EVE Search - For anyone who seriously wants to understand nanowhine.

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

For anyone who seriously wants to understand nanowhine.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.25 17:11:00 - [1] Originally by: Xparky Edited by: Xparky on 25/06/2008 15:35:46 It is theoretically possible to web from 98.2km Actually much much further is possible and has been done. Look at the officer webbers and using all reactors in the lows. Yes, this setup has been used on trinity in real pvp. But these numbers mean more and more that Rapiers/Huginns are required ships in gangs/fleets. To the extent that sometimes it is pointless to undock without enough Rapiers/Huginns in gang, ready, and with logistics to back them up.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.25 18:07:00 - [2] Originally by: Tae'Lin Hynd by that logic, all the caldari recons, scorp AND THE BB are WAY OVERPOWERED as now I can longer return fire, right? Oh wait, lets not forget that nasty lil ew frig of theirs as well. Actually many would argue this precisely. ECM needs some sort of stacking penalty.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.26 00:26:00 - [3] Edited by: ***zilla on 26/06/2008 00:26:21 Originally by: Tippia You set your ship up to counter what you expect to meet. If you meet something else, you're screwed. So what are nanos setup to counter? Everything? How many specialized setups are there for nano? One cookie cutter fitting for speed with very minor variation... Originally by: Tippia Multi-role, middle-of-the-road setups will come out poorly no matter what they encounter, because û by very definition û they're not properly prepared to deal all that well with anything. And yet nanos do so well with their one size fits all. How many times have you heard someone asking to dock up so they can switch ecm,target painters,disrupters, webs, or really much of anything? The issue is that non nanos must make hard decisions to annoy and drive off nanos. Nanos can use the same setup everywhere. If nanos meet something they can't handle they're much more likely to escape and fight another day. Before I flew nanos I had to make decisions about fittings that were specific to the scenerio. Now I decide if I want to use a few faction or t2 mods. Makes outfitting easy. Nanos are a beautiful thing to fly. No reason for everyone to not be flying nanos.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.26 00:56:00 - [4] Originally by: Esmenet Like what have recons in your gangs or some neuts?? Ah, thats why recons are in such high demand. They required for so many gangs. And the 2 best to counter nanos are the Huginn/Rapier which are nearly always ... nano'd. Neuts are one of the few realistic counters to nanos. Except they're useful on battleships only. So we need nanos to effectively kill nanos.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.26 01:26:00 - [5] Originally by: Blind Man and the person shooting at you at over NINE THOUSAND m/s transversal hits you HOW? a) points you and calls friends b) missiles c) drones The nano is likely to be setup for the speed, range, and travesal. For example a vaga might want to hit at 20km and have rigs for this. As the nano controls the speed and distance the nano can adjust till the nano can exceed your damage. If it goes wrong the nano has a much greater chance of escape. As they've a definite advantage in speed they control the conflict. They can slow down till the're in a position to do damage. When threatened a nano has a superior chance of getting out of scram range and warping off.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.27 22:13:00 - [6] Edited by: ***zilla on 27/06/2008 22:15:12 Edited by: ***zilla on 27/06/2008 22:14:53 Originally by: Dracon Zethera Many RR Battleship gangs can jump in, sit at the gate, take out support, tank the rest of the damage, and jump out of system without a loss. While they can jump back they must deal with whatever is on the other side. Sometimes thats a hot drop or another fleet. So they can be trapped and forced to engage. Yes its a bit different when a rr gang is hugging a high sec gate. Imho I think its foolish to even engage then. Too much like docking games. Remote repping gangs aren't exactly known for their ability to pursue or lock down a target. Originally by: Dracon Zethera Ewar stomps on nanos, just like it stomps on most other gangs so why not try using it more? Ewar annoys them. Doesn't make them commit. Originally by: Dracon Zethera Webs, of course are powerful against the nano, slows it speed, rapier and huginn get range bonus, yada yada yada. Takes nanos to catch nanos. t2 only (rapier/huggin/hyena). Excludes lower sp players. Requires fleets to have rapiers/huginns + other nanos to effectively counter. Originally by: Dracon Zethera Target painters make nanos easier to hit, why people dont use them more often is beyond me. Because nanos are already target painted. Some 550% sig radius increase from the mwd. Usually its the tracking speed, or missiles can't match the speed, or the explosion radius can't keep up. Originally by: Dracon Zethera RSD, although they suck now, force a nano pilot to get closer to get a lock. Why is this useful? Because you get them closer to your dedicated webbing ships! What a thought. Nanos usually work around 20km or so. To get within web would mean 10-13km. This would have worked before the RSD nerf. After the nerf most ships can't give up the mid slots for mwd, scram, web, cap boosters, plus a multiple rsd's. An RSD won't do much to a nano'd recon. It'll take multiple RSD's before a vaga is likely to notice. Isn't the ownage it once was. Originally by: Dracon Zethera Neutralizers, on curses with their increased range do very nice things to nano pilots. Try flying more curses. Heavy neutralizers also do wonderful things. Back to needing t2 nanos (curse). Heavy neuts are bs only. Originally by: Dracon Zethera Tracking disruptors, you reduce the optimal, you reduce the damage and they either have to get closer or disengage. Yes, this will negate some damage. Most nanos when they see this won't get closer. Doesn't help against missiles. Originally by: Dracon Zethera ECM, hopefully I do not even have to explain this one. Annoys. Doesn't kill. Originally by: Dracon Zethera Now a recon gang, with nothing nanoed, can easily win a fight against a nano gang as long as they are coordinated. So it takes a t2 gang with high skill points and having spent nearly as much isk as the nano gang? An enemy withdraw isn't a win. That is called a draw. Originally by: Spurty polys are expensive for a reason, Poly's are expensive because limited supply for a single required component. If the supply issue were fixed the price would drop like a rock. T2 was once expensive. Doesn't mean that t2 was that much better than t1 (named). The price of t2 has dropped because of increased supply. We've seen what has happened. Just because something takes a long time to train or lots of isk doesn't mean it should be great. There should be t1 counters. Ultimately the best counter to nanos is to fly nano's yourself.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.28 00:49:00 - [7] Remote rep gangs are forced to fight. They can be bubbled at a gate. They can be scanned effectively. Originally by: Dracon Zethera An enemy withdrawn is a win. A draw is a standoff at a stargate or some other thing like that. Whoever holds the field wins. Then according to this logic there is a module that nearly any ship can use and will nearly always result in a "win". A cloak. See a hostile and cloak. If they're unable to decloak you they can't kill you. They'll get bored. They'll leave. You'll hold the field. You win. Otherwise according to your logic if you can maintain a buffer around you free of hostiles you've won. So you use ecm. Nanos start to orbit at 50km. Neither can do much. So by your logic you've won. You hold the field for all 50km around you. The nanos own everything else in system. How is this a win precisely? What you've described is a draw. Two forces engage or standoff. Insignificant losses on both sides. Not much happens. A win would involve something going pop. Enough so that one side is forced to flee. Notice "forced". If nanos test defenses but don't get any where they withdraw. Notice the word "draw" in there. So imagine if a gang of nanos hits a gang of non nanos. Then a pack of rapiers uncloak to help out the non nanos. There would probable be "win" in here somewhere. With most other ships you can pursue. You can trap. You can empty the system out and put gate camps on all gates. You can run continous probes. I'm not a fan of afk cloaks but at least they must jump through gates and don't require huginns/rapiers/ceptors/dps to catch and kill.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.28 01:37:00 - [8] Originally by: Gamesguy pwn whatever you have on the otherside real quick while mwding out of the bubble(if there is one), then hop safespots till aggression is gone then log. So they had agression? They had to fight to get out of the bubble and warp off? Sounds like they had to fight on either side of the gate. Sounds like they were forced to fight. I said nothing about the rr gang not wining. Only that a fight could be forced.