It's not pass 1 ...
The Harb is not fine ...
And the usage stats show that ...


I used the harb for over 6 month gatecamping in null and low sec just around the time BCs got changed the last time when the Harbinger received the 10% dmg bonus and one turret slot was removed. A change that increased dmg and reduced cap consumption slightly. I was rather new back then and the Harb was the only ship i had nearly maxed out and therefore i used it a lot. I am sad to see that the next balance pass took years to come along and still does not address the Harbinger's issues. Once again the Harbs cap is buffed but it's problems remain.

Again: It is the only BC that gets only one effective bonus instead of two. And that is completely unjustified.


"The price you pay" for the lasers advantages are already compensated by their innate weaknesses:

- Pulse base damage is certainly not as good as blasters. And has a worse (less universal) damage profile.
- Pulse tracking is the worst among all short range turrets
- Lasers are vulnerable to neuts like no other weapon system while hybrids can be cycled to a certain degree under neuts.
- Tracking and damage get even worse once you start using the only advantage pulse lasers have here: Scorch M and range.

If your point was valid then all laser platforms need to have one bonus slot removed. Balance passes on cruisers have shown that CCP is willing to replace energy turret cap consumption bonuses. Why it has been overlooked here is beyond my comprehension.

Anyway, maintaining range and making use of it's turrets range is problematic for a Harb:
In it's current state a harb would run dry on it's own by only shooting pulse lasers even with max capacitor skills despite the 10% energy turret cap bonus. Let alone pulsing MWD. I sincerely hope that the buff to capacitor capacity will finally enable the Harb to continueouly shoot it's guns at least because being the only BC unable to do so despite a bonus slot dedicated to enabling it to do so was an extraordinarily pathetic state over the last years even for CCP balancing standards.

To run it's MWD after the new balance changes I would still expect the ship to need a cap booster which costs so much power grid that you can't fit a 1600mm plate anymore at which point i would choose any other BC over the Harb (if i was looking for an armor tank). So you can basically choose between pest and cholera either having:

- no PG for tank
- or no CAP for propulsion
- or no CAP for lasers

But what will really keep people from using the ship again is the fact that one of the hull bonuses is ****. I could live with the Harb running dry after a couple of minutes and even with the implications of fitting a cap booster but other hulls dont have the cap issue and offer a 2nd bonus. Screw the Harb, not going back to it.

That is Average regen, look at the regen time and the cap pool.

not a fan of more drones being added too ships, i think we need less drones myself, especially making caldari and minmatar have the same capability of fielding drones as the brutix is plain wrong and kills off gallente strengths and uniqueness

Except that the brutix isnt bonused to drones, and still does more damage than any other BC before drones (670ish with AM, 750 with void). Brutix is a hybrid boat, not a drone boat. If the drake got bonuses to hybrids then id tend to agree with you, but it didnt.

Giving BCs a better drone bay is a way to increase overall dps of the hull without changing slot layouts or traits. Probably why they went this route with the navy drake, instead of dropping a launcher and giving a RoF bonus. Since its launchers are unbonused via damage, they increased potential dps by giving it more dronebay/bandwidth. Same with the navy cane as it technically lost dps compared to t1 cane, so they are compensating with more drone bay/bandwidth.

i know why they are doing it that's quite obvious, however that doesn't justify it, navy drake will have huge tank on top the bizzare mobility buff, it doesn't need too go out of caldari lore just too buff its dps slightly.

Looking at the Navy variants I see value for money even for pvp where before only the Navy Brutix lived up to it's price tag, but now they all look good except the Navy Harb.

Is there a role that the Navy Harbinger is so good at you would risk 200mil isk for the hull knowing you're not getting much of it back from insurance if you lose it?

It's not pass 1 ...
The Harb is not fine ...
And the usage stats show that ...


I used the harb for over 6 month gatecamping in null and low sec just around the time BCs got changed the last time when the Harbinger received the 10% dmg bonus and one turret slot was removed. A change that increased dmg and reduced cap consumption slightly. I was rather new back then and the Harb was the only ship i had nearly maxed out and therefore i used it a lot. I am sad to see that the next balance pass took years to come along and still does not address the Harbinger's issues. Once again the Harbs cap is buffed but it's problems remain.

Again: It is the only BC that gets only one effective bonus instead of two. And that is completely unjustified.


"The price you pay" for the lasers advantages are already compensated by their innate weaknesses:

- Pulse base damage is certainly not as good as blasters. And has a worse (less universal) damage profile.
- Pulse tracking is the worst among all short range turrets
- Lasers are vulnerable to neuts like no other weapon system while hybrids can be cycled to a certain degree under neuts.
- Tracking and damage get even worse once you start using the only advantage pulse lasers have here: Scorch M and range.

If your point was valid then all laser platforms need to have one bonus slot removed. Balance passes on cruisers have shown that CCP is willing to replace energy turret cap consumption bonuses. Why it has been overlooked here is beyond my comprehension.

Anyway, maintaining range and making use of it's turrets range is problematic for a Harb:
In it's current state a harb would run dry on it's own by only shooting pulse lasers even with max capacitor skills despite the 10% energy turret cap bonus. Let alone pulsing MWD. I sincerely hope that the buff to capacitor capacity will finally enable the Harb to continueouly shoot it's guns at least because being the only BC unable to do so despite a bonus slot dedicated to enabling it to do so was an extraordinarily pathetic state over the last years even for CCP balancing standards.

