 700 m/s. AB gonna afterburn. vOv Quote: When you change into the 'defence mode' on the Jack with that 1mn afterburner and someone put one regular web on you, your speed with afterburner is 113m/s. In that 'defence mode' that only thing you can defend against is a freighter. Okay. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 260	Posted - 2015.05.17 20:49:24 - [290] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU Two MASBs. Oh jeez whoops

elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 673	Posted - 2015.05.17 21:11:51 - [291] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Napkin math: 200 * 1.333 * (1 + (1.68 * (1,500,000 / (1,050,000 + 500,000))) = 700 m/s. AB gonna afterburn. vOv Please log on SiSi and do that, convo me and I show you how good that goes. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Iyacia Cyric'ai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 147	Posted - 2015.05.18 04:18:10 - [292] - Quote Agile, huge tank, relatively low sig, no brainer damage projection. Sounds like a fleet/doctrine ship to me (i.e. the new Drake). Terrible speed makes it useless for solo or small gang though since it can't catch or escape anything by itself, but hey not every ship needs to be a solopwnmobile.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.18 09:15:46 - [293] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU Two MASBs. Oh jeez whoops Yes the salient point would be 230+ shield boosts on a ship with 70+ resists and a native HP bonus that can fit shield boost implants and boosters. I had an RLML caracal specifically fit to kill this thing and it still turned in to a meat-grinder. This is including using my superior cap pool and double his peak dps and the same sustained DPS. Yea yea yea I get that a 40mil cruiser should probably have problems killing a 50-60mil destroyer thats jacked up on roids but then I got to wonder how we accept that frigates will consistantly kill battleships and battlecruisers who by all accounts should roll around in the corpses of frigates like a kodiak in a pile of weasels. Yeah I just don't know about that one. Making MASB consume at least cap 100s or something to make them scale more appropriately with regular boosters is just a solution that could be put to the table for consideration as I don't want to outright nerf the jackdaw but solve a larger problem with these ASBs in general. Could it be argued that a golem really needs 1200m3 for cap charges if it decides to go XL-ASB and XLSB in combo using 800's and 400's in sync? Maybe it could I guess as a golem suffers different problems than a jackdaw but since I'm getting off track I'll stop there. Something isn't right when the scalpel you take to a tumour is ineffective at cutting the skin. A cerb might have done the job but then we're talking about a 200mil HAC used against a 50mil T3D and that's definitely a problem when that degree of escalation is what's required and even then I'd argue we can't be sure thanks to other factors including needing RLML just to apply any damage in the first case. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1208	Posted - 2015.05.18 09:38:29 - [294] - Quote I'd venture your weapon choice was the real issue. He can time his reloads with your own and he can approximately burst tank your burst. You'd have done a LOT better with a regular weapon system. ASB ships die to leak during reloads - with a weapon system also paired to a long reload that means either you need absolutely overwhelming DPS (you wont have it) or you're going to nearly stalemate. A vexor would pull the wings off this, for example. HOWEVER I agree with the overall sentiment that there are too many ships out there with no "natural" predators.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.18 11:16:44 - [295] - Quote I am not credulous enough to believe that a dedicated frigate/destroyer hunter should be unable to kill a frigate/destroyer with a weapon designed for fighting frigates/destroyers on a frigate/destroyer killing platform because said frigate/destroyer can "approximately tank my burst". That's called broken. There needs to be a natural order to things and this is not it. A ship one size catagory up than you using the appropriate weapon should be able to MURDER you. Permatanking my caracal is a complete joke and when I killed that cerb was even worse. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1044	Posted - 2015.05.18 11:29:51 - [296] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Hakaari Inkuran wrote: scramble ASB Invuln Prop Web I spy an empty midslot on that jackdaw. Surely he wasn't out of CPU to fit a second web or invuln, was he? I guess he must have been, considering he was using a meta DCU Two MASBs. Oh jeez whoops Yes the salient point would be 230+ shield boosts on a ship with 70+ resists and a native HP bonus that can fit shield boost implants and boosters. I had an RLML caracal specifically fit to kill this thing and it still turned in to a meat-grinder. This is including using my superior cap pool and double his peak dps and the same sustained DPS. Yea yea yea I get that a 40mil cruiser should probably have problems killing a 50-60mil destroyer thats jacked up on roids but then I got to wonder how we accept that frigates will consistantly kill battleships and battlecruisers who by all accounts should roll around in the corpses of frigates like a kodiak in a pile of weasels. Yeah I just don't know about that one. Making MASB consume at least cap 100s or something to make them scale more appropriately with regular boosters is just a solution that could be put to the table for consideration as I don't want to outright nerf the jackdaw but solve a larger problem with these ASBs in general. Could it be argued that a golem really needs 1200m3 for cap charges if it decides to go XL-ASB and XLSB in combo using 800's and 400's in sync? Maybe it could I guess as a golem suffers different problems than a jackdaw but since I'm getting off track I'll stop there. Something isn't right when the scalpel you take to a tumour is ineffective at cutting the skin. A cerb might have done the job but then we're talking about a 200mil HAC used against a 50mil T3D and that's definitely a problem when that degree of escalation is what's required and even then I'd argue we can't be sure thanks to other factors including needing RLML just to apply any damage in the first case. [edit] and maybe that's where it needs to go to stop utterly ridiculous fits like triple XL-ASB fits being so accessible and easy is to make them consume cap 800's instead. It's the XL booster, the largest of it's kind and it is supplementing its running cost with cap charges instead of impacting on the ships own capacitor. So making it consume a cap charge that is a lot larger than the cap cost of a regular booster instead will balance this out. It will not nerf the boosting power of the ship using them but it will hurt their sustainability. Cap 800's are very large and I've seen bait ships with expanded cargo holds to house more charges. So make the XL-ASB consume 800's and allowed to load 9 at time or whatever the question is not a matter of boosting power it's of being able to use a strictly burst tanking module and keep this running longer than cap-dependant systems. Down to the MASB, a t2 MSB consumes 60gj per charge, less 2% per level of shield compensation. 54gj per shot. This means that it is literally more cap effective to run the MASB over the MSB at base stats. Even at level 5s. So the MASB provides almost 50% more boosting power over an MSB for functionally less cost and lower fitting costs. Now I can handle the lower fitting costs but I can't handle the idea that a module which uses expendable charges to compensate for not using the ships own power source not only bolts on easier but is cheaper to run too. LASB vs LSB - we see the pattern going the other way, with LASB being slightly overcosted but in single digit percentages. T2 LSB uses 160 less 10% for 144 gj per shot while the LASB uses 150's and is cheaper to fit. XLASB and XLSB - same cap cost, t2 LSB has higher fittings. Ancillary shield boosters I just don't understand. They've always been considered a problem and they've either been too good for what they are or have been treated as garbage modules not worth fitting. It's just crazy. Did at any time anyone consider balancing these things through their activation costs instead of their boosting stats? Balancing this way does create an absolute ceiling at where they'll operate because links don't scale as well on them and using lows and rigs to make more cargo space or using friends to drop off charges is a game that's very risky as well due to how it could be intercepted. You literally got no idea what you're talking about. Also, your jackdaw fit is underwhelming.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.18 12:50:34 - [297] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: You literally got no idea what you're talking about. Also, your jackdaw fit is underwhelming. Which is why people celebrate in the gaming community how balanced EVE pvp is and how incredible all the ships are. I was being facetious btw. I didn't really mean anything I just said. Because it was lying. What jackdaw fit? The one I haven't posted anywhere yet? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1208	Posted - 2015.05.18 12:54:19 - [298] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: I am not credulous enough to believe that a dedicated frigate/destroyer hunter should be unable to kill a frigate/destroyer with a weapon designed for fighting frigates/destroyers on a frigate/destroyer killing platform because said frigate/destroyer can "approximately tank my burst". That's called broken. There needs to be a natural order to things and this is not it. A ship one size catagory up than you using the appropriate weapon should be able to MURDER you. Permatanking my caracal is a complete joke and when I killed that cerb was even worse. I'm partly in agreement. Burst systems create nasty outlier conditions, rlml seem fated to toil if the enemy doesn't die in a single clip.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.18 13:04:21 - [299] - Quote afkalt wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: I am not credulous enough to believe that a dedicated frigate/destroyer hunter should be unable to kill a frigate/destroyer with a weapon designed for fighting frigates/destroyers on a frigate/destroyer killing platform because said frigate/destroyer can "approximately tank my burst". That's called broken. There needs to be a natural order to things and this is not it. A ship one size catagory up than you using the appropriate weapon should be able to MURDER you. Permatanking my caracal is a complete joke and when I killed that cerb was even worse. I'm partly in agreement. Burst systems create nasty outlier conditions, rlml seem fated to toil if the enemy doesn't die in a single clip. and what can be done about it? I struggle to think of anything that's not just a gimmick or a hamfisted attack on 'a given playstyle'. Imagine getting a missile rig that reduces reload speed by 10%? It might be all it takes in these situations to break the back of barely holding on active tanks. I need to stress again that I had him in to very deep structure and stood a fair chance of killing him but as you can see he still dealt 41k damage to me compared to my own 34k to him. Is the jackdaw supposed to be the anti-missile user ship or something? Isn't that what every speedtanking ship since the dawn of time has been? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 674	Posted - 2015.05.18 13:28:59 - [300] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: ...Is the jackdaw supposed to be the anti-missile user ship or something? Isn't that what every speedtanking ship since the dawn of time has been? That is the one million isk question at this point. If we would get an answer to that I am curious to what that might be. At the current state the Jack is a one-trick pony with one more or less viable fit that is hardcoded into the hull. Do something else and you get toasted. Did you find a way to take less damage with the low speed and 532m signature radius that comes with it? You should even try heavy missiles against a Jack, it's slow and 'big' enough for them. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1208	Posted - 2015.05.18 13:32:21 - [301] - Quote It's a tough one, there are a lot of reasons for it being problematic not least the ability of smaller sized asb to carry so many charges) but also as you say, generally anything with an AB is going to laugh at all missile users because it's all about absolute velocity/sig. I reckon a gunboat and webs would have had a lot more success (and the vexor chew it up and spit it out). A lot of people overlook other dedicated frigate killing cruisers because the caracal is a no brainer "push F1 to win" and in fleets they're absolutely right. Solo, oft other ships are better. However more widely.....I dunno, the whole "food chain" seems all messed up these days with more and more hulls needing odd and weird (i.e. overly specific) fits to counter. Related to this there are too many examples of certain ships displacing the entire meta around them (garmurs, gilas, svipuls to name a few), if these ships didnt exist, other fits may have room to live and breath.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.18 13:49:17 - [302] - Quote What happened to Rise anyway? Aren't those ships his creation? I don't follow any CCP twitters Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1208	Posted - 2015.05.18 13:59:36 - [303] - Quote Don't know. I seem to have an idea in my head that the approximate hull size balance triangle should be roughly battleships>battlecruisers>cruisers>battleships with frigates running tackle and support and destroyers blowing up said support wings. But that seems to be just....dead in the water. I admit that may be rose tinted glasses/pipe dream (it's been a long time). However there is no denying that in the meta as she stands today, cruiser class hulls have no natural predators (which causes all sorts of nasty knock ons) and outlier hulls are punching FAR too high about their weight skewing the entire meta towards hulls that can either survive them or escape them (or most commonly, joining them). Gut feel suggests the entire cruiser tier needs hammered back into line and we see where we sit from there. Note I don't want to see them relegated to trash, just down a peg or five from "fly this size or go home". They're skewing everything: the game and peoples ideas/perceptions of "balance" when they see the alternates out there and compare it to cruiser class. I suppose one could buff the ass out of battlecruisers but that's just asking for more trouble than it is worth imo.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1045	Posted - 2015.05.18 14:39:16 - [304] - Quote afkalt wrote: Don't know. I seem to have an idea in my head that the approximate hull size balance triangle should be roughly battleships>battlecruisers>cruisers>battleships with frigates running tackle and support and destroyers blowing up said support wings. Should read Battleship>ABC>cruisers>destroyers>frigates>ABC. Take a 1v1 basis and show me the BS fitted for solo that loses to a single frig. In gangs, Muninn, Zealot, Ishtar and Caldari HACs easily escape that scheme, but they were tailored to do exactly that in larger numbers. Else, in a XvX scenario, BS would very likely still triumph over other choices, since your sig/movespeed barely matters once you're triplewebbed and the attackers are spread 15km away from each other, meaning you can only outrun the tracking of one at a time. It's the type of downsides they bring for big scales that dequalify them for doing what they'd supposed to be best at. Most people are godawful at flying BS, you see footage of people approaching T1 cruisers and shooting void instead of keeping range and a lot more oftenly I experience that, being shot by a bigger hull without any efforts by the pilot to minimize transversal. Then those usually come around BS are **** when they are just bad themselves actually. Talking fleets is obviously a completely different thing, with collective volley being as high as you wish (just write CTA to that ping) and bombers being as cheap/effective/efficient as they are. As it currently stands though, destroyers are arguably in the worst space out of all ships atm. They got poor tanks with the exception of overpropped+unwebbed T3Ds, huge sigs and are moving very slowly in general. Less adressing the base speed but their propped ones. The Talwar is the one viable destroyer - only due to its mwd-sigrad-bonus and acceptable speed for a LML boat with 70km range. Edit: I remember CCP Fozzie starting off the Cruiser revamp with First, we're increasing velocity by around 20% across the board. We actually wanted that. Now I've seen what cruisers with fair slot layouts and decent hull traits can accomplish, and I don't think all of those 20% were needed.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.18 14:58:37 - [305] - Quote FWIW one of the devs in days gone by said that the game was balanced around cruiser combat so with that in mind they will form the base of the pyramid. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1209	Posted - 2015.05.18 14:59:12 - [306] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: afkalt wrote: Don't know. I seem to have an idea in my head that the approximate hull size balance triangle should be roughly battleships>battlecruisers>cruisers>battleships with frigates running tackle and support and destroyers blowing up said support wings. Should read Battleship>ABC>cruisers>destroyers>frigates>ABC. Take a 1v1 basis and show me the BS fitted for solo that loses to a single frig. In gangs, Muninn, Zealot, Ishtar and Caldari HACs easily escape that scheme, but they were tailored to do exactly that in larger numbers. Else, in a XvX scenario, BS would very likely still triumph over other choices, since your sig/movespeed barely matters once you're triplewebbed and the attackers are spread 15km away from each other, meaning you can only outrun the tracking of one at a time. It's the type of downsides they bring for big scales that dequalify them for doing what they'd supposed to be best at. Most people are godawful at flying BS, you see footage of people approaching T1 cruisers and shooting void instead of keeping range and a lot more oftenly I experience that, being shot by a bigger hull without any efforts by the pilot to minimize transversal. Then those usually come around BS are ** when they are just bad themselves actually. Talking fleets is obviously a completely different thing, with collective volley being as high as you wish (just write CTA to that ping) and bombers being as cheap/effective/efficient as they are. As it currently stands though, destroyers are arguably in the worst space out of all ships atm. They got poor tanks with the exception of overpropped+unwebbed T3Ds, huge sigs and are moving very slowly in general. Less adressing the base speed but their propped ones. The Talwar is the one viable destroyer - only due to its mwd-sigrad-bonus and acceptable speed for a LML boat with 70km range. Yes I was generalizing hull size rather than specifics because T2's start messing things up if one gets too low level. 1v1 is a poor example, small gang is probably best as then we avoid running into alpha issues. The meta is currently set such that the best ratio of speed/dps/tank (in that order) is king and that's always coming down with cruisers. Certainly, there are BS comps cruisers will flee from (RR domis being a favourite), however without a strategic objective to force them to stay on field it's cruisers or bust. You can disengage from anything nasty you don't like (except a blob of frigs but blobs are blobs) and can kill well over your weight class (with exceptions noted). Even where you are forced on field, HACs do bad things to battleships (fair enough) with no real counterplay save "BRING MOOOOAR!" (not fair enough), range dictation/DPS dictation wins. Throwing logi in the mix and it gets even worse because the raw buffer matters less and the damage mitigation of small hull size makes all the difference and native resists are identical up the hull sizes and stacking penalties stop the bigger ships really doubling down hard on the resist front. This has actually only just hit me - does seem weird a logi is going to rep a Rokh as effectively as it will a Moa. Actually less so because Rokh takes more damage! Perhaps it's just me, but I just feel the cruiser sized hulls do too much, too well. ed: Caleb Seremshur wrote:** FWIW one of the devs in days gone by said that the game was balanced around cruiser combat so with that in mind they will form the base of the pyramid. Nothing wrong with that, but give them meaningful predators. Something that can hunt them. Get the Scissors back in rock, paper scissors.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 160	Posted - 2015.05.18 15:26:01 - [307] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: As it currently stands though, destroyers are arguably in the worst space out of all ships atm. They got poor tanks with the exception of overpropped+unwebbed T3Ds, huge sigs and are moving very slowly in general. Less adressing the base speed but their propped ones. The Talwar is the one viable destroyer - only due to its mwd-sigrad-bonus and acceptable speed for a LML boat with 70km range. . Destroyers are seeing a lot of use in faction war low sec in specialized roles. The Talwar is probably one of the less common. If I were to put them in order it would be: 1: Algos. Used mostly solo in fw, sits on the warp in ready to tackle anything that comes in, buffed drones to deal with rats and push off kiters, can run small and medium plexes easy enough. 2: Thrasher. mostly instalocking arty fits, used both solo and in gangs. 3: Cormorant. Sniper corms used to defend fw plexes in gangs 4: Catalysts/Coercers. pointless fits used en masse to melt stuff before it can warp off 5: Talwars. MWD/LML fit obviously, mostly used in gangs 6: Coraxes. Sometimes used with ewar as a counter to some of the other long range destroyers 7: Dragoon. probably the tankiest of all destroyers, good dps, good cap warfare bonus, but I don't see them very often because they lack range control due to only having 2 mid slots and a low base speed, just like the punisher is rarely used in frigates despite having the best tank... Which is why the tank on the Jackdaw doesn't impress me, there are plenty of ships out there that can fit hella tank, but if they can't tackle and hold pont they're of limmited use no matter how big the tank is.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 538	Posted - 2015.05.18 15:30:48 - [308] - Quote Regarding RR setups that has as much to do with generating cap out of thin air and remote reps being more powerful and accessible than local reps. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 263	Posted - 2015.05.18 16:11:27 - [309] - Quote afkalt wrote: Don't know. I seem to have an idea in my head that the approximate hull size balance triangle should be roughly battleships>battlecruisers>cruisers>battleships with frigates running tackle and support and destroyers blowing up said support wings. But that seems to be just....dead in the water. I admit that may be rose tinted glasses/pipe dream (it's been a long time). However there is no denying that in the meta as she stands today, cruiser class hulls have no natural predators (which causes all sorts of nasty knock ons) and outlier hulls are punching FAR too high about their weight skewing the entire meta towards hulls that can either survive them or escape them (or most commonly, joining them). Gut feel suggests the entire cruiser tier needs hammered back into line and we see where we sit from there. Note I don't want to see them relegated to trash, just down a peg or five from "fly this size or go home". They're skewing everything: the game and peoples ideas/perceptions of "balance" when they see the alternates out there and compare it to cruiser class. I suppose one could buff the ass out of battlecruisers but that's just asking for more trouble than it is worth imo. The problem other than mordus and serp ships, was the balance pass for cruisers and frigates was far too generous and the balance pass for battleships was far too stingy. So power creep overwhelmingly benefitted medium and small ships beyond a sane point.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12782	Posted - 2015.05.18 17:02:59 - [310] - Quote Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) +1 Powergrid -50 Shield HP +50 Armor HP +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass -25 scan resolution Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/


afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1209	Posted - 2015.05.18 17:11:25 - [311] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) +1 Powergrid -50 Shield HP +50 Armor HP +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass -25 scan resolution It's be good if you could explain the rationale for these, I mean for example...scan res nerf? On what basis? I mean I'm not saying you're wrong to do so, but "instalocking" followed by delayed application weapon seems like complete a non-issue. Was there overwhelming feedback it locked too fast? It would really help the feedback process if we understood the whys and the what is being aimed for.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 693	Posted - 2015.05.18 17:21:31 - [312] - Quote So now it has a free small shield extender, which are widely regarded as not worth, making the large buffer and passive regen fits much more difficult to pull off, while getting a single point of PG, which does not do much to enable the fits which weren't abusing this bonus, while becoming less agile but faster overall with more effect from prop mods and a mass which now is less than that of several frigates despite being a size class above them? Then nerfing the scan res on top of this change? I'm glad to see the communities cry for a bit more PG and speed were heeded, but was the further mass reduction and agility change really necessary, especially with the massive cut in power of the HP bonus? Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1754	Posted - 2015.05.18 17:27:20 - [313] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) What? A flat HP bonus per level? And only 50? What is that? Its never been done for a reason! Flat bonuses are as far from the EVE philosophy as it can get. Sounds like its officially the worst bonus of the game, and it horribly scales for about any fitting. What good does 250 shield hp does on a destroyer? (fixed it) I also don't understand why you nerfed the scan-res, snd you didn't even up the speed by more than a negligible amount! If this destroyer has to be less tanky without being faster, what's the point of using it in the first place? Looks like there won't be any use for the Jackdaw, its literally a worse more expensive Caracal. Apart from the warp speed / probe launcher CPU bonus. Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 694	Posted - 2015.05.18 17:28:50 - [314] - Quote Altrue wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) What? A flat HP bonus per level? And only 50? What is that? Sounds like its officially the worst bonus of the game, and it horribly scales for about any fitting. What good does 250 shield hp does on a frigate? Worse, on a destroyer. I could see 100Hp/lvl being a strong tank bonus which doesn't scale insanely with dual MSE or single LSE fits, but 50 is too weak to matter more than one good salvo. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Solarus Explorer The Church of Awesome Heiian Conglomerate 6	Posted - 2015.05.18 17:33:35 - [315] - Quote Altrue wrote: Sounds like its officially the worst bonus of the game I have to agree with this sentiment....... +50hp/level is actually funny as a hull bonus :P Poor caldari, it seems they never get the better end of the stick :\|
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1164	Posted - 2015.05.18 17:49:18 - [316] - Quote a little bizarre .. why even bother with 250 hp? .. might aswell remove it .. maybe add a 5% exp velocity bonus still keeping the excessive 6 mids.. Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1754	Posted - 2015.05.18 18:04:55 - [317] - Quote Let's look at this objectively shall we? Comparison Caracal RML vs Jackdaw Light missiles All V, without heat / implants / links / anything Caracal vs Jackdaw : 37 751 vs 22 753 --- EHP 374 vs 154 --- dps (caldari navy both - Hobgoblin T2) 125 vs 146 --- dps over 60sec with reload taken into account. 1881 vs 1540 --- m/s (standard MWD) 7.44s vs 6.32s --- align time 1127m vs 541m --- sig radius 337,5 vs 343,75mm --- scan res 72,7 vs 42,1km --- missile range 3 vs 4.5 AU/s --- warp speed 25m vs ~75m --- price tag So of course the modes aren't taken into account here, so let's take a look at these: - Sharpshooter Mode : Your missiles go about as far as a Caracal's - Propulsion Mode : You finally manage to go about 2050m/s, which is a bit more than 10% faster than a Caracal. - Defense mode : 29k EHP and 357m sig radius instead. Definitely the only place where one could eventually consider that the Jackdaw really differs from the Caracal. 357 sig at 1540m/s is however enough for medium AND large guns to threaten you. Conclusion: For TRIPLE the price, you get a ship that's WORSE in most cases, or that has negligible bonuses, especially for (again) triple the price. The only real difference lies in the signature radius, but given how SLOW the ship is, and given that the jackdaw would still be over 350m, I really don't see how this could significantly improve its survivability. Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1277	Posted - 2015.05.18 18:12:50 - [318] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Fergus Runkle wrote: Seriously, more powergrid required (unless of course you want to force people to fit rockets all the time?) 5 t2 lml with a t2 ab and you have 25.5pg left. Not enough to fit even the storyline MSE. The fitting downsides and compromises that need to be made are fairly awesome on this ship. While the jackdaw is certainly strong, it has it's terrible footprint to bear (high sig, low speed) and actually even with a mwd+nano, you're only looking at 2km/s cold in prop mode. I fooled around on SiSI yesterday to look for what seems like a comfort fit, and right now it's something like LML, 2MSE, point+web, fitting mods and more resists for about 18k ehp ingame. It's a little podla drake with combats. Pestilen Ratte wrote: Rantrantrant. Where did the evil svipul touch you? This is dead on. Even with perfect fitting skills it needs some fitting rig help to everything it needs. And it is slow. On the plus side, with a nano in the low, it aligns from full stop to warp in about 2 seconds. 3 seconds from the undock. I have no doubt what-so-ever that sub-2-second align times can be had. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1754	Posted - 2015.05.18 18:21:39 - [319] - Quote Soldarius wrote: I have no doubt what-so-ever that sub-2-second align times can be had. I have no doubt about how useless this is in any combat situation, and no doubt that I'd gadly trade it for speed instead The agility really is a poisonned gift, given the lack of speed and the really bad agility in other modes. Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
Zeb Horlock Rifterlings The WeHurt Initiative 2	Posted - 2015.05.18 18:50:14 - [320] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) +1 Powergrid -50 Shield HP +50 Armor HP +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass -25 scan resolution Ok i'm going to suggest something kinda radical (and will probably be met with ire and forum chest beating) but it may allow for more interesting small gang fights and reduce its effectiveness in a solo situation. Instead of a 50HP shield per level make it a remote shield rep amount per level, something sane being as realistically your only going to have 1 slot available most times for the remote rep. depending on how impacting this is you can either keep the 6 mids or reduce it to 5 (i'll be honest, not entirely thought out the mids for this situation) This change would add an interesting twist on the Cal T3 dessie which would actually make an impact (unlike the 50hp/lvl) and would work well with other T3ds (not only other Jackdaws but also Svipuls and many other shield gangs) Yes i'm also well aware that this could also introduce a frigate/dessie sized tinker setup but really, that would also be more interesting than 50hp/lvl... Let the flames begin.

Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 645	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:04:54 - [321] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) Cool. Quote: +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass 5MN MWD 0 Meta velocities: 170 * 1.25 (1 + (6.25 * (1,500,000 / (1,100,000 + 500,000))) = 1457 m/s and 1,664 m/s overheated, with 1,943 m/s 2,772 m/s overheated in Propulsion mode, mkay. Align times into warp: -in(0.25) * 1,100,000 * 6.6 * 0.9 * 0.75 / 1,000,000 = 6.79 seconds vs 6.28 previously, and Prop's new 2.26 seconds vs 2.1 sec. Faster, less agile in all cases. ( -á° -ƒ-û -í°) // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 263	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:08:18 - [322] - Quote Altrue wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) Sounds like its officially the worst bonus of the game, and it horribly scales for about any fitting. What good does 250 shield hp does on a destroyer? (fixed it) Buffs the shield HP by about 33%. Jeez are you people's calculators broken? Thanks to your whining his shield HP role bonus went from 50% to 33% gratz Oh and now instead of scaling with extenders it now will only scale with resists. I liked it before.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 645	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:10:26 - [323] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Altrue wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) What? A flat HP bonus per level? And only 50? What is that? Sounds like its officially the worst bonus of the game, and it horribly scales for about any fitting. What good does 250 shield hp does on a frigate? Worse, on a destroyer. I could see 100Hp/lvl being a strong tank bonus which doesn't scale insanely with dual MSE or single LSE fits, but 50 is too weak to matter more than one good salvo. Well, with the base shield being 850 hp * 1.25 Skills = 1,062 hp + 250 hp from the bonus = 1,312 hp. With a 5% hp per level one it would have been 1,062 * 1.25 = 1327 hp. Reasonable as is. Another example, 1,062 hp + 1,050 from MSE II * 1.25 = 2,640 hp. 1,062 hp + 1,050 + 250 hp = 2,362 hp. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12784	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:25:14 - [324] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) Cool. Quote: +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass 5MN MWD 0 Meta velocities: 170 * 1.25 (1 + (6.25 * (1,500,000 / (1,100,000 + 500,000))) = 1457 m/s and 1,664 m/s overheated, with 1,943 m/s 2,772 m/s overheated in Propulsion mode, mkay. Align times into warp: -in(0.25) * 1,100,000 * 6.6 * 0.9 * 0.75 / 1,000,000 = 6.79 seconds vs 6.28 previously, and Prop's new 2.26 seconds vs 2.1 sec. Faster, less agile in all cases. ( -á° -ƒ-û -í°) You added 50,000kg mass instead of removing it. It's both faster and more agile after these changes. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 645	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:26:46 - [325] - Quote Apologies. I'll update current post. 1,540 m/s / 2,204 overheated and 2,053 / 2,938 m/s OH in Propulsion mode. Align time then is 6.17 and 2.06 seconds respectively. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Suitonia Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep 539	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:33:57 - [326] - Quote Jackdaw -Free Small Shield Extender II at Caldari Tactical Destroyer 5. I don't think this bonus feels all that good, The Jackdaw is the only (current) tactical destroyer with a tank bonus on the ship per level bonuses. Perhaps a more niche (but useful) replacement could be used instead like an ECCM bonus or something? I think this is needed to balance it, but it is probably the worst ship per level bonus in the game, perhaps excluding the Helios' thermal drone per level bonus. Otherwise, I think you've done a great job with the preliminary balancing. Contributer to Eve is Easy: https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
Desiderya Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade 971	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:39:07 - [327] - Quote I can see the %bonus to be problematic on this ship but the 50/level bonus seems to be quite low. When it comes to multi-extender fit the only thing I see is that this should lead to a significant signature, which is, in many situations, quite a downside making these extra ehp questionable. Edit: I like the idea about not bothering with 250 hp and taking an electronics (range/sensor) bonus on board. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise.
Suitonia Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep 540	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:47:10 - [328] - Quote A small niche bonus like 5% to sensor strength per level would be pretty 'cool' and more useful than the 50HP shield bonus Jackdaw base is 15 (x1.2) (18 at all level 5) (36 while in sharpshooter mode) If it had 5% per level ECCM it would have 22.5 at level 5, and 45 while in sharpshooter mode. Definitely not going to break anything but would be cool bonus that isn't completely negligible. Contributer to Eve is Easy: https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12784	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:51:07 - [329] - Quote Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Pharill An Eye For An Eye AN EYE F0R AN EYE 15	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:54:37 - [330] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) +1 Powergrid -50 Shield HP +50 Armor HP +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass -25 scan resolution If you want to give this ship a tank bonus then give it a real tank bonus. If not then drop it. 50hp per level is one of the biggest jokes of a bonus I have ever seen.

Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 645	Posted - 2015.05.18 19:55:47 - [331] - Quote Shield Booster Activation cost in Defense mode in place of the Sig reduction one - base hull signature radius may need to be decreased somewhat. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Hendrink Collie Steel Fleet Gentlemen's.Club 29	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:09:38 - [332] - Quote Suitonia wrote: Jackdaw -Free Small Shield Extender II at Caldari Tactical Destroyer 5. I don't think this bonus feels all that good, The Jackdaw is the only (current) tactical destroyer with a tank bonus on the ship per level bonuses. Perhaps a more niche (but useful) replacement could be used instead like an ECCM bonus or something? I think this is needed to balance it, but it is probably the worst ship per level bonus in the game, perhaps excluding the Helios' thermal drone per level bonus. Otherwise, I think you've done a great job with the preliminary balancing. An ECCM bonus? OOooooh, I actually like the sound of that, especially compared to a free small shield extender XD. Let's go real crazy, since it's a caldari platform, maybe do something with jams? The six mids would be super fun to play with, yet doing pure jams would make it a paper plane if shot at.
Gorski Car 608	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:15:16 - [333] - Quote HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA FREE SSE BOIS Collect this post
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1045	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:29:43 - [334] - Quote The flat HP bonus feels superawkward and inconsistent. NOT YOU, they said. Everything on any ship scales, but this is wonky. If it currently goes out of line, reducing the base hp to some levels where additional extenders impact total HP stronger will both take the alpha resilence from local tanked ships and leave fits sacrificing slots for 2 MSEs mainly intact. Though 5% less flight time and 10% more missile speed per level would also help :D
Saerin Korvalu Scope Works 21	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:34:34 - [335] - Quote Giving the Jackdaw a niche bonus would be a bit odd, so I'd vote against an ECCM bonus. The Jackdaw's damage is something I'm a bit worried about - it has a mediocre alpha with LMLs, but the DPS is far too underwhelming. I'd suggest falling back to the 5% damage buff previously shown in the statistics slide shown at fanfest. Sacrifice the tank buff and turn it into a nice hit-and-run destroyer.
Suitonia Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep 541	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:35:46 - [336] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. I really like the sensor strength bonus :) As an alternative, what about % reduction to the Signature Penalty of shield extenders per level. Would have some synergy with the bonus on the Defense Mode, although this bonus would only apply to fits using extenders so might hurt variety a bit. Contributer to Eve is Easy: https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
Sturm Gewehr TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 72	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:38:02 - [337] - Quote I would rather have a "joke" (I call it flavor) bonus than an OP bonus. Pretty much any good bonus I can think of would make this ship really strong unless it came with nerfs to other parts of the kit to balance. The ship is still really strong without it. Some ideas are: -1s reload per level (probably too strong) Cap reduction to shield boosters per level Cap reduction to propulsion modules per level Shield recharge (could be great for PvE, need to make sure its not too strong for PvP) Launcher Capacity bonus (as long as not exploitable) Signature radius reduction bonus to shield extenders (could actually be stronger than 5% per level depending on strength) Even a lot of these are spooky looking. I think just about any meaningful resist, buffer, signature radius or active tank bonus in conjunction with 6 mids and defensive mode will just be too strong.
Zand Vor Anomalous Existence Low-Class 12	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:41:40 - [338] - Quote Shield recharge bonus would be fun for both PvP and PvE at this ship size.
Saerin Korvalu Scope Works 21	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:43:23 - [339] - Quote Sturm Gewehr wrote: I would rather have a "joke" (I call it flavor) bonus than an OP bonus. Pretty much any good bonus I can think of would make this ship really strong unless it came with nerfs to other parts of the kit to balance. The ship is still really strong without it. Some ideas are: -1s reload per level (probably too strong) Cap reduction to shield boosters per level Cap reduction to propulsion modules per level Shield recharge (could be great for PvE, need to make sure its not too strong for PvP) Launcher Capacity bonus (as long as not exploitable) Signature radius reduction bonus to shield extenders (could actually be stronger than 5% per level depending on strength) Even a lot of these are spooky looking. I think just about any meaningful resist, buffer, signature radius or active tank bonus in conjunction with 6 mids and defensive mode will just be too strong. A 10% or 15% bonus to shield recharge rate per level could be nice.
Tiberian Deci Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore 131	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:45:47 - [340] - Quote Hi Jackdaw, Sorry for pissing everyone off so much you got hit with the nerfbat into the ground before you were born. Sincerely, Your Older Brother, the Drake

Lura Zara Worlds Without Boundaries Special Forces 10	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:46:38 - [341] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. If I may say. Ide rather see the following if the 5% shield hp is off the table 75hp/level +x% Shield booster cap need per cycle reduction. +x% Shield booster boost amount [Like a built in shield amp instead of HP] Some things like those. Having a active tank dessi instead of a passive tanking EHP Block would be nice. So far the only things caldari have that have a Rep amount bonus is the Golem...
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1210	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:53:07 - [342] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. ECM bonus to multispec jammers only. Let it use those mids.
Saerin Korvalu Scope Works 21	Posted - 2015.05.18 20:54:56 - [343] - Quote Lura Zara wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. If I may say. Ide rather see the following if the 5% shield hp is off the table 75hp/level +x% Shield booster cap need per cycle reduction. +x% Shield booster boost amount [Like a built in shield amp instead of HP] Some things like those. Having a active tank dessi instead of a passive tanking EHP Block would be nice. So far the only things caldari have that have a Rep amount bonus is the Golem... Having a bonus that caters to a specific type of tank eliminates the idea of the ship being a 'tactical' destroyer.
Lura Zara Worlds Without Boundaries Special Forces 10	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:00:14 - [344] - Quote Saerin Korvalu wrote: Lura Zara wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. If I may say. Ide rather see the following if the 5% shield hp is off the table 75hp/level +x% Shield booster cap need per cycle reduction. +x% Shield booster boost amount [Like a built in shield amp instead of HP] Some things like those. Having a active tank dessi instead of a passive tanking EHP Block would be nice. So far the only things caldari have that have a Rep amount bonus is the Golem... Having a bonus that caters to a specific type of tank eliminates the idea of the ship being a 'tactical' destroyer. Thats not what tactical means. Tactical: of, relating to, or constituting actions carefully planned to gain a specific military end. What your saying implies 'Broad."
Max Kolonko WATAHA. Unseen Wolves 516	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:06:56 - [345] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. 4% res per level? Read and support: Don't mess with OUR WH's What is Your stance on WH stuff?
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 263	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:11:39 - [346] - Quote Saerin Korvalu wrote: Lura Zara wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. If I may say. Ide rather see the following if the 5% shield hp is off the table 75hp/level +x% Shield booster cap need per cycle reduction. +x% Shield booster boost amount [Like a built in shield amp instead of HP] Some things like those. Having a active tank dessi instead of a passive tanking EHP Block would be nice. So far the only things caldari have that have a Rep amount bonus is the Golem... Having a bonus that caters to a specific type of tank eliminates the idea of the ship being a 'tactical' destroyer. No it friggin' doesn't, as it still has the three modes.
Rex Omnipotens Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:12:33 - [347] - Quote What if it had the ability to alter its resists, like a reactive armor hardener, each level reduced the time it took to cycle the resists?
fauckasf afasdaf Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:18:12 - [348] - Quote [/quote] Having a bonus that caters to a specific type of tank eliminates the idea of the ship being a 'tactical' destroyer.[/quote] Thats not what tactical means. Tactical: of, relating to, or constituting actions carefully planned to gain a specific military end. What your saying implies 'Broad." [/quote] At a very basic level yes but the difference is more between strategy and tactics that he is getting at. For example strategy would be to Alliance X knows Alliance Y always tends to fit a doctrine of ships that use EM damage so Alliance X attempts to use an EM tanked variant of a ship rather than omni tank and tanks all of alliance Y's damage and bombs even with impunity. Tactics would be if when on field Alliance Y noticed alliance X's doctrine is specific tanked rather than omni tanked in this specific engagement and calls for bombers to go buy explosive bombs to counter Alliance X's EM tanking strategy by making a short term tactical decision to get results during this fight. In this situation being locked into a certain damage/tank type reduces the tactical options on the table. Look up the difference between tactics and strategy if my hastily written. Examples are not very good.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 28	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:18:51 - [349] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) +1 Powergrid -50 Shield HP +50 Armor HP +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass -25 scan resolution Man I really want to be excited about this ship but I am struggling right now. Thank you for the 1PG and speed enhancement. That helps a bit. The change in the 25% shield bonus is a significant change and a flat +200hp gain is not impressive at all in comparison. I say 200 since you simultaneously lowered the base shield by 50, negating 1 rank. I was willing to try out the slow tanky ship, but this just got a lot less tanky and a little bit faster. With no Shield extenders the base HP before 900 * 1.25 = 1125 now 850 +250 = 1100, but you also get no added benefit from using extenders. Okay, I agree there is appeal for both PvE and PvP for a passive regen bonus. Bump the base shield HP to about 1000 and add 5% per level Shield Regen bonus. And DON'T make the base regen below every other shield destroyer only to be brought up to normal with the bonus. Let is be a bonus.
Marian Devers Rage and Terror Against ALL Authorities 67	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:23:34 - [350] - Quote Next week on CCP's "Balancing without guidelines" hit reality show, Rifters get a flat 2km optimal bonus per level. Just because. Stay tuned! Comming up next, Amarr ships to get a autocannon bonus? What will the jokester Fozzie think of next! Exclusive interview: "I dont know how to balance ships within existing guidelines, so i decided to ignore them! I also cant remember what 1/10/100mn stands for - i think its percentage of speed increase! Who knows"

Chan'aar State War Academy Caldari State 7	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:23:37 - [351] - Quote Tiberian Deci wrote: Hi Jackdaw, Sorry for pissing everyone off so much you got hit with the nerfbat into the ground before you were born. Sincerely, Your Older Brother, the Drake Thanks, I just spat my coffee over my keyboard!
Krell Kroenen The Devil's Shadow 254	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:23:58 - [352] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. I do hope that another bonus is found, 250 shield points is so anemic and leaves a bad taste in my mouth just by reading it.
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 536	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:26:54 - [353] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) +1 Powergrid -50 Shield HP +50 Armor HP +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass -25 scan resolution This is not only completely unnecessary it is bordering on spiteful. Why on earth would you even think that a flat hp bonus is even viable as a concept? It's pointless compared to ANYTHING else you could give it. Either give it a missile bonus or stay with the old one; an explosion velocity bonus would be fine, but this is just wrong on so many levels. I seriously hope this is some kind of joke because this kind of thing is FAR below the expectations the community holds its devs to. You are not a month-old character posting a balance thread on the forums for the first time; you are a dev in charge of balancing and releasing content for one of the largest online communities in the world. While it is ok to posit new and different ideas for balance, give them out as an OPTION amongst other choices, then listen to feedback. I can guarantee letting the community debate balance choices WILL give you better feedback than posting poorly conceived ideas and having page after page of backlash.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:27:18 - [354] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. 4% res per level? Wait that is beautiful, an existing defensive Caldari trait... I like it. The other area I was trying to figure out would have been a bonus per level to ship MWD penalty. 5-10% per level reduction is sig penalty would be welcome on a ship that will likely have its MWD on most of the time.
Saerin Korvalu Scope Works 21	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:31:04 - [355] - Quote My idea for a 10%-15% passive shield regen bonus per level still stands.
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 536	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:37:12 - [356] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Here's a toolbox of bonuses ideas for you to work with, all of which are significantly better than the flat hp bonus: 5% shield hp per level (revert) 10% bonus to ship sensor strength per level 5% bonus to scan probe strength per level (focuses on combat probing abilities) 5% bonus to missile sig radius per level 7.5% bonus to missile explosion velocity per level 10% bonus to missile velocity per level (double bonused with the sharpshooter mode) 20% bonus to small hybrid turret range per level ( add 6 turret slots for unbonused rail/blaster usage) 7.5% bonus to shield booster amount per level 10% reduction in shield sig radius drawback per level Passive recharge bonus (unknown inherent modifier value)
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1760	Posted - 2015.05.18 21:56:01 - [357] - Quote How to fix the Jackdaw: The Jackdaw should be as fast as a confessor. You should change the layout to 6/5/3, Give it 4 launchers instead of 5, Increase the role bonus to accomodate the DPS for the lost launcher, (maybe not a full increase to slightly nerf its dps?) Keep the current PWG and lower the CPU a bit Make a meaningful bonus with percentages, not this awful flat rate hp that has never been used before for a reason (its the complete opposite of what the fitting system in EVE is, as it is completely impermeable to changes in fitting, as opposed to a % bonus) Swap the agility / speed bonus to 33 / 66% Fix its god damned inertia Increase its mass because otherwise it would be OP on 10mn Reduce its sig radius to 60 Why: Can be answered with one simple question: Why do people fly destroyers? Because they want to have fun with something fast. A destroyer cannot reasonnably have more tank or more theoretical DPS than a cruiser, the only thing destroyers have over cruisers are: Application, Sig Radius, Speed. The Jackdaw has NONE of these. Therefore, since you won't give it cruiser-level dps or tank (despite battlecruiser-level speed and cruiser-level agility), you must either face the choice of having it useless or change it into something fast. How to make sure the jackdaw is not OP? First off, its important to remind people that the fun part about T3 destroyers is that they are... destroyers. By very definition, they cannot become something like the Ishtars that are the easy choice for PvE AND PvP, because the jackdaws - as destroyers- cannot reasonably threaten anything bigger than T1 cruisers. [] Take away light missile bonuses from the hull bonuses, put them into sharpshooter mode. Hull bonuses are for rockets only, sharpshooter missile bonuses (apart from the flight speed/time) are for light missiles only. Signature Tanking Best Tanking* Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2072	Posted - 2015.05.18 22:01:04 - [358] - Quote What about a shield recharge bonus... make it into old school mini drake... something like 75 extra shield hp per level and 5% to shield recharge time... There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 694	Posted - 2015.05.18 22:04:48 - [359] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. 4% res per level? Yey, dual invuln + EM rig + lvl5 tactical destroyer + logi bursts. The ultimate un-killable pirahna pack Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 1713	Posted - 2015.05.18 22:06:44 - [360] - Quote Why not just eliminate the bonus and give the ship +250 shield hp? As for the resist bonus suggestion, that's pretty dangerous on a ship that already has t2 resists. I believe heavy interdictors are the only ships that see anything like that. Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information. BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!

per Terpene Conglomerate 54	Posted - 2015.05.18 22:18:18 - [361] - Quote how about explosion velocity? its destroyer its caldari missile boat it should hurt small ships a lot since its t3 currently you cant do almost nothing to small linked kiting ships with your missiles, hell corax will be better than this 50+ hp per level is really, i dont know , like nothing? ninja edit: pls no ecm bonus, noone likes ecm, its broken, dont screw another ship with it
MukkBarovian Blackwater USA Inc. Pandemic Legion 41	Posted - 2015.05.18 22:52:33 - [362] - Quote Something other than +50HP a level. Anything that resembles a real bonus. Even if it isn't any good, as long as it appears to be a real bonus. Nerf something and give it a bonus to get just above the nerfed stats. Give it a situational bonus like lock range or ewar strength. Just a real bonus.
Punching Meg Zoidberg Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 1	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:01:01 - [363] - Quote Here's a wildcard for you. 10% Reduction in Shield Booster Capacitor Need per level. (Ancillary Shield Boosters don't receive this bonus)
Zafrena Tyrleon Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 4	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:03:55 - [364] - Quote Altrue wrote: How to fix the Jackdaw: The Jackdaw should be as fast as a confessor. You should change the layout to 6/5/3, Give it 4 launchers instead of 5, Increase the role bonus to accomodate the DPS for the lost launcher, (maybe not a full increase to slightly nerf its dps?) Keep the current PWG and lower the CPU a bit Make a meaningful bonus with percentages, not this awful flat rate hp that has never been used before for a reason (its the complete opposite of what the fitting system in EVE is, as it is completely impermeable to changes in fitting, as opposed to a % bonus) Swap the agility / speed bonus to 33 / 66% Fix its god damned inertia Increase its mass because otherwise it would be OP on 10mn Reduce its sig radius to 60 Why: Can be answered with one simple question: Why do people fly destroyers? Because they want to have fun with something fast. A destroyer cannot reasonnably have more tank or more theoretical DPS than a cruiser, the only thing destroyers have over cruisers are: Application, Sig Radius, Speed. The Jackdaw has NONE of these. Therefore, since you won't give it cruiser-level dps or tank (despite battlecruiser-level speed and cruiser-level agility), you must either face the choice of having it useless or change it into something fast. How to make sure the jackdaw is not OP? First off, its important to remind people that the fun part about T3 destroyers is that they are... destroyers. By very definition, they cannot become something like the Ishtars that are the easy choice for PvE AND PvP, because the jackdaws - as destroyers- cannot reasonably threaten anything bigger than T1 cruisers. Take away light missile bonuses from the hull bonuses, put them into sharpshooter mode. Hull bonuses are for rockets only, sharpshooter missile bonuses (apart from the flight speed/time) are for light missiles only. This is a pretty good list of things that need to happen. Changing slots to 6/5/3 and dropping launchers to 4 keeps it in line with the others. Loss of damage? Maybe, but you have that extra low slot for a BCS. Change that 5% ROF to 10% damage, just like the Svipul and Confessor. Then scrap your shield bonus (remember we're stripping a mid slot too), bake more shields into the hull, and add in 10% missile explosion velocity per level. So, 4 launchers after bonuses brings it up to 9 total, but it can apply damage quite well. Swap around the 33/66 spread on Propulsion mode to make it similar to the other T3Ds, or it really won't see much use. I understand the idea behind not making the T3Ds carbon copies of each other, and to be sure, there is something desirable about that. But that isn't the pattern established with the Svipul and Confessor, and the current iteration of the Jackdaw doesn't measure up at all. If this were to go live as is, the role of the Jackdaw would be to use the ship's incredible agility to turn and run when the opponent shows up in a different T3D, because it's just not much of a contest at the moment.
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 61	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:16:54 - [365] - Quote +More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please. Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those"
PotatoOverdose Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS. 2684	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:24:24 - [366] - Quote Even T1 frigs don't use the small shield extender, and you think adding one to a T3D is a good idea? To be clear: I'm not saying the ship did or didn't need a nerf - I'm just saying that a small shield extender's worth of hp should be rolled into it's base stats and that as a bonus, it is completely un-inspired and dull. If you don't want to give it a dps/tank bonus, consider giving it a utility bonus like any of the following: 10% ECM strength per level (utillity fits - the caldari have an ewar battleship, why not an ewar destroyer?) 10% bonus to sensor strength per level (so an ECCM) 5% reduction in shield booster cap usage - to encourage active fits that don't use ancillary boosters 5% reduction in MWD cap usage
per Terpene Conglomerate 54	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:24:53 - [367] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: +More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please. Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those" fast missiles doesnt mean they will do some serious dmg to small and fast targets even if your missiles can catch them, explosion radius and explosion velocity is the most important thing if you wanna do some dmg to them
Garrett Howe Spectres 5	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:29:45 - [368] - Quote If the Jackdaw is going to be the slowest and have the least DPS of the T3 destroyers, it should at least be the tankiest. Keep the tactical destroyer bonuses similar to the other T3s (10% bonus to rocket/LML damage, 5% bonus to ROF). Then, change the 33.3% bonus on shield resistances to 66.6% bonus and reduce the velocity bonus in sharpshooter mode to 33.3%. If that is too OP, at least change the signature bonus to a 66.6% reduction, then buff the base sensor strength a bit so you could be near unprobeable in defensive mode alone.
Pierre Fonulique Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:33:14 - [369] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. I'd really prefer the ECCM bonus, or an ECM bonus. I feel like the T3 destroyers should demonstrate a cross section of what that race's frigates do without hitting all of the highs, and it would be good to se ewar represented without getting the full bonus that a EAF gets.
Kaldfir Gongukaslan Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic 2	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:45:25 - [370] - Quote Alright, so 5% per level is too much, and a flat-bonus is inconsistent with other bonuses (and 50hp seems underpowered). Is there a reason nobody has suggested the obvious thing, which is to just reduce the 5% to 2-4%? I haven't run the numbers or anything, but that seems to be the obvious way to tone-down a bonus that is too strong.

Makoto Priano Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd. 7027	Posted - 2015.05.18 23:50:28 - [371] - Quote Alternatively, what about a fitting bonus? 5% per level reduction to shield upgrade PG and CPU useage? Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries: exploring the edge of the known, advancing the state of the art. Would you like to know more?
Xavier Azabu Fluid Motion Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 15	Posted - 2015.05.19 01:06:48 - [372] - Quote Hi Fozzie. Trust me, that 250hp shield bonus needs to go. Just give the ship about 150-200 more shield ehp. For the replacement bonus, why not a grab bag for versatility? I'd consider these two for a unique ship. You could use ECM on the thing but not giving it a bonus to strength makes for cool fitting decisions due to the lack of lows. (most would do a DCU and then something else) 10% bonus to ECM Optimal Range per level 10% bonus to Missile Launcher Reload Time per level Players could use rig slots to increase velocity. Then you have a sniping light missile ecm boat with quick draw timing and a decent tank. This guy's post is key - Altrue wrote: Let's look at this objectively shall we? Comparison Caracal RML vs Jackdaw Light missiles ... Conclusion: For TRIPLE the price, you get a ship that's WORSE in most cases, or that has negligible bonuses, especially for (again) triple the price. The only real difference lies in the signature radius, but given how SLOW the ship is, and given that the jackdaw would still be over 350sig, I really don't see how this could significantly improve its survivability. TL;DR: I won't bother and rather pick a caracal or, if I really want to go pimp and small, a flycatcher. As for others who call for an explosion or velocity bonus... you're just going to have the Jackdaw completely replace the almost never used Corax and the Garmur if that happens.
Heinrich Rotwang Zentralrat deutscher Fliesentischbesitzer e.V. 66	Posted - 2015.05.19 01:15:25 - [373] - Quote An example of a way more useful bonus would be a 10 percent reduction per level to the volume of Fedos in the cargohold.
Onslaughtor Occult National Security Phoenix Naval Systems 141	Posted - 2015.05.19 01:19:43 - [374] - Quote Zafrena Tyrleon wrote: Altrue wrote: How to fix the Jackdaw: The Jackdaw should be as fast as a confessor. You should change the layout to 6/5/3, Give it 4 launchers instead of 5, Increase the role bonus to accomodate the DPS for the lost launcher, (maybe not a full increase to slightly nerf its dps?) Keep the current PWG and lower the CPU a bit Make a meaningful bonus with percentages, not this awful flat rate hp that has never been used before for a reason (its the complete opposite of what the fitting system in EVE is, as it is completely impermeable to changes in fitting, as opposed to a % bonus) Swap the agility / speed bonus to 33 / 66% Fix its god damned inertia Increase its mass because otherwise it would be OP on 10mn Reduce its sig radius to 60 Why: Can be answered with one simple question: Why do people fly destroyers? Because they want to have fun with something fast. A destroyer cannot reasonnably have more tank or more theoretical DPS than a cruiser, the only thing destroyers have over cruisers are: Application, Sig Radius, Speed. The Jackdaw has NONE of these. Therefore, since you won't give it cruiser-level dps or tank (despite battlecruiser-level speed and cruiser-level agility), you must either face the choice of having it useless or change it into something fast. How to make sure the jackdaw is not OP? First off, its important to remind people that the fun part about T3 destroyers is that they are... destroyers. By very definition, they cannot become something like the Ishtars that are the easy choice for PvE AND PvP, because the jackdaws - as destroyers- cannot reasonably threaten anything bigger than T1 cruisers. Take away light missile bonuses from the hull bonuses, put them into sharpshooter mode. Hull bonuses are for rockets only, sharpshooter missile bonuses (apart from the flight speed/time) are for light missiles only. This is a pretty good list of things that need to happen. Changing slots to 6/5/3 and dropping launchers to 4 keeps it in line with the others. Loss of damage? Maybe, but you have that extra low slot for a BCS. Change that 5% ROF to 10% damage, just like the Svipul and Confessor. Then scrap your shield bonus (remember we're stripping a mid slot too), bake more shields into the hull, and add in 10% missile explosion velocity per level. So, 4 launchers after bonuses brings it up to 9 total, but it can apply damage quite well. Swap around the 33/66 spread on Propulsion mode to make it similar to the other T3Ds, or it really won't see much use. I understand the idea behind not making the T3Ds carbon copies of each other, and to be sure, there is something desirable about that. But that isn't the pattern established with the Svipul and Confessor, and the current iteration of the Jackdaw doesn't measure up at all. If this were to go live as is, the role of the Jackdaw would be to use the ship's incredible agility to turn and run when the opponent shows up in a different T3D, because it's just not much of a contest at the moment. I can't upvote for some reason. So this gets a quote because its about 90% of what I would like to see.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 65	Posted - 2015.05.19 01:43:11 - [375] - Quote I haven't been tracking this thread, but just wanted to say, the 50HP per level bonus just seems wrong and out of place in the game. I'm not commenting on the power or weakness of the bonus, just that it isn't consistent with the rest of the game.
Agata Black Minami no Kantai 2	Posted - 2015.05.19 01:45:02 - [376] - Quote If everything else fails you can always reduce the base shield HP of the ship enough so that with the old % bonus to shield ammount at max level it has the ehp you want it to have right now. Or would that leave some odd end susceptible to exploit? Should make for a really nice reason to train the caldari tactical destroyer skill to V. Bit of a **** move, though. * Keep the 5% shield ehp bonus * Change base shield hp to 880 * Has same shield hp at lvl V CTD as current build (1100)
Nikolai Agnon dirt 'n' glitter 16	Posted - 2015.05.19 02:25:28 - [377] - Quote Confessor: + Damage (10%/level) + Reduction in activation cost (10%/level) (matches the Coercer 10%-per-level) Svipul: + Damage (10%/level) + Range (10%/level) (at level 5, matches the Thrasher passive 50%) Jackdaw: + ROF (5%/level) + ...tank? (50 flat/level) The Confessor is already hard on cap, so that's really important. Great utility bonus. The Svipul needs the range in order to compete with pretty much every other Minmatar gunboat frigate. It makes sense. The Jackdaw's utility bonus should be for the weapon, not the tank. The Corax's passive 50% bonus is to missile velocity, which is already being applied via the sharpshooter mode. However, it's still missing any kind of actual precision bonus. Can we get a +10% missile explosion velocity bonus per level? This will put the Jackdaw's damage application bonus on par with its T1 counterpart. Otherwise, a T1 Corax would be more effective at shooting anything fast enough to catch a T3 destroyer.
Gorn Arming Merch Industrial Goonswarm Federation 395	Posted - 2015.05.19 03:05:20 - [378] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Give it a 2s/level reduction in missile launcher reload time. Instant reloads would be fun without seriously altering the ship's power level, and fit with the "flexible" gimmick for T3s. In most cases you'd see an opponent and select a damage type a few seconds ahead of time, but a reload time reduction would still be helpful when things change mid-fight.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 541	Posted - 2015.05.19 03:25:30 - [379] - Quote Altrue wrote: Soldarius wrote: I have no doubt what-so-ever that sub-2-second align times can be had. I have no doubt about how useless this is in any combat situation, and no doubt that I'd gadly trade it for speed instead The agility really is a poisonned gift, given the lack of speed and the really bad agility in other modes. It is useful for ships that get kited so they can slingshot. That's essentially the hurricane-vs-spitfire equation. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 541	Posted - 2015.05.19 03:42:03 - [380] - Quote Punching Meg Zoidberg wrote: Here's a wildcard for you. 10% Reduction in Shield Booster Capacitor Need per level. (Ancillary Shield Boosters don't receive this bonus) ASBs need a nerf as opposed to regular boosters needing a buff. At the module level. Not at the suspiciously specific ship level. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.

Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 541	Posted - 2015.05.19 03:43:32 - [381] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: +More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please. Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those" I've made a significant number of posts in the past about why high-speed missile combat doesn't work and this would result in so much damage bleed you'd still lose. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
w1ndstrike Strange Energy The Bastion 31	Posted - 2015.05.19 04:03:44 - [382] - Quote Nikolai Agnon wrote: Confessor: + Damage (10%/level) + Reduction in activation cost (10%/level) (matches the Coercer 10%-per-level) Svipul: + Damage (10%/level) + Range (10%/level) (at level 5, matches the Thrasher passive 50%) Jackdaw: + ROF (5%/level) + ...tank? (50 flat/level) The Confessor is already hard on cap, so that's really important. Great utility bonus. The Svipul needs the range in order to compete with pretty much every other Minmatar gunboat frigate. It makes sense. The Jackdaw's utility bonus should be for the weapon, not the tank. The Corax's passive 50% bonus is to missile velocity, which is already being applied via the sharpshooter mode. However, it's still missing any kind of actual precision bonus. Can we get a +10% missile explosion velocity bonus per level? This will put the Jackdaw's damage application bonus on par with its T1 counterpart. Otherwise, a T1 Corax would be more effective at shooting anything fast enough to catch a T3 destroyer. pretty much this, drop the tank bonus and add an application bonus
Solarus Explorer The Church of Awesome Heiian Conglomerate 6	Posted - 2015.05.19 04:05:09 - [383] - Quote The way i see it, the Jackdaw sacrifices speed and raw dps compared to its t3d brethren, and leaves itself open to be kited. To survive in this situation, it should have a really good tank, else it just becomes 'kiter-food'. Might I suggest a weaker version of the resist bonus for the hull bonus of the ship..... +3% to Shield Resists per level
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2072	Posted - 2015.05.19 04:21:45 - [384] - Quote The Jackdaw we want to see wrote: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 7.5% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Launcher damage per level +5% reduction in shield recharge time per level 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Role Bonus: 50% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile damage 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements Additional bonuses are available when one of three Tactical Destroyer Modes are active. Modes may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is active Propulsion Mode: 33.3% bonus to max velocity while Propulsion Mode is active 66.6% bonus to ship inertia modifier while Propulsion Mode is active Sharpshooter Mode: 66.6% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile velocity while Sharpshooter Mode is active 100% bonus to sensor strength, scan resolution and targeting range while Sharpshooter Mode is active Slot layout: 5 H, 6 M, 3 L, 5 launchers 3 Rig Slots, 400 Calibration Fittings: 57 PWG, 270 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1225 / 600 / 600 Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 60 / 55 / 50 Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 72.5 / 43.75 / 10 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 700 / 300s / 2.333 Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 170 / 6.6 / 1,000,000 / 4.5 / 9.15s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 55km / 275 / 7 Sensor strength: 15 Gravimetric Signature radius: 70 Cargo capacity: 450 There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 61	Posted - 2015.05.19 05:44:15 - [385] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Specia1 K wrote: +More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please. Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those" I've made a significant number of posts in the past about why high-speed missile combat doesn't work and this would result in so much damage bleed you'd still lose. Oh ya I know greater missile velocity doesn't equal more damage . Was just a comment to say I don't care as much about being kited for flying something slower, if I had more ability to inflict damage. The hecate will be a beast, so just plugging for moar now Missile bonuses please...
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 160	Posted - 2015.05.19 06:12:39 - [386] - Quote Give it a bonus to webifier strength to make up for the lower speed in scram range without making it viable for light missile kiting.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 161	Posted - 2015.05.19 06:20:28 - [387] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: -25 scan resolution [/list] Also did you mean +25 scan res?
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.19 06:57:49 - [388] - Quote Not one normally to participate in an echo chamber but CCP changing the speed of the Jackdaw is appreciated while the interia and mass changes make using (oversized) prop mods even more penalising (my interpretation) in terms of acceleration. I don't think the jackdaw should be 6/5/3 or anything but what it is because that would be homogenising the races and you'll just *** about it should that happen. I think that the jackdaw does respectable dps as it is, my (as yet unkilled fit) does 250dps with light missiles and can still burn and tank quite well. A rocket variant of the fit does some 340dps which makes it nearly catalyst levels of beastly. I don't think at this time that modifying the jackdaws damage output is a good move. The changes to the tank of the jackdaw surprises me slightly but at the same time it kind of doesn't. I never considered a 5%/level hp buff as being overly strong compared to active tank fits which can stay alive for much longer. Buffer only protects against alpha, local reps protects against high dps. I never built myself an MSE jackdaw so my commentary here can only be somewhat limited. Increasing damage application is also something I don't think the jackdaw needs or deserves. As one gentleman long ago pointed out most shield ships tend to fit upwards of 50% more tank than armour fits at the expense of any application mods/rigs and that this was the area which required attention. While I only partially agreed with him at the time now I see more of his side of the debate and tend to fit my missile ships with at least one rigor rig in order to press home that damage mechanic advantage missiles have over turrets. I think that the real issues we're facing with the jackdaw is that we're still using modules which haven't undergone a comprehensive rebalancing yet, whereas small projectiles at least have - and things like hulltanking benefits armour tanking ships more than it does shield tanks. This is limiting for shield ships as they're already starved for slots and particularly for missile users who have trouble with application and/or range. Our ships have less flexibility in fitting. Some outlier gimmick ships like buffer-armour ravens exist but battleships are in a league of their own and comparing them to smaller ships is kind of a disservice to everyone involved. So at the moment instead of everyone flipping the ** out and hurling abuse at Fozzie&co give the changes a chance to get tested by the player base, observe the new fitting meta and then provide feedback. Everything in EvE has a butterfly effect - we know this - fits fit to fight a fit get counter-fits fit to fight that fit and then the original fit is modified to fight against the fit fit to fight its fit. I'm calling for moderation here people. I'm calling for rationality to prevail and give the jackdaw the testing it NEEDS before criticism is leveled. The jackdaw has already seen one interim balance pass which leaves it more balanced right now than the svipul and confessor were on release. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Azami Nevinyrall Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 2240	Posted - 2015.05.19 09:02:52 - [389] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) Makes no sense... 50hp/level bonus? OK, sure maybe on............well nothing! I think Iceland is getting to you, have a shot of Maple Syrup and come back and fix this next level of stupid... (seriously, what kinda buff is that?) Hello, world!
Azami Nevinyrall Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 2240	Posted - 2015.05.19 09:13:36 - [390] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Giving the Jackdaw an ECCM bonus would make it inconsistent with the rest of the T3. Look at the other ships in the T3 line and follow suit when it comes to bonuses. Hello, world!

Great Cegun Talon Swarm NEOS FLEET 0	Posted - 2015.05.19 10:52:21 - [391] - Quote I see that the jackdaw is to become, a speedtank kiter. His bonuses on agility this show fully, but I think you are missing an important point that the speed tank means primarily speed. 170m \ c is not even a cruiser, this BC. On 1 mN afterberner, jackdaw will achieve a maximum of 800 in prop mode, even with two track disruptor allows get 150-mm guns. It is not necessary to speak about the so popular drones. I guess kite Tristan takes a lot of inconvenience to jackdaw. -íCP, pls do not make jackdaws sucking ****!!!! I think that Alture is right. Like Altrue wrote: How to fix the Jackdaw: The Jackdaw should be as fast as a confessor. You should change the layout to 6/5/3, Give it 4 launchers instead of 5, Increase the role bonus to accomodate the DPS for the lost launcher, (maybe not a full increase to slightly nerf its dps?) Keep the current PWG and lower the CPU a bit Make a meaningful bonus with percentages, not this awful flat rate hp that has never been used before for a reason (its the complete opposite of what the fitting system in EVE is, as it is completely impermeable to changes in fitting, as opposed to a % bonus) Swap the agility / speed bonus to 33 / 66% Fix its god damned inertia Increase its mass because otherwise it would
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1077	Posted - 2015.05.19 11:01:39 - [392] - Quote rabble rabble fix corax pg/cpu/speed
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.19 11:02:15 - [393] - Quote Great Cegun wrote: The Jackdaw should be as fast as a confessor. You should change the layout to 6/5/3, Give it 4 launchers instead of 5, Increase the role bonus to accomodate the DPS for the lost launcher, (maybe not a full increase to slightly nerf its dps?) Keep the current PWG and lower the CPU a bit Make a meaningful bonus with percentages, not this awful flat rate hp that has never been used before for a reason (its the complete opposite of what the fitting system in EVE is, as it is completely impermeable to changes in fitting, as opposed to a % bonus) Swap the agility / speed bonus to 33 / 66% Fix its god damned inertia Increase its mass because otherwise it would Can you produce a single justification of why this should be done? Quote: I guess kite Tristan takes a lot of inconvenience to jackdaw. The above quote is not a justification. Fit light missiles or suffer being kited with rockets. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Xavier Azabu Fluid Motion Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 15	Posted - 2015.05.19 11:21:41 - [394] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Specia1 K wrote: +More damage. Application of, alpha, ROF, velocity, explosion radius or whatever it takes to effectively kill things faster. Any bonus to missiles is welcome, please. Pilot 1: "My ship does 4000km/s, I can outrun you" Pilot 2: "My missiles do 7000km/s. Outrun those" I've made a significant number of posts in the past about why high-speed missile combat doesn't work and this would result in so much damage bleed you'd still lose. Oh ya I know greater missile velocity doesn't equal more damage . Was just a comment to say I don't care as much about being kited for flying something slower, if I had more ability to inflict damage. The hecate will be a beast, so just plugging for moar now Missile bonuses please... For LML and rocket boats with tank and missile damage/range/velocity type bonuses we already have the Garmur, Talwar, (the ineffective in PVP) Corax, and various Flycatcher and Heretic "combat interdictor" fits. Also as mentioned earlier in this thread, the Caracal is king of cheap light missile barrages and will outperform the Jackdaw in many ways. Only the Orthrus and Scythe Fleet Issue can be fit in a way that challenges the Caracal's status. But both are reasonably expensive to balance it out. My point is - why do we want to make another version of any of these ships? We already have so many boats with missile velocity and explosion bonuses. I'd rather have fitting warriors pop on Hydraulic Bay Thrusters to make the Jackdaw perform similarly. That's why I'm still in favor of a few "grab bag" bonuses. Unique bonuses that are suited to Caldari and add to the Jackdaw's versatility. A broad ECM range bonus or effectiveness bonus would be very cool. The Jackdaw should be difficult to probe in the tradition of the Tengu with high sensor strength. For the final one how about either an afterburner bonus (seen on Sansha faction ships with Caldari requirements), a strong missile launcher reload speed bonus, or something else unique. Cycle bonuses are often hard to wrap our heads around, but could be interesting. Imagine a bonus to Afterburner cycles allowing quick pulsing. I agree with these repeated comments that it is lacking in stats. But it should find a niche and then be fine-tuned.
Warde Guildencrantz TunDraGon That Escalated Quickly. 1208	Posted - 2015.05.19 11:29:07 - [395] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Lets see: Reduction in shield extender sig radius penalty per level 1.5% bonus to shield resists per level (or even 1%) Increased effectiveness of Shield Flux Coils (AKA trade alpha resistance for passive tank) +10% missile velocity and -10% (5%?) missile flight time per level 5% reduction in heat damage generated by propulsion modules TunDraGon Director ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us My ship fits
Nagarythe Tinurandir House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness 199	Posted - 2015.05.19 11:32:33 - [396] - Quote Azami Nevinyrall wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Giving the Jackdaw an ECCM bonus would make it inconsistent with the rest of the T3. Look at the other ships in the T3 line and follow suit when it comes to bonuses. And while we're at it, just make every HAC a Ishtar copy? Nobody will force you to fly a jackdaw, if it's not to your liking. Let CCP try something new. People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... The only (minor) issue I have right now is the cap usage of all the nasties one can put in midslots...
Saerin Korvalu Scope Works 23	Posted - 2015.05.19 12:18:17 - [397] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Azami Nevinyrall wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Giving the Jackdaw an ECCM bonus would make it inconsistent with the rest of the T3. Look at the other ships in the T3 line and follow suit when it comes to bonuses. And while we're at it, just make every HAC a Ishtar copy? Nobody will force you to fly a jackdaw, if it's not to your liking. Let CCP try something new. People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... The only (minor) issue I have right now is the cap usage of all the nasties one can put in midslots... edit: but yeah, the HP flat is boring. A Bonus for remote SeBo or cap usage of painters would be super awesome. So you're saying ships shouldn't have an equal footing? Alright, let's give the Jackdaw extremely limited capabilities for the sake of making it 'unique'.
Nagarythe Tinurandir House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness 199	Posted - 2015.05.19 12:44:06 - [398] - Quote Saerin Korvalu wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Azami Nevinyrall wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Giving the Jackdaw an ECCM bonus would make it inconsistent with the rest of the T3. Look at the other ships in the T3 line and follow suit when it comes to bonuses. And while we're at it, just make every HAC a Ishtar copy? Nobody will force you to fly a jackdaw, if it's not to your liking. Let CCP try something new. People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... The only (minor) issue I have right now is the cap usage of all the nasties one can put in midslots... edit: but yeah, the HP flat is boring. A Bonus for remote SeBo or cap usage of painters would be super awesome. So you're saying ships shouldn't have an equal footing? Alright, let's give the Jackdaw extremely limited capabilities for the sake of making it 'unique'. oh no!1!, two of the logistic cruisers do not have cap transfer bonus and are more aligned to small gang than big fleets. CCP please fix this issue! I detect unequal footing. -> better make the jackdaw use hybrids then, we do not want the T3Ds to be too different from each other... of course one can troll with semantics
Azami Nevinyrall Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 2242	Posted - 2015.05.19 12:52:01 - [399] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Azami Nevinyrall wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. Giving the Jackdaw an ECCM bonus would make it inconsistent with the rest of the T3. Look at the other ships in the T3 line and follow suit when it comes to bonuses. And while we're at it, just make every HAC a Ishtar copy? Nobody will force you to fly a jackdaw, if it's not to your liking. Let CCP try something new. People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... The only (minor) issue I have right now is the cap usage of all the nasties one can put in midslots... edit: but yeah, the HP flat is boring. A Bonus for remote SeBo or cap usage of painters would be super awesome. Yes, nobody can and will force me to fly anything. (Can't say that about Nullsec Coalitions.) What we have here is inconsistences between ships of the same class. Confessor - 10% bonus to damage/10% reduction in activation cost. Svipul - 10% bonus to damage/10% to optimum range. Jackdaw - 5% bonus to rate of fire/+50 additional base Shield Hitpoints and/or "bonus" to ECCM? Don't you see in inconsistences here? I'm hoping you're not this dense! It should be - 10% rate of fire/10% to explosion velocity or damage or speed Hello, world!
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2073	Posted - 2015.05.19 12:53:13 - [400] - Quote How about this for a bonus. Give the ship a 7% reduction in cap effect from shield power relays. That way at level v you dont loose any cap from using a srp. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.19 12:54:55 - [401] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: rabble rabble fix corax pg/cpu/speed Yeah I'd definitely agree that the corax needs more help than the jackdaw, that's for sure. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Aliventi Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 858	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:02:35 - [402] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. What could possibly be more Caldari than a kiting missile spamming ship doctrine? It might be hard to balance, but I think the tactical subsystems could be a way to make that work. Either you get range, tank, or speed. But not all three at once. I think a 10% sig radius bonus per level would work well. With that bonus the Jackdaw could perhaps not have as large of a buffer, but could sig/speed tank a lot of the damage. It would still be a fine brawler with all of it's mids and high resists. But I would love to see a "mini-drake" bringing back the kiting missile spam doctrines.
Ab'del Abu Atlantis Ascendant 283	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:03:47 - [403] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks for the feedback so far, especially those of you who have been testing on SISI. We're making a couple tweaks that should be in the next SISI build for you to try out. Changing the 5% shield HP bonus to a +50 shield HP per level (generally toning down the bonus a bit, especially when fitting multiple extenders) +1 Powergrid -50 Shield HP +50 Armor HP +10 Velocity +0.2 Inertia -50,000kg mass -25 scan resolution Why not change the +5% to +4%. +50 shield HP is a weird bonus imho
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1077	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:08:32 - [404] - Quote Aliventi wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. What could possibly be more Caldari than a kiting missile spamming ship doctrine? It might be hard to balance, but I think the tactical subsystems could be a way to make that work. Either you get range, tank, or speed. But not all three at once. I think a 10% sig radius bonus per level would work well. With that bonus the Jackdaw could perhaps not have as large of a buffer, but could sig/speed tank a lot of the damage. It would still be a fine brawler with all of it's mids and high resists. But I would love to see a "mini-drake" bringing back the kiting missile spam doctrines. caldari are supposed to like slowkiting imo. it bothers me when they get good speed and sig for no reason.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:20:11 - [405] - Quote Aliventi wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. What could possibly be more Caldari than a kiting missile spamming ship doctrine? It might be hard to balance, but I think the tactical subsystems could be a way to make that work. Either you get range, tank, or speed. But not all three at once. I think a 10% sig radius bonus per level would work well. With that bonus the Jackdaw could perhaps not have as large of a buffer, but could sig/speed tank a lot of the damage. It would still be a fine brawler with all of it's mids and high resists. But I would love to see a "mini-drake" bringing back the kiting missile spam doctrines. I believe minmatar have the 'kiting missile' thing in their basket. Caldari are more the tanky brawler missile kind. Minmatar also are the guys who most commonly get the shield boost amount (with the hawk, bustard and golem being high-profile exceptions). If Fozzie is prepared to accept different bonuses for the Jackdaw then I would posit something a little rarer, something a little more off the beaten path. Something like warp speed acceleration, or 5%/level to overheat effectiveness or a -5% cap use on shield boosters bonus. Things that introduce more aggressive and risky behaviour (Rise's favourite). Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1047	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:21:54 - [406] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... Actually people were wtf-OP 50km artillery in prop mode. Then some were trololol ship with 2MASBs and a 10mn AB and 300dps+. But calling it bad, no one did that.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12790	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:28:12 - [407] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... Actually people were wtf-OP 50km artillery in prop mode. Then some were trololol ship with 2MASBs and a 10mn AB and 300dps+. But calling it bad, no one did that. The most commonly expressed opinions in the Svipul feedback thread said it would be terrible and that nobody would fly it. We've accepted that the community as a whole underestimates the strength of Tactical Destroyers until someone proves to them how good they can be. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1770	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:32:53 - [408] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We've accepted that the community as a whole underestimates the strength of Tactical Destroyers until someone proves to them how good they can be. I'd rather say that you tried to make a better version than their T1 counterpart. The Confessor is inspired of the Coercer The Svipul is inspired of the Thrasher The Jackdaw is inspired of the Corax Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2073	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:33:05 - [409] - Quote In the op you dont post shield recharge time... Just curious if you would be willing to up the rof bonus so you can reduce to 4 missile hard points and give us 3 low slots... then we could make old school pure passive tanks and be mini drakes. There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Spugg Galdon Nisroc Angels 673	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:48:57 - [410] - Quote Super - Crazy - Random Idea: Jackdaw gets a fitting bonus to propulsion mods. Allowing it to fit a M-MJD with -50% jump range and activation time. Give it another bonus that reduces the MJD cooldown timer to 30 seconds. Then the Jackdaw can be a slow ass ****** destroyer that just blinks around the grid laughing at people whilst it spams missiles

Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1802	Posted - 2015.05.19 13:49:35 - [411] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... Actually people were wtf-OP 50km artillery in prop mode. Then some were trololol ship with 2MASBs and a 10mn AB and 300dps+. But calling it bad, no one did that. The most commonly expressed opinions in the Svipul feedback thread said it would be terrible and that nobody would fly it. We've accepted that the community as a whole underestimates the strength of Tactical Destroyers until someone proves to them how good they can be. What's your vision of it? What are you trying to build with it? Is it supposed to be a good solo ship like the previous 2 T3D or is it supposed to be used differently? I don't think it's an outright bad ship but it would be nice to know what you are trying to accomplish with this hull so feedback can be targeted at realising this goal instead of pulling in every direction and ending up with stuff like a "free* SSE at skill V". *Not actually free since you "paid" a bonus slot for it.
Spugg Galdon Nisroc Angels 673	Posted - 2015.05.19 14:24:34 - [412] - Quote Spugg Galdon wrote: Super - Crazy - Random Idea: Jackdaw gets a fitting bonus to propulsion mods. Allowing it to fit a M-MJD with -50% jump range and activation time. Give it another bonus that reduces the MJD cooldown timer to 30 seconds. Then the Jackdaw can be a slow ass **** destroyer that just blinks around the grid laughing at people whilst it spams missiles Building on this daft idea: Jackdaw Caldari Tactical Destroyer Bonuses Per Level: 10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile damage 5% bonus to rocket and light missile launcher RoF 5% reduction in heat damage generated by modules Role Bonus: 80% reduction in M-MJD PG and CPU requirements -50% to MJD jump distance, activation time and activation cost 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements Additional bonuses are available when one of three Tactical Destroyer Modes are active. Modes may be changed no more than once every 10 seconds. Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active 33.3% reduction in ship signature radius while Defense Mode is active Propulsion Mode: 66.6% reduction to MJD cooldown while Propulsion Mode is active 33.3% bonus to ship agility while Propulsion Mode is active Sharpshooter Mode:** 66.6% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile velocity while Sharpshooter Mode is active 100% bonus to sensor strength, scan resolution and targeting range while Sharpshooter Mode is active Slot layout: 6 H, 6 M, 2 L, 5 launchers
Shailagh Ministry of War Amarr Empire 100	Posted - 2015.05.19 14:30:23 - [413] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... Actually people were wtf-OP 50km artillery in prop mode. Then some were trololol ship with 2MASBs and a 10mn AB and 300dps+. But calling it bad, no one did that. The most commonly expressed opinions in the Svipul feedback thread said it would be terrible and that nobody would fly it. We've accepted that the community as a whole underestimates the strength of Tactical Destroyers until someone proves to them how good they can be. Im pretty sure the community knows that T3 Destroyers are the most OP and biggest power creepers the game has seen since the introduction of T3 Cruisers. Seriously, who thinks T3 anythings are not over powered??? Power leeeeap
Nagarythe Tinurandir House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness 199	Posted - 2015.05.19 14:41:44 - [414] - Quote Azami Nevinyrall wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Azami Nevinyrall wrote: [quote=CCP Fozzie]snip. And while we're at it, just make every HAC a Ishtar copy? Nobody will force you to fly a jackdaw, if it's not to your liking. Let CCP try something new. People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... The only (minor) issue I have right now is the cap usage of all the nasties one can put in midslots... edit: but yeah, the HP flat is boring. A Bonus for remote SeBo or cap usage of painters would be super awesome. Yes, nobody can and will force me to fly anything. (Can't say that about Nullsec Coalitions.) What we have here is inconsistences between ships of the same class. Confessor - 10% bonus to damage/10% reduction in activation cost. Svipul - 10% bonus to damage/10% to optimum range. Jackdaw - 5% bonus to rate of fire/+50 additional base Shield Hitpoints and/or "bonus" to ECCM? Don't you see in inconsistences here? I'm hoping you're not this dense! It should be - 10% rate of fire/10% to explosion velocity or damage or speed Oh I understand what you want perfectly. I just have a different point of view. That is exactly why I brought up the logistic cruisers. Similar situation there. 2 sets of logistics catering to different kinds of fleets. I'd like the idea of at least one or two T3Ds giving the option of playing the support role. But I am with you on switching out the 50HPflat bonus. o7
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1803	Posted - 2015.05.19 14:44:41 - [415] - Quote Shailagh wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... Actually people were wtf-OP 50km artillery in prop mode. Then some were trololol ship with 2MASBs and a 10mn AB and 300dps+. But calling it bad, no one did that. The most commonly expressed opinions in the Svipul feedback thread said it would be terrible and that nobody would fly it. We've accepted that the community as a whole underestimates the strength of Tactical Destroyers until someone proves to them how good they can be. Im pretty sure the community knows that T3 Destroyers are the most OP and biggest power creepers the game has seen since the introduction of T3 Cruisers. Seriously, who thinks T3 anythings are not over powered??? Power leeeeap If you read the thread back they were announcing the svipul, a **** load of people were saying it would be UP at least compared to to the confessor. People were saying it would not get flown at all. Of course we won't try to expose every single of of them but there were a lot of negative comment.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1217	Posted - 2015.05.19 14:48:04 - [416] - Quote Wtf. MMJD on a destroyer being proposed? And you complain CCP don't listen?! Sheeeeeeeeesh.
John Eod Merlins Online 0	Posted - 2015.05.19 14:52:23 - [417] - Quote It will be a strong ship, as a brawler it has great range control and range; there should be no arguing that. But please make the bonus something meaningful (I personally liked someone's suggestion of more launcher capacity per level), 250hp is very underwhelming.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1048	Posted - 2015.05.19 14:59:37 - [418] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Shailagh wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... Actually people were wtf-OP 50km artillery in prop mode. Then some were trololol ship with 2MASBs and a 10mn AB and 300dps+. But calling it bad, no one did that. The most commonly expressed opinions in the Svipul feedback thread said it would be terrible and that nobody would fly it. We've accepted that the community as a whole underestimates the strength of Tactical Destroyers until someone proves to them how good they can be. Im pretty sure the community knows that T3 Destroyers are the most OP and biggest power creepers the game has seen since the introduction of T3 Cruisers. Seriously, who thinks T3 anythings are not over powered??? Power leeeeap If you read the thread back they were announcing the svipul, a **** load of people were saying it would be UP at least compared to to the confessor. People were saying it would not get flown at all. Of course we won't try to expose every single of of them but there were a lot of negative comment. Unlike a dev, I can be very selective regarding which posters I read . So when they announced the svipul, was kinda wtf optimal in the hull to that speed and volley, are they mad or something? and must've missed some comments. Out of curiosity, are snakes/links/propmode stacking penalized? I got 2km/s in defensive mode and 2.5km/s in propulsion mode with a 10mn, and that's most certainly not the speed boost on the packaging.
Azami Nevinyrall Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 2242	Posted - 2015.05.19 15:01:41 - [419] - Quote Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Azami Nevinyrall wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: Azami Nevinyrall wrote: [quote=CCP Fozzie]snip. And while we're at it, just make every HAC a Ishtar copy? Nobody will force you to fly a jackdaw, if it's not to your liking. Let CCP try something new. People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... The only (minor) issue I have right now is the cap usage of all the nasties one can put in midslots... edit: but yeah, the HP flat is boring. A Bonus for remote SeBo or cap usage of painters would be super awesome. Yes, nobody can and will force me to fly anything. (Can't say that about Nullsec Coalitions.) What we have here is inconsistences between ships of the same class. Confessor - 10% bonus to damage/10% reduction in activation cost. Svipul - 10% bonus to damage/10% to optimum range. Jackdaw - 5% bonus to rate of fire/+50 additional base Shield Hitpoints and/or "bonus" to ECCM? Don't you see in inconsistences here? I'm hoping you're not this dense! It should be - 10% rate of fire/10% to explosion velocity or damage or speed Oh I understand what you want perfectly. I just have a different point of view. That is exactly why I brought up the logistic cruisers. Similar situation there. 2 sets of logistics catering to different kinds of fleets. I'd like the idea of at least one or two T3Ds giving the option of playing the support role. But I am with you on switching out the 50HPflat bonus. o7 Then why not all 4 of them? Why specifically the Caldari T3 play logi? Why not the Amarr and Gallente play support? If you have 1 or 2 playing the support roles, you'll be stepping on the logi frigs and the T1/T2/T3 logi Cruisers' toes. Keep the ships inline with the other ships in the same role. It makes next to no sense to do it otherwise! Hello, world!
Maximus Andendare The Scope Gallente Federation 926	Posted - 2015.05.19 15:09:20 - [420] - Quote Max Kolonko wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. 4% res per level? A resist bonus feels like the best fit for a Caldari hull, still gives some shield benefit and doesn't wreck the hull too much. It could even be a 2% per level if a 20% resist bonus would be too powerful for a hull this size. A +boost amount (or any bonus affecting active tanking) doesn't really fit Caldari's "fantasy," and it'd send a mixed message to new players looking to learn various factions' philosophies. Step onto the battlefield, and you're already dead, born again at the end of the battle to live on and fight another day. >> Play Dust 514 FREE! Sign up for exclusive gear today! <<