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.06.28 17:50:00 - [9] Edited by: ***zilla on 28/06/2008 17:59:03 Originally by: Gamesguy Nanos have to kill the tackling inties too to warp off, so you conceed that nanos are balanced because the tacklers force them to fight? So what tacklers do we need? More nanos? This is an issue. Or as you said ceptors? So we agree that it takes t2 to be viable? This is sad. Then we're back to requiring specific ships just to pursue. Not kill, pursue. With a remote repping gang an ibis with a t1 scram can get a point and be remotely useful. Nearly anything can go after a remote repping gang. Most anything can force a fight against most ship types, ceptor for nanos. Even an ibis can bump a mothership out of alignment if it can't point it (supercaps are still messed up). Nanos control the range. I rather doubt they stick around for the tacklers unless they want the free kills. It remains that the only thing to pursue a nano are more nanos or maybe lots of ceptors. As we know ceptors don't do so hot against nanos. Buff frigs/ceptors/assault frigs. When t1 ships can go after a t2 vaga and have a decent chance to web it then we might have something. Originally by: MenanceWhite If they're directly flying away from you without the mwd on, should'nt you be able to mwd after them and shoot+send drones at them? A nano with the mwd off isn't that much slower than a mwd with a mwd. This tactic works if the nano is very close. If the nano is out towards the edge of scram range it doesn't work so hot. Drones either won't catch, won't do enough damage to be noticable, or will follow at 0 traversal where medium guns can chew up very very quickly. If heavy drones had the speed of warrior t2 drones then this might be viable. Otherwise the only drones that are remotely useful might be webbing or sentry drones. Then we're back to needing a battleship. Mwd after a nano is mostly a waste. The only time mwd would help would be if you time the orbit of a nano just so that you mwd where they will be to close distance a few km and get a web. Or you catch the nano when its not running the mwd and you use yours to close. Shooting is mostly a waste. With a scram you won't do enough damage to an 8km nice resist shield buffer tank.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.01 04:56:00 - [10] Originally by: Gamesguy Yes its a real chore training 3 weeks for an inty, its totally unreasonable, yep. 3 weeks for a new player? To buy not only the ship plus the fittings? Still fairly steep entry cost for what is a suicidal tackler with a steep learning curve. Originally by: Gamesguy You have something called a warp disruptor, I suggest you look it up. I hear inties that outrun nanoships is quite good at webbing them. Scramming? Yes. Webbing? Not really. If the nano has a web then the ceptor is quickly toast. Originally by: Gamesguy Ceptors do fine against nanos, provided you have proper support for them. So we need multiple ceptors. Plus jammers. Plus dps. And most likely we'll pop a single nano out of the group (if luckly) and the rest are gone. Better to get the entire gang in nanos themselves. They'll simply be more effective. The tacklers are simpler and the best thing to threaten a nano gang is another nano gang. Originally by: Gamesguy A nano with the mwd off isn't that much slower? ...You get low on cap from warping, often a single heavy neut will render you unable to mwd after you finish a warp. If a bs pulses the mwd it takes time to speed up. The bs has to be aligned just so. The relative speed isn't that much. So maybe 500m/s difference with the bs at full speed and the nano hanging at 20km away. Takes a bit even to get in range for a web overloaded (more training). Not impossible. But not a simple tactic. Originally by: Gamesguy ...my absolution will ***your vagabond when you're flying in circles around me at 6km/s. Yes. t2 ships and fittings can hit stuff. Can you web the nano? Do you expect the nano to approach and wait for you to kill it? Originally by:** Gamesguy A t1 cruiser can force a nanoship to disengage easilly. As can a battlecruiser. However a disengage isn't a kill nor a win. So the t1 solution is lots of t1 frigs setup for a suicidal run. They need good skills to keep up. The need great ecm/logistical support to stay alive. They need battlecruisers/cruisers for damage. Oh wait. These have limited range (the tacklers are probably 50-100km before they get some good tackles). So now we need nano'd cruisers to close or "long range" cruisers. Or we need battleships to snipe. In the end it is just easier to just fly nanos. The best answer to nanos are nanos.