Stabilising the warp core

6th March 2014 – 5.11 pm

Warp core stabilisers have drawbacks, almost certainly to prevent their widespread adoption, which would make many engagements much less of a risk for those involved. These drawbacks are decreased targeting range and decreased scan resolution, i.e. increased locking time. Increased locking time will be significant in minor skirmishes, when the engagement can be decided by a few shots either way. A delayed positive lock denies you some early shots and can almost doom you in the engagement before it starts. Decreased targeting range is significant too, denying sniping as a valid tactic, preventing a reply to sniping ships, and forcing a ship to get closer to brawlers.

The drawbacks to fitting warp core stabilisers are significant. They clearly affect how many combat ships are seen fitted with them. However, there are no negative effects for non-combat ships, which is where I believe the real problem with warp core stabilisers arises. The obvious example is with industrial ships, most notably haulers, where targeting range and locking speed are simply not a factor in the ship's role. The only drawback to fitting a warp core stabiliser is that it uses up a fitting slot, but when that slot is not being used for anything else this is also no longer a drawback.

Personally, I see the problem exemplified with the redesigned Tech I haulers that have specialised cargo bays. Whereas previously the low fitting slots forced a compromise on either increasing cargo capacity or adding warp core strength. If you wanted both you would need to train and pay for a deep space transport. But now, if you just want to haul planet goo (or minerals, ore, or ammunition), you can do so with a dedicated bay whose capacity is not modified by modules. Those low fitting slots no longer compromise your fitting, warp core stabilisers have no drawbacks to their use.

There is another class of non-combat ship where the lack of drawbacks for fitting warp core stabilisers is having a negative effect, and these can be seen in faction warfare. The plexing frigates may be combat ships in design, but they have been repurposed to avoid combat entirely. They do not engage other ships, or even intend to engage or be engaged by other ships. For this reason, I think it is no great leap to suggest that these plexers are not combat ships.

The same issues with T1 haulers with specialised bays are true of the non-combat plexers. Any drawbacks designed in to warp core stabilisers have no effect on the ship they are being fitted to, because they are non-combat ships, and so not affected by combat drawbacks, and the fitting slots being used are not diminishing the capability of the ship's primary purpose.

The frustration surrounding the warp core stabiliser is not to do with the module itself, but in its abuse. Clearly the module is not overpowered, as no one ever suggests its use in the same way they do as, for example, the damage control unit. This is because there are significant drawbacks to fitting even one that will have a noticeable affect in just about every combat situation, against rats or other players. The abuse comes when the warp core stabiliser can be used without such a negative effect. Exploitation without penalty.

It seems that to prevent continued frustration with the warp core stabiliser there needs to be a drawback added to the module that will significantly affect its fitting to any non-combat ship. Perhaps decreasing the agility, increasing the inertia of the ship, so that it takes longer to align for warp, giving an aggressor more of an opportunity to rake through the target's defences. But this may not matter given the low fitting slots used for warp core stabilisers are shared with armour defences, and the mid fitting slots for shield defences remain free.

Perhaps fitting warp core stabilisers could lower the resistances of a ship's shields, or reduce the absolute shield HP. Any shield tank would then be compromised, at best only a little above the default levels with the mid-slots dedicated to shield modules, and the armour cannot be augmented without affecting how many warp core stabilisers can be fitted. Or do both, and combine a shield penalty with an agility penalty.

Other, less controversial modules have corresponding penalties to compensate for enhancing certain attribute of a ship. As is the crux of this post, even warp core stabilisers do, effective enough to prevent any serious adoption on combat ships. It is straightforward to consider that stabilising a warp core could effect a ship's manoeuvrability, and manipulating such fields could harm the integrity of the shields. But these are just suggestions, a means to provoke thought and discussion. What should be apparent, though, is that warp core stabilisers on non-combat ships need adjustment.

  1. 36 Responses to “Stabilising the warp core”

  2. To be fair I think that it would not matter that much if industrial ships got their shields or hit points lowered by stabs. Well, unless the alpha damage before it warps off is so large it instantly pops.