Izmaragd Dawnstar EVE University Ivy League 0	Posted - 2015.05.19 15:10:53 - [421] - Quote From a design perspective, a fixed shield HP bonus (besides being about as weak as a wet noodle) does not make a lot of sense, because it doesn't scale with your shield extenders, other skills like Shield Management, or with implants. If you look at the other ship's bonuses, you don't exactly find a lot of those running around (except things like Ishkur drone bay bonus or +drone number bonuses on carriers or Guardian-Vexor). If you fear that the +5% shield HP bonus would be OP (which I doubt seeing silly stuff like LSE svipuls running around), then swap it to something else entirely, for example +5% shield recharge per level (to keep in the tune of recent Tengu subsystem changes, or something for better damage application for light missiles and rockets (+explosion radius or velocity). On a side note, I don't understand the whole "let's get +ROF instead of +damage" approach. Maybe a replacement of the main bonus to a +damage percentage is in order as well. It's apparently OK on Mordu's ships and on other tactical destroyers, so I don't see why the Jackdaw would get such a disgrace. Right now, I feel that developers have been so traumatized by the Drake that they are afraid to make any missile boat for us poor Caldari pilots to use. On the other hand, having the Garmur and Orthrus is apparently okay.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2015.05.19 15:24:21 - [422] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote: People were bitching about how bad the svipul will be prior to its introduction and now they are complaining it is flown to much... Actually people were wtf-OP 50km artillery in prop mode. Then some were trololol ship with 2MASBs and a 10mn AB and 300dps+. But calling it bad, no one did that. The most commonly expressed opinions in the Svipul feedback thread said it would be terrible and that nobody would fly it. We've accepted that the community as a whole underestimates the strength of Tactical Destroyers until someone proves to them how good they can be. You are mostly right Fozzie, and please know I respect you and I try to present only reasonable suggestions. If I recall the biggest complaints about the Svipul were around the weapon system and the optimal range bonus. People didn't realize how good the speed and small signature would compensate for some of the other perceived short comings. With the Jackdaw, it has neither the speed nor signature of the Svipul, and we are having a hard time seeing how the agility will make up for the other short comings. Could you share the some insight into how the design team would like to see the Jackdaw used? Is it as a rocket brawler? If so I can see it doing better than people think in this role. But, if it is intended to be used equally as LML OR rocket I think the LML group is having a hard time seeing where this ship shines.
Nagarythe Tinurandir House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness 199	Posted - 2015.05.19 15:26:46 - [423] - Quote Azami Nevinyrall wrote: Then why not all 4 of them? Very good question, I don't know. I'd love to have the option to support-role them. Svipul can do this to some extend, the confessor will ever be the burning sword of ddom for me shrug Azami Nevinyrall wrote: Why specifically the Caldari T3 play logi? Why not the Amarr and Gallente play support? If you have 1 or 2 playing the support roles, you'll be stepping on the logi frigs and the T1/T2/T3 logi Cruisers' toes. Keep the ships inline with the other ships in the same role. It makes next to no sense to do it otherwise! With support I do not mean logi. I only brought up logistics to show than not all ships of one class need to be clones of each other in order to be viable. Support is anything force multiplier, in a way. painters, webs, damps, disruptors, remote sebo, additional scrams you name it. Just be honest here, if every T3D would be more or less the same, people will find the one doing it's job as SOLOPWNge^!^11! boat best and henceforth the other three will see less and less action. You saw this already after the svipul was introduced. Svipul fitted better in the kiting meta -> a lot more svipul than confessor, just as one example.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.19 15:54:24 - [424] - Quote How can people not have seen the svipul as being OP right out of the box? Also sisi is not exactly a true-to-life testbed for ships as people do 'fly to die' on there and the svipuls main strengths are inflated again in the TQ environment where money matters and people get scared and try to run. Testing info on sisi can only outline a picture the colours are added on TQ. And the svipul looked competent from sisi before it went live and then it just backflipped on all expectations and oversized prop mods made them OP. I'm sure noone here needs the history lesson but jesus christ peope if you thought svipul was underpowered before launch you're a god damned liar. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 12793	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:12:07 - [425] - Quote Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

Gorski Car 616	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:14:35 - [426] - Quote Yes that is way better. Good choice fozzie Collect this post
Torei Dutalis IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic 26	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:16:34 - [427] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. I'm glad you went with this idea, I strongly agree that it was the best of the lot suggested here and I think it fits perfectly with the theme of this ship class; adaptability.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 653	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:18:26 - [428] - Quote Lura Zara wrote: Saerin Korvalu wrote: Lura Zara wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Yeah the 50 per level bonus is intentionally one of the weaker ship bonuses, to keep the rest of the package balanced. I am open to considering other bonuses like the ECCM one, and I'm interested in other ideas you folks have for bonuses that don't have a huge impact on the ship power level while remaining flavourful for Caldari. If I may say. Ide rather see the following if the 5% shield hp is off the table 75hp/level +x% Shield booster cap need per cycle reduction. +x% Shield booster boost amount [Like a built in shield amp instead of HP] Some things like those. Having a active tank dessi instead of a passive tanking EHP Block would be nice. So far the only things caldari have that have a Rep amount bonus is the Golem... Having a bonus that caters to a specific type of tank eliminates the idea of the ship being a 'tactical' destroyer. Thats not what tactical means. Tactical: of, relating to, or constituting actions carefully planned to gain a specific military end. What your saying implies 'Broad." Therefore, any of those as a hull bonus further reduces the concept of T3Ds, unless you meant that for the Defensive mode - Double active tank bonuses is can of worms in and of itself. Something like SB Activation cost reduction in place of ship Sig reduction could work. ~Flavour~ // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1077	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:23:28 - [429] - Quote so are you actually honestly out of ideas and just picking stuff? this new one is still really strange. can't you just cut a launcher and slot, then give it double damage? or drop its agility and give it an agility bonus? maybe the shield bonus breaking it should tell you something about how wonky shield tanking is, and get you to take a look at that. while reload speed does address something I really dislike about rocket launchers, I'd prefer it if you'd just fix the silly low launcher capacity/high ammo volume/whatever you want to call it for all ships, rather than one of them.
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc Brave Collective 1770	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:25:18 - [430] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. That is... a very good idea ! Good job :) Signature Tanking Best Tanking Exploration Frontier Inc [Ex-F] CEO - BRAVE - Eve-guides.fr

Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1165	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:27:53 - [431] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. quicker reload than blasters... a little too good i suggest .. also why 6 mids? .. my ferox only has 5 and its a bc does this seem right too you? Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Hendrink Collie Steel Fleet Gentlemen's.Club 29	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:28:24 - [432] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. Oooooh. I dig that. +1
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1077	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:30:13 - [433] - Quote Harvey James wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. quicker reload than blasters... a little too good i suggest .. also why 6 mids? .. my ferox only has 5 and its a bc does this seem right too you? ferox being down a slot compared to other BCs isn't right at all. doubt it'll ever get fixed though.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 653	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:33:21 - [434] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: How can people not have seen the svipul as being OP right out of the box? Also sisi is not exactly a true-to-life testbed for ships as people do 'fly to die' on there and the svipuls main strengths are inflated again in the TQ environment where money matters and people get scared and try to run. Testing info on sisi can only outline a picture the colours are added on TQ. And the svipul looked competent from sisi before it went live and then it just backflipped on all expectations and oversized prop mods made them OP. I'm sure noone here needs the history lesson but jesus christ peope if you thought svipul was underpowered before launch you're a god damned liar. You think this wasn't brought up ad nauseum in the previous thread? Gÿæ Double tank bonus in Def Gÿæ Optimal range hull bonus Gÿæ ACs taking 0.0000000000000001 PG to fit Idea: Swap Tracking one in SS with the Optimal range in hull - fixes Arty nanugafing, but then ACs. Idea two: Optimal range for SS, Shield recharge time reduction for hull bonus w/ possible hull Shield attribute review afterwards. Atm Svipul is faster, more EHP, same Cap recharge, better applied projection than a Confessor. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1165	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:34:53 - [435] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: Harvey James wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. quicker reload than blasters... a little too good i suggest .. also why 6 mids? .. my ferox only has 5 and its a bc does this seem right too you? ferox being down a slot compared to other BCs isn't right at all. doubt it'll ever get fixed though. mm.. wouldn't be so bad if the drake had the same amount of mids Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1166	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:36:35 - [436] - Quote i think this thread and D3's in general really demonstrate how much prop mods need too be class limited, you know how people will exploit everything. Tech 3's need to be multi-role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:45:44 - [437] - Quote Harvey James wrote: i think this thread and D3's in general really demonstrate how much prop mods need too be class limited, you know how people will exploit everything. I've been saying that for over 3 months but people always parrot on about their options being removed nevermind that balance is a higher priority. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Great Cegun Talon Swarm NEOS FLEET 1	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:47:48 - [438] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Great Cegun wrote: The Jackdaw should be as fast as a confessor. You should change the layout to 6/5/3, Give it 4 launchers instead of 5, Increase the role bonus to accomodate the DPS for the lost launcher, (maybe not a full increase to slightly nerf its dps?) Keep the current PWG and lower the CPU a bit Make a meaningful bonus with percentages, not this awful flat rate hp that has never been used before for a reason (its the complete opposite of what the fitting system in EVE is, as it is completely impermeable to changes in fitting, as opposed to a % bonus) Swap the agility / speed bonus to 33 / 66% Fix its god damned inertia Increase its mass because otherwise it would Can you produce a single justification of why this should be done? Quote: I guess kite Tristan takes a lot of inconvenience to jackdaw. The above quote is not a justification. Fit light missiles or suffer being kited with rockets. The main argument that the current TTX does not give freedom to create your own configuration. But I am ready to paint all a bit more precisely. firstly speed. Agility course convenient indicator. but the game mechanics agility affects really on three things: 1. The speed of the warp outward 2. 3. triangular acceleration speed in low orbit. 1 - it makes sense when passing camps. However, we are talking about a combat situation where we ourselves want to kill someone, not just run away. 2 and 3 - the bottom line is that here directly affects the maximum speed if the ship does not have a speed of 1000, the special does not matter how much we will reach its maximum speed, or the speed with which we orbitet our enemy. I hope this is trivial. Now launchers. Actually it is simple justice, that the ratio of slots and implements all T3 is equal to the greater of slots not occupied by guns and the smaller the longer guns can be used to overheat. Now pg, if you ever probyvali fitit Corax, then you know the problem is that without mandatory crutches, the ship is going. Jackdaw will follow exactly the same problem. Finally about slots, it is the culmination of the problem of creating your own configuration, the pilot is not able to properly calibrate the ship for themselves. And it stands out of TTX others T3 - confessor 6 5 3, Matar - 6 4 4, Gall - 6 4 4 it is quite logical that the Caldari would 6 5 3
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1077	Posted - 2015.05.19 16:58:52 - [439] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Harvey James wrote: i think this thread and D3's in general really demonstrate how much prop mods need too be class limited, you know how people will exploit everything. I've been saying that for over 3 months but people always parrot on about their options being removed nevermind that balance is a higher priority. the option to have missile and tackle immunity is good for the game and is an important and valid playstyle that needs to be protected and having capitals that warp in 10 seconds, that's also important, and it would be unfair to fix it because then people would be sad
unidenify Plundering Penguins 113	Posted - 2015.05.19 17:04:22 - [440] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. inb4 someone try to make RLML fit on Jack

Zetheral Knights Of The Chloroform 1	Posted - 2015.05.19 17:13:24 - [441] - Quote Here is a crazy idea, and if it was already suggested then just ignore this post (didn't read the whole thread). The speed of this ship is a hot button topic but I wonder if there is some light we can get from the crazy inertia bonus the ship gets. Maybe instead of making this into a raw speed machine like other two, give it a warp speed bonus so it can align and warp faster than other ships of its class. Think of it as the heavy tackle for interceptors. The speed of a ceptor gets the initial point but ceptors are generally weak, with the ability of the jackdaw to stay in tow with a crazy warp speed means that they can take over the point and maintain the point while the rest of the fleet arrives. While the lack of the speed could hurt this role, it does keep it from out right replacing ceptors. Then it has the damage to and tank to help the fleet out. It is a crazy idea but could work.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 653	Posted - 2015.05.19 17:14:30 - [442] - Quote Marian Devers wrote: Next week on CCP's "Balancing without guidelines" hit reality show, Rifters get a flat 2km optimal bonus per level. Just because. Stay tuned! Comming up next, Amarr ships to get a autocannon bonus? What will the jokester Fozzie think of next! Exclusive interview: "I dont know how to balance ships within existing guidelines, so i decided to ignore them! I also cant remember what 1/10/100mn stands for - i think its percentage of speed increase! Who knows" Don't be an ass. If they were to listen to the average suggestions, every single ship would have cookie-cutter Damage/Tank/Speed bonuses. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 265	Posted - 2015.05.19 17:22:36 - [443] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. This might be hilarious with polarized Rockets. Too bad you cant really get rlmls on this just for ***** and giggles
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2015.05.19 17:59:02 - [444] - Quote Harvey James wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. quicker reload than blasters... a little too good i suggest .. T1 Hybrid ammo changes amount of damage and range. T1 Missiles changes damage type. This is meaninful bonus that gives the Jackdaw an interesting buff to tactical choices but a minor overall dps buff from shorter reloads.
motie one Secret Passage 17	Posted - 2015.05.19 17:59:39 - [445] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. That is quite a nice idea, some effect, coupled with a quality of life improvement. Nice Now the shield bonus is out of the way, Will we still be getting the reduced base shield you announced with the last suggestion? (The -50 shield HP) Or keeping it as it was originally? There is no need to have that to balance the shield bonus now? Thanks
Mystical Might V0LTA Triumvirate. 186	Posted - 2015.05.19 18:18:33 - [446] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. So, dear brother fozzie, In what situation is this reload situation bonus an applicable game changer? What does it achieve for anyone?
Krell Kroenen The Devil's Shadow 254	Posted - 2015.05.19 18:24:48 - [447] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. A much better looking bonus, and interesting one at that. thank you
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 161	Posted - 2015.05.19 18:24:49 - [448] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: ASBs need a nerf as opposed to regular boosters needing a buff. At the module level. Not at the suspiciously specific ship level. "Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate"
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2015.05.19 18:54:54 - [449] - Quote Mystical Might wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. So, dear brother fozzie, In what situation is this reload situation bonus an applicable game changer? What does it achieve for anyone? I had to step back and ponder this, but is a nice bonus for a tactical ship and here is why: 1) Quickly change damage type ammo:. EM to Explosive 2) Quickly change between standard/T2 ammo: missiles to precision or fury; rockets to rage or javelin. 3) Small dps increase when reloading ammo does occur over the course of a fight. Points 1 & 2 are purely tactical, quickly changing your ammo to best fit the target. Point 3 is a small bonus all the time.
Gorski Car 618	Posted - 2015.05.19 19:09:01 - [450] - Quote Mystical Might wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. So, dear brother fozzie, In what situation is this reload situation bonus an applicable game changer? What does it achieve for anyone? If you are up against 10 frigs both shield and armor tanked you can swap between mjolnir and nova fast because 10 frigs is about what you need vs a jackdaw huehue Collect this post

Talia Soucu Janus Financial Group 5	Posted - 2015.05.19 19:18:28 - [451] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. Great idea
Sturm Gewehr TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 73	Posted - 2015.05.19 19:23:37 - [452] - Quote Kind of surprised the reload bonus is as strong as it is, I thought 10% per level would be too bold a suggestion, 15% per level is fantastic. It makes the bonus meaningful for in combat reloads to swap missile and damage types, also minor DPS boost overall. I think it fits the archetype of t3ds being tactically flexible.
Tiberian Deci Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore 139	Posted - 2015.05.19 19:46:41 - [453] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. I like this much better.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2015.05.19 19:49:05 - [454] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. Will you be adjusting the base Shield HP further? Right now it is below T1 Cal destroyers 900/950. Also have you posted the recharge rate for the Jackdaw shields yet? P.S. Thank you for buffing small shield extenders, now that they are in the 500HP range they become a realistic option on small ships.
Lortar Ogarr Exanimo Inc Gentlemen's.Club 0	Posted - 2015.05.19 19:57:02 - [455] - Quote I like the change. I hope 15% is not OP
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 61	Posted - 2015.05.19 20:01:49 - [456] - Quote +1 for the reload bonus
Great Creator PPCORP 1	Posted - 2015.05.19 20:26:38 - [457] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. crap... rly crap. or give bonus to fit rapid lauchers. yea yea - 2.5 sec reload, but WHY? for shoot-reload-shoot? nah - for rockets - useless. for lml? naaah - rof with bonuses can be around 4-5 sec. For dat sh/r/sh - it will be around 5 too (lag, ping and other "server work fine") and? damage type change? wut? damage type alrdy choosen by direct scan.
MeBiatch GRR GOONS 2073	Posted - 2015.05.19 20:30:04 - [458] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. Cool... so like hybrid teload time There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote: Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2015.05.19 21:03:28 - [459] - Quote Great Creator wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. crap... rly crap. or give bonus to fit rapid lauchers. yea yea - 2.5 sec reload, but WHY? for shoot-reload-shoot? nah - for rockets - useless. for lml? naaah - rof with bonuses can be around 4-5 sec. For dat sh/r/sh - it will be around 5 too (lag, ping and other "server work fine") and? damage type change? wut? damage type alrdy choosen by direct scan. Do you never fight against more than one ship? When you do are they all the same race? If you go in against a mixed gang that had a Wolf, Zealot and a Hawk you might want to use Scourage on the Wolf, Inferno on the Zealot, and EM on the Hawk. That said. I am looking this over some more and while a cool, unique, and tactical skill. It adds very little power in the scope of your average fight. I hope they raise the base shields to a good place to keep the defense in line with the ship's design, knowing that this tactical bonus is cool but still very situational.
Phoenix Jones Isogen 5 1332	Posted - 2015.05.19 21:13:54 - [460] - Quote This is going to be one broken boat Yaay!!!!

Izmaragd Dawnstar EVE University Ivy League 0	Posted - 2015.05.19 21:29:42 - [461] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. While certainly very nice to have, I feel such a bonus falls out of the line compared to the other tactical dessies. Let's do this in order: - What is the problem of the lasers? They use cap. So, the Confessor gets a bonus on laser cap usage. - What is the problem of the autocannons? The have crap optimal and shoot in falloff a lot. So, the Svipul has a bonus to optimal. - What is the problem of hybrids? Well, they don't really have one, but both null and void come with -25% tracking so the Hecate is planned to have a tracking bonus (unless you guys decide to replace it with something else before July, of course ) Now, what is the problem of missiles and rockets? Is it reload time? While reducing reload time is definitely nice and everyone will take it over the 50HP shield bonus every day, it's not going to make or break stuff, unless we're talking RLMLs, which a dessie can't fit. Now, the missile application (aka "I need at least a web to make rage rockets hit a frigate for something") can be an issue. So, again, why not an application bonus? Pretty please? I could also do with a 7.5% shield boost amount, to keep it in line with the hawk.
Awkward Pi Duolus Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 41	Posted - 2015.05.19 21:40:22 - [462] - Quote CCP Fozzie, just wanted to chime in to say, I like this new bonus much better :)
Xavier Azabu Fluid Motion Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 15	Posted - 2015.05.19 22:10:27 - [463] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. YES! I don't know if I was the first to think of this but this should be really cool and should make the ship really adaptable as others have said. It also increases the overall DPS. Great job buffing without breaking, Fozzie. I also think that your reload speed increase is better than the 10% that I thought of... Xavier Azabu wrote: Hi Fozzie. Trust me, that 250hp shield bonus needs to go. Just give the ship about 150-200 more shield ehp. Also please increase the speed a little! And the locking range by 5km. For the replacement bonus, why not a grab bag for versatility? I'd consider (this) for a unique ship.... 10% bonus to Missile Launcher Reload Time per level... ...Players could use rig slots to increase velocity. Then you have a sniping light missile... boat with quick draw timing and a decent tank. With this buff I'd just tweak the stats a bit after testing and the Jackdaw should be a lot of fun.
Alexis Nightwish 195	Posted - 2015.05.19 22:25:04 - [464] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. So you've gone from a great defensive bonus, to a mediocre defensive bonus, to no bonus at all. You've completely lobotomized any buffer and passive regen fits. slowclap Combined with its sig radius (easily the highest of the T3Ds, Hecate included, even in defense mode), this thing is going to take all the damage. I hope that dual MASBs are enough to make the magic happen, cause if not I'm just going to call this the Jokedaw. CCP approaches problems in one of two ways: nudge or cludge EVE Online's "I win!" Button Fixing bombs, not the bombers
Pancocco Honestly We didnt know Unsettled. 0	Posted - 2015.05.19 22:39:09 - [465] - Quote Fozzie. Thanks for listening to the feedback. The change adds depth and a reason for us not to keep autoreload on the missiles for once. Even if it doesnt work out, Im happy to see it being attempted :) Personally I would have liked to see something like reduced sig penalty, but this is suprisingly interesting and engaging too! To the rest of you complaining: Theyre taking in feedback, just cause they didnt take in yours specifically doesnt mean its ****.
Great Creator PPCORP 1	Posted - 2015.05.19 22:43:10 - [466] - Quote Terra Chrall wrote: Do you never fight against more than one ship? When you do are they all the same race? If you go in against a mixed gang that had a Wolf, Zealot and a Hawk you might want to use Scourage on the Wolf, Inferno on the Zealot, and EM on the Hawk. That said. I am looking this over some more and while a cool, unique, and tactical skill. It adds little power in the scope of your average fight. I hope they raise the base shields to a good place to keep the defense in line with the ship's design, knowing that this tactical bonus is cool but still very situational. EDIT: Selecting between T2 ammo types quickly is a good use of this bonus. Changing damage types is a little less critical. And takes a lot more player knowledge of enemy ships. Of course if you think a ship is shield fit and find it was in fact armor fit, that extra 7.5 seconds could prove to be precious seconds. KB... and - i`m fight 1vsOverview in 90%, when i`m solo, so ... i know what i`m saying. if i go against this gang? - okay. but... on which ship?) on THIS new t3d - if THEY (gang i mean) not idiots - u just die cause of zealot and tackle from hawky/wolfy :) or u just warp out :) cause u have no tank., no speed :) or if u have bonuses, HG crystall and blue pill - u just don`t give a **** about damage type. u just tank them amd slowly it`s not add everything - trust me, it`s just waste of text and ship bonus. Haha - change t2? why - if u fight against destr+(but better cruiser, and it slow as maller, and not oversized ab) size = fury, else - faction. t2 lm prec - waste of cargo. t2 javelin - mb - but rly - if u need javelin rockets on close and slow destr - all goes wrong or u have a interestenig long range rocket setup (but actually it don`t work good too) yea yea - seconds >_> it`s just imagination.
SilentAsTheGrave Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective 265	Posted - 2015.05.19 22:58:22 - [467] - Quote Gorski Car wrote: Yes that is way better. Good choice fozzie (Would have loved a ECM bonus though because I hate people ) And you wonder why you didn't make it into CSM 10. Buddy Program: If you sign up with my buddy invite link and subscribe with a valid payment method - I will give you 95% of the going rate for PLEX!
Xavier Azabu Fluid Motion Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 15	Posted - 2015.05.19 23:11:18 - [468] - Quote SilentAsTheGrave wrote: Gorski Car wrote: Yes that is way better. Good choice fozzie (Would have loved a ECM bonus though because I hate people ) And you wonder why you didn't make it into CSM 10. Do you know who you're talking to? Gorski is an extremely talented pilot and theorycrafter. I've only flown with him a few times. He was one of those pilots who knows what to do at every step of the battle. He is far more experienced than many of the people on the CSM (no offense to anyone) at flying the ships. He was also responsible for some input into changes during the last CSM. Sorry to distract but I trust his advice in this thread. For all of those whining - give Fozzie some time. He might adjust the tank or sig or speed a bit. Haven't we been through this enough to know that it's not done yet? Just remember for all of your criticism that the thing has 6 mids and decent damage and agility.
Ix Method Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 451	Posted - 2015.05.19 23:13:30 - [469] - Quote New bonus best bonus, gg. Travelling at the speed of love.
Nikolai Agnon Dirt 'n' Glitter 19	Posted - 2015.05.19 23:28:39 - [470] - Quote The Jackdaw needs a damage application bonus, not a reload change. Anything with a cap stable tank higher than 20 ehp/s will be immune to the Jackdaw at 19km and 4km/s, especially if it's too slow to be able to slingshot with. This is a fantastic brawler, but this will have almost nonexistant applied damage against targets that are actually moving. This bonus heavily favors rockets, while does absolutely nothing for LML's. Please give the Jackdaw an explosion velocity bonus similar to the Corax.

Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1279	Posted - 2015.05.19 23:57:56 - [471] - Quote Yesterday I had a big long point-by-point post on the bonuses. I decided not to click submit because I knew things were changing rapidly and I wanted to do things on sisi. Glad I held off. So this new reload time bonus is unusual, unique, interesting, and tactically useful, especially for non-doctrine skirmishing like what you might see in losec or nulsec. On the other hand, the Jackdaw has a rather... small... base buffer now. Good thing it has 6 mids to compensate. And dat align time in prop mode... lol holy crap. edit: no application bonuses are required on small missiles. They apply perfectly to almost everything if you just put some SP into the appropriate skills. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Jenshae Chiroptera 1555	Posted - 2015.05.20 00:42:32 - [472] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Role Bonus: 50% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile damage 95% reduction in Scan Probe Launcher CPU requirements Additional bonuses : Defense Mode: 33.3% bonus to all shield resistances while Defense Mode is active Firstly, (I say this after Provi just beat NC.'s Tempest Fleet Issues with Nagas and Tornados) I do not like destroyers and Tier 3 battle cruisers. - Cruisers are good enough for killing frigates. - Standard battle cruisers are good enough for killing cruisers. Destroyers and Tier 3s have way too much power for too little skill and ISK. Tech 3 cruisers ... you finally saw they are over powered and nerf'ed them a little. Now ... you are making destroyers with 50%, let me repeat FIFTY percent damage bonus before mods on hulls that are already over powered AND they get 33.3% shield resists ... wait ... a Tengu gets 20% with subsystem skill to FIVE but a T3 destroyer can have 13% over and above a T3 cruiser by default?! What substances are your team taking? CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids . High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow Fozzie is treating a symptom.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.20 01:25:01 - [473] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: ASBs need a nerf as opposed to regular boosters needing a buff. At the module level. Not at the suspiciously specific ship level. "Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate" I take it you feel that ASBs are fine as-is? Care to explain why? Try to reference more than just their reload time (I'm sure I don't need to go there). Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.20 01:27:25 - [474] - Quote SilentAsTheGrave wrote: Gorski Car wrote: Yes that is way better. Good choice fozzie (Would have loved a ECM bonus though because I hate people ) And you wonder why you didn't make it into CSM 10. As "the 4chan candidate" he had a hard enough time getting elected in the first place. He was what, 14th or 15th in line to the throne and only got there because so many people quit csm9? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Arthur Aihaken Jormungand Corporation 4450	Posted - 2015.05.20 01:30:27 - [475] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. Great! Now can we get this for the Barghest as well...? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Aven Heleneto Furtherance. 0	Posted - 2015.05.20 01:59:00 - [476] - Quote Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Now ... you are making destroyers with 50%, let me repeat FIFTY percent damage bonus before mods on hulls that are already over powered AND they get 33.3% shield resists ... wait ... a Tengu gets 20% with subsystem skill to FIVE but a T3 destroyer can have 13% over and above a T3 cruiser by default?! strategic cruisers get all five of their subsystem bonuses all the time, the resist bonuses from defensive mode on tactical destroyers preclude the speed/inertia bonus from speed mode or the range of sharpshooter mode, it's a completely different style of play. and the 50% damage role bonus the class has was so they could remove a few hardpoints and have the same amount of damage as the original version, and then nerf the powergrid to make oversized afterburner fits require some compromise without making long range fits impractical.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.20 02:04:57 - [477] - Quote This all makes me wonder where t3s are going. 5 subsystems with 3 modes each? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Stunt Flores Anime Masters Verge of Collapse 8	Posted - 2015.05.20 02:07:17 - [478] - Quote Kind of a lame bonus. I mean its cool for fleet situations swapping ammo types I guess but the other t3ds dont get that kind of bonus pure damage.
Aven Heleneto Furtherance. 0	Posted - 2015.05.20 02:08:21 - [479] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: This all makes me wonder where t3s are going. 5 subsystems with 3 modes each? each set independently for 75 different ways to fly it?
Jenshae Chiroptera 1556	Posted - 2015.05.20 02:21:01 - [480] - Quote Aven Heleneto wrote: Jenshae Chiroptera wrote: Now ... you are making destroyers with 50%, let me repeat FIFTY percent damage bonus before mods ... strategic cruisers get all five of their subsystem bonuses all the time, ... Role + mode. Not mode vs mode. Mini-max these T3 destroyers into specific roles and it won't be long until a fleet of them is rolling out with just tackle and logi. These ships also exacerbate power creep, so new players will look at how far they have to go and possibly quit. This is already a huge problem before new ships are added. CCP - Building ant hills and magnifying glasses for fat kids . High Sec needs a stepping stone to other areas of space, where they can grow Fozzie is treating a symptom.

Zurakaru Ze Open University of Celestial Hardship Art of War Alliance 15	Posted - 2015.05.20 05:31:09 - [481] - Quote Meh. As with all new ships, it seems, whatever comes out in the first release will be nerfed/buffed/completely changed by the second. Now, have the ability to squeeze some RLML on there AND have a reload bonus...that'd get the drool going.
Liafcipe9000 Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 36470	Posted - 2015.05.20 05:45:16 - [482] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. slow clapping and sad laughter GG Fozzie. G ****ING G. I LOVE YOU... I am a cat.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 161	Posted - 2015.05.20 06:50:34 - [483] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Fourteen Maken wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: ASBs need a nerf as opposed to regular boosters needing a buff. At the module level. Not at the suspiciously specific ship level. "Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate" I take it you feel that ASBs are fine as-is? Care to explain why? Try to reference more than just their reload time (I'm sure I don't need to go there). because local reps are only really used by solo/small gang, even pve players avoid using ancillary reps, same with oversized prop mods, because we don't need to do anything else to limit that playstyle, and because if what you've said so far in this thread is anything to go by you might just be the worst solo advocate ever.
bunzing heet Demon-War-Lords Circle-Of-Two 3	Posted - 2015.05.20 08:31:01 - [484] - Quote Izmaragd Dawnstar wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. While certainly very nice to have, I feel such a bonus falls out of the line compared to the other tactical dessies. Let's do this in order: - What is the problem of the lasers? They use cap. So, the Confessor gets a bonus on laser cap usage. - What is the problem of the autocannons? The have crap optimal and shoot in falloff a lot. So, the Svipul has a bonus to optimal. - What is the problem of hybrids? Well, they don't really have one, but both null and void come with -25% tracking so the Hecate is planned to have a tracking bonus (unless you guys decide to replace it with something else before July, of course ) Now, what is the problem of missiles and rockets? Is it reload time? While reducing reload time is definitely nice and everyone will take it over the 50HP shield bonus every day, it's not going to make or break stuff, unless we're talking RLMLs, which a dessie can't fit. Now, the missile application (aka "I need at least a web to make rage rockets hit a frigate for something") can be an issue. So, again, why not an application bonus? Pretty please? I could also do with a 7.5% shield boost amount, to keep it in line with the hawk. yeah what he said i fully support the application bonus and active shield boost bonus seems to suit this ship better Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.20 09:41:22 - [485] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Fourteen Maken wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: ASBs need a nerf as opposed to regular boosters needing a buff. At the module level. Not at the suspiciously specific ship level. "Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate" I take it you feel that ASBs are fine as-is? Care to explain why? Try to reference more than just their reload time (I'm sure I don't need to go there). because local reps are only really used by solo/small gang, even pve players avoid using ancillary reps, same with oversized prop mods, because we don't need to do anything else to limit that playstyle, and because if what you've said so far in this thread is anything to go by you might just be the worst solo advocate ever. Let's review, 25% of this games weapons get made irrelevant and negates some elements of tackle, by another mans admission. Only neuts or substantial amounts of webbing affect oversized prop mods. Hmm. There's something to think about here. Ancillary shield boosters; this is a good one to bring up. They were OP to start with and now where are they? All I ever said was to make them consume larger charges so that the ship couldn't carry so many. That's literally what I was suggesting. Do you have a salient complaint to make about that point? But I guess you made some assumptions about me based on... god knows how little info... and you're suggesting that I don't believe in solo or small gang even though my killboard is almost exclusively exactly that. And mostly shield ships. And I spend substantial amounts of my EVE time on sisi because I like the arena like environment where you just fight without concern over price. So please, give me your best shot. I'm listening. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1053	Posted - 2015.05.20 10:53:22 - [486] - Quote You need two ASBs to make them somewhat of an active tank. At that point, they're a cheap, CPU intesive alternative to a c-type SB - fitting which also secures your AB cap. If you apply enough damage, you'll get both ASBs into reload simultaniously and he dead. The cap question is all but unimportant. Oversized props got quite some activation costs that don't come back over the 12s cycle of a med neut. ASB in general seem like a neat baseline for where you want your tanking levels to be. Couldn't agree more though on the cap charges. It all started with the just dumb cargospace on a hawk in comparison to other frigates to that shield boosting bonus. Being able to carry 5ish reloads should be the limit on a non-marauder. It's exactly that for cruisers with XLASB to BS with XLASB.
motie one Secret Passage 17	Posted - 2015.05.20 11:01:11 - [487] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. Great! Now can we get this for the Barghest as well...? Application bonus would be my first choice, but this would be nice, without bringing the power level significantly up and more acceptable overall. The barghest could do with a little look at, I agree.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 13044	Posted - 2015.05.20 11:05:01 - [488] - Quote So, had a rough few days at work, haven't been able to keep up until now. But does anyone else find the "50HP per level" thing to be downright insulting? I can barely believe that it wasn't a joke. Whether that actually made it to release or not, it's still strange that it was even up for consideration at all. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Nagarythe Tinurandir House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness 199	Posted - 2015.05.20 11:11:40 - [489] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So, had a rough few days at work, haven't been able to keep up until now. But does anyone else find the "50HP per level" thing to be downright insulting? I can barely believe that it wasn't a joke. Whether that actually made it to release or not, it's still strange that it was even up for consideration at all. That was a tactical move by FozzyTheFox to make the reload time bonus even more attractive ;)
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.20 11:56:06 - [490] - Quote motie one wrote: Arthur Aihaken wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. Great! Now can we get this for the Barghest as well...? Application bonus would be my first choice, but this would be nice, without bringing the power level significantly up and more acceptable overall. The barghest could do with a little look at, I agree. You don't see how a 9 second reload RHML barghest would be a problem? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.

Kane Carnifex Yard Evolution The Kadeshi 36	Posted - 2015.05.20 14:35:37 - [491] - Quote I <3 this Jackdaw. For me it is the evil sister of the drake. Nice Missle DPS & Range and a decent Tank. 5x Rocket Launcher II (Mjolnir Rage Rocket) 1MN Microwarpdrive II 2x Medium Ancillary Shield Booster (Navy Cap Booster 50) 2x Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Warp Scrambler II Co-Processor II Ballistic Control System II Small Warhead Rigor Catalyst II Small Core Defense Operational Solidifier II Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II http://vesuvi.de - EVE & Food Porn in German...
Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 29	Posted - 2015.05.20 15:06:14 - [492] - Quote Kane Carnifex wrote: I <3 this Jackdaw. For me it is the evil sister of the drake. Nice Missle DPS & Range and a decent Tank. 5x Rocket Launcher II (Mjolnir Rage Rocket) 1MN Microwarpdrive II 2x Medium Ancillary Shield Booster (Navy Cap Booster 50) 2x Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Warp Scrambler II Co-Processor II Ballistic Control System II Small Warhead Rigor Catalyst II Small Core Defense Operational Solidifier II Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Wouldn't it be worth swapping out something for web on a rocket fit? Better application, and the Jackdaw is slow so you need to keep the target from escaping / keeping range.
scorchlikeshiswhiskey Totally Abstract O X I D E 393	Posted - 2015.05.20 17:25:33 - [493] - Quote I really like the reload reduction, I think it will greatly increase versatility in a unique way that I'm am interested to test out. I know that I have been in plenty of situations where a 10-second ammo swap before a fight would be.... bad. Being able to quickly swap once in the fight, between Navy and T2, between damage types, will also make this an interesting ship if it isn't broken in other ways. Fozzie, I have a lingering question though: Will there be a balance pass on missiles, in general or specific sizes/types, with the Jackdaw release like there was with the Confessor and Svipul releases? I understand if you want to keep the specifics quiet for now, or if they're still being decided on, but I would love to have something else to look forward to with Carnyx that could fix some of the less useful missile ships and provide even more versatility.
Solj RichPopolous Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 128	Posted - 2015.05.20 19:55:02 - [494] - Quote Really feeling the Jackdaw. The increase in speed is pushing me up to just under 3km/s. I would rather see a damage application bonus in the explosion velocity department over reload. Since LMLs can have a hard time applying to the more speedy targets. Other then that I'm really loving this ship. I'm going no contest in SiSi vs 90% of ships under BS class really living up to the hopes I had for this ship, a faster mini 100mn tengu.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 161	Posted - 2015.05.20 21:39:30 - [495] - Quote Solj RichPopolous wrote: The increase in speed is pushing me up to just under 3km/s. Very nice, but what's your set up? is that overheated deadspace 10mn ab with high grade snakes, links, and quafe?
Solj RichPopolous Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 128	Posted - 2015.05.20 21:52:56 - [496] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: The increase in speed is pushing me up to just under 3km/s. Very nice, but what's your set up? is that overheated deadspace 10mn ab with high grade snakes, links, and quafe? HG snakes, Corelum C-type 10mn No heat, Links, No Quafe. I always fit like this though. Check muh losses, I fit for performance.
Catherine Laartii Crimson Serpent Syndicate Heiian Conglomerate 539	Posted - 2015.05.20 22:33:02 - [497] - Quote Mystical Might wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. So, dear brother fozzie, In what situation is this reload situation bonus an applicable game changer? What does it achieve for anyone? Switching damage types for missiles quickly is very good for fighting multiple targets with different tank layouts, especially t2, as it allows for switching from shield damaging to armor damaging ammo, or visa versa. Even in solo combat, switching from mjolnir to nova quickly when you reach their armor is going to be a big thing.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 161	Posted - 2015.05.20 23:41:42 - [498] - Quote Solj RichPopolous wrote: Fourteen Maken wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: The increase in speed is pushing me up to just under 3km/s. Very nice, but what's your set up? is that overheated deadspace 10mn ab with high grade snakes, links, and quafe? HG snakes, Corelum C-type 10mn No heat, Links, No Quafe. I always fit like this though. Check muh losses, I fit for performance. I saw that earlier it's why i asked , sadly i can't roll like that in or i'd lose my shirt. I'm tempted to try setting up on sisi again just to see what a space peasant can do in a jackdaw with t2 fit and no links. The agility and midslots should give good options for brawling, and that's where it should shine... dictating range in brawls. I'm hoping people don't find a cheap way to break it with light missiles so let's not do the damage application bonus. As it stands a fast kiting frigate can probably outrun your missiles since you'll be in prop mode with no bonus to missile velocity, and if you switch to sharpshooter he can come and go at will which is only right given the amount of cancer and tank we can put on this. Missile fits will work well in gangs, but rockets for solo imo.
Count Szadek Apex Security and Innovations The Angry Fellows 8	Posted - 2015.05.21 01:25:26 - [499] - Quote Any chance of us getting the reload bonus as a Caldari thing? Would not mind at all seeing this on say a Osprey Navy Issue.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.21 03:52:22 - [500] - Quote Count Szadek wrote: Any chance of us getting the reload bonus as a Caldari thing? Would not mind at all seeing this on say a Osprey Navy Issue. It can't because of rapid launchers. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.

James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 702	Posted - 2015.05.21 04:08:45 - [501] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Count Szadek wrote: Any chance of us getting the reload bonus as a Caldari thing? Would not mind at all seeing this on say a Osprey Navy Issue. It can't because of rapid launchers. It might be workable as say, a single offensive bonus during the t3 rebalance for the tengu, with maybe some of the ECM bonus retained. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.21 04:25:31 - [502] - Quote I wish they'd just fix ECM before slapping bonuses on to more ****. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 702	Posted - 2015.05.21 04:29:57 - [503] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: I wish they'd just fix ECM before slapping bonuses on to more ****. Tengu already has a pair (one offensive, one electronic) which bonus ECM. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 544	Posted - 2015.05.21 04:39:31 - [504] - Quote That was not my point. The point is ECM as a system sucks and I'd like to see it modified. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 702	Posted - 2015.05.21 04:41:57 - [505] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: That was not my point. The point is ECM as a system sucks and I'd like to see it modified. Got a good suggestion? One which scales acceptably (not like the remote reps, which scales far too well, nor active tanking, which scales not at all), does not make blackbird/falcon/whatever an absolute requirement and doesn't make it almost impossible to counter ECM? Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Fergus Runkle Truth and Reconciliation Council 56	Posted - 2015.05.21 08:44:48 - [506] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: That was not my point. The point is ECM as a system sucks and I'd like to see it modified. Got a good suggestion? One which scales acceptably (not like the remote reps, which scales far too well, nor active tanking, which scales not at all), does not make blackbird/falcon/whatever an absolute requirement and doesn't make it almost impossible to counter ECM? And that does not nerf it (even more) into the ground for those of us that use it. I don't get the ECM hate these days, its not like you seen fleets of griffins or blackbirds .. unlike the damp boats that are our there.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 546	Posted - 2015.05.21 09:23:33 - [507] - Quote When ECM goes on the table I'll state my opinion, until then it's navel gazing. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 673	Posted - 2015.05.21 12:46:13 - [508] - Quote Aven Heleneto wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: This all makes me wonder where t3s are going. 5 subsystems with 3 modes each? each set independently for 75 different ways to fly it? A gameplay balance director's dream. Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So, had a rough few days at work, haven't been able to keep up until now. But does anyone else find the "50HP per level" thing to be downright insulting? I can barely believe that it wasn't a joke. Whether that actually made it to release or not, it's still strange that it was even up for consideration at all. Where's the insult? Base 900 hp + 250 hp from the bonus = 1,150. Base 900 hp * 1.25 from the 5% hp bonus = 1,125. I, too, love and adore drama! // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Aven Heleneto Furtherance. 2	Posted - 2015.05.21 13:21:02 - [509] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Aven Heleneto wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: This all makes me wonder where t3s are going. 5 subsystems with 3 modes each? each set independently for 75 different ways to fly it? A gameplay balance director's dream. but which kind? nightmare? recurring? (wet?)
Master Sergeant MacRobert Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade 202	Posted - 2015.05.21 16:19:38 - [510] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: Aven Heleneto wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: This all makes me wonder where t3s are going. 5 subsystems with 3 modes each? each set independently for 75 different ways to fly it? A gameplay balance director's dream. Kaarous Aldurald wrote: So, had a rough few days at work, haven't been able to keep up until now. But does anyone else find the "50HP per level" thing to be downright insulting? I can barely believe that it wasn't a joke. Whether that actually made it to release or not, it's still strange that it was even up for consideration at all. Where's the insult? Base 900 hp + 250 hp from the bonus = 1,150. Base 900 hp * 1.25 from the 5% hp bonus = 1,125. I, too, love and adore drama! James Baboli wrote: Got a good suggestion? One which scales acceptably (not like the remote reps, which scales far too well, nor active tanking, which scales not at all), does not make blackbird/falcon/whatever an absolute requirement and doesn't make it almost impossible to counter ECM? Depends. I have one that involves increasing the target's Heat levels for the respective H/M/L slot layouts, if any modules are active there, even if not overheated. With the usual consequences, of course - keep firing, or reping and burn out your guns/RR. Heat increase rate is subject to testing. How stacking penalised it would be, if not outright limited to 1 per ship, would require testingGäó. P lore-oriented, well within the realms of ECM, uniqueGäó, not overly OP, just like TDs, neuts, TP. Well, damps will be damps. Externally unexplored mechanic, which also is an excellent candidate for ECM. ECM I too like the exploration of the idea for overheating modules or causing heat damage to modules to break them. It could also be paired with an effect to reduce Drone Bandwidth on a target ship hull (which would fit Caldari against Gallente lore). ECCM then could be given the attributes of an anti heat damage module (meaning it has a use even when you are not subject to attack from ECM) along with other anti ECM attributes. There are 5x ECM module types to consider though. How to differentiate the racials? Perhaps by giving them a bonus to their applicaton or projection whilst fitted to the hull of the same race? Multifreq gives benefits for all at higher cap usage. Then you have signal distortion amplifiers that also need to be considered (a low slot module for which no other EW module has a parallel). What will they do? ECM rigs then need a rebalance. You can see why the subject as been avoided for sooo long. As a final extra nicety, it could be considered allowing ECM modules to be used for ship hijacking - once all the modules fitted are overloaded (destroyed) the ECM module can overload the capacitor (run it to over 100%) forcing a capsule ejection. ...now that would make piracy interesting. Hasn't everyone wanted to steal someone's ship from them whilst they watch? Jackdaw Either make it tanky or make it faster. Personally I'd prefer an incline to a Rocket hull. A Brawler that can douche it out as good as any in it's class. "Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"

Hakaari Inkuran State War Academy Caldari State 269	Posted - 2015.05.21 16:56:19 - [511] - Quote Oh my bad. Feel free to delete
Solj RichPopolous Mentally Assured Destruction The Pursuit of Happiness 128	Posted - 2015.05.21 18:00:24 - [512] - Quote Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: Jackdaw Either make it tanky or make it faster. Personally I'd prefer an incline to a Rocket hull. A Brawler that can douche it out as good as any in it's class. Pls explain the different classes of douche.
Fourteen Maken The Great Harmon Institute Of Technology Enemy Spotted. 163	Posted - 2015.05.21 18:38:52 - [513] - Quote Any chance of testing a web strength bonus on this instead? I think it would suit the hull well without making it OP, it would make people chose rockets instead of light missiles, and it would make up for the lower speed in brawling range.
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1816	Posted - 2015.05.21 19:15:53 - [514] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Any chance of testing a web strength bonus on this instead? I think it would suit the hull well without making it OP, it would make people chose rockets instead of light missiles, and it would make up for the lower speed in brawling range. It won't happen because it's not fitting for the race...
Master Sergeant MacRobert Pyre Falcon Defence and Security Multicultural F1 Brigade 202	Posted - 2015.05.22 07:47:18 - [515] - Quote Solj RichPopolous wrote: Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: Jackdaw Either make it tanky or make it faster. Personally I'd prefer an incline to a Rocket hull. A Brawler that can douche it out as good as any in it's class. Pls explain the different classes of douche. LOL That should read "Duke" "Remedy this situation or you shall live out the rest of your life in a pain amplifier"
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 62	Posted - 2015.05.22 09:11:56 - [516] - Quote Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: Solj RichPopolous wrote: Master Sergeant MacRobert wrote: Jackdaw Either make it tanky or make it faster. Personally I'd prefer an incline to a Rocket hull. A Brawler that can douche it out as good as any in it's class. Pls explain the different classes of douche. LOL That should read "Duke" Nah, I like the first one Naming my ship "Massengill"
Ellendras Silver CrashCat Corporation 171	Posted - 2015.05.22 11:01:59 - [517] - Quote when will this ship be available? [u]Carpe noctem[/u]
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 623	Posted - 2015.05.22 14:15:44 - [518] - Quote Fourteen Maken wrote: Any chance of testing a web strength bonus on this instead? I think it would suit the hull well without making it OP, it would make people chose rockets instead of light missiles, and it would make up for the lower speed in brawling range. Why in hell would a missile ship using mainly rockets need a web?
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 719	Posted - 2015.05.22 15:32:28 - [519] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Fourteen Maken wrote: Any chance of testing a web strength bonus on this instead? I think it would suit the hull well without making it OP, it would make people chose rockets instead of light missiles, and it would make up for the lower speed in brawling range. Why in hell would a missile ship using mainly rockets need a web? To keep opponents inside brawling range. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 719	Posted - 2015.05.22 15:37:29 - [520] - Quote Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: James Baboli wrote: Got a good suggestion? One which scales acceptably (not like the remote reps, which scales far too well, nor active tanking, which scales not at all), does not make blackbird/falcon/whatever an absolute requirement and doesn't make it almost impossible to counter ECM? Depends. I have one that involves increasing the target's Heat levels for the respective H/M/L slot layouts, if any modules are active there, even if not overheated. With the usual consequences, of course - keep firing, or reping and burn out your guns/RR. Heat increase rate is subject to testing. How stacking penalised it would be, if not outright limited to 1 per ship, would require testingGäó. P lore-oriented, well within the realms of ECM, uniqueGäó, not overly OP, just like TDs, neuts, TP. Well, damps will be damps. Externally unexplored mechanic, which also is an excellent candidate for ECM. And also a great way to force passive tanking, meaning that hardeners burn out or need to be turned off, dropping EHP levels on fleet ships significantly and mostly disadvantaging shields due to the complete lack of a passive omni-resist module for shields. I like it, but I like it as an addition to ECM, with very moderate heat generation so that 8 people stacking their one on the logi in something like the AT doesn't automagically burn their reps out, and so that 200 people stacking their one on the primary doesn't instantly burn out their tank. Please put this up as it's own thread bro. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp

Terra Chrall Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 34	Posted - 2015.05.22 15:48:46 - [521] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Fourteen Maken wrote: Any chance of testing a web strength bonus on this instead? I think it would suit the hull well without making it OP, it would make people chose rockets instead of light missiles, and it would make up for the lower speed in brawling range. Why in hell would a missile ship using mainly rockets need a web? When the rocket ship is slower than most ships below Battle Cruiser size. The Jackdaw's base speed is 170m/s. If you want to keep your target from flying out of your range you will likely want to use a web. If it is another brawler, than you will want to keep him from escaping or give yourself a chance to escape. Plus being slow you probably want to use a Scram over Disruptor to turn off MWD, so you should be in web range any way.
Styphon the Black Forced Euthanasia Soviet-Union 24	Posted - 2015.05.22 18:32:15 - [522] - Quote Capqu wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: With only two lowslots, you might as well just auto fit it with a Damage Control and a BCU. Two lowslots is not as crippling as two mids, but it's still really restrictive of potential fits. I'm holding out for the Hecate. [edit: I mean, it has enough mids to double web, so it slaughters frigates, but lots of things slaughter frigates. dude its already absolutely absurd with 2 lows nothing can fight this 1v1 in faction war you want it to be good with light missiles too? There is more PVP happening than just FW.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 723	Posted - 2015.05.22 18:35:20 - [523] - Quote Styphon the Black wrote: Capqu wrote: dude its already absolutely absurd with 2 lows nothing can fight this 1v1 in faction war you want it to be good with light missiles too? There is more PVP happening than just FW. But it is PVP, and so can't be waved away entirely as a balance concern like PvE can be by most, and FW is mostly frigate/destroyer pvp, so listening closely to FW about frigates and destroyers seems wise. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 130	Posted - 2015.05.23 05:41:47 - [524] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Styphon the Black wrote: Capqu wrote: dude its already absolutely absurd with 2 lows nothing can fight this 1v1 in faction war you want it to be good with light missiles too? There is more PVP happening than just FW. But it is PVP, and so can't be waved away entirely as a balance concern like PvE can be by most, and FW is mostly frigate/destroyer pvp, so listening closely to FW about frigates and destroyers seems wise. FW is mostly frigates and destroyers out of necessity, not by choice (for the most part). T3 Destroyers should not be treated or theory-crafted like they are some run of the mill FW or L2 mission ship.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 725	Posted - 2015.05.23 05:49:02 - [525] - Quote Traejun DiSanctis wrote: FW is mostly frigates and destroyers out of necessity, not by choice (for the most part). T3 Destroyers should not be treated or theory-crafted like they are some run of the mill FW or L2 mission ship. They should be one voice, not the only voice. They do definately need to be listened to, as making a cancer on any one area of the game for any other (t3s for WHs being cancer on the rest of eve) is bad design and business. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 130	Posted - 2015.05.23 06:01:54 - [526] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Traejun DiSanctis wrote: FW is mostly frigates and destroyers out of necessity, not by choice (for the most part). T3 Destroyers should not be treated or theory-crafted like they are some run of the mill FW or L2 mission ship. They should be one voice, not the only voice. They do definately need to be listened to, as making a cancer on any one area of the game for any other (t3s for WHs being cancer on the rest of eve) is bad design and business. I'm not really sure what you mean by this, but I'll respond based on my understanding: T3's are not a cancer on WH's. They make WH's accessible to people that don't want to live in a wormhole. I had no interest in joining a WH corp and moving into one full time, but I did want to check them out and/or occasionally dive one for ISK. T3's made that possible where no other ship allowed for it. If you're annoyed because prior to T3's, you and your corp had a monopoly on WHs, that's your issue... not a problem with the game. As for T3D's being a cancer on FW, that remains to be seen. In my experience - which is limited with respect to FW - T3D's are unlikely to play a huge role in FW. The cost will be prohibitive. FW is not for the feint of heart. I've heard stories from good friends who participate in it as to just ho quickly things can go ****-up. I doubt people who aren't making 100's of millions of ISK a day are going to be lining up to drop ISK into a 100M ISK destroyer that can get offed by a couple of cheap cruisers or a gang of welfare frigates. Furthermore, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not hearing about the Svipul playing a huge role in Minmatar FW.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 725	Posted - 2015.05.23 06:16:51 - [527] - Quote Traejun DiSanctis wrote: James Baboli wrote: Traejun DiSanctis wrote: FW is mostly frigates and destroyers out of necessity, not by choice (for the most part). T3 Destroyers should not be treated or theory-crafted like they are some run of the mill FW or L2 mission ship. They should be one voice, not the only voice. They do definately need to be listened to, as making a cancer on any one area of the game for any other (t3s for WHs being cancer on the rest of eve) is bad design and business. I'm not really sure what you mean by this, but I'll respond based on my understanding: T3's are not a cancer on WH's. They make WH's accessible to people that don't want to live in a wormhole. I had no interest in joining a WH corp and moving into one full time, but I did want to check them out and/or occasionally dive one for ISK. T3's made that possible where no other ship allowed for it. If you're annoyed because prior to T3's, you and your corp had a monopoly on WHs, that's your issue... not a problem with the game. As for T3D's being a cancer on FW, that remains to be seen. In my experience - which is limited with respect to FW - T3D's are unlikely to play a huge role in FW. The cost will be prohibitive. FW is not for the feint of heart. I've heard stories from good friends who participate in it as to just ho quickly things can go ****-up. I doubt people who aren't making 100's of millions of ISK a day are going to be lining up to drop ISK into a 100M ISK destroyer that can get offed by a couple of cheap cruisers or a gang of welfare frigates. Furthermore, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm not hearing about the Svipul playing a huge role in Minmatar FW. T3s were a cancer on the rest of eve as they played a vastly different power curve because they were balanced around the sleeper sites, which can get to be absolutely brutal in C6 sites. When the rest of eve started getting in on these awesome death machines, they started dunking on pretty much everything else, thus the t3 nerfs, and the SP loss, and and and. They were built without input from everywhere being considered, and with small gang in mind, so little attention was paid to just how awesomely they scaled with various things, like links or numbers. As for FW isk, if you are farming the missions, I have seen numbers of 300m/hr quoted and then backed by wallet logs. So, 3 PVP ships/hr if you are good at your farming. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
bunzing heet Demon-War-Lords Circle-Of-Two 4	Posted - 2015.05.23 23:36:19 - [528] - Quote well unless it gets changed i donjt see the jackdaw as best performing ship of the t3 destroyers dont get me wrong its a ok boat and i do see the problem of it getting op fast if handled incorrect but it strugles to keep up in just about every aspect compared to the other t3's it doesnt active tank well enough to makle it shine buffer is ok but thats about it the agility you get is pretty nice but comes not in play when using the ship in battle because of the base slow speed and the lower bonus it gets from propulsion mode i see that as a uneffective mode besides from the agility it gains defensive mode does it job well but again doesnt do its job so well that it out shines any of the other t3 destroyer i would suggest giving it a passive shield recharge increase while def mode is active smiper mode again its a nice trickk to shoot rockets from 25 k with jav rockets but not really viable as niche for a sniper ship the jackdaw is just to slow to act as a propper kiting/sniper ship it can kite sure, but with low speed it istnt really up to the job as a brawler it misses its edge my suggestion because higher base speed can be to powerfull give its propulsion mode a 10% bonus to afterburner speed this would make itt a good brawler and keeps it in line at this point i hope you guys find a niche for this ship because it really needs one and derserves one Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!
Silverbackyererse The Church of Awesome Heiian Conglomerate 141	Posted - 2015.05.24 02:15:18 - [529] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Hey everyone. Thanks to those of you who have provided feedback so far. We're going to try another all-new bonus to replace the tank bonus on the CTD skill: a 15% reduction in missile launcher reload time per level. The flexibility that this bonus provides for in-combat ammo switching should be pretty interesting, without causing an oppressive increase in the best-case power level of the ship. At level 5, missile launchers would reload in 2.5 seconds. This bonus won't be working correctly in the next SISI build tomorrow, but it will be in an upcoming build for you guys to try out. Of the opinion that this is a pretty poor choice you've made Fozzie. Please give the ship an explosion radius and an explosion velocity bonus.
James Zimmer Furtherance. 16	Posted - 2015.05.24 08:13:39 - [530] - Quote I'm not super experienced in PvP, but from the little I've seen, you need speed. If you don't have it, you need projection, DPS and tank so you can't be kited or simply chased down and outbrawled. Destroyers tend to be weak because they lack the speed to outrun cruisers and lack the DPS and tank to beat them when they get caught (though projection in Talwars and Coraxs is exceptional). In my opinion, the Svipul and Confessor do what destroyers should have been doing all along: Beating frigates all day long and running from, or getting beat by cruisers all day long (post nerf). The Jackdaw goes back to being an old-school destroyer. It will be great against frigates, and may have the projection, DPS and tank to fight off other T3Ds, but when it has to compete with T1 cruisers because it can't outrun them, it will lose hard.