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.01 18:12:00 - [11] Edited by: ***zilla on 01/07/2008 18:12:44 Originally by: Gamesguy 3 week old player in any ship against any gang is not an effective member...they die in 2 seconds to warrior IIs from anything. And ceptors do that much better? What makes the difference is speed, speed, and speed. But only some of the ceptors work. 2 slot layouts versus 3 slot layouts. Originally by: Gamesguy Most nanos do nont, and thats what ECM support is for, to keep your ceptors alive. And for every one or two tackler we need an ECM ship. So one somewhat overpowered (ECM) to counter another. Originally by: Gamesguy You spread your tacklers and tackle as many as you can, rest will probably flee, how is this different from battleships? Even a fleet of sniper bs jumping into a gatecamp can usually get the majority of its ships out unless there are anchored bubbles on the gate or something. So wildly grab tackles. Hope that the ECM boats can figure something out. Meanwhile non nanos can be forced to fight with dictor bubbles, anchored bubbles etc. A sniper fleet going through a gate camp can be forced to deal with everything from t1 frigs, drakes to other battleships. Few of which a sniper fleet can effectively deal with (its sniper, configured for long range and not short range slug fests). Originally by: Gamesguy Its not easier to get the entire gang into nanoships, because the whiners typically do not have the isk or the skill to effectively fly a nanoship. Certainly not easy but if they must train long term than nanos are a better bet than battleships etc. A nano isn't that much more expensive than a battleship (polys versus faction webs etc, bs pays out insurance etc). Add in the t2 weapons and the nano looks good. Add in the ability to survive and the nano is a done deal. Originally by: Gamesguy Not to mention nanogangs kill each other with rapiers, not because putting nanos on an ishtar will somehow allow it to hit other nanoships. It will not. Rapiers would work just as well in a normal gang. Not quote. Rapiers are fairly close range. 35-40km is usually the effective range. But they need to be paired with Arazu's to point, or they must nano themselves after the nanos and try to point, hopefully with logistics backup. So we get the nano dance. Two gangs face off. They try and distract the other and close. Then all of the cloaked rapiers uncloak. Anyone not gone in 5-7 seconds (re-cal time) is primary. Can't have huginns or there wouldn't be a fight. So then we get the vaga's replacing a lse for a web. So nanos are the most effective way to go after nanos and support rapiers etc (nano support). Originally by: Gamesguy You stated that medium guns cannot hit nanos unless they are webbed, this is blatantly false. Medium guns can hit. What nano pilot will wait there to be popped when they're not webbed? Yes you can drive them off. Then draw versus win argument. Originally by: Gamesguy Its easy for 3 week old noobs to fly 200m nanohacs when you say inties are too difficult/expensive for them to fly? Something that is expensive or takes more training time should give an edge. Not a significant advantage. Originally by: Gamesguy The reason nanogangs do well against their own counterparts is because they tend to have rapiers, falcons, and scimitars. They have logistical and ECM support with specialized tacklers. If you put thohse in a normal gang it will *****a nanogang too. Ah. This is the part where nano support is required. Takes Rapiers (nano'd), Scimitar (nano'd), and falcons (not nano'd). Takes t2. Takes fairly expensive ships. In a normal gang all that happens is the tacklers outpace the dps. So then you get a blob ball on a gate with the dps etc all close up. The nanos try and seperate the rapiers/tacklers from the blob ball so they can be primaried. Mobility wins.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.02 21:50:00 - [12] Originally by: Gamesguy Ceptors t2 fit with no rigs will outrun warrior IIs, a very important thing that keeps them alive against any ship with 25m3 of drone bay. Which makes ceptors required. Mostly those with more than 2 slots. And leaves t1 stuff in the dust. Originally by: Gamesguy A falcon will practically permajam a hac And we're back to having t2 being required. Originally by: Gamesguy A sniper fleet jumping through a gatecamp is intentionally engaging, its not forced to do anything. A sniper fleet can a) engage, b) be chased and held up with bubbles, c) hop safe spots while being probed and trapped, d) log off. The other options are to get no where close to the system or not undock. Snipers that warp to on grid are likely to have an engagement forced. Originally by: Gamesguy Nano is MUCH more expensive than a battleship. Price shouldn't set utility. Certainly not t2 price. So a hac is only 4x more expensive than a bs, but thats only after insurance. Insurance itself costs a bit. Before insurance in terms of assets a nano isn't that bad. Add in the ability to survive and the nano is a good deal. Originally by: Gamesguy [Eh what? You're telling me battleships dont have a "significant