One could do that, or one could reduce the damage another way without making it ineffective for the PVE he is describing.

He is pointing out that there may be a way of reducing the damage another way than removing a low slot. Possibly by either removing a missile hardpoint/ High slot or If the team feels a low must go, compensate it by increasing the passive regen to replace a shield power relay, Which does not help PVP but helps keep PVE utility.

There is PVE in other places than wormholes, HS , LS, Null basically absolutely everywhere, So are you saying ALL PVE players should Take one for the team because PVP players used it to excess?

Hardly balanced that, is it?

I use the Gila for PVP too, Great ship, Still good for PVP, we will cope. Absolutely buggered for it's primary PVE role now as a passive regen ship though.

CCP Fozzie has asked us to point out issues,and things are not finalised.

Do people think he is superman, plus the wisdom and infallibility of the Pope?

Of course he needs feedback from the people who use the ships, in the areas they use them. He is asking for our input.

And like any reasonable person he will look and see where the unforeseen problems created by the proposal, can be mitigated, whilst still achieving the primary goal.

We shouldn't get to worried at this point from a PVE point of view, regarding PVP, the effective damage reduction is in the right ballpark and honestly expected by most, CCP will just hopefully pick a different way of achieving the same goal, He has said he has an open mind.

The Gila nerf is absolutely brutal to Jspace denizens soling C3s.

Max passive regen I can eft is 663, with all Vs, faction extenders and A-type amplifiers. That's on a ship that will run you around 600 mil at jita and has 0 insurance (huge risk of losing all your investment). With t2 extenders (~120 mil cheaper) the max tank with all Vs is around 630.

The lowest-dps C3 site has a 669 dps wave.

3/4 of C3 sites neut and most web, the site that doesn't neut starts off at 7k alpha (undodgable in a cruiser) and the last wave alphas for 9k. Any other ideas that don't involve 2-3 month olds trying to fly HACs?

Barghest:
The Barghest is underperforming a tad in our eyes, so this change provides a slight DPS buff at high skill levels (9 effective launchers vs the previous 8.75) while providing a second utility high.

-1 Launcher (second utility high)

Change damage bonus to 10% per level

As we keep working and incorporate feedback, it's very possible that some of these changes may be adjusted or removed, or that more could be added. This is also not the complete list of balance changes coming this Winter, keep an eye on this forum section for the latest updates.

We really want to hear your feedback on these proposals. Let us know what you think!

Finally find a ship thats fun and great, in comes ccp with the nerf hammer. Every. Single. Time. I'm starting to ask myself, why even bother anymore.

3/4 of C3 sites neut and most web, the site that doesn't neut starts off at 7k alpha (undodgable in a cruiser) and the last wave alphas for 9k. Any other ideas that don't involve 2-3 month olds trying to fly HACs?

Maybe 2-3 month olds shouldn't be able to farm C3s so effectively because a certain ship is unbalanced? You want to retain your PvE farming ability at the cost of balancing the game?

You must not read because this hurts PVE more than PVP, I gave an example of how to retain the tank while lowering dps, which is rhe obvious goal of this to make PVP fits sacrifice a dps mod in the lows to bring them down a notch, which I can agree with, but in a way that doesn't smash the PVE aspect.

There aren't many ways to make money as a newbro in a wormhole while still being in the wormhole for content, short of huffing gas (boring and slow), scanning lower class holes for explo sites (no local here, even more dangerous than K space), or heading out to space to look for explo/DEDs (well now they're not very close to home). You could do PI but that's a good bit of effort to set it all up and running it daily. Our newbros have access to a C3 all day right next door, means we can come help them if they get caught and there are fewer deaths because some people won't mind scouting holes for them while watching YouTube. I'm not getting anything out of this besides newer pilots saying "I'm not in hole because I need money so I went out to NS and still can't find anything" then miss out on fights because they're not home and don't have steady income to start building their supply of ships.

Barghest - It doesn't deserve a nerf at all - compare it to the rattlesnake.

I'm really pleased with most of the changes, though I have the following reservations:

The speed nerfs and buffs are really inconsequential, as they only amount to a few percent of their ships base speed. You're probably going to have to go a little deeper to get the required effects.

The orthrus will still be extremely overpowered even after this nerf. It simply has too much fitting, control, agility, and speed for a ship that is capable of dealing significant damage, and I don't think that hinging balance decisions on a new module that is unlikely to be adopted in a widespread fashion is a good design choice.

Please reconsider the punisher as a missile ship, the amarr frigate lineup already has strong laser choices, it may provide a strong progression to khanid ships or even an avenue toward redesign of other somewhat redundant and lackluster amarr hulls. It's not like people are using the maller much these days either.

The navy osprey fills a role that's already well filled in the navy and pirate cruiser lineup, we simply do not need to have yet another kitey missile cruiser that can shake off tackle easily. An idea I've heard before is to make the navy osprey a caldari version of the navy aug. Give it two utility highs, a hybird bonus, and a shield HP bonus. I think it's an interesting concept, and it might lead to a great ship with a variety of novel uses, instead of walking on well trodden ground.

It's not being nerfed.

Replace the 5% damage bonus with -10% laser cap use per level

This is unacceptable - you should just adjust lasers cap use so we don't need a passive gunnery bonus just to use the ship. Imagine if you will any gallente or caldari turret vessel that had a bonus like this effectively removing a gunnery bonus. This doesn't make it less susceptible to energy neuts. If it had a cap battery like bonus then ok that would be interesting but that cap use bonus to lasers deserves retirement like the KE lock.

Give Sac cap back!

Remember it does only have two drones, and previously was able to launch full flights of sentries or heavy drones.

Damage is applied by the Gila through both missiles and drones, I would argue, that if damage is too high, the missile side of the equation may be a better place to address.