Enso Nibbana Brahman 3	Posted - 2015.05.24 08:21:25 - [531] - Quote #MoarPGneed150MNplz
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1062	Posted - 2015.05.24 11:16:18 - [532] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Sorry, wrecked the quote... Would agree that in the FW environment (Maulus, Kites, Links, Implants, Griffins, random huginn), T3Ds are not the smartest choice for solo work. However, they really start to become menacing as a small gang of 2 or more, since their volley is simply absurd (1.5k and more) and thanks to modes, up to 70km with CN ammo. Adding the flexibility granted to switch between modes and from navy to fury and back in a jiffy, this ship both needs and promotes good coordination between the pilots. The Jackdaw with the exception of the overpropped active rocket fit doesn't appeal like a superb solo boat, but damn does it rock the crap out of their opposition in a small, well piloted gang.
James Baboli Ferrous Infernum 735	Posted - 2015.05.24 13:58:35 - [533] - Quote Enso Nibbana wrote: Would it be op if it got 64 PG? Considering it becomes medium easy to squeeze on a faction/storyline LSE then? probably. Talking more, Flying crazier, And drinking more Making battleships worth the warp
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 701	Posted - 2015.05.24 15:03:28 - [534] - Quote Enso Nibbana wrote: Would it be op if it got 64 PG? Cute. Would it be op if a Legion had 1.5k base PG? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eRLwCe6hYxIJqKSh3GK94bEM4IvFJuNBaag2GLungtg/pubhtml?gid=0&single=true Base 64 * 1.25 + 1 MACP II = 92 MW. The new RF MSE is 26 PG * 0.75 = 19.5 MW. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Enso Nibbana Brahman 3	Posted - 2015.05.24 21:52:01 - [535] - Quote Well if 64 is op then I like it, it looks like a solid ship that may escape a further nerfbatting.
Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 705	Posted - 2015.05.25 15:25:31 - [536] - Quote James Baboli wrote: Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote: James Baboli wrote: Got a good suggestion? One which scales acceptably (not like the remote reps, which scales far too well, nor active tanking, which scales not at all), does not make blackbird/falcon/whatever an absolute requirement and doesn't make it almost impossible to counter ECM? Depends. I have one that involves increasing the target's Heat levels for the respective H/M/L slot layouts, if any modules are active there, even if not overheated. With the usual consequences, of course - keep firing, or reping and burn out your guns/RR. Heat increase rate is subject to testing. How stacking penalised it would be, if not outright limited to 1 per ship, would require testingGäó. P lore-oriented, well within the realms of ECM, uniqueGäó, not overly OP, just like TDs, neuts, TP. Well, damps will be damps. Externally unexplored mechanic, which also is an excellent candidate for ECM. And also a great way to force passive tanking, meaning that hardeners burn out or need to be turned off, dropping EHP levels on fleet ships significantly and mostly disadvantaging shields due to the complete lack of a passive omni-resist module for shields. I like it, but I like it as an addition to ECM, with very moderate heat generation so that 8 people stacking their one on the logi in something like the AT doesn't automagically burn their reps out, and so that 200 people stacking their one on the primary doesn't instantly burn out their tank. Please put this up as it's own thread bro. I would, with the explicit permission from the moderators, as there are many other ECM threads floating around. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
Pestilen Ratte Artimus Ratte 19	Posted - 2015.05.27 02:58:06 - [537] - Quote There is an obvious logical fallacy in the claim that "no ship can compete with ship XXX in solo pvp". Clearly, the same ship will always be a fair fight for the same ship. So, what do we really want to say? We need to think hard for a few moments, so we don't step in a pile of farce. Do we want all the ships to be the same, ensuring a "fair fight" no matter what? No, because this creates zurgism, and blob mechanics rule. There is nothing fair about 10 ships killing 2 ships. Everyone hates that. Do we wish to prevent ultra powerful ships from roaming eve and doing whatever they wish, and generally allowing a certain type of risk averse player to win pvp by choice of ship alone? Maybe. That would depend on subscriber demographics. if Eve is populated by ship spinning cowards, CCP are going to need a business model that caters for that reality. Am I going to support their jobs and families if they fail to give their customers what they want? No. I am not. CCP are on their own with their demographic, and Eve will evolve accordingly. One of the truly inspired and great things about FW is that the system of gates and please provides the ingredients required to facilitate "fair fights", without being overly restrictive about what ships can participate. FW plexes do not just limit ship classes, they also provide an early warning system so that blobs are frustrated. You don't need to be brilliant on the d scan to know when a blob is about to drop. This cannot be underestimated. FW would not exist without this blob prevention mechanic. FW really is small gangs waiting to see if other small gangs want a fair (it) fight. The artificial mechanics facilitate this, and they generate content as a result. One of the structural and axiomatic problems with generating content in Null Sov territory is that the meta game takes over, and the desires of the corp leadership in null no longer match the desire of players to get stuck in and have brawling fights. The mata game rewards "big deals", and big deals in null establish their grand reputation by owning vast territories, and by blobbing to this end. that i not anyone's fault, it is just a case of "show me the incentive, I will show you the outcome". The meta game has evolved to establish that the metrics for success in null are to blob and hold territory. They do not reward, culturally or through in game economics, the generation of content for small gangs looking for fights: i.e. content. So, what? So, I submit that we need to pay due respect to why FW works, and why the mechanics that make it work achieve their aims. That is, if we want content for pew hungry maniacs, the best of whom are manifest by the Gallente militia. They came with drones, the courage of lions, and shiny principles. They left New Eden a better place for small children and warm puppies. Gal Mil hoo-rah.
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 83	Posted - 2015.05.27 03:31:29 - [538] - Quote Pestilen Ratte wrote: Gal Mil hoo-rah. (golf clap) Mini-Drake Train is coming...
Traejun DiSanctis Astro Technologies SpaceMonkey's Alliance 139	Posted - 2015.05.27 07:00:00 - [539] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: James Baboli wrote: Sorry, wrecked the quote... Would agree that in the FW environment (Maulus, Kites, Links, Implants, Griffins, random huginn), T3Ds are not the smartest choice for solo work. However, they really start to become menacing as a small gang of 2 or more, since their volley is simply absurd (1.5k and more) and thanks to modes, up to 70km with CN ammo. Adding the flexibility granted to switch between modes and from navy to fury and back in a jiffy, this ship both needs and promotes good coordination between the pilots. The Jackdaw with the exception of the overpropped active rocket fit doesn't appeal like a superb solo boat, but damn does it rock the crap out of their opposition in a small, well piloted gang. Agreed. I think both the Rocket brawler and LML fit would work well in small gangs. Both will have excellent volley damage. If applied to webbed frigates, we could be looking at a real killer. I also agree that it doesn't look like a ship that can solo in any way, shape or form. I see this as a bad thing, because both the Svipul and Confessor can solo pretty well. Not in all circumstances, of course, but enough that my WiP Jackdaw fits seem lackluster in comparison.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1296	Posted - 2015.05.27 10:28:42 - [540] - Quote afkalt wrote: If you're doing a missile look-at in June too, you need to tell us now. Feedback is worthless without knowing this. I say this because it was mooted previously. Can we take this as a "No", at this point?

Lev Ironwill World Burning 1	Posted - 2015.05.27 15:52:37 - [541] - Quote afkalt wrote: afkalt wrote: If you're doing a missile look-at in June too, you need to tell us now. Feedback is worthless without knowing this. I say this because it was mooted previously. Can we take this as a "No", at this point? That's what I'm taking it as, we asked way back on (I think) page 2 and there has been 0 response. Besides, why would missiles need to be looked at? The Drake is doing just fine, and is just as useful as intended. I use the Drake not because I think the ship could use some looking at, which it definitely could, but because its weapon systems are pretty ***.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 624	Posted - 2015.05.27 15:56:58 - [542] - Quote Compared to the other 2 tactical destroyers, I find the Jackdaw a bit lackluster.
Nagarythe Tinurandir House of Freedom 208	Posted - 2015.05.28 07:45:08 - [543] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Compared to the other 2 tactical destroyers, I find the Jackdaw a bit lackluster. That's the only real problem the Jackdaw has. The performance you get out of the other two is amazing and since the last patch they have also become even cheaper. But before nerfing Svipul and the 'Fessor into the ground let's give the Jackdaw a chance on TQ. CCP should however in the light of upcoming T3C rebalance reconsider the place of T3 within the powerspectrum of ships. Their original statement was that T3 is not significantly more powerful than T1 but very versatile. Right now, T3 ships feel very versatile (good) but on the level T2, faction or even beyond (feels awesopme but is not good for the game)
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 552	Posted - 2015.05.29 02:23:37 - [544] - Quote I don't think there's a single t1 ship destroyer-below that stands a chance against a t3d even in pairs. You might get lucky with catalysts but those can't hold anything down. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lev Ironwill World Burning 1	Posted - 2015.05.29 02:50:14 - [545] - Quote My initial impression of the Jackdaw is that, like most missile ships, it will do very well. When there are other ships on-grid to handle minor details like points and webs so that the target(s) can't simply burn away and warp off leaving the Jackdaw pilot to wonder if half-kills count. Anything that the Jackdaw does manage to get into point and web range of, with a weak enough tank, will surely die and I expect that the Jackdaw will be splendid at hunting weak targets and running away from anything big or fast. The large sig radius will ensure that it will take plenty of damage outside of Defense mode, and the very wanting speed will make sure that if it can be forced into Defense mode it will stand a good chance of dying shortly after. This is not to say it's horrible, it's not, but I do believe it is on par with what can be expected of a Caldari missile ship: -big (sig radius) -slow -useful when other ships carry much of the load Again, I'm not saying it's horrible but I do not expect it to see as much use as the Confessor or Svipul, and surely not as much as the Hecate will. The Jackdaw, having been vaccinated against the sins of the Tengu and Drake, will likely be a one-off in small gangs. I will say, it's quick turn and acceleration will, with SeBo's and Hyperspatials, make it useful for initial tackle so long as the rest of the fleet is not too far behind.
Iyacia Cyric'ai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 148	Posted - 2015.05.29 03:19:56 - [546] - Quote While its slow speed prevents it from being a roflpwnsoloboatkite4dayz ship, it also makes it incredibly easy to track by long range weapons or larger weapons, particularly if its buffer fit. I think if you want to make it as slow as it is, you need to decrease the sig radius of the ship significantly.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 552	Posted - 2015.05.29 05:34:40 - [547] - Quote The main sin with caldari ships seems to be they're balanced around the principle that any role they've got in a fleet can easily be filled by any equivalent. The same is not said in the reverse. What scenarios prompt the call for caldari ships over the more flexible gallente and minmatar ships? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1067	Posted - 2015.05.29 10:31:39 - [548] - Quote Lev Ironwill wrote: I will say, it's quick turn and acceleration will, with SeBo's and Hyperspatials, make it useful for initial tackle so long as the rest of the fleet is not too far behind. T3Ds can all warp in one tick regardless of aligntime. Just initiate warp in propmode and then immediately switch to another and it will put you into warp.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1308	Posted - 2015.05.29 11:20:13 - [549] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: The main sin with caldari ships seems to be they're balanced around the principle that any role they've got in a fleet can easily be filled by any equivalent. The same is not said in the reverse. What scenarios prompt the call for caldari ships over the more flexible gallente and minmatar ships? Standup fleet scraps with heavy logistics. Same as Amarr. Because the resist bonuses right up the stack. The other races are more skirmish suited (with some outlier ships) to local reps. I'm aware I'm generalising and there are exceptions.
Dailar Toralen Toralen Industries 25	Posted - 2015.05.29 16:45:24 - [550] - Quote Mudder fuddin' Jackdaws!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Seriously, I want one. NOW. NOW. GIVE ME ONE, NOW! I SAID NOW! We are Toralen Industries. It doesn't matter if you fight for money, idealogies, or because it's what you are good at and it doesn't matter if you fight threw trade, combat, or diplomacy. No matter what or how you fight, there's a place for you.

elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 677	Posted - 2015.05.29 20:25:44 - [551] - Quote Oh boy, those changes.. While it is new to change ammo in two seconds it still doesn't help the Jackdaw, the ship without purpose or identity. The thing the Jachdaw has going is that it can run away fast and sometimes even fight a frigate or two. Anything more and it is going to be a 100 million isk loss. The Jackdaw cannot fight a Confessor and hope to win and in no configuration fight a svipul or more, it just can't. You cannot mitigate incoming damage by speed or movement with a 1mn or a 10mn afterburner and your signature radius makes you a battleship with a mwd on. Buffer tanks are a futile exercise and active tanks don't help either and believe me, I tried them all. Rockets used to be one option before the change but brawling isn't really popular these days and you would have to pin your target first, so light missiles it is. Bring friends you say? Yes sure but then, every other boat scales too in numbers, don't they? So here it is again, the one million isk question, what are we supposed to fight with it? Ah, I see - NPCs. Thank you for yet another Caldari pve boat. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Izmaragd Dawnstar EVE University Ivy League 4	Posted - 2015.05.29 20:41:29 - [552] - Quote elitatwo wrote: So here it is again, the one million isk question, what are we supposed to fight with it? Ah, I see - NPCs. Thank you for yet another Caldari pve boat. The irony is, it is only moderately good for PVE as well. PYFA now has the Jackdaw in the database, so I've been trying to put together a decent PVE fit, and the result is "meh" at best. Basically, you can get only slightly lesser dps and tanking out of a hawk (yes, hawk is limited to kinetic, but that covers "only" half the map). The only advantage compared to other two T3s is projection, but the decrease in dps you get to account for it is waay to high. If (big IF) this is to be a PVE boat, it needs another bonus instead of the reload rate: shield boost amount or straight +missile damage (possibly limited to kinetic and/or thermal) would be ideal.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 552	Posted - 2015.05.30 03:03:59 - [553] - Quote afkalt wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: The main sin with caldari ships seems to be they're balanced around the principle that any role they've got in a fleet can easily be filled by any equivalent. The same is not said in the reverse. What scenarios prompt the call for caldari ships over the more flexible gallente and minmatar ships? Standup fleet scraps with heavy logistics. Same as Amarr. Because the resist bonuses right up the stack. The other races are more skirmish suited (with some outlier ships) to local reps. I'm aware I'm generalising and there are exceptions. I for one would never fly a fleet tengu. That means ishtars. Not even fleet logi so far as I've seen uses minmatar reps not caldari. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 552	Posted - 2015.05.30 03:11:22 - [554] - Quote The only truly unique thing a jackdaw could have is a double range bonus I think. Allowing to shoot out to 100 with lights in sharpshooter and about 16-18 with rockets. It could be a mini cerberus. What would it mean in the long run? Well maybe something that can fight linked kiters at last. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Pashko Morgan Nomads of Republic Smile 'n' Wave 3	Posted - 2015.05.30 08:51:12 - [555] - Quote Ok I loved this thread. > Experts with opinion who got 2-3 kb kills with t3d > Guys who kicked in within fleets of 10+ t3d with support > B O I S who want it RIGHT NAOW > Unlucky poor folks who decided to kill a 300-500 mil snaked boat with their atron but didnt succeed Thanks for capsuleers fitted with brains who mentioned really important downsides of the concept: - 6 meds means Thermodynamics 5 or gtfo. That would be the month of burned medium subsystem. - Low speed with 10mn ab or huge sig with mwd. No kite - no life. Speed tanking was 90% of tanking. Confi and svipuls were op in beam/arty kite fits. All close setups were just dead briks untill something heavy (or any EAF) or not so dumb landed on. - The amount of fights which will be flipped due to reload speed bonus is a joke. Just remember how many times reload time was more critical than distance/cap control. Anyway the patchnotes are here and soon we'll be facing talwar 2.0 in action.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1067	Posted - 2015.05.30 10:35:30 - [556] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Oh boy, those changes.. While it is new to change ammo in two seconds it still doesn't help the Jackdaw, the ship without purpose or identity. The thing the Jachdaw has going is that it can run away fast and sometimes even fight a frigate or two. Anything more and it is going to be a 100 million isk loss. The Jackdaw cannot fight a Confessor and hope to win and in no configuration fight a svipul or more, it just can't. In a 1v1 brawl, jackdaw >> svipul/confessor. You're constantly applying 300+ dps to their weakest resists, they're happy if they can apply any damage. For kiting, a jackdaw got 265dps with furies at 30/50km. Not calling that weak when you pop another frig in four volleys latest. Pashko Morgan wrote: Anyway the patchnotes are here and soon we'll be facing talwar 2.0 in action. No, the jackdaw is a terrible talwar replacement. They are fine in that they are like a bad talwar with combat probes, but that's it.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 552	Posted - 2015.05.30 11:08:40 - [557] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: elitatwo wrote: Oh boy, those changes.. While it is new to change ammo in two seconds it still doesn't help the Jackdaw, the ship without purpose or identity. The thing the Jachdaw has going is that it can run away fast and sometimes even fight a frigate or two. Anything more and it is going to be a 100 million isk loss. The Jackdaw cannot fight a Confessor and hope to win and in no configuration fight a svipul or more, it just can't. In a 1v1 brawl, jackdaw >> svipul/confessor. You're constantly applying 300+ dps to their weakest resists, they're happy if they can apply any damage. For kiting, a jackdaw got 265dps with furies at 30/50km. Not calling that weak when you pop another frig in four volleys latest. . 30-50km? Kiting? That's 100mil point at minimum, 100mil point + 1 billion booster at maximum? Also killing any frigate in 4 shots? Hmm.. it's possible to kill t1's that easily sure but the jackdaw gets ROF not volley while iirc the corax and flycatcher both get raw damage. I can push a flycatchers volley up to 2198 with fury scourge, what does a jackdaw get? 1700 or so? I don't remember. Like this is the problem - most of these theoretical fits exist only for those with the pre-req billions to shell out for this stuff. Are these the only clientele who should be flying these ships? Do pensioners drive lambourghinis? I said it earlier in the thread that if the maximum balance of the ship is based around an infinite budget then sure we can work with that but people always assume balance is around some lower fitting and if you start thinking like that then we get perceived imbalances. Only make balance commentary around the maximum pimp of a ship. The only really valid balance criticism is that based off a ship which cannot be blinged out any further - links included. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
bunzing heet Demon-War-Lords Circle-Of-Two 5	Posted - 2015.05.30 12:57:32 - [558] - Quote It isn't that bad of a boat it just misses its niche You get decent dps with both lights as rockets Tank isn't that great but still will do fine against other dessies and frigs I've been fighting svipuls and confessors on sisi and it has a fair chance of winning The reload is great it gives you the abbility to choose damage types even during a fight and still come out on top Still I was hoping it would get a niche like passive tank ability in def or ab speed buff in propulsion But then again I like flying underestimated ships that's why I like caldari so much So we will see what will happens once it hits tq I do like the way it looks great job on that Fly safe keep killing And remember I'm watching you !!!!
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1067	Posted - 2015.05.30 15:53:10 - [559] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: 30-50km? Kiting? That's 100mil point at minimum, 100mil point + 1 billion booster at maximum? Also killing any frigate in 4 shots? Hmm.. it's possible to kill t1's that easily sure but the jackdaw gets ROF not volley while iirc the corax and flycatcher both get raw damage. I can push a flycatchers volley up to 2198 with fury scourge, what does a jackdaw get? 1700 or so? I don't remember. Like this is the problem - most of these theoretical fits exist only for those with the pre-req billions to shell out for this stuff. Are these the only clientele who should be flying these ships? Do pensioners drive lambourghinis? I said it earlier in the thread that if the maximum balance of the ship is based around an infinite budget then sure we can work with that but people always assume balance is around some lower fitting and if you start thinking like that then we get perceived imbalances. Only make balance commentary around the maximum pimp of a ship. The only really valid balance criticism is that based off a ship which cannot be blinged out any further - links included. I've been running with empty head. The 10mn fit is about 130mil on TQ and I used my TQ booster (4link eccm scangu, 350mil boosterfit and 40mil skirmish mindlink), I don't consider that expensive. The defense mode being so not agile is almost beneficial, accelerate in prop and switch to cruise mode. The volley-statement is just, things I saw happen. Regarding the LML-fit, 22-26km is regular kite range. You got thermo V and a masive heat bonus on the hull, so you can heat your point for about 2 minutes and still not burn that thing. With links, ranges increase to 31/37km pointage, or just barely fury range and CN range using propmode.
TrouserDeagle Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 1093	Posted - 2015.05.30 16:00:24 - [560] - Quote swap back to faction ammo if you want to actually hit

Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1069	Posted - 2015.05.30 16:06:11 - [561] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: swap back to faction ammo if you want to actually hit Use fury against destroyers and bigger, CN against frigates. Use Rage against anything in range cause you apparently don'T do less damage against anything but a succubus/chremora.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 552	Posted - 2015.05.30 19:03:37 - [562] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: 30-50km? Kiting? That's 100mil point at minimum, 100mil point + 1 billion booster at maximum? Also killing any frigate in 4 shots? Hmm.. it's possible to kill t1's that easily sure but the jackdaw gets ROF not volley while iirc the corax and flycatcher both get raw damage. I can push a flycatchers volley up to 2198 with fury scourge, what does a jackdaw get? 1700 or so? I don't remember. Like this is the problem - most of these theoretical fits exist only for those with the pre-req billions to shell out for this stuff. Are these the only clientele who should be flying these ships? Do pensioners drive lambourghinis? I said it earlier in the thread that if the maximum balance of the ship is based around an infinite budget then sure we can work with that but people always assume balance is around some lower fitting and if you start thinking like that then we get perceived imbalances. Only make balance commentary around the maximum pimp of a ship. The only really valid balance criticism is that based off a ship which cannot be blinged out any further - links included. I've been running with empty head. The 10mn fit is about 130mil on TQ and I used my TQ booster (4link eccm scangu, 350mil boosterfit and 40mil skirmish mindlink), I don't consider that expensive. The defense mode being so not agile is almost beneficial, accelerate in prop and switch to cruise mode. The volley-statement is just, things I saw happen. Regarding the LML-fit, 22-26km is regular kite range. You got thermo V and a masive heat bonus on the hull, so you can heat your point for about 2 minutes and still not burn that thing. With links, ranges increase to 31/37km pointage, or just barely fury range and CN range using propmode. Let's go over this again. You said 30-50km kite range. That's faction point +links material. Empty head woopee you got no excuse, how many SP is a booster alt? I don't even ******* know isn't like 40mil SP just in boosting skills alone? Plus ship skills? 50mil SP? at 3mil SP a month we're talking 15 months solid right there plus change. Now PLEX is 895mil/unit so we're talking multiple billions just for the toon to mount the hardware for the ship to provide the links. So there's the raw ISK evaluation sorted. I really don't see your point. At all. If you have to bring 10 billion in SP just to make 130mil of destroyer work for you there might be a problem. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 678	Posted - 2015.05.30 20:52:37 - [563] - Quote Sorry for barging in again but I did try standard fits with meta4 / tech2 stuff on and no links to get a feeling for the boat first, so all my findings are without any links or 3 billion isk worth of brain surgery. The opponents were linked, snaked and whatnot and some weren't but I couldn't break one svipul in any fit. One Confessor almost got me but I could escape and the others had a really easy time killing the Jack. Even though I like the rocket fits, there was no way I could keep any ship in web-range to poke them long enough with rockets. And while web range isn't a problem to achieve, getting in scram range is. Of course I had a much easier time with links and some bling but I am still conflicted if it is worth to put in on one. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1070	Posted - 2015.05.31 02:32:33 - [564] - Quote 30/50km initially stated the ranges with fury missiles. 30km in prop, 50km in sharpshooter. It said: You can use furies out to the edge of point range, or 265dps no matter where and how you move, as long as you got a point - dps. I don't know how you jump from that to a statement that 50km points are normal. I'm a bit flattered though.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 553	Posted - 2015.05.31 05:51:19 - [565] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: 30/50km initially stated the ranges with fury missiles. 30km in prop, 50km in sharpshooter. It said: You can use furies out to the edge of point range, or 265dps no matter where and how you move, as long as you got a point - dps. I don't know how you jump from that to a statement that 50km points are normal. I'm a bit flattered though. And that's not what I said either. It's eminently possible to kite at 30km no? Getting to 50 requires specialist equipment. And that's what I said. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Torei Dutalis IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic 29	Posted - 2015.06.01 06:55:16 - [566] - Quote So just got around to running the numbers on this thing in PYFA. I take back half the bad things I said about this ship. [Jackdaw, m1] Overdrive Injector System II Ballistic Control System II 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II 1MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile [Empty High slot] Small Bay Loading Accelerator I Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Prop Mode 200 dps @ 42.2 2508 m/s Your fitting capabilities may surpass mine, but I feel this shows the ship has more than mediocre performance outside of brawling.
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 680	Posted - 2015.06.01 15:13:11 - [567] - Quote Torei Dutalis wrote: So just got around to running the numbers on this thing in PYFA. I take back half the bad things I said about this ship. [Jackdaw, m1] Overdrive Injector System II Ballistic Control System II 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II 1MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile [Empty High slot] Small Bay Loading Accelerator I Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Prop Mode 200 dps @ 42.2 2508 m/s Your fitting capabilities may surpass mine, but I feel this shows the ship has more than mediocre performance outside of brawling. This is one of the reasons I don't use fitting tools anymore. On paper or on your screen this may look good but the second you undock this you will be made aware of how this flies and what downsides the fitting tool doesn't show. Try this on SiSi and ask some corpmates to shoot you and tell us how it went. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1074	Posted - 2015.06.01 16:10:04 - [568] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Torei Dutalis wrote: [jackdaw fit] This is one of the reasons I don't use fitting tools anymore. On paper or on your screen this may look good but the second you undock this you will be made aware of how this flies and what downsides the fitting tool doesn't show. Try this on SiSi and ask some corpmates to shoot you and tell us how it went. With a fitting tool, you'd probably see a more than just linear increase using pith boosters over CL-5 though, regarding additional rep vs. extra cost with regards to the whole ship. Without a fitting tool, I'd probably not had seen that you can squeeze 2 BCS on a LML-fit - and together with tac V, this makes all the difference.
Torei Dutalis IceBox Inc. Lasers Are Magic 30	Posted - 2015.06.01 17:30:30 - [569] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Things By no means the only fit I have come up with. If you had read the entirety of this thread you would know I had previously been testing more brawly fits (to be fair my posts were a ways back though). Fitting tools are eminently useful as they save copious amounts of time doing math for making those crazy or really tight fits. Tested this latest fit on sisi a little today. Performed as expected. Light tank, light dps, but a decent kiter. It loves snakes, but that goes without saying I suppose. Probably stick with another t3d for kiting, but the ship can manage in that arena to some degree.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 299	Posted - 2015.06.01 18:56:20 - [570] - Quote I'm interested in giving this a shot just for something different, but even as a kiter I doubt I'll end up giving up the tried, tested, and true venerable confessor.