    Conversely I've yet to see a tackled industrial make it out alive. So while I agree that it can be frustrating with the loads of stabs in the lows it is no worse than having an Iteron V with cargo expanding rigs and 5 stabs in the low.

    Align speed increased, acceleration decreased are other things that could be discussed along with you suggestions.

    By Akely on Mar 6, 2014

  3. Penny, I sit on the other side of the fence.

    I fly goo ships, you want to hunt goo ships. I want goo ships to be caught some times. I already know that prepared hunters have no problems catching us.

    There are two common epithal configs I know of : 1 DCU, 3 WCS, and 4 WCS.

    I would suggest that if you are having difficulties catching us, you are not properly configured.

    Just like you want my ships to make compromises, (say WCS or tank), I want hunters to make compromises (say catch t1 haulers OR be PVP competent OR spend isk).

    You want a single fit to catch both stab fit epithals AND not to make PVP compromises.

    Both of us agree that having a single option for slots is a little silly.

    So I have a counter proposal.

    A balance to WCS. Increase align time.

    A new WCS modules : A new faction WCS providing 2 points of stab is made available, say roughly in cost what a SOE probe launcher costs. This becomes the dominant cost of a stabbed T1 hauler.

    Modify one of the existing WCS to counteract reduced align time.

    The t1 specialised haulers get a 2 points of WCS, just like the venture. Yes this means you either need faction scram or dual scram.

    Then the t1 specialised haulers have the following configurations :
    * Stabbed. Hunters could fit 2 scrams, or maybe gank heavy.
    * Quick align (possibly a bonus to nanofiber modules?). Hunters needs sebo
    * Tanky for baiting hunters.
    * Expanded cargo. (i.e. allow cargo expanders to increase the admittedly large specialised holds)

    I already know that there are hunters with the competence to catch epithals. We have the kill(ed) boards to show it.

    I don't want to return back to the days of a found hauler = dead hauler.

    By Foo on Mar 6, 2014

  4. Forgot to say that with the above, the also would be reduced low slots on specialized to haulers. Maybe just the 1.

    By foo on Mar 6, 2014

  5. You are focusing on WCS as "the" problem. But I don't see it that way. As you say, for almost all ships, WCS are not a problem. It is only in a handful of circumstances that they are problem: combat ships generally in FW, and Epithals. If there is any solution (which I doubt in the latter case), it ought to be to change FW and Epithals.

    With Epithals, I'd be content if they just take away one low slot. As Foo writes, there are only two ways that one should fit an Epithal's lows: 4 WCS or 3 WCS and one DC. For PI, I think the former fitting is better. What I hate about it is that even with two warp scramblers, I still cannot stop a properly-fit Epithal (without buying a faction scrambler). Here I have burned a slot, gimped my own ship against anything except WCS, and I still don't win.

    By Von Keigai on Mar 6, 2014

  6. I like the idea of making them reduce shield resists. It can be wedged into the lore, and will affect armor tanks as well by taking a slot and the cpu necessary for an enam. What kind of reduction were you thinking?

    And let's be honest, most indies die during the align...

    By Rabbit on Mar 7, 2014

  7. I notice the same thing with many of your blog posts that I see all the time in game and on the forums from 'bittervets:' The game has changed and you can't (or don't want) to change with it. Every suggestion you make is solely to benefit yourself with no regard to other players. As a relatively new player myself I'm having to learn how to play EVE the way it is now, so I don't have anything to complain about (yet). This puts my mind in the perspective of not really getting why the bittervets don't just adapt.

    Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy your blog and I find your writing to be engaging!

    Personally, I don't see any issues currently with WCS. The *only* ships anyone (with any sense) ever fits them on are ships that are quite easily alpha'd right off the field. Like you said, their attributes make it so that no one would fit them to a true combat ship, and rightly so! Just as you are laughed at for not fitting a DCU on a PvP ship, you should be laughed at for not fitting WCS on an industrial ship in dangerous space. If you aren't paying attention to your ship for even just a few seconds you get ripped apart.