advantage" over battlecruisers? Or battlecruisers dont have a significant advantage over cruisers? Or how about recons vs their t1 counterparts? Curses dont have a significant advantage over arbitrators? Crusaders dont have a significant advantage over executioners? Show me a battleship that can negate nearly all damage. Show me one that can't be effectively scrammed. Big ships increase dps but decrease mobility and the ability to deal with small stuff. The issue with speed as that as ships go over certain boundaries game mechanics start to break down. Originally by: Gamesguy shield boosting vaga and get killed, then get the km posted in a comedy km thread. Oh yes. This is because variety is nearly dead. There are very few fits for nanos. Very little variation. There is a fitting screen but it is entirely to apply one of a few approved templates. Other setups are comedy because of how much better the approved ones work. Originally by: Reiaandra Ilin I'm an inty pilot. You know what scares me more than fast vagas? Rapiers or anything with a web for that matter. Rapiers with 90% webs are a bit overpowered. Partly a problem with how webs currently work. Webs are mostly an all or nothing module. I'd prefer to see changes that buff ceptors.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.03 16:48:00 - [13] Edited by: ***zilla on 03/07/2008 17:27:24 Originally by: Xaen Multiple killboard prove this statement false. By that reasoning nano battleships were balanced. They could be killed. Occasionally a nano phoon/mach would grace someones killboard. A faction nano mach costs a lot. If it is expensive with expensive implants and expensive faction mods then it must be all right! Originally by: Xaen they nerfed snipers? Yes. The scripts for the sensor boosters. Snipers no longer get an advantage to range + lock time. Not a major nerf, but still. Originally by: Xaen I agree actually. But just taking speed away from HACs will make them completely useless. That's not balance, it's ruination. Which is why many argue for nerfing the crazy non stacked speeds (ie 8km/s+). Adjusting the stacking of poly's. Adjusting the stacking of implants. For most of the normal nanos keeping the speed roughly what they are. But introduce scripts for webs. Introduce sig radius as a factor for the webs ablitiy to be effective. Buff assault frigs somewhere in here. So assault frigs + ab's would be weakly affected by webs (low sig radius). A ceptor with mwd would be hit hard by a short range 90% webber. However if a ceptor is hit with 24km 25% webber it wouldn't hurt that much with the reasonable sig radius. A battleship would hurt with even the 24km 25% webber variety much less a 10km 90% webber. A nano would still find the 10km 90% webber to be death. However the nano can trade tank etc for a 30km 25% webber itself which improves the nanos chances. Take away a bit of the bonus from the Rapier/Huginn. Worst case it would web at 120km-150km at 25% (plus would have 2-3x webbers). Rapiers can web now that far on Trinity with officer gear. So possibly reduce the 60% bonus to range.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.03 18:37:00 - [14] Edited by: ***zilla on 03/07/2008 18:41:11 Originally by: Xaen They're already out of lock range of a lot of ships, so they hardly need a tank. Snipers already had no tank. The issue is that while they can lock at range it takes them a while to do so. This means snipers are less effective against small ships. Less effective in quickly locking a friendly for remote reps. Losing effective dps while waiting to lock the next target (ie: Primary pops, secondary insta pops, and still locking the next targets). Less effective in handling ships that do get close (the scripts can be switched, just takes time). Not a major change, but still significant. Originally by: Xaen most people are arguing that the realistic speed ships (3k-4k) also need nerfed. I'd like to see a light counter to this. Ie a 24km web script at 25% effectiveness. About what webber drones might do. It won't complete stop a nano but would increase the effectiveness of guns/missiles. Something that won't hose frigs/ceptors. Originally by: Xaen completely reliable way to counter nanos, then they'll be completely dead just as if you'd completely nerfed speed A web script wouldn't kill nanos. Nanos would take a bit more damage if the pilot had a web (like a target painter). Nanos would still have the speed advantage even while webbed. The main use would be for a ship to disrupt the orbit to close within 10km. Or for a ceptor to use to lightly web a nano so that a ceptor has a better chance to survive. Nanos can still counter web. Nanos wouldn't be completely stopped even if they were webbed at long range. Consider this. A nano can scram a