Gumpy Bitterhawk Tax Evaders. 8	Posted - 2015.06.01 22:24:20 - [571] - Quote wowow i can make a drake go faster then this thing in prop mode...
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 554	Posted - 2015.06.02 06:19:12 - [572] - Quote Amazingly I still haven't lost my jackdaw. Granted I don't do crazy fights and it has been blown up in gang-bangs but in terms of solo vs other t3d and below I've done pretty well. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Gideon Askiras SniggWaffe WAFFLES. 4	Posted - 2015.06.03 06:23:04 - [573] - Quote Torei Dutalis wrote: So just got around to running the numbers on this thing in PYFA. I take back half the bad things I said about this ship. [Jackdaw, m1] Overdrive Injector System II Ballistic Control System II 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II 1MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile [Empty High slot] Small Bay Loading Accelerator I Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Prop Mode 200 dps @ 42.2 2508 m/s Your fitting capabilities may surpass mine, but I feel this shows the ship has more than mediocre performance outside of brawling. So... it's slower and does less dps than something like an INS but with slightly better range for significantly more isk? Seems to be pretty mediocre by that standard. I'll reserve final judgment for after I spent some real time playing with one but I'm not as excited about this ship as I'd initially thought I would be.
Dato Koppla Konvict Cartel The Asylum. 846	Posted - 2015.06.03 07:39:01 - [574] - Quote Gideon Askiras wrote: Torei Dutalis wrote: So just got around to running the numbers on this thing in PYFA. I take back half the bad things I said about this ship. [Jackdaw, m1] Overdrive Injector System II Ballistic Control System II 5MN Y-T8 Compact Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II 1MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner Medium Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 50 Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile [Empty High slot] Small Bay Loading Accelerator I Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Small Auxiliary Thrusters II Prop Mode 200 dps @ 42.2 2508 m/s Your fitting capabilities may surpass mine, but I feel this shows the ship has more than mediocre performance outside of brawling. So... it's slower and does less dps than something like an INS but with slightly better range for significantly more isk? Seems to be pretty mediocre by that standard. I'll reserve final judgment for after I spent some real time playing with one but I'm not as excited about this ship as I'd initially thought I would be. It has more tank and the AB + double web means you can pull range while wrecking scram frigates that get in close to tackle you. However the speed in speed mode is definitely pathetic, fast Cruisers will easily run you down and wreck you which is the biggest weakness of this ship IMO. Also the dps is subpar, a Flycatcher has better base speed, and better dps due to being able to use fury more reliably cause of the application bonus it gets. It's also got 5 mids so it gets alot of utility like the Jackdaw does. Tank and agility is pretty much the only thing the Jackdaw has on the Flycatcher. IMO if you're going to make full use of the Jackdaws potential it's going to be rocket brawl with massive tank and midslot utility.
Enviah Exiled Kings The Fearless Empire 1	Posted - 2015.06.03 12:44:56 - [575] - Quote All that I am seeing from a lot of the posts in here is 'Waaah, waaah, waaah... This ship does not conform to the exact specifications that I wanted so CCP you have ruined my game...' So the ship has gimped PWG, learn to deal with it. So it only has one utility if fitting all weapons... Again, deal with it. More damage or two utilities. You still have the option to fit the same # of utilities, you just have to decide which you want more. Then there's the lows. Sure... I would love to see a ship where I could load out as many BCS' as possible. But game balance doesn't work that way. There's a potential for 50% extra damage, 25% RoF and a 75% reduction in reload times, one of the biggest killer for missile boats imo. Suddenly when your 10 second reload becomes about 2.5s your damage application is looking a lot more consitent. It's reloading at the same speed as small hybrids from what I recall... No ship should be able to do everything perfectly... It should have glaring weaknesses to go alongside its blatant strengths. If you disagree with this, I can guarantee to you that having it any other way would simply result in a broken game where everyone flies the same ships.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1334	Posted - 2015.06.03 13:56:01 - [576] - Quote Enviah wrote: I can guarantee to you that having it any other way would simply result in a broken game where everyone flies the same ships. You mean like today where it's Svipuls and Ishtars online depending if you're FW or Sov?
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 83	Posted - 2015.06.03 14:02:35 - [577] - Quote Enviah wrote: No ship should be able to do everything perfectly... It should have glaring weaknesses to go alongside its blatant strengths. If you disagree with this, I can guarantee to you that having it any other way would simply result in a broken game where everyone flies the same ships. I hope you are right. If the Hecate can fit 5x 150 Rails II and 3x Magstab II, you will eat those words. And (some) people thought 250 rails were OP...
elitatwo Eve Minions Poopstain Removal Team 682	Posted - 2015.06.03 15:20:30 - [578] - Quote Enviah wrote: All that I am seeing from a lot of the posts in here is 'Waaah, waaah, waaah... This ship does not conform to the exact specifications that I wanted so CCP you have ruined my game...'.... This is not what we are saying. The Jackdaw is now the third destroyer hull of the new tactical kind. The first was the Confessor - you might have heard stories from that one but nobody flies them anymore since CCP thought they were so uber-stronkhhh-omg-bbq-wft-pnw-mobiles that would disband pandemic legion and goonsworm before the new sov system was implemented so they had to nerf them into the stoneage. That slav- minmatar one still reigns supreme all over low- and nullsec but since it's a slave- errm minmatar boat it's toats fine and all. Now we get the Jack' and you cannot blame us when we do comparisons based on the other two hulls. Now what was (as in past tense for the Confessor) the thing they had going for them? Was it an indestructable tank with 23992377427874672 ehp? No, definately not. You cannot call 7000ehp indestructable. Was it yolo-super-swap-speed that no interceptor could match? No, it was not. Was it unmatch firepower of doom that was killing supers and titans all day long? Nope, can't say that it was. The thing was that you could (as in past tense for the Confessor) fit an oversized afterbuner on them to not get stopped by a scram or a scram and a web and succum to a noobship. Now all the faction warfare kids cried rivers of tears at the fanfest because they thought it was a totally good idea to try and gank a destroyer hull in a frigate. The destroyer hulls that are already in the game for ages should have given it away that it was a good idea to try that - so they cried, rivers and oceans. Anyhow, from the past experience we were in hope we would get a Caldari boat with missiles that could mitigate damage as good as the other two and were massivly disappointed that it wasn't. As we started to fiddle with the ship on SiSi for a few days it turned out that the Jack' came with so many inbuild weaknesses that it isn't really worth buying the skillbook in the first place. Anyhow that one thing that CCP is kindly forgetting is that low and dullsec are not the only places in New Eden. In unknown space we need that kind of mitigation and punch in one boat because we deal with stronger forces and all kind of different threats. It may have incurred to you that the tech3 shipline was custom made for dealing with those stronger threats. The Jackdaw will be the first sleeper ship that cannot deal with sleepers since all inbuild weaknesses will make sure that sleepers will just volley them of the grid as soon as they land. That the destroyers were good to use in lowsec too should have been given if you look at what our general destroyer class vessel we had for the better part of a decade already. People were so blindfolded by the cruiser madness that they all forgot that there are other shipclasses out there and were talking about imbalance for the frigate class. How dare the next bigger shipclass was stronger at killing the smaller ones?? That is like saying the a Brutix (I still like the Brutix) should get nerfed because she can sink a stabber on her own. We we get here is a Drake with heavy missiles - that one cannot sink anything but a few NPCs. Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
Duchess Starbuckington Starbuckington Manor 340	Posted - 2015.06.03 17:18:20 - [579] - Quote Enviah wrote: All that I am seeing from a lot of the posts in here is 'Waaah, waaah, waaah... This ship does not conform to the exact specifications that I wanted so CCP you have ruined my game...' So the ship has gimped PWG, learn to deal with it. So it only has one utility if fitting all weapons... Again, deal with it. More damage or two utilities. You still have the option to fit the same # of utilities, you just have to decide which you want more. Then there's the lows. Sure... I would love to see a ship where I could load out as many BCS' as possible. But game balance doesn't work that way. There's a potential for 50% extra damage, 25% RoF and a 75% reduction in reload times, one of the biggest killer for missile boats imo. Suddenly when your 10 second reload becomes about 2.5s your damage application is looking a lot more consitent. It's reloading at the same speed as small hybrids from what I recall... No ship should be able to do everything perfectly... It should have glaring weaknesses to go alongside its blatant strengths. If you disagree with this, I can guarantee to you that having it any other way would simply result in a broken game where everyone flies the same ships. Oh look, one big strawman argument. Classic tactic of the truly stupid. Try reading some of the better critiques of the ship in this thread rather than dismissing the concerns offhand to make yourself feel superior.
Aglais Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 530	Posted - 2015.06.03 19:17:47 - [580] - Quote Enviah wrote: All that I am seeing from a lot of the posts in here is 'Waaah, waaah, waaah... This ship does not conform to the exact specifications that I wanted so CCP you have ruined my game...' So the ship has gimped PWG, learn to deal with it. So it only has one utility if fitting all weapons... Again, deal with it. More damage or two utilities. You still have the option to fit the same # of utilities, you just have to decide which you want more. Then there's the lows. Sure... I would love to see a ship where I could load out as many BCS' as possible. But game balance doesn't work that way. There's a potential for 50% extra damage, 25% RoF and a 75% reduction in reload times, one of the biggest killer for missile boats imo. Suddenly when your 10 second reload becomes about 2.5s your damage application is looking a lot more consitent. It's reloading at the same speed as small hybrids from what I recall... No ship should be able to do everything perfectly... It should have glaring weaknesses to go alongside its blatant strengths. If you disagree with this, I can guarantee to you that having it any other way would simply result in a broken game where everyone flies the same ships. Have you looked at the ship's stats at all beyond a cursory analysis? Have you flown it? You're right to claim that people are upset that the ship didn't conform to the exact specifications that they wanted. That is because these exact specifications were "a good tactical destroyer with Caldari flavouring (ie. missile using, favours defense over speed but not disproportionately so given the nature of tactical destroyers, solid shield tank with damage mitigation)". This is not what we have here. Instead it is essentially the return of the "Faildari" ethos I remember being prevalent in Caldari ships back in 2009-2010 (Drake excluded obviously). The ship is basically nothing but weakness after weakness, and it has no "blatant strength" to speak of. The 2.5 second reload time does nothing but increase sustained DPS- but that doesn't mean very much because burst DPS is already not particularly high (that being said, it does help light missiles a lot more than rockets due to their difference in cycle time IMO). There is no big selling point that makes me think, "Dang I need to buy 30 Jackdaws, these things are good at (role) because of (stat combination)!" So it doesn't even conform to your statement of it being some sort of specialist at something (which already is against the grain of what tactical destroyers are supposed to do, as adaptable generalists, which the Jackdaw still isn't.) With it's horrendous powergrid, "fitting choice" (as opposed to actual fitting options) is invoked and I can honestly say I'm completely at a loss as to how I'm supposed to fit out a Jackdaw if I'm going to be using light missiles. Maybe my little break from the game (Over this winter, since just after the Confessor came out) has taken some of my familiarity with fitting, but honestly the Jackdaw just doesn't seem like its hull stats actually work together to make it a dependable ship. I wouldn't even dream of throwing the Jackdaw into PvP, unless I had millions of ISK I wanted to burn for some arbitrary reason. That's all it seems to be right now. The most efficient way to lose ISK.

Iroquoiss Pliskin Hedion University Amarr Empire 723	Posted - 2015.06.03 20:59:00 - [581] - Quote Enviah wrote: All that I am seeing from a lot of the posts in here is 'Waaah, waaah, waaah... This ship does not conform to the exact specifications that I wanted so CCP you have ruined my game...' So the ship has gimped PWG, learn to deal with it. So it only has one utility if fitting all weapons... Again, deal with it. More damage or two utilities. You still have the option to fit the same # of utilities, you just have to decide which you want more. Then there's the lows. Sure... I would love to see a ship where I could load out as many BCS' as possible. But game balance doesn't work that way. There's a potential for 50% extra damage, 25% RoF and a 75% reduction in reload times, one of the biggest killer for missile boats imo. Suddenly when your 10 second reload becomes about 2.5s your damage application is looking a lot more consitent. It's reloading at the same speed as small hybrids from what I recall... No ship should be able to do everything perfectly... It should have glaring weaknesses to go alongside its blatant strengths. If you disagree with this, I can guarantee to you that having it any other way would simply result in a broken game where everyone flies the same ships. Goodpoast. Svipul still cancerous and does not conform to the T3D concept, though. // Turret-Equivalent of the Rapid ML Concept // Cruisers Online - [Damage done in PvP by Shiptype]
ARMED1 Relentless Terrorism Separatists 53	Posted - 2015.06.04 00:11:08 - [582] - Quote So the stipulated and confessors get a nerf and then an OP jackdaw is released... Why? CCP terribad with releasing these new ships. Release then nerf. How long til the jackdaw gets its nerf? Right before the next D3 is released prolly.
LastGunslinger Tull Chronicles of the Angry Bomber Chronicles of the Angry Wormholers 0	Posted - 2015.06.04 03:27:33 - [583] - Quote The nerf of removing the shield bonus all together is crap CCP and you know it is. Add the shield cap bonus back but reduce it, 3% per level is fair. 15% at 5 which is still a 10% reduction overall and that is more than fair. The ships were SUPPOSED to have individuality but instead just another addition to someones personal hangar, no webs, long points, ewar buffs. Just a destroyer on dope unlike the versatility of a T3 cruiser. My suggestion, give the Hectate (in the future) point bonus, the Svipul web bonus, and the confessor (a small) bonus to nos or neut per level. To make things interesting and give the destroyers more ability to perform in combat and fast paced battles. Fact is, they had decent plans. But not anymore, the Caldari are renown for being tanky, the gallente for DPS, the amarr for being specialized in neuts and the minmitar speed and webs. Now what do we have, overpriced destroyers with no reason to fly them other than them being new. I was excited for the jackdaw, but it was just another disappointing release. Please take my input at least into discussion and i know there are alot of other people out there that would argue the same point as me including my room mates.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 556	Posted - 2015.06.04 08:07:57 - [584] - Quote I think the reload bonus is under-rated. Switching from rage to javelin against a kiter for example might save you a decent 1500-2100 damage difference depending on what you're fighting. Something not mentioned yet is how a decent lightmissile fleet of these things with reps could work - projecting out to 62-70km and a reasonably small sig plus the speed to chase or pull. No they're not the fastest ships out there but I challenge anyone to tell me how the jackdaw is outright terrible considering some ships scale in fleets better than others (typically those ships with the best damage projection i.e. ishtars, railgus, raileagles etc). I have never in 6 years seen a fleet of stabbers. One other thing to mention before I go about the comment of sustained damage from reload reduction: notice how ACs get like 120 shots per load? Their lower total dps lasts longer. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1336	Posted - 2015.06.04 08:21:11 - [585] - Quote ARMED1 wrote: So the svipul and confessors get a nerf and then an OP jackdaw is released... Why? CCP terribad with releasing these new ships. Release then nerf. How long til the jackdaw gets its nerf? Right before the next D3 is released prolly. Overpowered? Hahahahaha. It's about as fast as a plated cruiser. Apart from bads who can't dscan in FW, if you die to this you're doing it wrong.
Kamahl Daikun Back To Basics. 59	Posted - 2015.06.04 09:19:16 - [586] - Quote Aglais wrote: Enviah wrote: All that I am seeing from a lot of the posts in here is 'Waaah, waaah, waaah... This ship does not conform to the exact specifications that I wanted so CCP you have ruined my game...' So the ship has gimped PWG, learn to deal with it. So it only has one utility if fitting all weapons... Again, deal with it. More damage or two utilities. You still have the option to fit the same # of utilities, you just have to decide which you want more. Then there's the lows. Sure... I would love to see a ship where I could load out as many BCS' as possible. But game balance doesn't work that way. There's a potential for 50% extra damage, 25% RoF and a 75% reduction in reload times, one of the biggest killer for missile boats imo. Suddenly when your 10 second reload becomes about 2.5s your damage application is looking a lot more consitent. It's reloading at the same speed as small hybrids from what I recall... No ship should be able to do everything perfectly... It should have glaring weaknesses to go alongside its blatant strengths. If you disagree with this, I can guarantee to you that having it any other way would simply result in a broken game where everyone flies the same ships. Have you looked at the ship's stats at all beyond a cursory analysis? Have you flown it? You're right to claim that people are upset that the ship didn't conform to the exact specifications that they wanted. That is because these exact specifications were "a good tactical destroyer with Caldari flavouring (ie. missile using, favours defense over speed but not disproportionately so given the nature of tactical destroyers, solid shield tank with damage mitigation)". This is not what we have here. Instead it is essentially the return of the "Faildari" ethos I remember being prevalent in Caldari ships back in 2009-2010 (Drake excluded obviously). The ship is basically nothing but weakness after weakness, and it has no "blatant strength" to speak of. The 2.5 second reload time does nothing but increase sustained DPS- but that doesn't mean very much because burst DPS is already not particularly high (that being said, it does help light missiles a lot more than rockets due to their difference in cycle time IMO). There is no big selling point that makes me think, "Dang I need to buy 30 Jackdaws, these things are good at (role) because of (stat combination)!" So it doesn't even conform to your statement of it being some sort of specialist at something (which already is against the grain of what tactical destroyers are supposed to do, as adaptable generalists, which the Jackdaw still isn't.) With it's horrendous powergrid, "fitting choice" (as opposed to actual fitting options) is invoked and I can honestly say I'm completely at a loss as to how I'm supposed to fit out a Jackdaw if I'm going to be using light missiles. Maybe my little break from the game (Over this winter, since just after the Confessor came out) has taken some of my familiarity with fitting, but honestly the Jackdaw just doesn't seem like its hull stats actually work together to make it a dependable ship. I wouldn't even dream of throwing the Jackdaw into PvP, unless I had millions of ISK I wanted to burn for some arbitrary reason. That's all it seems to be right now. The most efficient way to lose ISK. I hate to say it but I partially agree with this. I'm still struggling to find any LML fit that's practical on this hull. Sharpshooter mode isn't really necessary with the natural range of LMLs, however, Prop mode doesn't provide the required speed. Even with a Nano or ODI, at least with my skills, pushing this thing up to 2.5kms is sort of a problem. It's a glaring problem because Cruisers and Frigs, as well as the Flycatcher, are capable of more sustained speed than the Jackdaw. What am I supposed to run from, a Battleship? Aside from that, simply fitting T2 LMLs on this thing sucks up too much PG. You end up blowing lows/rigs for fitting just to fit a MSE or two. At least from my perspective, this thing can't kite. The only way you could pull it off is if you're running with links/snakes or have someone to tackle/peel for you. Might as well fly a Hookbill or Caracal for kiting. Which is pretty sad, a smaller and larger hull are both better at kiting than a T3 Dessie with bonuses for ranged missiles and propulsion. This thing seems specifically designed for Rocket Brawling/Tackling. In fact, it's stupidly good at it. Potential 300+ DPS with Dual Web/Scram.
Rosidah Rahim Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2015.06.04 11:25:49 - [587] - Quote Can't wait to see the Gallente version of it!
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 556	Posted - 2015.06.04 11:48:21 - [588] - Quote Kamahl Daikun wrote: This thing seems specifically designed for Rocket Brawling/Tackling. In fact, it's stupidly good at it. Potential 300+ DPS with Dual Web/Scram. And you might very well be right. Do you also complain this much when your kiting rail rokh gets run down by megathrons or nighthawks? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Pam Demonium Spy Satellite Network 0	Posted - 2015.06.04 12:25:45 - [589] - Quote LastGunslinger Tull wrote: The nerf of removing the shield bonus all together is crap CCP and you know it is. Add the shield cap bonus back but reduce it, 3% per level is fair. 15% at 5 which is still a 10% reduction overall and that is more than fair. . Concur, some safety glass on this cannon would be nice I came back just to fly this bird
Lisa Sophie d'Elancourt Empusa. 17	Posted - 2015.06.04 12:56:59 - [590] - Quote Firstly we compare jackdaw with confessor and svipul, both - even nerfed - very nice ships. So I expected another ship, which will be in the line. Is jackdaw in the line? To my mind not. Basic bonuses are ok, but what jackdaw offers next? Snail speed - nothing what could attract. Defense mode - ok, but nothing special. Sharpshooter mode - nothing special. Propulsion mode - really, nothing special. And we are talking about T3 ship - T3 means very advanced technology which makes ship unique and gives it features above T1 and T2. Just clicking buttons to switch modes - oh antennas are moving! - it's not enough. I really don't understand why you discriminate missile ships. And I bet Hecate will be another very nice ship. So the result after implementing all T3 dessies will be - three nice ones and one "nothing special". I'd like to be understood well - I don't expect superhiperomnikiller platform. I know every ships has own weakness. But there should be something what can compensate it. But there is nothing in jackdaw what would persuade me to use it. Maybe from time to time, but surely not too often. I've been waiting for this ship for months. And I liked its name. Finally it came out that CCP made a mistake, because "Disappointment" matches this hull much, much better than "Jackdaw".

Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 556	Posted - 2015.06.04 13:44:20 - [591] - Quote Lisa Sophie d'Elancourt wrote: I've been waiting for this ship for months. And I liked its name. Finally it came out that CCP made a mistake, because "Disappointment" matches this hull much, much better than "Jackdaw". Are you for cereal suggesting that you ignored testing this ship on SiSi despite it being there for 2 months? Where do you people come from? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1086	Posted - 2015.06.04 13:54:39 - [592] - Quote Kamahl Daikun wrote: I'm still struggling to find any LML fit that's practical on this hull. Sharpshooter mode isn't really necessary with the natural range of LMLs, however, Prop mode doesn't provide the required speed. Even with a Nano or ODI, at least with my skills, pushing this thing up to 2.5kms is sort of a problem. For LMLs, there's a sniperfit for ~110km range (2BCS), a dualweb fit with 2 MSEs and 265dps with furies(2BCS), a dualprop one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), a 10mn one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), and I saw some people have success wth a kiting 2 MASB one. Having 2 BCS makes a huge difference for breaking tanks solo imo, however sustained tank in kiting scenarios is great, too. While it doesn't go that fast, fitting a 25mil deadspace mwd and the resulting overheat durations are worth the investment. Regular mwds burn out in 3-4 cycles, but on a T3D, you can heat an a-type mwd for minutes, yielding something like 3.2km/s.
Ares Desideratus GUILD OF DOOM MOOD UBER SWAG ETERNAL 260	Posted - 2015.06.04 14:31:43 - [593] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Kamahl Daikun wrote: I'm still struggling to find any LML fit that's practical on this hull. Sharpshooter mode isn't really necessary with the natural range of LMLs, however, Prop mode doesn't provide the required speed. Even with a Nano or ODI, at least with my skills, pushing this thing up to 2.5kms is sort of a problem. For LMLs, there's a sniperfit for ~110km range (2BCS), a dualweb fit with 2 MSEs and 265dps with furies(2BCS), a dualprop one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), a 10mn one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), and I saw some people have success wth a kiting 2 MASB one. Having 2 BCS makes a huge difference for breaking tanks solo imo, however sustained tank in kiting scenarios is great, too. While it doesn't go that fast, fitting a 25mil deadspace mwd and the resulting overheat durations are worth the investment. Regular mwds burn out in 3-4 cycles, but on a T3D, you can heat an a-type mwd for minutes, yielding something like 3.2km/s. Do deadspace MWDs have more overheating time in general than normal MWDs? If there is a difference in overheating times between deadspace and normal MWDs, EFT doesn't show it. But I would like to know because that is good investigative material no doubt.
Ares Desideratus GUILD OF DOOM MOOD UBER SWAG ETERNAL 260	Posted - 2015.06.04 14:36:01 - [594] - Quote Regarding Jackdaw, here is a light missile fit that I just based off of cookie cutter Orthrus type fits. It's kind of like a Caracal, only it's faster and has it's advantages and disadvantages. JACKDAW Ballistic Control System II Nanofiber Internal Structure II 5MN Quad LiF Restrained Microwarpdrive Warp Disruptor II Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I Gistum C-Type Medium Shield Booster Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Small Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 400 Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Light Missile [empty high slot] Small Bay Loading Accelerator I Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II I don't know how much the shield booster is but a normal Tech II will not fit so I just threw that on. 200 dps cold. But this thing is slow man, 2,377 m/s. Maybe it is not meant to be flown this way but there it is. I couldn't come up with any notable rocket fits, except a 10mn fit 10MN JACKDAW Ballistic Control System II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Federation Navy 10MN Afterburner Caldari Navy Warp Scrambler Federation Navy Stasis Webifier Gistum C-Type Medium Shield Booster Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Small Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 400 Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Mjolnir Rocket [empty high slot] Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II This is stupidly expensive and seems mediocre overall. Waste of an attempt. You can do 250 dps at 100km with a light missile fit though, which is cool.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 556	Posted - 2015.06.04 14:50:47 - [595] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Kamahl Daikun wrote: I'm still struggling to find any LML fit that's practical on this hull. Sharpshooter mode isn't really necessary with the natural range of LMLs, however, Prop mode doesn't provide the required speed. Even with a Nano or ODI, at least with my skills, pushing this thing up to 2.5kms is sort of a problem. For LMLs, there's a sniperfit for ~110km range (2BCS), a dualweb fit with 2 MSEs and 265dps with furies(2BCS), a dualprop one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), a 10mn one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), and I saw some people have success wth a kiting 2 MASB one. Having 2 BCS makes a huge difference for breaking tanks solo imo, however sustained tank in kiting scenarios is great, too. While it doesn't go that fast, fitting a 25mil deadspace mwd and the resulting overheat durations are worth the investment. Regular mwds burn out in 3-4 cycles, but on a T3D, you can heat an a-type mwd for minutes, yielding something like 3.2km/s. For 100mil in domination BCS you can hit 294dps unheated. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Kamahl Daikun Back To Basics. 59	Posted - 2015.06.04 16:12:04 - [596] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: Kamahl Daikun wrote: I'm still struggling to find any LML fit that's practical on this hull. Sharpshooter mode isn't really necessary with the natural range of LMLs, however, Prop mode doesn't provide the required speed. Even with a Nano or ODI, at least with my skills, pushing this thing up to 2.5kms is sort of a problem. For LMLs, there's a sniperfit for ~110km range (2BCS), a dualweb fit with 2 MSEs and 265dps with furies(2BCS), a dualprop one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), a 10mn one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), and I saw some people have success wth a kiting 2 MASB one. Having 2 BCS makes a huge difference for breaking tanks solo imo, however sustained tank in kiting scenarios is great, too. While it doesn't go that fast, fitting a 25mil deadspace mwd and the resulting overheat durations are worth the investment. Regular mwds burn out in 3-4 cycles, but on a T3D, you can heat an a-type mwd for minutes, yielding something like 3.2km/s. I don't think you're really getting my point here. The Jackdaw as a Rocket hull is pretty awesome. The mids and hull bonuses work great for it. It's just the PG that's a bit tight and the reload speed bonus is a bit wasted. As a LML hull, I'm still trying to find a reason to even bring one. If I had a choice between a LML Jackdaw or a Caracal, I'd probably bring the Caracal. The Caracal has flexible fitting options (Keyword: Options), doesn't need to invest in fitting rigs/mods, can project damage out to similar range, can maintain equal, if not higher, speed than the Jackdaw, and it's significantly cheaper. The only drawback of the Caracal is that people see "Caracal" and instantly think "I'm not fuckin' with that".
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 556	Posted - 2015.06.05 01:05:07 - [597] - Quote Kamahl Daikun wrote: Lloyd Roses wrote: Kamahl Daikun wrote: I'm still struggling to find any LML fit that's practical on this hull. Sharpshooter mode isn't really necessary with the natural range of LMLs, however, Prop mode doesn't provide the required speed. Even with a Nano or ODI, at least with my skills, pushing this thing up to 2.5kms is sort of a problem. For LMLs, there's a sniperfit for ~110km range (2BCS), a dualweb fit with 2 MSEs and 265dps with furies(2BCS), a dualprop one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), a 10mn one with a shieldbooster(1BCS), and I saw some people have success wth a kiting 2 MASB one. Having 2 BCS makes a huge difference for breaking tanks solo imo, however sustained tank in kiting scenarios is great, too. While it doesn't go that fast, fitting a 25mil deadspace mwd and the resulting overheat durations are worth the investment. Regular mwds burn out in 3-4 cycles, but on a T3D, you can heat an a-type mwd for minutes, yielding something like 3.2km/s. I don't think you're really getting my point here. The Jackdaw as a Rocket hull is pretty awesome. The mids and hull bonuses work great for it. It's just the PG that's a bit tight and the reload speed bonus is a bit wasted. As a LML hull, I'm still trying to find a reason to even bring one. If I had a choice between a LML Jackdaw or a Caracal, I'd probably bring the Caracal. The Caracal has flexible fitting options (Keyword: Options), doesn't need to invest in fitting rigs/mods, can project damage out to similar range, can maintain equal, if not higher, speed than the Jackdaw, and it's significantly cheaper. The only drawback of the Caracal is that people see "Caracal" and instantly think "I'm not fuckin' with that". Id fight a caracal with a jackdaw seeing as I proved they can't kill me. And if they buffer fit they die even easier Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Kamahl Daikun Back To Basics. 65	Posted - 2015.06.05 09:24:30 - [598] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Id fight a caracal with a jackdaw seeing as I proved they can't kill me. And if they buffer fit they die even easier Wait.... what? I'm not seeing where you proved any of that. Just for shiggles, I fitted a LML Jackdaw and a Caracal. With Nanofiber II on both and Polycarbon Engine Housing I and the appropriate size MWD, the Jackdaw only achieves a slightly higher max speed in Propulsion mode. Meanwhile, the Caracal is nearly matching speed with a better tank, higher DPS, and better application (Assuming a TP here) at equal range. The hilarious thing is how bloated the Jackdaw's Sig Radius is while flying with that MWD. I'd even bet a TP wouldn't be necessary.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 556	Posted - 2015.06.05 09:39:09 - [599] - Quote It's almost like you don't understand that 5x sigR with 5x V is the same as shooting a ship without a MWD? Or that you only recently joiined this conversation? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Arla Sarain 481	Posted - 2015.06.05 10:37:59 - [600] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: It's almost like you don't understand that 5x sigR with 5x V is the same as shooting a ship without a MWD? Or that you only recently joiined this conversation? Only really true for turrets, because in missiles the second coefficient term has an exponent. x5^n/x5 is not strictly proportional change to x5/x5 In any case... I don't see why a Jackdaw losing to a Caracal is a cause for alarm. Haven't T3Ds made enough ship classes obsolete yet? Whether Jackdaw deserves the same praise or not. It's more alarming that people go on about how they can't kite in this. Just keep on snowballing EVE into a Dot Versus Dot simulator, right? If I may be hyperbolic, how soon can we expect small ships to project damage from one edge of the grid to another? And have enough speed to cover the distance for the last, heroic, "well deserved" 80km tackle.