    Also, I would be very sad if I couldn't spend the odd weekend purposely hanging out in FW space with a stabbed ship for the sole purpose of griefing all those elite pvpers! Everyone has their own play style and mine often includes enticing 'pirates' into rage tears... even if I do get caught, my atron only costs a few hundred thousand ISK but has provided me with quite the entertainment! ;-)

    By Amy on Mar 7, 2014

  8. I would like to remind hunters that even in wormhole space, that there is this new module that allows you to refit anywhere. If you see active PI haulers, fit for 6 points. Mobile depots dont take that long to deploy.

    With 6 points, hunter 1, epithal 0.

    Yes, we have been caught by a 6 pointed hunter.

    By Foo on Mar 7, 2014

  9. "warp core stabilisers have no effect on the ship they are being fitted to, because they are non-combat ships"
    You are suggesting that they make a module for keeping non-combat ships alive, reduce their ability to stay alive? Can we change your gyrostabilizers so they reduce your optimal?

    I'd be willing to lose 2 low slots on the epithal, if I could get 32% more PG and 2 more medium slots. Now the option is either fit 2 WCS or act as bait.

    FW needs changing, changing WCSs won't help.

    By The Lion on Mar 7, 2014

  10. Lion, do you mean like how shield extenders increase your shield HP but make your signature radius bigger and so your ship easier to damage? Or how micro warp drives increase your signature radius, add mass to make you less manoeuvrable, and reduce your capacitor size so that you can't power other active modules for as long? Or how inertia stabilisers make you more agile at the cost of increasing your signature radius, making you easier to catch and damage? Or how afterburners increase your mass and therefore your agility and align time? Or how the bastion module increases your weapon range and repair amounts, but makes you completely immobile? Or maybe how loading different ammunition does indeed change my optimal range in inverse proportion to my the damage potential? Yes, like that.

    The warp core stabiliser is an excellent example, with its ability to let a ship escape but at the cost of targeting range and scan resolution. My point is that although this is a fine module for combat ships, there is no relevant drawback for fitting one to non-combat ships. I can fully understand why there perhaps shouldn't be one, and didn't even consider that there should be one in the old environment. Except now we have to consider specific changes to ships or the environment that allow full racks of WCS to be fit that remove all risk from an activity that has rewards associated with it.

    Amy, I understand where you are coming from. I think your warping around frustrating pirates is a fine activity. But if you happen to be doing this whilst making a generous amount of LP from plexing then I start to have a problem. I have previously argued that greater reward in the game comes from the greater risk involved, and that this greater risk comes in the form of other players. In a nutshell, remove all other players from the game except you and consider what risk low- or null-sec space now poses in and of itself. None.

    If a player wants a greater reward they need to accept a greater risk, and that that risk comes from other players. When a change to the environment then allows players to nullify that risk, to effectively evade all normal encounters with other players, then the environment is broken. Low SP pilots in cheap ships being able to reap significant benefits with almost no possibility of losing those ships is against the spirit of the game. I am happy that your cheap ship gives you plenty of entertainment, and I'm sure any losses are easily covered by any gains you make in the process. Probably by an order of magnitude, in fact.

    Foo, the cheapness of the ships and their use in making good ISK is a major factor in my argument. I appreciate that you don't want to be a duck in a shooting gallery, but what is your loss? Maybe a million ISK for the fitted ship, and you can probably shove your goo back in the POCO if you're paying attention? I have already adapted my fitting to try to catch stabbed ships, and never complained when a pilot who chose to go further than me went free.

    The problem is that, as agreed, there is no reason to fly an Epithal with less than a warp core strength of four. My faction scrambler can't stop that, nor can two normal scrams. No one has yet managed to convince me that needing a fleet or a specialised goo hunter to catch a T1 hauler makes any kind of sense. It's a glorified cargo container, it costs nothing to buy or replace, and I find it absurd for anyone to consider it normal to require extraordinary measures to catch a completely ordinary ship.

    I am not even convinced of the utility of the mobile depot in this instance. For a start, what does an 'active PI hauler' look like? The only indication of activity is one warping around planets, and by that time it's generally too late to refit. Second, the mobile depot solution relies on the system being big enough to hide you from the tower, and there are plenty of systems where this just isn't possible.

