ok, I know im always in here ranting about some thing or another with capital changes and this time is no different.
ie Capital Neuts and Nos. This sig res is ridiculous! It mkaes them utterly useless outside of those huge once in a great while capital on capital fights. Most response fleets form sub caps and these cap warfare modules do next to nothing against anything non capital! I'm not saying they need to instantly drain anything subcap but for example a Battle cruiser or cruiser with an 800 sig is only going to be neuted at 10% effectiveness? I could see this being acceptable if the cycle time wasnt 48 frikkin seconds! This needs to be rebalanced. As the effectiveness goes down, so should the cycle time to reflect as cap war module comparable to the amount being neuted. there should be a direct correlation between cycle and neut amount

The entire point of those modules is to be used and useful against capitals, not sub-caps. If you know they're not going to be useful then bring something else and save those for when you need to neut out an enemy capital to kill it...

No arguing dumb logic.
The fact you often don't know what your fighting until the escalation lands on grid does indeed make fitting capital neuts all but useless. Then of course you can always carry one or 2 in your fleet hangar and risk being killed while you wait out the minute + to refit.
Or just do what most groups do when there is capitals to kill - Just bring more subcaps.

Unfortunately, these modules were designed with CCP's slim hopes of large capital/super fights in mind. While ever subcaps are as adept as they are at killing capitals, there is unlikely to be another large capital/super fight (sadly). So either sell your capital neuts and spend the isk on something more useful or just keep it and hope it one day finds a use.

I'm well aware of all of this, and that it makes these modules more niche, but that's more or less the same for Neuts and NOS at the sub-cap level too. You either fit it for something specific or it's used in a utility high, and not much in between.

None of this has stopped people from doing stuff like Neuting FAX fits though, which at least shows that these modules are getting some use.

I'm well aware of all of this, and that it makes these modules more niche, but that's more or less the same for Neuts and NOS at the sub-cap level too. You either fit it for something specific or it's used in a utility high, and not much in between.

None of this has stopped people from doing stuff like Neuting FAX fits though, which at least shows that these modules are getting some use.

You do know 2 or 3 machs with utility neut's are far more effective at neuting a Fax than a capital neut is. A Bhal or Geddon, even more so.
Which might be why, capital neuts aren't in any well used doctrines - Check the killboards if you don't believe me.

Mention fitting capital neuts to any alliance capital doctrine designer (worth half his salt) and expect to be removed from the discussion channel.

NB; most capital fits are so tight the trade off of fitting a capital neut (even if they were useful in more than the odd rare situation) is not worth it.

It's still a pretty needless and frankly arbitrary limitation which ironically diminishes meaningful fitting choices because the times a cap neut is ever worth it are so rare that you'd be insane to suck up the very high fitting costs for a module useless 99% of the time.

I'm not saying they're widely used, I'm saying they get some niche use where dropping a single FAX for neuting is a good move, generally in smaller engagements.

As for your examples, you're comparing three sub-caps to one capitals module. I would kind of expect it to be more effective, doubly so for the Bhaalgorn which gets a specific bonus to Neuts. If we ever see a Neut-bonused faction FAX then I would expect that to be pretty ridiculous itself.

The application bonus is to prevent caps from dominating sub-caps, which is a reasonable risk for a module that neuts half of a Battleship's cap in one cycle, or 7.25 times a Heavy Neut in twice the cycle time (which, btw, means those three Machs actually neut less total over time than the single Capital neut, they make up for it with stagger, but the capital neut will still drop cap faster in general).



It's not needless or arbitrary, it's the same kind of penalty most capital offensive modules got to prevent them from dominating sub-cap ships. It's still a very effective module if used situationally, but that's fine it doesn't need to be amazingly good and a must-have to justify its existence.

Mate I'm sorry but all your going to achieve with a capital neut fit on a fax, is a fax without cap.
A fax, with active modules (doing its designed role of repping ships) can't keep cap up to itself with as few as 3 Machs with T2 neuts on it. As most Mach fleets have far more than 3 machs - What chance do you think the Fax has?

The current attributes of Capital neuts - Makes them a very poor fitting choice.

Once and only once have I seen a carrier fit a capital neut - He activated it on an Opposing Apostle as it was called primary - The Fax was dead before the Capital Nuet had cycled once - The carrier pilot now uses the same as the rest of us - T2 large neuts.

Who would waste a Fax (a capital logistics ship) by fitting it with capital neuts? They don't get a bonus to them, they don't have the cap to run them and it is just a waste unless your in a huge engagement where you know there will be caps to use them on, before you die horribly.
If they ever do release a faction fax with a neut bonus, it will once and for all show - Devs have no idea what they are doing. Unless that bonus is 100% reduction to activation cost.

NB; you do know, most Fax's, especially in smaller engagements are used to rep subcaps right?

CCplease fix the fighter follow mechanic so they dont land 5000 Km off of the carrier after warp. a couple hundered, sure, but this is refreakingdiculous

Don't recall them until you've come out of warp.

If they're already returning before you commence warp, then stop them (send them somewhere else first) - then recall them after you have warped.

It is still a bug.

Can we please address the insane disparity between T1 and T2 Fighter Support Units?? Seriously CCP, a 1% bonus BEFORE stacking penalties in no way justifies the price. Please give a 2-4% buff to the bonus on the t2

When compared to dreads fighters aren't worth the cost

There is no way that all of those engagements are just gate camps, and they're absolutely getting more use than they saw Pre-Citadel. Just anecdotally people are using Carriers in more or less the same ways they did before, just more so. The two exceptions are Triage which has been replaced by FAXes and drone death-balls which have been relegated to sub-caps.

Of course carriers are seeing more use, they are cheap and not quite as disposable as dreads.
They have far better range and application than commonly used dread fits, they can get reps and are still cheaper than dreads.
As for drone death balls, they still exist although now it is light fighters. You don't need to assign fighters to have 30 or 40 flights engage a single target.
I'm not sure they are getting more use than prior to Citadel, they are just being used in different ways since the split off of remote reps. I remember remote repping carrier blobs being far bigger than what we see now.

This is all well and good - but HAW dreads are stepping all over Marauders and have an easier time applying. You guys have some major balance issues by obsoleting certain classes of ships. Just like t3d vs assault frigate.

Um... Marauders have never been PvP focused ships, and they've never been competing with Dreads.

Bastion is not comparable to Siege.

I'm sorry you feel this way but your complaint is basically going to be viewed as "yup, working as intended" by CCP and the vast majority of the player base.

Why someone think that ship 1 is only PVE and ship 2 is only PVP ?
Open your mind! Any ship can be at any role!

I wanted to say that I am 100% AGAINST the proposed changes to the fighters in regard to their being targeted by NPCs in combat. The proposed changes will completely ruin the ability for me to make a living in EVE Online. If these changes are brought forth, I am not sure how long I will be able to keep subscribing to the game. I hope you decide against this change to fighter's aggression from NPCs. Thank you.

-Sid

Um... Marauders have never been PvP focused ships, and they've never been competing with Dreads.

Bastion is not comparable to Siege.

I'm sorry you feel this way but your complaint is basically going to be viewed as "yup, working as intended" by CCP and the vast majority of the player base.