Kamahl Daikun Back To Basics. 65	Posted - 2015.06.05 11:18:56 - [601] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: It's almost like you don't understand that 5x sigR with 5x V is the same as shooting a ship without a MWD? Or that you only recently joiined this conversation? Only really true for turrets, because in missiles the second coefficient term has an exponent. x5^n/x5 is not strictly proportional change to x5/x5 In any case... I don't see why a Jackdaw losing to a Caracal is a cause for alarm. Haven't T3Ds made enough ship classes obsolete yet? Whether Jackdaw deserves the same praise or not. It's more alarming that people go on about how they can't kite in this. Just keep on snowballing EVE into a Dot Versus Dot simulator, right? If I may be hyperbolic, how soon can we expect small ships to project damage from one edge of the grid to another? And have enough speed to cover the distance for the last, heroic, "well deserved" 80km tackle. I'm not saying it's a cause for alarm. My argument is that the LML portion of the bonuses for the Jackdaw are wasted. Typically, when you're fitting LMLs, you're going to take advantage of the range. Fit a long point and kite with the superior range of your missiles. If you're going to brawl or be in overheated web range, you're probably going to take a weapon system that excels at closer ranges like Rockets. The Jackdaw doesn't have the ability to make full use of LMLs. It's pretty slow and sports a pretty fragile tank with the tight PG. It can't kite, so why have bonuses for a weapon system that only gets used for kiting? Just saying, if the bonuses for LMLs were removed and the Jackdaw was further bonuses into a dedicated brawling hull, I think it'd be a lot better. The only real threat comes in a FW Scenario where you land at 0 in a Plex and a Jackdaw is waiting for you or in a small gang scenario where someone already tackled it.
Arla Sarain 482	Posted - 2015.06.05 12:28:57 - [602] - Quote People were begging for an EWAR centric destroyer a while back. Jackdaw has 6 mids; why not utilise it? 22km fed navy webs with links. Start the fight at 70km and peel people away as they burn in to "negate your LML advantage", and then get Double webbed outside of their projection range because you are also stacked with a selection of damps/TDs.
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 1859	Posted - 2015.06.05 13:45:58 - [603] - Quote Arla Sarain wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: It's almost like you don't understand that 5x sigR with 5x V is the same as shooting a ship without a MWD? Or that you only recently joiined this conversation? Only really true for turrets, because in missiles the second coefficient term has an exponent. x5^n/x5 is not strictly proportional change to x5/x5 In any case... I don't see why a Jackdaw losing to a Caracal is a cause for alarm. Haven't T3Ds made enough ship classes obsolete yet? Whether Jackdaw deserves the same praise or not. It's more alarming that people go on about how they can't kite in this. Just keep on snowballing EVE into a Dot Versus Dot simulator, right? If I may be hyperbolic, how soon can we expect small ships to project damage from one edge of the grid to another? And have enough speed to cover the distance for the last, heroic, "well deserved" 80km tackle. Problem is CCP created a precedent with the first 2 T3D and people are expecting those from other races to have similar capabilities.
Arch-Magus Mephisto Black Scorpions Inc Fidelas Constans 1	Posted - 2015.06.05 14:12:27 - [604] - Quote So what is the verdict? Is it even worth chasing down? I see someone lost a 8 bill Jackdaw. Wonder how he feels about it.
Sloppy Podfarts Hedion University Amarr Empire 33	Posted - 2015.06.05 15:09:15 - [605] - Quote Arch-Magus Mephisto wrote: So what is the verdict? Is it even worth chasing down? I see someone lost a 8 bill Jackdaw. Wonder how he feels about it.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 556	Posted - 2015.06.05 16:02:09 - [606] - Quote He feels pretty good actually. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Redbull Spai Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 9	Posted - 2015.06.05 17:21:46 - [607] - Quote Jackdaw is pretty nice, but what Eve really needs is a ship that can turn those pesky 200km orbitting frigs into ash.
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 83	Posted - 2015.06.05 17:27:33 - [608] - Quote Looking at the current bonus scheme, I would actually suggest adding the Caldari 5% kinetic damage. It would help level this ship out against the Svipul (which is currently crushing it on the KBs). Otherwise it seems to be doing a reasonable job so far.
Sial Harkonnen Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 4	Posted - 2015.06.05 21:04:06 - [609] - Quote it looks like a flying "toblarone". absolute not like a caldari ship. and this name... maybe the designers was drunk, or smoke some srange things... should be fired!
HiddenPorpoise Under Dark Sins of our Fathers 353	Posted - 2015.06.05 21:15:21 - [610] - Quote I like the jackdaw overall. I don't know what people mean by it being slow, it's faster than every t1 destroyer in the game, and it's actually very easy to fit if you're used to fitting destroyers. My only complaint is that it has sub-cruiser scan-res. Even in SS mode it has very average res for a destroyer, and very low for D3.

afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1348	Posted - 2015.06.05 21:53:05 - [611] - Quote HiddenPorpoise wrote: I don't know what people mean by it being slow, it's faster than every t1 destroyer in the game It's also slower than my hurricane out of prop mode (and that 'cane has hyperspatials so it warps faster too)....so...yeaaaaaaah.
HiddenPorpoise Under Dark Sins of our Fathers 353	Posted - 2015.06.05 22:58:31 - [612] - Quote afkalt wrote: HiddenPorpoise wrote: I don't know what people mean by it being slow, it's faster than every t1 destroyer in the game It's also slower than my hurricane out of prop mode (and that 'cane has hyperspatials so it warps faster too)....so...yeaaaaaaah. And that's what prop mode is for. Only a duo-nano/OIS cane is faster than it out of prop mode, and with a OSI and a engine housing a jackdaw is faster than that fit overheated. I also doubt your cane aligns faster than an interceptor (which I find bizarre).
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 556	Posted - 2015.06.06 03:01:46 - [613] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: Looking at the current bonus scheme, I would actually suggest adding the Caldari 5% kinetic damage. It would help level this ship out against the Svipul (which is currently crushing it on the KBs). Otherwise it seems to be doing a reasonable job so far. The ship also is only a week old?? Did anyone ask why Small neut 8pg - medium neut 170pg Small cap booster 5pg - medium cap booster 150pg 5mn mwd 17pg - 50mn mwd 175pg 1mn ab 11pg - 10mn ab 55pg? Wut? 100mn ab 650pg?? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 83	Posted - 2015.06.06 03:30:39 - [614] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: 1mn ab 11pg - 10mn ab 55pg? Wut? 100mn ab 650pg?? Jeebus that 10mn is just messed. Should be like 100pg.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 557	Posted - 2015.06.06 04:38:36 - [615] - Quote Specia1 K wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: 1mn ab 11pg - 10mn ab 55pg? Wut? 100mn ab 650pg?? Jeebus that 10mn is just messed. Should be like 100pg. The same trend follows for guns, neuts, smartbombs, shield boosters, armour reppers and armour plates (assuming 400mm is frigate/destroyer, 800mm is cruiser and 1600 is battleships) also remote armour reppers and remote cap transfers. notable module sets that buck the trend or don't follow it are remote shield reps. shield extenders (where you could argue large extenders are a cruiser module since they easily fit on most cruisers and that shield extenders lack an equivalent 1600mm extender) and cap batteries. Missile launchers don't strictly follow the trend either but that being said most of them haven't been tiericided yet. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Sylana Sif Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic 1	Posted - 2015.06.07 10:43:25 - [616] - Quote My suggestion about the Jackdaw is more of a graphical nature.. I fly it alot last few days, i love what you did to it, its the best small missile boat currently out there. The only problem with it is.. Where is the Bridge? I have no feeling for the ship beeing a ship, i feel like im flying a piece of metal with launchers.. All the other caldari ships have the bridge somewhere, but Jackdaw has it nowhere to be found.. Im sure this will be dismissed easily but if possible this graphic tweak would mean alot to im sure alot of people and not just me once they notice it : )
Specia1 K State War Academy Caldari State 84	Posted - 2015.06.07 10:59:45 - [617] - Quote Sylana Sif wrote: My suggestion about the Jackdaw is more of a graphical nature.. I fly it alot last few days, i love what you did to it, its the best small missile boat currently out there. The only problem with it is.. Where is the Bridge? I have no feeling for the ship beeing a ship, i feel like im flying a piece of metal with launchers.. All the other caldari ships have the bridge somewhere, but Jackdaw has it nowhere to be found.. Im sure this will be dismissed easily but if possible this graphic tweak would mean alot to im sure alot of people and not just me once they notice it : ) Where do you think the bridge should go?
afkalt Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 1352	Posted - 2015.06.07 11:01:45 - [618] - Quote HiddenPorpoise wrote: afkalt wrote: HiddenPorpoise wrote: I don't know what people mean by it being slow, it's faster than every t1 destroyer in the game It's also slower than my hurricane out of prop mode (and that 'cane has hyperspatials so it warps faster too)....so...yeaaaaaaah. And that's what prop mode is for. Only a duo-nano/OIS cane is faster than it out of prop mode, and with a OSI and a engine housing a jackdaw is faster than that fit overheated. I also doubt your cane aligns faster than an interceptor (which I find bizarre). Yup but in prop mod it's squishy and fat. Dat sig....
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 562	Posted - 2015.06.07 12:40:38 - [619] - Quote So do we have any truly successful fits out yet? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1089	Posted - 2015.06.07 14:03:25 - [620] - Quote Sylana Sif wrote: My suggestion about the Jackdaw is more of a graphical nature.. I fly it alot last few days, i love what you did to it, its the best small missile boat currently out there. The only problem with it is.. Where is the Bridge? I have no feeling for the ship beeing a ship, i feel like im flying a piece of metal with launchers.. All the other caldari ships have the bridge somewhere, but Jackdaw has it nowhere to be found.. Im sure this will be dismissed easily but if possible this graphic tweak would mean alot to im sure alot of people and not just me once they notice it : ) You could also say the jackdaw as a T3 reverse engineered from future tech, it doesn't have a need for a bridge besides a suitable pod-cage made of rolled tungsten it seems. What's the point of having a bridge on the outside anyways, we got cameras now!

SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 301	Posted - 2015.06.07 22:56:55 - [621] - Quote I like the jackdaw for small gang/brawling potential. Anything bigger than that, and its pretty much useless. Especially as LML configuration. Forget kiting big fleets with this hull. At least with the confessor you can make that work. And if your stuck with any kind of tidi, you'll be so much more happy that you stuck with confessor. You will at least have instant damage application with your lazors. And from what I could tell, much more consistent damage application.
HELLBOUNDMAN Engineering Without Permits 212	Posted - 2015.06.08 01:24:11 - [622] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: I like the jackdaw for small gang/brawling potential. Anything bigger than that, and its pretty much useless. Especially as LML configuration. Forget kiting big fleets with this hull. At least with the confessor you can make that work. And if your stuck with any kind of tidi, you'll be so much more happy that you stuck with confessor. You will at least have instant damage application with your lazors. And from what I could tell, much more consistent damage application. Jackdaw burns through rockets like crazy... Got a 8.4km rage range and it fires the second volley before the first even hits... I'm going to be spending a lot on ammo for this thing.... assuming it survives that long.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 301	Posted - 2015.06.08 14:02:10 - [623] - Quote HELLBOUNDMAN wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: I like the jackdaw for small gang/brawling potential. Anything bigger than that, and its pretty much useless. Especially as LML configuration. Forget kiting big fleets with this hull. At least with the confessor you can make that work. And if your stuck with any kind of tidi, you'll be so much more happy that you stuck with confessor. You will at least have instant damage application with your lazors. And from what I could tell, much more consistent damage application. Jackdaw burns through rockets like crazy... Got a 8.4km rage range and it fires the second volley before the first even hits... I'm going to be spending a lot on ammo for this thing.... assuming it survives that long. It does burn through them, but therein lies the other reason for going rockets instead of LML, rate of fire. I can see a lot of situations when brawling when the quick rate of fire is going to make all the difference between wrecking or getting wrekt. Especially when you are fighting small ships, you don't want to explode because your quarry survived the first volley and popped you before your second volley even goes off. Once again another reason to love the confessor.
HELLBOUNDMAN Engineering Without Permits 213	Posted - 2015.06.08 15:52:12 - [624] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: HELLBOUNDMAN wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: I like the jackdaw for small gang/brawling potential. Anything bigger than that, and its pretty much useless. Especially as LML configuration. Forget kiting big fleets with this hull. At least with the confessor you can make that work. And if your stuck with any kind of tidi, you'll be so much more happy that you stuck with confessor. You will at least have instant damage application with your lazors. And from what I could tell, much more consistent damage application. Jackdaw burns through rockets like crazy... Got a 8.4km rage range and it fires the second volley before the first even hits... I'm going to be spending a lot on ammo for this thing.... assuming it survives that long. It does burn through them, but therein lies the other reason for going rockets instead of LML, rate of fire. I can see a lot of situations when brawling when the quick rate of fire is going to make all the difference between wrecking or getting wrekt. Especially when you are fighting small ships, you don't want to explode because your quarry survived the first volley and popped you before your second volley even goes off. Once again another reason to love the confessor. That reload time though.... It's awesome! However, I think this ship was balanced with this reload time.... Based on it's slow velocity, I think it would have been much better off with a damage buff, range, or web bonus..... It's slow, and ineffective with LMLs, so it needs something better than a reload time, despite the reload time being pretty cool.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 565	Posted - 2015.06.08 16:11:31 - [625] - Quote LMLs win for me thanks to range. Also their volley is a good 2.5x higher so where it counts you can practically volley straight through some reps. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
SFM Hobb3s Wrecking Shots Black Legion. 301	Posted - 2015.06.08 19:41:38 - [626] - Quote It would take a pretty dumb garmur to stick around for your volleys to hit. Even if they have to align somewhere and click warp. I think I've only fought one ASB garmur before and it died in about 2 volleys (at 80+km with aurora). That would be about 1 cycle time for beam lasers. How many cycles do you think I'd manage compared to a jackdaw firing at around 100km away, before that first volley of missiles hits?
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 565	Posted - 2015.06.09 02:22:34 - [627] - Quote Well seeing as you can't shoot that far I guess you get 0 Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
HiddenPorpoise Expendable Miscreants 353	Posted - 2015.06.09 02:57:57 - [628] - Quote It can hit to 70 km, it has flight time of 7.5 and a cycle of 6, you aren't wasting shots. My preferred fit has managed to get LML, a T2 MSE, and combat probes. The people complaining about tight fits don't use nongank destroyers and the other D3 set a bad bar. Quote: I consider my fit to be reasonably sound, able to fight off linked garmurs at a pinch as well as some unlucky chap found out today. Getting pointed at 45km away makes me upset. Damps are suddenly your friend when that happens.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 565	Posted - 2015.06.09 09:52:19 - [629] - Quote HiddenPorpoise wrote: It can hit to 70 km, it has flight time of 7.5 and a cycle of 6, you aren't wasting shots. My preferred fit has managed to get LML, a T2 MSE, and combat probes. The people complaining about tight fits don't use nongank destroyers and the other D3 set a bad bar. Quote: I consider my fit to be reasonably sound, able to fight off linked garmurs at a pinch as well as some unlucky chap found out today. Getting pointed at 45km away makes me upset. Damps are suddenly your friend when that happens. 65km on my fit. Must be missing a level 5 skill somewhere. Have you considered using navy medium extenders? [Jackdaw, Jackdaw bling LML copy] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Republic Fleet Medium Shield Extender Republic Fleet Medium Shield Extender [Empty Med slot] Warp Disruptor II [Empty Med slot] 5MN Microwarpdrive II Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Expanded Probe Launcher II, Sisters Core Scanner Probe Small Ancillary Current Router II Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II Small Ancillary Current Router II Currently republic extenders are 7mil a piece or you can grab cal navy for 10 mil each. 14k or 14.5k ehp respectively and fittings to spare for other mids. approx 40cpu and 3 pg. as for damping that requires me to actually have them fit no? Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
HiddenPorpoise Expendable Miscreants 353	Posted - 2015.06.09 11:27:26 - [630] - Quote I made cuts to dps for speed and utility. Sticking to cheap means when it all settles it will cost 45-55mil. And it has sub 2 tick align. I suppose I could move up to T2 rigs. [Jackdaw, LML] Ballistic Control System II Overdrive Injector System II Warp Disruptor II 5MN Microwarpdrive II Medium Shield Extender II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron Phased Muon Sensor Disruptor I, Targeting Range Dampening Script Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Light Missile Expanded Probe Launcher II, Sisters Combat Scanner Probe Small Ancillary Current Router I Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I

Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 565	Posted - 2015.06.09 11:51:19 - [631] - Quote Personally I'd just fit a passive EM hardener and an em rig rather than the invul, because it's cap expensive and if it shuts off so does 18% of your resists in EM. FWIW that jackdaw does have respectable cap but you have no injector and iirc the confessor/svipul are still faster with an extra spare high which will present some problems for you if they elect to run even a single small neut and let you burn your cap with the micro. You would cap out in 53 seconds. Even less when considering the invul, painter and damp. 30 seconds. I'd be very careful about flying this ship in pvp especially against another t3d. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1093	Posted - 2015.06.09 12:09:36 - [632] - Quote SFM Hobb3s wrote: HELLBOUNDMAN wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: I like the jackdaw for small gang/brawling potential. Anything bigger than that, and its pretty much useless. Especially as LML configuration. Forget kiting big fleets with this hull. At least with the confessor you can make that work. And if your stuck with any kind of tidi, you'll be so much more happy that you stuck with confessor. You will at least have instant damage application with your lazors. And from what I could tell, much more consistent damage application. Jackdaw burns through rockets like crazy... Got a 8.4km rage range and it fires the second volley before the first even hits... I'm going to be spending a lot on ammo for this thing.... assuming it survives that long. It does burn through them, but therein lies the other reason for going rockets instead of LML, rate of fire. I can see a lot of situations when brawling when the quick rate of fire is going to make all the difference between wrecking or getting wrekt. Especially when you are fighting small ships, you don't want to explode because your quarry survived the first volley and popped you before your second volley even goes off. Once again another reason to love the confessor. A garmur in a 40-45km orbit at 7km/s is already safe from sharpshooter LMLs. That's like snakes only if I'm not mistaken.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 565	Posted - 2015.06.09 12:33:10 - [633] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: It does burn through them, but therein lies the other reason for going rockets instead of LML, rate of fire. I can see a lot of situations when brawling when the quick rate of fire is going to make all the difference between wrecking or getting wrekt. Especially when you are fighting small ships, you don't want to explode because your quarry survived the first volley and popped you before your second volley even goes off. Once again another reason to love the confessor. A garmur in a 40-45km orbit at 7km/s is already safe from sharpshooter LMLs. That's like snakes only if I'm not mistaken. I forced one off today. They're not completely safe I'd say. To that effect I always carry a standard crash booster to up the meagre dps as well. When my garmur friend warped off he had about 30% armour remaining. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Dato Koppla Konvict Cartel The Asylum. 852	Posted - 2015.06.10 03:16:20 - [634] - Quote Lloyd Roses wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: HELLBOUNDMAN wrote: SFM Hobb3s wrote: I like the jackdaw for small gang/brawling potential. Anything bigger than that, and its pretty much useless. Especially as LML configuration. Forget kiting big fleets with this hull. At least with the confessor you can make that work. And if your stuck with any kind of tidi, you'll be so much more happy that you stuck with confessor. You will at least have instant damage application with your lazors. And from what I could tell, much more consistent damage application. Jackdaw burns through rockets like crazy... Got a 8.4km rage range and it fires the second volley before the first even hits... I'm going to be spending a lot on ammo for this thing.... assuming it survives that long. It does burn through them, but therein lies the other reason for going rockets instead of LML, rate of fire. I can see a lot of situations when brawling when the quick rate of fire is going to make all the difference between wrecking or getting wrekt. Especially when you are fighting small ships, you don't want to explode because your quarry survived the first volley and popped you before your second volley even goes off. Once again another reason to love the confessor. A garmur in a 40-45km orbit at 7km/s is already safe from sharpshooter LMLs. That's like snakes only if I'm not mistaken. 7km/s orbit requires both MG Snakes and links, you'd be able to get only around 5.5-6 with just links or just snakes, cold. When linked + HG Snaked Garmurs are immune to pretty much every kind of anti tackle weapons except Lights from another Garmur or an Orthrus. Coming back to the Jackdaw, it's completely outclassed in the LML role. Flycatcher does it much much better. It's faster and has much more reliable range since going into sharpshooter gives your 'kite' D3 the speed of a plated Cruiser. Flycatcher has more dps, more alpha, 5 mids so it gets just as much utility as the Jackdaw does. The fitting is quite solid and it can fit LMLs quite comfortably while maintaining a tank. Most importantly, Flycatcher gets an application bonus (which is absolutely huge for killing frigs) and allows it to use fury against tackled frigates and against other destroyers. The only things the Jackdaw has going for it in an LML role is marginally better tank in speed mode, and much better tank in defense mode (which is basically just a last ditch effort if you get scram/webbed and try to kill the tackler). Also much better agility, which is the only real advantage in a kiting LML setup. The rest of the 'advantages' doesn't really matter for the role. Either rocket brawl or go home with the Jackdaw IMO. CCP has pretty much pigeonholed it into that role by nuking the speed. This is pretty much exactly what they did to the Corax which is easily one of the least flown dessies from my experience.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 566	Posted - 2015.06.10 03:37:44 - [635] - Quote Corax is a fleet vessel. When used in a fleet it is vicious. Not everything has to be great in solo and not every solo ship scales well in fleets. Jackdaw can kind of go either way. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Dato Koppla Konvict Cartel The Asylum. 852	Posted - 2015.06.10 05:02:43 - [636] - Quote Caleb Seremshur wrote: Corax is a fleet vessel. When used in a fleet it is vicious. Not everything has to be great in solo and not every solo ship scales well in fleets. Jackdaw can kind of go either way. That's a bad argument cause the Talwar completely outclasses the Corax, better fittings, faster, same dps, same alpha, same range AND it has an MWD sig bonus which makes it significantly better in fleets. The only thing the Corax gets is an extra mid which it can't fit because of the horrendous fittings lol. There's just absolutely no reason to use a LML Corax for anything. Ever. If you've seen Suitonia's recent video on the Corax, its speed is so bad, that it's like 10m/s faster than a 1600plate Maller, which is pretty much the slowest Cruiser out there.
Caleb Seremshur Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance 566	Posted - 2015.06.10 05:30:58 - [637] - Quote Dato Koppla wrote: Caleb Seremshur wrote: Corax is a fleet vessel. When used in a fleet it is vicious. Not everything has to be great in solo and not every solo ship scales well in fleets. Jackdaw can kind of go either way. That's a bad argument cause the Talwar completely outclasses the Corax, better fittings, faster, same dps, same alpha, same range AND it has an MWD sig bonus which makes it significantly better in fleets. The only thing the Corax gets is an extra mid which it can't fit because of the horrendous fittings lol. There's just absolutely no reason to use a LML Corax for anything. Ever. If you've seen Suitonia's recent video on the Corax, its speed is so bad, that it's like 10m/s faster than a 1600plate Maller, which is pretty much the slowest Cruiser out there. Here is a reasonably cheap fit that I've used when flying in fleets and doing FW plexes. Why this fit? It smashes frigates off the field in 2 hits. [Corax, corax lml] Ballistic Control System I Ballistic Control System I Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron Prototype Sensor Booster 1MN Y-S8 Compact Afterburner Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile Small Warhead Calefaction Catalyst I Small Warhead Rigor Catalyst I Small Warhead Rigor Catalyst I 3% cpu implant required. Really all this ship needs is like 10cpu and it's good to go. It's a glass cannon, but as a dark eldar player that's the kind of thing I do. Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
Runjuan Junhom Das Raumfahrer Syndikat The Volition Cult 0	Posted - 2015.06.11 07:35:06 - [638] - Quote Any News when it will be add to EVEMON ? Regards Runjuan
Amonios Zula Aeon Ascendant 44	Posted - 2015.06.11 20:52:02 - [639] - Quote Runjuan Junhom wrote: Any News when it will be add to EVEMON ? Regards Runjuan Heh yeah, just finished training "Unknown IV"
Suzuha Yamada Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd. 7	Posted - 2015.07.05 10:06:08 - [640] - Quote I love my jackdaw soooo much. Having shield rechargers and a cap recharger makes it one kick ass passive shield tank. But yeah vulnerable to neuts as i found...



Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.