    It all comes back to risk-vs-reward. Planet goo in w-space is the best in the game, and the risk is arguably the highest because of the lack of local and a predominance for cloaked hunters. Suggesting that a basic hauler should survive a goo run in w-space should be met with the same scepticism as expecting it to survive a resupply run through low-sec. There are more suitable ships available that can be used, or you should expect to lose the cheaper version on those occasions that you are caught. And any loss can pretty much be made up by the far greater reward that w-space goo provides, even with a string of bad luck, considering how cheap the basic haulers are.

    I think you're right that the warp core stabiliser isn't the problem in itself, VK. I believe it's a combination of factors: cheap ships reaping significant rewards in risky environments in situations where there are no drawbacks to fitting a full rack of WCS. That's pretty specific, so I don't think I am suggesting a sweeping change. I have stated before that dropping the number of low fitting slots on the Epithal to two would be a decent solution. But that's only a solution to one problem, and faction warfare plexers will not be affected. If a change to the warp core stabiliser can bring back some element of risk to the activities without needing a further change to the environment, I see that as preferable than trying to tweak several adjustments in different places.

    By pjharvey on Mar 7, 2014

  11. Foo: I don't normally fit two (or, ugh, three) scramblers. And this means that most of the time when I find an Epithal, I am not fit right to tackle it.

    I do carry a depot in my Manticore, along with a second scrambler. This is mostly for catching Ventures, though, if I ever find one gassing. Not Epithals. I suppose I should throw in a third scrambler. It might be handy in a few situations. However, it is rare that I would actually refit to use it.

    Why would that be rare? I see Epithals a lot more often than Ventures. And occasionally I would have time to refit to go after an Epithal. Sometimes that would work. But usually it won't. In a small system, for example, there can be no place to refit out of dscan range.

    But worse is the time required to refit. Usually when you first see an Epithal on dscan, and it turns out to be manned, you have a very brief window to gank. This is because you have to find his tower, then wait for him to do a run from it. Meanwhile, he is just going to run to five planets and do a quick dropoff and pickup. He does not get in an Epithal except to run goo.

    Refitting takes time: just to deploy the depot requires a full minute in which you cannot watch the target. Including drag and drop time, and warp time to get to and from an outer planet, it's more like a two minutes. That's enough time for a planet-gooer to do half his planets.

    If I have found an Epithal and found his tower, and I am sitting there hoping he moves, then yeah maybe if he has done nothing for 10 minutes I would take the risk to warp out and refit and return. But he might move any time, and I don't want to miss that. So typically I fight with the fit I have. There's still hope to bump him and alpha him.

    By Von Keigai on Mar 7, 2014

  12. Amy:

    The only ships anyone ever fits [WCS] on are ships that are quite easily alpha'd right off the field.

    This is not the case with Epithals. One can hope to alpha one. In fact my corp has alpha'ed a few. But it won't happen if the guy running it fits it right.

    Take the four-stab Epithal, for example. Fit as follows:

    [Epithal, PI Hauler]
    'Repose' Core Compensation
    'Repose' Core Compensation
    'Repose' Core Compensation
    'Repose' Core Compensation

    Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
    Medium Subordinate Screen Stabilizer I
    Limited 'Anointed' EM Ward Field
    Limited Adaptive Invulnerability Field I

    [empty high slot]
    [empty high slot]

    Medium Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer I
    Medium Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer I

    Note that none of the fittings costs more than 150000 ISK. So it's incredibly cheap. It has +4 WCS so it requires three scramblers to tackle (or two if one of them a faction scrambler).

    Can one alpha it? It has 14000 EHP. My Manticore does 500 DPS. So I would need 28 seconds to kill it before it can warp.

    By Von Keigai on Mar 7, 2014

  13. So we can add a drawback to your gyrostabs?

    "I have stated before that dropping the number of low fitting slots on the Epithal to two would be a decent solution."
    In exchange for what? If you want to limit how well it can escape, you are going to need to allow it to survive long enough for help to arrive, or you are just asking to shoot fish in a barrel. I'm not fish. If you want to fight I'll fight, but the epithal will be dead by the time my HAC lands.

    I would pay at least 30Mil isk for the epithal, just for that cargo bay and no low slots. "cheap ships" isn't my fault. The ship does have the potential to carry 650Mil or more. It's a T1 ship so alts can fly it.