target with 100% reliability and no specialization. A long range webber would only cut some of the speed from the nano. Now we have choices. A non-nano could play bait with most of the mid slots of long range webs for example. The major change is that a nano could not always use the same cookie cutter setups. They would have to sacrifice tank for webs so that they could counter web. Nanos in small groups may need to coordinate so that some sport scrams and some webs. I mostly fly dictors and nano'd cruisers with my alt. I'd love to have some more varied fitting options. I bulk buy most of my t2 ships with exactly the same fittings every time. There is very little reason these days to fly anything but a cookie cutter setup.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.03 19:37:00 - [15] Edited by: ***zilla on 03/07/2008 19:46:07 Edited by: ***zilla on 03/07/2008 19:44:28 Originally by: Xaen And what's to stop you from using two webs? Whats stopping us from using more neuts etc? Originally by: Xaen A 250M ISK ship with a full rack of speed mods in the lows, and 100M in rigs with over three months of skills trained owned by a 12M ISK ship with a week old pilot with two 24km webs. Thats how it should be. A ship specifically fitted out to handle nanos that has given up everything else. Originally by: Xaen So any cruiser with 5 mids immediately becomes 100% reliable at killing nanos. And a cruiser still has mids left for a mwd (oh wait), tank (oh wait), scram (oh wait), anything else (oh wait). About a blackbird is the only thing that could pull this off. And we know how fast they pop. t1 cruisers are limited in the number of mids they've got. Originally by: Xaen And that doesn't look like a balance issue to you? Yep. Just as non nano can load up on webs, a nano must balance scrams, webs, and tank. The same choice that every ship must make. Originally by: Xaen Or did you not even consider putting two 24km webs on? Even with stacking penalties it spells certain death from 24km. Certain death by what? A cruiser that gives up nearly everything could slow a nano a bit. It'll be torn apart by anything else. The nano is still likely faster than the cruiser. If the nano counter webs and sacrifices some of its mids then the nano is still likely faster. If the nano isn't faster comparing mwd versus mwd, then the nano will have greater buffer tank, resists, damage, more drones, etc. Originally by: Xaen Try a rupture, arbitrator, stabber, thorax, or vexor. Only the arbitrator could dual web with mwd + scram. The others are 3 slot fits. Doesn't sound like a great threat to me. Originally by: Xaen traditional tank for speed (which you've just taken away) However some nanos still fit in a LSE t2 or 2x. Pushing them to about 8k shield buffer with decent resists. Would be a shame if they had to decide between scram, web, and buffer tank.
Crackzilla The Shadow Order SMASH Alliance	Posted - 2008.07.04 05:10:00 - [16] Edited by: ***zilla on 04/07/2008 06:06:10 Originally by: Dianeces Otherwise, why do I have to pay up to 10x as much as a T1 cruiser for my HACs or Recons? Surely it isn't because they have capabilities in excess of what their T1 cousins have? You're absolutely right. A t1 stasis webber is 10k isk, and a t2 webber is about 1mil isk. Thats a 100x price difference. A t1 stabber is 3.5mil isk. So a vaga should cost 350mil. A great imbalance exists. A vaga can be purchased for 82mil. So yes this price imbalance needs to be fixed. A vaga should cost more? Utility doesn't set price. Price is set by demand and by the relative value. Consider this. I purchased a name shuttle for way more than a normal shuttle. The utility is precisely the same. However the shuttle is named and in limit supply. The relative value is vastly increased versus a lesser (but not in stats) unnamed shuttle. So t2 need not be better to be expensive. Only limited and different. If the t2 module/ship is slightly better in some regards then we would say it has increased utility but a much higher value. T1 named, T2, faction, and officer stuff has always cost way more than t1. Often the abilities aren't that massive compared to the t1 stuff. A bit easier cpu/pg fittings. Some more resists. A few km here and there of range. If price is an issue than raise the price of a vaga to 350mil. Hacs are very cheap wnen comparing other t1 versus t2 ships/items. They're better than the t1 options in about all regard. So just because something is expensive does not mean it is balanced. It does not mean that the item must have a vastly increased utility. A t2 item/ship should be different or slightly better than the t1 option. And it can still cost 10x or 100x more and have value. Price does not dictate balance.

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.