To run it's MWD after the new balance changes I would still expect the ship to need a cap booster which costs so much power grid that you can't fit a 1600mm plate anymore at which point i would choose any other BC over the Harb (if i was looking for an armor tank). So you can basically choose between pest and cholera either having:

- no PG for tank
- or no CAP for propulsion
- or no CAP for lasers

But what will really keep people from using the ship again is the fact that one of the hull bonuses is ****. I could live with the Harb running dry after a couple of minutes and even with the implications of fitting a cap booster but other hulls dont have the cap issue and offer a 2nd bonus. Screw the Harb, not going back to it.

I'm still left wondering why Caldari seem have suddenly improved their agility. Why does the Navy Drake seem to have gained obscene levels of agility in comparison to the other BC hulls. And why is the Ferox in the top three most agile T1 BCs.

Consider that these are going to be fit with shields and so will suffer no agility penalties means Caldari are basically becoming the most agile race in terms of this rebalance.

I'm still left wondering why Caldari seem have suddenly improved their agility. Why does the Navy Drake seem to have gained obscene levels of agility in comparison to the other BC hulls. And why is the Ferox in the top three most agile T1 BCs.

Consider that these are going to be fit with shields and so will suffer no agility penalties means Caldari are basically becoming the most agile race in terms of this rebalance.

And, why are BCs being rebalanced as medium gun snipers with their range bonus, but then one gets to be far and away best in that class? Of course this is the Ferox. It will be what all the others will essentially fail at. It will be able to form a fleet doctrine or stand off snipers with some defensive dronage, and decent native agility, aided by ease of fitting nanos, with which to disengage if enemies get too close.

This will mirror the current state of Destroyers. Sniper Corms are the thing in FW plexes. They are uncounterable unless you up ship to sniper Harpys.

If you are still reading this, Fozzie, how can you miss the weighted advantage that Corms and now Feroxes will have? They will be double range bonused. All other ships in class will essentially have a worthless range bonus. They will always be outsniped by Feroxes.

Corms rule FW small plexes. Numbers being equal no other destroyer can knock them out of a plex, due to the range advantage. I like the class range bonus on Destroyers and now on BCs. But to not recognize the built in advantage double range bonused ships such as the Ferox will have against other ships in their class, is a serious error.

Pretty sure a couple maulus could counter a sniper corm. So they are far from uncounterable. Other races have damage selection for their range bonuses (navy drake/cane), so against lets say an ishtar, cerb, or eagle gang, it might be better to use a missile or cane based doctrine. Especially navy drake since it gets a tank bonus and application bonus with selectable damage types.

Caldari ships have always been quite agile, but dont have enough speed to really make it matter in kiting setups(except the nosprey). Take for example the jackdaw, it gets a bigger bonus to inertia than velocity in prop mode. I would imagine with the navy drake they want it to fly around acting like heavy missile spam. Keeping it mobile in a fleet setup is ideal.

I'm still left wondering why Caldari seem have suddenly improved their agility. Why does the Navy Drake seem to have gained obscene levels of agility in comparison to the other BC hulls. And why is the Ferox in the top three most agile T1 BCs.

Consider that these are going to be fit with shields and so will suffer no agility penalties means Caldari are basically becoming the most agile race in terms of this rebalance.

Caldari ships have always been the third least agile of the races. Minmatar used to be top, and then CCP decided to allow Gallente to have the agility crown. Caldari have never been known for producing agile ships and certainly not the most agile of all four of the races.

I agree the Ferox is quite easily going to be the most powerful of the T1 battlecruisers, and possibly even more powerful than some of the navy variants. It really doesn't need that agility buff on top.

In speed, caldari ships are generally slower, but either aligns faster or matches the other races in agility. I would agree that gallente are bordering on the most agile race, but caldari aren't far behind.

It will be based on what role they expect ships to be used for, and the Navy Drake was already agile - second overall. It seems to have passed the Navy Brutix, but i'm not sure because it looks like the Brutix has had a mass reduction while the Navy Drake has had a mass increase: so does that offset the base agility/velocity buffs after you put a prop mod on, exaggerate them, or make no difference?

The Navy Brutix has a lower mass which means its agility will be more easily impacted by putting on armour plates or prop mods. The Navy Drake has better base agility and is less affected by prop mods. So yes, the Navy Drake is the most agile BC now by quite a long way.

Who plates a Navy Brutix?

They all fit a 50mn MWD, and that will increase the mass of the ship from 11,800,000 to 16,800,000. So yes, it will make a big difference to the Brutix, wheras the effect is less for the Drake.

Someone can attempt to burn in to scram range on arty sleip. I have an arty sleip fit that was good and used MJD. MJD, XLASB, 720's, MWD, was good kite combination. I also had dual neuts, so most small tackle could get neuted out semi-quick. MJD is more to escape things faster than you that hold a point. Like garmur.

MMJD is far from useless on CS though. I've actually had a number of CS with MJD as its too useful not to use. Vulture has over 100km long range, making MJD dunks easy. Damnation can get over 100km lock range with single range rig. So there are definitely fits that could benefit from a MJD bonus.