    By The Lion on Mar 7, 2014

  14. I'm not saying it's your fault, Lion. That doesn't change there being a problem.

    If you want to fight, or keep your Epithal safe, fly your HAC as escort. Why hold back in the first place?

    What's the specific problem with gyrostabilisers? I'm not arbitrarily picking a module to change to make my life easier.

    By pjharvey on Mar 7, 2014

  15. " 'cheap ships' isn't my fault." My point here was that, them being cheap should not be a factor.

    No, I don't want to keep it safe. I really don't care if it gets blown up (even if it was 30Mil), but I'd like more options than a)fly away b)die.

    I would hold back in the first place for the same reason you would keep Aii and Fin on the other side of the hole in a Raven and Domi when you saw I was escorting it in a HAC. Escalation. You can tank until help gets there, why shouldn't I be able to? Because it's cheap? Do I have another option?

    I have no problem with gyrostabs (this is my point). Yes you are. If the the epithal had another option, fine, but it doesn't.

    The WCS has the drawback it has for combat ships, as you said. It's a good drawback and using one on a short range boat so you're not pinned down by a kiter might be a good idea.

    Epithal WCS use is much different than non-combat FWers WCS use. FWers could fight and choose not too, I have no choice.

    I'll admit I don't like hunting. I shot too many doves in the face when I was younger and don't get any thrill from killing something that can't fight back anymore. I would rather epithals be used to create fights, instead of fodder. There will still be plenty of people who won't fight back.

    By The Lion on Mar 7, 2014

  16. It's not about getting fights. It's about reaping greater rewards, either w-space goo or faction warfare loyalty points, whilst entirely negating the greater risk that is meant to be an inherent factor of the activity.

    Yes, you have another option. A deep space transport can be tanked well enough, and has added warp core strength, and a large cargo bay that can be expanded.

    Yes, you have a choice. Use your basic T1 hauler that really isn't designed to withstand much combat fire to collect planet goo in high-sec.

    By pjharvey on Mar 7, 2014

  17. You should not be able to get LP without fighting in FW, end of story. I don't know FW well enough to know how to fix it, but WCS changes is not it.

    As Foo has said, w-space goo is not without risk. He also needs a POS, he needs fuel, POCOs, he needs to move stuff out.

    Yes, perfect example. Your Impel kill, he could carry almost 15k m3 and lasted? 18 seconds?
    I'm saying I don't have the Procurer/Retriever choice, because of the cargo bay. I wasn't saying I don't have the Procurer/Skiff choice but that is also true.
    The epithal removes the cargo/WCS choice. All I'm saying is if you are going to reduce it's WCS, it should get tank, or that should be a choice. If you think that should be reserved for T2 haulers, fine, but those would need to change, as you've shown how well an expanded DST works.

    By The Lion on Mar 7, 2014

  18. What do these hunters know that you don't?

    1 hunter

    2 hunter

    By Foo on Mar 7, 2014

  19. You're kidding, right?

    I'm guessing the Sabre pilot knew to drop a bubble on the ship. The Broadsword did the same, with a Tengu for help; quite a lot of firepower required to catch one crappy T1 hauler. Another pair knew they also had to gang up with multiple scrams to catch a crappy T1 hauler. And maybe the Manticore pilot knew to catch a low-skilled pilot that was AFK at a POCO. I don't know, I wasn't there. Were you?

    Either way, there will be exceptions. I've caught a couple. I've also had many more escape. There has also been the one used as bait, that not only tanked my firepower for his friends to badly fluff the counter-ambush, but was able to warp clear when my final bump didn't quite hit him straight.

    Is that what you're after, Lion? Because I don't understand. My proposal above is to offer the Epithal WCS or tank. As it stands, you can have both, without compromising your capacity, in a crappy T1 hauler. That uncompromising capability in a very basic ship is what I find objectionable about the Epithal.

    By pjharvey on Mar 7, 2014

  20. I agree with Penny with respect to the Epithal and planet goo-ing. At least before the change a choice had to be made between stabs and cargo. The specialized bay eliminates this and gives the Epithal the best of both worlds. It's not a WCS problem, it's a PI-bay-Epithal problem.

