Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2802
   |
Posted - 2017.01.03 16:03:28 -
[1] - Quote
Personally, I wouldn't add the T1 battlecruiser application bounses to the command ships. A few reasons why:
1. In at least one case (Prophecy), the bonus would make zero sense. Why would a Khanid missile boat need a drone MWD bonus?
2. In another case (Ferox), the resulting bonus would be insane. +125% Optimal + 25% falloff at CS V? Ouch.
3. Command Ships already tend to have bonuses geared towards application to smaller targets. Giving them a blanket ability to apply to targets that are also further away would increase their power dramatically.
Having said that, I could see Command Ships getting a little love of some sort, especially now that they have to be on-grid in order to boost. I'm just not sure that this is what they need.
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
I predicted FAUXs
|
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
2806
|
Posted - 2017.01.05 14:56:00 -
[2] - Quote
Serendipity Lost wrote:Taking the long training hit is a personal choice. I think for command ships - it's worth it. If you don't, that doesn't equate to command ships needing a buff.
I should probably clarify. I don't think that Command Ships as a class need any sort of buff, but there are a few things that I think need to be addressed.
1. Slot layout on the Nighthawk. 5/5 mid/low on a Caldari BC? Lolwat? This is utterly ridiculous. Borderline criminal. Make this 6/4 like a sane person.
2. Slot layout on the Sleipnir. Again, 5/5 mid/low. Not nearly as egregious as the Nighthawk since Minmatar ships typically shield or armor tank, but it should probably be 4/6 or 6/4.
3. Slot layout on the Absolution. While 3/7 mid/low makes sense from a lore standpoint as a Carthum ship, it's the only CS that can dedicate a 7 slots entirely to tank, plus it happens to have a naturally balanced resit profile that matches those slots. I think 4/6 like the other armor tankers would be a bit more sane tank-wise, plus offer more utility with an extra midslot.
4. Drone Bay on the Eos. Providing less of a drone bay on the Eos than the Ishtar is nuts. I've said for a long time that the problem with the Ishtar isn't its drones, it's its massive drone bay, which strays from the typical Gallente/Amarr bandwidth/bay balance. I'd swap the two values so that the Ishtar has 250m^3 and the Eos has 375m^3, and then maybe tone the Eos down to 300m^3 or so.
So, again, no major things, and nothing class-wide. Just a little love here and there to address some issues.
Relatively Notorious By Association
My Many Misadventures
I predicted FAUXs
|