    FW is a bit different in my opinion, and poses a slightly less difficult solution for the hunter. Most plexers are in frigates and not all frigs have 4 lows making them somewhat easier to catch. Also most FW plex hunters specialize their ships for tackling their intended prey, whereas WH hunting requires more versatility in your fit, as you don't know if you're going to find a Drake running an anomaly, a hauler exporting to hisec, or the aforementioned gooing Epithal.

    By Gwydion Voleur on Mar 8, 2014

  21. "My proposal above is to offer the Epithal WCS or tank. As it stands, you can have both, without compromising your capacity, in a crappy T1 hauler."
    It has 60k EHP like a bait Procurer? Procurers are crappy T1 right? A bait Procurer can fit a strip miner and do its job, with a hull price of 16Mil.
    At most I can squeeze 20k EHP out of a bait epithal with level 5s and no WCS.

    My counter proposal is to make it so you can have a 40k EHP epithal with a 20k m3 goo bay and no WCSs or a 15kEHP epithal with 60k m3 goo bay and 2 WCSs with level 5 skills and a cost of 16 Mil.

    Then we would both be at risk.

    By The Lion on Mar 8, 2014

  22. Penny, the listed kills were against us, when we were at keyboard, and trying not to be killed.

    If you wish to believe that these were setups, by all means do so. We will be safer for your belief.

    However, I have a longer response with some suggested fits for you at

    By Foo on Mar 8, 2014

  23. Foo: she didn't say they were setups, she pointed out that wcs don't save epithals from bubbles. Also, bombers outwarp and dps an indy to death regardless of lows, which makes stabs pretty irrelevant. Penny hunts in a loki (or have you switched again?), which needs more time to catch and kill an indy. Hence the problem: a stabbed, tanked epithal can usually escape a solo faction point loki.

    By Rabbit on Mar 8, 2014

  24. What do these hunters know that you don't?

    1 hunter

    2 hunter

    By Foo on Mar 7, 2014


    1. Bomb, notice the bomb there? Likely also torped but the bomb got in last.
    2. Bubble, it's an Interdictor?
    3. Republic Fleet scram (3pts) + at least 1pt from the Tengu = 4pts. Epithal has 3pts worth of WCS. Maths is fun.
    4. Broadsword. Infinite point / Bubble.

    Seriously dude, if you don't have sufficient knowledge of game mechanics to have even the slightest idea why these situations worked out badly for you, maybe you shouldn't be stuttering around in wormhole space.

    By Mortlake on Mar 9, 2014

  25. I'm pretty sure Foo was pointing out that other pilots have 'worked out' that you need special fits and tactics to catch Epithals. From his blog post, he believes that a standard PvP should not be enough. Lion also believes that there is good reason for T1 haulers to have either massive EHP or high warp-core strength to allow them to survive in hostile space. I respectfully disagree with both viewpoints.

    Prior to the industrial redesign, there was a straight progression through the ships of each race, and once you trained for the next ship the previous ones would never offer a reason to fly them. The point of the redesign was to give each ship a purpose, so that there would be a reason for each of them to be flown, for their own reasons.

    What the redesign didn't do is repurpose the T1 haulers to be anything other than basic haulers, the equivalent of the vans that delivery groceries. They have no bonuses to suggest that they should be able to evade even the simplest of PvP ships. They are simply not designed to survive in hostile space, just to haul goods. The ships that are designed to operate in hostile space are the deep space transport and blockade runner. This isn't to say the T1 haulers can't operate in hostile space, but that if you try to do so, they are not built to survive any kind of encounter.

    That the Epithal can be fit to have a warp core strength of four, and fit and rigged to have a high enough EHP to survive long enough to make use of that warp core strength, all without affecting its carrying capacity, is, I contend, not a result of the redesign but a result of an oversight in the redesign.

    There is nothing inherently special about the Epithal as a hauler. Its remarkable capability is, I believe, an accident that needs to be fixed. That is my argument.

    By pjharvey on Mar 9, 2014

  26. For the record, Penny's summary of my position is correct.

    She claims that the Epithal/WCS is a game problem that needs to be fixed. (I.e. t1's should fall over to a PVP ship)

    I claim that the Epithal/WCS is is a hunter problem to be fixed with a correct fit. (i.e. t1's can fall over to a correctly fit PVP ship)

    By Foo on Mar 9, 2014

  27. "Lion also believes that there is good reason for T1 haulers to have either massive EHP or high warp-core strength to allow them to survive in hostile space."
    No I do not.
    All I want is an option, which I feel you are not open to.
    You suggest a Deep space transport. This would be a cargo space reduction of 960%, hull price increase of 13500%. Seriously? Please check my math because that can't be right.

    My opening proposal called for 40k ehp of an epithal with no WCSs and reduced cargo space.
    Jester's caracal (a T1 ship that uses medium rigs like an epithal) fit has 35k ehp with little compromise to it damage or tackle ability.
    His Procurer (again, T1 ship with medium rigs) fit has 60k ehp with tackle mods and a strip miner.
    So no, I do not believe I'm asking for a massive tank, but I'm open to a counter offer.

    My proposed option to that was a 15k ehp epithal with 2 WCSs and the current amount of cargo space. I don't believe you have ever considered +2 Warp core strength to be high, and I'm not open to a counter offer here.

    I'm open to having to fly T2 haulers in w-sapce with my PI alts, but a change to the DST would be needed, and I feel like you are not open to that idea. Would a DST with 30km3 special cargo (at level 5s) be the end of the world?

    Give me either option, see what Foo thinks, take this conversation to CCP, say "carebears and hunters have agreed to a rebalance" and they may actually help you out.

    By The Lion on Mar 9, 2014

  28. Lion, the problem was caused by the creation of specialised cargo space. By creating such a hold that cannot be modified by modules or rigs, any slots that would have gone to adding cargo capacity can be permanently repurposed. The choice between WCS and expanded cargo was removed, I think in an oversight.

    Take another look at the DST. Our Bustard carries around 30,000 m³ of cargo with +2 inherent warp core strength. That's by filling the lows with expanded cargoholds. If you want more warp core strength you'll have to sacrifice cargo space. I believe this is exactly what you've just asked for.

    If it isn't what you asked for, and you really want to add a special cargo hold to the Bustard, those low slots will become useless for carrying capacity (or will add to the basic hold to make it rival an Orca) and will either have to be taken off the ship or they'll be filled with WCS to make it uncatchable as well as holding what you want.

    Do you see the problem now? This is exactly what's happened to the Iteron-turned-Epithal. The redesign was to give the ship a purpose, not turn it in to a beast.

    By pjharvey on Mar 9, 2014

  29. You forgot to mention the possible EHP of the Bustard fit with that cargo bay. About 46k ehp. You also forgot the warp out time, 18 seconds.

    The Procurer has 60k ehp, with full tackle. It has a AB, scrambler, and web with that EHP.

    It is possible to fit a bait Bustard with tackle and a 55k EHP and a cargo bay of 6875m3.

    Do you see the problem now? What about your risk? For a hauler to pose any threat to a solo hunter, it will need to be T2, fit against it's strengths, and do its job 800% worse. Now compare this again to the Procurer.

    The epithal is not balanced, true, but you are asking to go back to something that CCP clearly felt wasn't balanced either. Oversight? what do you think they thought we were going to do with them? If anything it was an apology for the awful click fest that is PI.

    I'm not asking for warp core strength. I want you to also be at risk. If you think killing an epithal is risky you are lieing to yourself. Do I want to hear about failed counter ambushes? No, I want to hear about a successful one.

    By The Lion on Mar 9, 2014

  30. You can't have everything in one ship, Lion. You certainly can't have it in a T1 hauler.

    No, I don't think killing a PI hauler is risky. I also think it is not meant to be inherently risky. I think it is a natural consequence of a hauler operating in dangerous space.

    By pjharvey on Mar 9, 2014

  31. Yeah, I also disagree with that article.

    How are you not being hypocritical? You know how they are fit and that they pose zero risk to you, but you want even more risk for them and still no risk to yourself.

    You are not willing to trade even a little risk to yourself so that they are more at risk. Because crappy T1 hauler...

    "I also think it is not meant to be inherently risky." Oh well I don't think running my PI around was meant to be inherently risky. Why didn't I start with that, instead actually trying to balance game play?

    By The Lion on Mar 9, 2014

  32. Penny is talking about flying around in the most dangerous space in EvE in a cloaky T3 strategic cruiser, one of the deadliest ships in EvE, and not being able to catch a cheap non-cloaky T1 hauler without a super-specialized fit that would gimp her against just about any target that can shoot back.

    If all WH hunters did was camp PI stations (like FW plex hunters in lowsec) you might have a point, but her ship needs to be able to do more than that. A cheap non-cloaky T1 hauler shouldn't be able to evade one of the most sophisticated ships in the galaxy like that without making significant sacrifices. The specialized PI bay negates the need for those sacrifices by removing the choice between stabs and cargo. It's not about risk-reward for the T3, it's about risk-reward for the Epithal. The solo T3 pilot's risk comes from the possibility of the hauler (or any other target for that matter) being bait for an ambush an a local-less environment.

    By Gwydion Voleur on Mar 10, 2014

  33. "one of the deadliest ships in EvE"
    Not the way she fits it.

    "gimp her against just about any target that can shoot back."
    She could replace her sebo with a faction scram and still have what is basically an assault frig with a cov ops cloak, and interdiction nullifier.
    And god forbid she flies the correct ship or fit for this.

    "being bait for an ambush an a local-less environment."
    A stealth bomber could align before uncloaking, kill the hauler before the hauler even locked, and never be in danger. And by never I mean not even if I had a cloaked ship on grid with the hauler, because you could warp out. I do understand that this is difficult to do, I just find it very hypocritical that giving the hauler more tank so it can actually be bait is not even on the table in this discussion.

    Saying I want the epithal to be a beast or do everything is just not correct. Limit it to 2 low slots, let cargo expanders effect the goo bay, reduce goo bay to 30k m3, make it so if you put PG upgrades in the lows you can fit a 35k tank and a long point. Now it either hauls more, escapes (not from Penny), or baits(still bad at it).

    By The Lion on Mar 10, 2014

  34. You say you want a 30k hold and +2 warp strength. I show you a ship that does that and you say it doesn't tank enough and is too slow to align.

    What you're saying is that you want your T1 hauler to be bigger, faster, stronger, cheaper than its T2 counterpart.

    Not only do you think this is a reasonable request, you also deny that you want your T1 hauler to be more than it is. It's a hauler. It hauls. It does not tank an ambush, it does not escape a simple PvP fit combat ship (without gimping itself), and it does not fight back.

    Lion, despite your name, you are not a dangerous animal being hunted by someone in a pith helmet and carrying a rifle. In your Epithal, you are the antelope. You are eating the planet goo grass whilst hoping you never encounter a predator.

    But you've stated that you don't agree that you are or should be at risk from other capsuleers in hostile space. If you don't agree with that, we will never agree on this.

    By pjharvey on Mar 11, 2014

  35. You know, I've changed my mind.
    "The Lion", email: Cowardly@whatsanemail is a joke to myself, and not my eve name because I don't want you to think less of my corp for associating with such a spineless whiner.
    I believe our hunter agrees with you, but I shouldn't speak for him. I was recently able to help him with a kill and I know I wouldn't have been able to without his considerable scouting, chasing, and tackling abilities. I think he's made these skills by hunting like you. While I don't want to do what you do, I can admit that I would be very bad at it and would need a lot of practice to ever succeed at it.
    So if nerfing epithals is what is need for us to have good hunters, let's do it. I'll switch to running goo in a closed system, but maybe others won't.

    By The Lion on Mar 11, 2014

  36. You just had a different point-of-view, Lion. Thanks at least for pushing me to clarify my arguments, it really does help.

    By pjharvey on Mar 11, 2014

  37. ""one of the deadliest ships in EvE"
    Not the way she fits it."

    Penny should use a Proteus, I agree, but she has some strange aversion to Gallente perfection.

    By Gwydion Voleur on Mar 13, 2014

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed.