Warp speed accel changes

The best thing to happen to Eve in a long time.

It's never made sense that to get into warp it takes a inty the same amount of time as a BS or even a BC or hell, even a cruiser. Perhaps everyone doesn't get UP to warp speed as fast, that being 75% of top speed, but once there, everyone gets into and out of the warp bubble with such a marginal difference in spool up that it's negligible in the long term of an engagement or even warp between stargates.

Well NOT ANYMORE!

CCP is pushing through a new change with Rubicon that is going to change the way fast tackle and forward scouting, not to mention pursuit of fleeting hostiles or BS targets will work.

In this video by dkcarlos, the true speed can be brought into focus. This is of course utilizing a Stiletto, with 2 t1 warp rigs, speeding along at 14 AU/s. It makes a complete 31 AU warp in roughly 10 seconds. Another video by GamingwithDaOpa, shows a side by side comparison between the new warp speed and what is currently on TQ.

Just to name a few reasons why this is going to be pretty amazing, now if a cruiser or BS slips from tackle and heads towards the nearest clestial or warp gate, before they would likely be able to escape, but now, even with a 5-10 second lead frigate class, especially the fast warping interceptors, will be able to not only catch up, but also overtake fleeing ships and fleets, able to land tackle and get kills. To offset that, greater coordination will be needed in large mixed fleets because of mixed warp times. No longer can that triple plated baddon scoot along only marginally slower than that AHAC fleet, it will no be a good 20-30 seconds behind on almost every warp.

Overall we are going to see a resurgence of people who specialize in fast tackle and specialized, read t2 warp speed rigged, inty pilots who will maximize every stat to shaving time off warps. On the downside, this does impact smaller fleets ability to disengage from larger blobs with tackle able to more easily catch up and lock down one or two at a time.

Amarr HAC and CS changes

Odyssey 1.1 and your changes are here. In this post I will be covering the changes to the Amarr CS and HAC's and the impact of these changes.

Just as a disclaimer because I won't talk about it too much, HAC's across the board are getting a boost to their sensor strengths to bring them in line with t1 battleships in the 20-24 range it appears. Now this is a huge improvement across the board in response to EWAR so it does make a big difference, but I just don't want to have to circle around and mention it every time. They are also receiving a role bonus that provides a 50% reduction in MWD signature radius penalty (bloom). This is also quite significant, but mostly brings into question if AHAC doctrines will become MWD doctrines instead. Additionally HAC's got a bonus to their capacitor recharge rates and capacitor amounts in order to hopefully allow more cap hungry setups.

Heavy Assault Cruisers

SACRILEGE
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Amarr Cruiser Bonuses:
5% to Heavy Assault and Heavy Missile damage (added heavy missiles)
4% to all Armor Resistances
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile velocity (was capacitor recharge time)
5% bonus to Missile Launcher rate of fire
Slot layout: 6H, 4M, 5L; 1 turrets(-3), 5 launchers
Fittings: 1100 PWG(+70), 420 CPU(+20)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1100(-293) / 2250(+162) / 1690(+2)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1700(+75) / 255s (-80s) / 6.66s (+1.8)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 200(+2) / .567 / 11750000(-540000) / 9.24s(-.4)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50(+35) / 50(+35)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km(+20km) / 312 / 7
Sensor strength: 22 Radar(+7)
Signature radius: 135(-5)

The Sac is now not a dedicated HAM platform, and has gained bonuses to HML in addition to the already present HAM bonuses adding to it's utility and removing three turrets (which went unused) for the convenience.

A slight nerf to shield HP is followed by a buff to armor HP, with a 2hp addition to structure, for all the good that does. THe most significant change is the loss of the capacitor recharge time, which used to allow the Sac to fit a massive active tank and have the capacitor recharge to run it even under the most adverse conditions.

CCP has stated that this change was partly in response to the overall capacitor changes for HAC's, and that this bonus was mostly getting rolled into every HAC as a matter of course with this update. However the bonus would make the cap stronger than this slight change to recharge time that is in this version of the Sac. So the extra bonus, as a replacement, to heavy missiles and HAM's has changed the amount of DPS this boat can put out, and perhaps even prompt the dropping of the usual 2 BCU's in favor of more cap recharge or an even stronger active or passive tank.

ZEALOT
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Amarr Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret capacitor use
5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret rate of fire
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret optimal range
5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage
Slot layout: 5H, 3M, 7L; 5 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 1180 PWG, 320 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 980(-4) / 2250 / 1670(-18)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1500 / 285s (-50s) / 5.26/s (+.78)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 210(+1) / .553 / 12580000 / 9.64s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km(+20km) / 306 / 6
Sensor strength: 21 Radar(+8)
Signature radius: 125

The Zealot has long been one of the most used HAC's in game because of both it's small sig radius AND large native resists and tankability. It is to the armor tanking world, what the "Fist" or AHAC doctrine was centered around. I'm not expecting any huge changes to the Zealot and unsurprisingly we see very little change here but it's the role bonus that brings up a good question. Is the MWD Zealot going to replace the AB Zealot in AHAC doctrines?

With the built in 50% reduction in MWD sig penalty, the extra speed afforded by a MWD over a AB could make this already fearsome doctrine, even more aggressive, mobile and deadly. Sure the 125 sig radius will still see some bloom, but the addition of the extra speed will more than make up for the radius increase. This is a little unusual, because previous "kings of their class" ships while being left alone actually suffered quite a few nerfs, looking at the Minmatar ships that suffered a loss of usability caused by the balancing of other ships up to their level, the Zealot doesn't suffer similarly and remains in one of the strong positions in the HAC lineup.

Command Ships

Absolution
Amarr Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Armor Resistances
10% bonus Medium Energy Turret capacitor use
Command Ships skill bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret rate of fire
10%(+5) bonus Medium Energy Turret damage
3% bonus to strength of Armored Warfare and Information Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H, 3 M, 7 L, 5 turrets (-1), 0 launchers (-1)
Fittings: 1500 PWG (-75), 400 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2900(-463) / 5300(+695) / 4600(+276)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 20 / 70(+7.5) / 87.5(+6.25)
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 35 / 62.5(+9.38) / 80(+10)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 3375 / 750s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 150 / 0.71(+0.006) / 13300000(-200000) / 13.09s(-0.09)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km (+25) / 210 / 7(+1)
Sensor strength: 21 Radar (+5)
Signature radius: 265
Cargo capacity: 375 (+25)

Laser shows are pretty and having 6 medium pulses used to be the short route to putting off an impressive display. Sadly, with the loss of One turrets, it loses he extra "cool factor." If there ever was such a thing. Truth be told the Abso never saw much in the way of combat but could always tank, actively, very well thanks to it's impressive armor profile and huge base resists. Now with a buff to it's armor resists up to the Damnation's level of resists the Abso might see a surge in use in armor gangs that the Damnation and it's three links used to long hold.

Truth be told I don't see this happening as the Damnation still holds the advantage in huge tank with the bonus to HP per level, but the Abso could be a very effective and strong addition to smaller <20 gangs.="" man="" p="">

Damnation
Amarr Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Armor Resistances
10% bonus to Heavy Assault Missile and Heavy Missile velocity
Command Ships skill bonuses:
10% bonus to all Armor hitpoints
10% bonus to Heavy Assault Missile and Heavy Missile damage
3% bonus to strength of Armored Warfare and Information Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H, 4 M, 6 L , 2 turrets (-2), 5 Launchers
Fittings: 1300(-290) PWG, 500(+25) CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 3600(+137) / 4700(+95) / 4400(+76)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 20 / 70 / 87.5
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 35 / 62.5 / 80
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 3375 / 750s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 150 / 0.7(-0.004) / 13500000 / 13.10s(-0.08)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 (+25) / 100 (+75)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km (+20) / 210 / 7(+1)
Sensor strength: 22 Radar (+6)
Signature radius: 265
Cargo capacity: 645

Another ship that was king of it's class was the Damnation. Long used as a link support ship and the designated "cyno carrier" in most fleets, now the Cynonation can share that dubious honor with the Abso, but will still be mostly dominant in larger fleets mainly because of the huge 50% at level 5 bonus to armor HP that continues to make the Damnation such a huge flying brick.

With it's changes to damage potential, the Damnation might actually become a much more capable combat BC than it was prior and might see use in roaming smaller gangs because of it's increased DPS output as well as a hefty tank.

Recap

Overall the Amarr were the kings of both the HAC and CS tree's in the meta before Odyssey 1.1 and look to continue that trend by providing options that their t1 counterparts are unable to do. Main reliant on their t2 resists to have an improved rep profile for Logstics and large enough DPS numbers and utility to continue to be the mainstays of large armor fleets, especially the improved Damnation's damage and the Zealot's new ability to fit a MWD with just a fraction of the signature radius.

Source links

HAC changes
CS changes
Armor Rep Changes
Domi Tracking bonus change
Gang bonus changes
Rail/Arty Changes

Caldari HAC and CS changes

Odyssey 1.1 and your continued changes, this time with the Caldari HAC and CS changes! I think this'll be a good one!

Just as a disclaimer because I won't talk about it too much, HAC's across the board are getting a boost to their sensor strengths to bring them in line with t1 battleships in the 20-24 range it appears. Now this is a huge improvement across the board in response to EWAR so it does make a big difference, but I just don't want to have to circle around and mention it every time. They are also receiving a role bonus that provides a 50% reduction in MWD signature radius penalty (bloom). This is also quite significant, but mostly brings into question if AHAC doctrines will become MWD doctrines instead. Additionally HAC's got a bonus to their capacitor recharge rates and capacitor amounts in order to hopefully allow more cap hungry setups.

Heavy Assault Cruisers

CERBERUS
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Caldari Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Kinetic Missile damage
10% bonus to Missile velocity
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Missile flight time
5% bonus to Missile Launcher rate of fire
Slot layout: 6H, 5M, 4L; 0 turrets, 6 launchers(+1)
Fittings: 800 PWG(+165), 520 CPU(+80)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2000(-4) / 1200(+4) / 1400(-6)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1200(+137.5) / 235s (-100s) / 5.1/s (+1.93)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 220(+45) / .463 / 12720000 / 8.17s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 15(+15) / 15(+15)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 95km(+15km) / 282 / 6
Sensor strength: 24 Gravimetric(+8)
Signature radius: 135

Care-bear-r-us... That's pretty much all I ever thought of when I saw this ship, both in space and in fights. I know it's got some good advantages, but honestly, I just remember it back from it's days and a missile spamming PVE god. How things have changed.

It's dropping it's utility high (finally) for another launcher spot, and adding a chunk of PG and cpu to be able to fit out the highs with a full loadout of HML, RLML, or HAM's with varying amounts of tank. Additionally it's finally scoring some drones to even it out vs closer brawling tackle, so now it too can fit EC-300s!

The extra mobility and extra launcher slot will easily update this to be one of the better HAC's post-change.

EAGLE
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Caldari Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
4% bonus to shield resistances
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
Slot layout: 5H(-1), 6M(+1), 4L; 5 turrets, 2 launchers
Fittings: 990 PWG(+115), 440 CPU(+2)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2500(+391) / 1250(-16) / 1550(+3)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1350(-25) / 255s (-80s) / 5.29/s (+1.2)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 180(+16) / .576 / 11720000 / 9.36s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 90km(+20km) / 252 / 8
Sensor strength: 25 Gravimetric(+7)
Signature radius: 140(-10)

The Boa's big brother, the Beagle is getting a sort of nerf/boost with the now live changes. That is, it's losing a valuable high slot for an extra mid. Usually in a brawler HAC, with cap dependent weapons I like to see either a nos in the high to keep things running or enough mids to fit a cap booster to do the same. Now the Beagle has gone from nos to cap booster. With the rail changes it should also become a feared sniping rail platform, but I think the real bonus will be with blasters and brawling.

Command Ships

Nighthawk
Caldari Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Shield Resistances
7.5%(+2.5) bonus to heavy and heavy assault missile kinetic damage
Command Ships skill bonuses:
7.5%(+2.5) bonus to Heavy Assault and Heavy missile launcher rate of fire
5% bonus to Heavy Assault Missile and Heavy Missile explosion radius (was explosion velocity)
3% bonus to strength of Siege Warfare and Information Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H, 5 M, 5 L , 2 turrets (+1), 5 Launchers (-1)
Fittings: 1000 PWG (+290), 560 CPU (+5)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 5500(+695) / 3200(-163) / 3700(-144)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 80(+10) / 70(+7.5) / 50
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 86.25(+6.88) / 62.5(+9.38) / 10
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2812(-187.5) / 625s(-41.7) / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 140 / 0.65(+0.02) / 14810000(+800000) / 13.35s (+1.15)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 80km (+20) / 195 / 9(+1)
Sensor strength: 24 Gravimetric (+5)
Signature radius: 285
Cargo capacity: 700 

This is also getting the five weapon system treatment now so familiar to all the Command BC's out there. This means that the Nighthawk is gaining a RoF bonus and a damage bonus and retains it's powerful missile explosion radius bonus to boot. Now this will be doing even more damage, per missile, to smaller ships, and receiving a bonus to Siege (shield) warfare modules and the newly acquired Information Warfare links, for what I imagine will be the suddenly more popular ECM blob ships. With one of these in fleet, suddenly Blackbirds will be like falcons, but at a much greater range.

Vulture
Caldari Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Shield Resistances
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
Command Ships skill bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
3% bonus to strength of Siege Warfare and Information Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H , 6 M, 4 L, 5 turrets, 2 launchers (-3)
Fittings: 1275 PWG, 545 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 5300(+495) / 3400(+37) / 3900(+56)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 80 / 70 / 50
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 86.25 / 62.5 / 10
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 3000 / 667s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 140 / 0.67(+0.042) / 14000000(-10000) / 13s (+0.8)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 95km (+20)/ 195 / 9(+1)
Sensor strength: 23 Gravimetric (+4)
Signature radius: 285
Cargo capacity: 400 (+55)

Keeping in line with the blaster Eagle, the Vulture is the "hybrid" Command BC platform. Prior to this change it was mostly seen as a floating brick tank, capable of absorbing massive amounts of damage, as well as pushing out good link status, but with relatively little DPS. Not much has changed here, the slot loadout remains the same, with the bonus to the ship across the board stating the same, just mostly the Siege warfare and Information warfare link bonus getting changed and added.

Recap

Overall I think the Cerb is the clear winner out of these four ships. The added mid slot and added fitting adds a lot of versitility for what is otherwise an underused ship. Does it do enough to be better than a flight of Drakes, caracals or Tengu ball? Probably not, but does it become a more viable cruiser sized attack ship? I think definately and it may surprise some lowsec and nullsec residents when they suddenly start getting killed by kiting solo Cerbs. Not that they aren't already getting killed by solo Cynabals!

Source links

HAC changes
CS changes
Armor Rep Changes
Domi Tracking bonus change
Gang bonus changes
Rail/Arty Changes

SCL 4 Team drawings completed!

With the fourth SCL drawing near, the random draw for the remaining ten slots has finally been completed. Full details can be found at this link.

Or I am just going to copy it all in here.

Pandemic Legion and Reputation Cartel, as top 4 finishers in SCL 3, are guaranteed spots. Insurance Fraud Inc and Warlords of the Deep did not return this round.

This leaves 10 spots from the random drawing, so the first 10 teams on this list get in. I will be mailing these team captains to collect the entry fee.

1. Team Mincemeat
2. TEST Tourney Team Please Ignore
3. Spiritus Draconis
4. EXEceptional Otters
5. DeepWater
6. Pandemic B-Lues
7. Black Legion
8. Footwork
9. Top Three Teams from ATXI
10. Verge of Collapse
Your Boats Don't Count
RONIN
xX.Shadoo.For.Queen.Xx
Reputation Cartel
Late Night Alliance
CVA
Jakkaru's Revenge
Cerberus Allstars
Penumbra
Zulu Squad
Pandemic Legion
No Boundaries
Nulli Secunda
AT Renegades Council (RIOT)

Now with all 12 teams chosen the SCL can continue down the path for what is likely the most talked about tournament so far. Mainly because of the screen time the SCL commentators received during ATXI and the still relatively high interest around the SCL and alliance tournaments.

Unfortunately, my Rote Kapelle-filled team (No Boundaries) did not make the cut, but Reputation Cartel is guaranteed a spot. So no SCL for me! Maybe SCL5. In any case the SCL website remains down, but the bracket will now be filled in with actual team names.

Also, thanks Poetic, who pointed out that the teams that were guaranteed spots were also in the random drawing, those being both PL and Reputation Cartel.

Gallente HAC and CS changes

With Odyssey 1.1 a host of new changes are coming online for game mechanics in general but also specific to Command Ships and HAC's. This is my breakdown post for the changes as they currently stand, Gallente edition.

As I said in the Minmatar breakdown, All HAC's are getting a new role bonus to MWD signature bonus, this will reduce all MWD bloom by 50%. They are also getting an across the board buff to their sensor strengths to bring them in line with t1 BS instead of cruisers. This is in the 21-24 range of sensor strength. Additionally HAC's got a bonus to their capacitor recharge rates and capacitor amounts in order to hopefully allow more cap hungry setups.

Heavy Assault Crusiers

DEIMOS
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
7.5% bonus to Armor Repair amount
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff
5% Medium Hybrid Turret damage
Slot layout: 5H(-1), 4M(+1), 6L; 5 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 1050 PWG(+60), 360 CPU(+10)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1200(+40) / 2100(+60) / 2550(+19)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1400(+25) / 225s (-110s) / 6.2/s (+2.1)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 230(+22) / .475(-.055) / 11460000 / 7.54s(-.875)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 50
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 85km(+20km) / 270 / 6
Sensor strength: 22 Magnetometric(+7)
Signature radius: 150(-10)

The Deimos or the more commonly known Diemost was popular for a while, then unpopular and then popular with the "kool kids" and then unpopular again and now might once again see the light of day in regular fleet ops. Well if everything goes according to plan that is.

Like several other HAC's the Deimos keeps it's original bonuses but then gets some very beneficial changes to it's slot layout. To be exact, it's gains another mid slot at the cost of a high. With already having 6 lows it's utility high was scrapped and moved into a mid slot providing that extra slot needed for fitting full tackle AND a capacitor booster needed so badly on this ship to keep the guns and reps running throughout a fight. It's also picking up some needed PG and CPU to allow for the extra module needed in the mid slot. Extra speed has also been added, along with a touch more agility, extra lock range and better capacitor recharge.

Overall the extra speed, mid slot and increase to agility will allow the Deimos to finally outlast it's long earned name.

ISHTAR
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
7.5% bonus to Heavy Drone speed and tracking(was 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage)
10% bonus to Drone hitpoints and damage
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
5 km bonus to Drone operation range per level
7.5% bonus to Sentry Drone optimal range and tracking speed(was bonus to drone bay capacity)
Slot layout: 4H(-1), 5M, 5L; 4 turrets(+1), 0 launchers
Fittings: 780 PWG(+80), 340 CPU(+55)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1400 (-6) / 1600 (-18) / 2300 (+191)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1400 (+275) / 265s (-70s) / 5.28/s (+1.9)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 195(+4) / .52 / 11100000 / 8.43s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 375(+250)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 80km(+20km) / 294 / 7
Sensor strength: 23 Magnetometric (+7)
Signature radius: 145

Wow. That's it, just wow. This is a dedicated Drone ship if I've ever seen one. Not only that but this is borderline OP in so many cases. The only thing that makes it more fair is that the bonus to speed and tracking is only to heavy and sentry drones. But the 10% damage bonus is still to every type of drone it can field, which as usual is pretty scary. With the Odyssey 1.1 Dominix bonuses stacked on top of a drone operation range bonus, even more drone bay, and more lock range, this thing is a beast. The price it has to pay is one high slot. I think the trade is worth it. Drones alone, Ishtars will be doing between 600-700 DPS with close range sentries and only slightly lower with Heavy drones, without a full low rack of Drone Damage Augmenters, which can boost damages up to 700-900 DPS total. Truly this is once again a formidable opponent at range. Being cruiser sized does come with one downside, lower HP, and it retains the usual Gallente weakness to explosive damage in it's armor.

The Ishtar retains it's ability to cross tank, that is be either a shield or an armor tank, and do both effectively with the shield tank being marginally weaker due to the EM resist, but then supplemented by the fact that the usually weak explosive hole is plugged in the shields. The Ishtar, once again, is going to beat out most other drone boats and be a king of the space-lanes.

Command Ships

Astarte
Gallente Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
7.5%(+2.5) bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
7.5% bonus to Armor Repairer effectiveness
Command Ships skill bonuses:
7.5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret rate of fire (was 5% damage)
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff
3% bonus to strength of Armored Warfare and Skirmish Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H, 4 M, 6 L, 5 turrets (-2), 2 launchers (+2)
Fittings: 1350 PWG (-100), 440 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 3400(-444) / 4900(+576) / 5000(+195)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 60(+10) / 85(+7.5) / 50
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 67.5(+8.13) / 83.75(+8.13) / 10
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 3000(+187.5) / 667s(+41.7) / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 155 / 0.7(+0.03) / 12300000 (-950000) / 11.94s (-0.34)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 75(+25)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km (+20) / 200 / 8(+1)
Sensor strength: 23 Magnetometric (+5)
Signature radius: 300
Cargo capacity: 400

So if you saw the changes to the Sleipnir, you know that none of the 7 gunned beasts are safe. The Astarte has been reduced to 'just' 5 guns, but don't worry, it's got the dual damage bonus to pick it back up and give it the meaty feel of shooting 7 guns at once. Like the Sleipnir the Astarte is also receiving a alignment of it's resists to the Eos level and gaining a slight boost to it's drone bay up to 75 from the previous 50, but retains the 50m3 drone bandwidth limitations.

The interesting thing here is that with the changes to rails, Railtarts become a much more viable option even if the Falloff bonus isn't a Optimal range bonus on this ship. As usual, the astarte receives a active rep bonus that could really shine with the incoming bonuses to local reps also happening in 1.1. The 7.5% bonus per level could make this an active tanked beast for smaller to mid ranged fleets and even more so for solo pilots out looking to score a kill or two before help can arrive. The Astarte loses the information warfare bonuses but in return receives bonuses for both Armored warfare and Skirmish. A more than fair trade off.

Otherwise it has a decent slot layout, fine for active or passive armor tanking. For those adventurous types, it does keep it's 4 midslots, enough for a passive shield tank.

Eos
Gallente Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
7.5% bonus to Armor Repairer effectiveness
10% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints (was 5% MHT damage)
Command Ships skill bonuses:
7.5% bonus to Heavy Drone tracking and microwarp velocity (was drone bay bonus)
7.5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret tracking (was link bonus)
3% bonus to strength of Armored Warfare and Skirmish Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 6 H (-1), 4 M, 6 L, 4 turrets (-1)
Fittings: 1200 PWG (-225), 425 CPU (-25)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 3300(-544) / 5100(+776) / 5500(+695)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 60 / 85 / 50
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 67.5 / 83.75 / 10
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2812 / 625s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 145 / 0.704 / 13000000(-250000) / 12.69s (-0.24)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 (+50) / 250 (+100)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km (+10) / 200 / 8(+1)
Sensor strength: 22 Magnetometric (+4)
Signature radius: 300
Cargo capacity: 400

When the Eos was first introduced, it had the ability to field 5 heavy drones and outside of the regular combat command ships, it was one of the more used command ships in the game. Truth be told with it's great slot layout and the damage from 5 bonused Heavy drones, it was quite a beast. Then it was nerfed down to 75m3 bandwidth, quite a blow to a drone based ship if ever there was one. From there the Eos fell in popularity, only rarely seen in space or in Alliance tournament and NEO setups for it's unique information warfare bonus.

Well it's time has come again. Boosted back up to 125m3 bandwidth and a large 250m3 drone bay, enough for two flights of sentries or heavies, the Eos is back! In addition to this good news the Eos has gone on a diet, lost a bit of weight, added a bit more lock range, hardened it's armor tank, and got ready to be an passive tank brawler or a very effective actively tanked dominator in small to mid gang sized fights. It got a rather sneaky bonus as well, a tracking bonus per command ships level, which incidentally boosts a rail based setup to support those ranging drone packs.

Recap

As we can see, if there are ever winners and losers in the mad race of nerfs and buffs, the Gallente definitely came out as one of the winners in this set of changes. Every ship is improved and even ones that were still good got a needed boost. In this case the HAC's do a good job of both improving on and providing the quality needed to match their increased price tags. As for the Command ships here, I think they are strong, but will have their niche uses. By that I mean the active tank bonus is still good, but in larger fleet fights, that being 20+ people, alpha is still going to be too high for the active tank to be used fully. In smaller gangs, the rep bonus will allow insane amounts of DPS sponged while they sitll put out close to or above 1k DPS.

Source links

HAC changes
CS changes
Armor Rep Changes
Domi Tracking bonus change
Gang bonus changes
Rail/Arty Changes

Minmatar HAC and CS changes

Odyssey 1.1 is coming out and with it a lot of rebalance and changes to the Cruiser and BC lines of t2 ships. Specifically so far the CS changes and HAC changes are in their second iteration on the forums. All rebalances and changes can be found with a bit of effort on the Eve Online Forums. Specifically under Features and Idea Discussions.

Just as a disclaimer because I won't talk about it too much, HAC's across the board are getting a boost to their sensor strengths to bring them in line with t1 battleships in the 20-24 range it appears. Now this is a huge improvement across the board in response to EWAR so it does make a big difference, but I just don't want to have to circle around and mention it every time. They are also receiving a role bonus that provides a 50% reduction in MWD signature radius penalty (bloom). This is also quite significant, but mostly brings into question if AHAC doctrines will become MWD doctrines instead. Additionally HAC's got a bonus to their capacitor recharge rates and capacitor amounts in order to hopefully allow more cap hungry setups.

Let's take a look at Minnie HAC changes first and then move on to their CS changes.

Heavy Assault Cruisers

VAGABOND
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire
7.5% bonus to shield boost amount (was 5% bonus to max velocity)
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret falloff
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage
Slot layout: 6H, 4M, 5L; 5 turrets, 1 launchers(-1)
Fittings: 900 PWG(+45), 400 CPU(+5)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1750(+97) / 1400(+63) / 980(-4)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1200(+137.5) / 245s (-90s) / 4.9/s (+1.7)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 295(+56) / .504 / 11590000 / 8.1s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km(+20km) / 330 / 6(+1)
Sensor strength: 21 Ladar(+7)
Signature radius: 115

I kept hoping this ship would be made relevant again, so let's see if these changes actually take steps towards making the Vagabond a solidly better choice than either the inexpensive Stabber or the Cynabal.

The Vagabond has most noticeably had it's max velocity bonus removed replaced both with a significant base speed buff, up to 295 m/s base, and the bonus replacing the velocity change is going to be a shield boost amount bonus. Overall I'm pretty underwhelmed by what is the largest change to the ship. Active shield boosting with ASB's can be very nice, and this change would be great, if the Vagabond could fit a XLASB, and dual 180mm t2 guns without having to use an ACR or fitting modules to make it happen, but as it stands, even with a solid PG boost and tiny CPU boost we still won't being seeing that configuration all too often as you will need both the usual co-pro and ACR to make it happen.

The overall here is that the Vagabond is becoming less buffer-skirmish and more active-skirmish. It won't have the tank and DPS combo to go face to face with much in the way of fleets, it retains most* of it's speed so it can still be a viable heavy tackle ship, but in large, in my opinion, it fails to provide a demonstrable advantage over the cheaper stabber or the on par Cynabal. In the Stabber you are still able to do 90% of what the Vagabond is going to do, for a fraction of the cost. Other options still include flying the Vagabond without taking advantage of the active boosting bonus, and still flying via buffer tank, here the extra Power grid could make fitting 425's an easier option to increase potential range and damage both at range and up close. Bottom line is that even with the t2 resist profile and baseline EM resist common to Minmatar t2 ships, the Vagabond is still going to be squishy, lacks the capacitor to effectively run a large or XL shield tank, and even after local rep changes, I just do not see MSB or even faction Small shield boosters giving this enough tank to last in a brawler type fight.

* - 5% bonus turns out ot be a little bit faster than the baseline 295 they have given the Vagabond here.

MUNINN
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret optimal range
7.5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret tracking speed
Slot layout: 6H(-1), 3M, 6L(+1); 5 turrets, 1 launchers(-2)
Fittings: 1160 PWG, 355 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1580(-2) / 2000(-4) / 1400(-6)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1300(+50) / 255s (-80s) / 5.1/s (+1.4)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 210(+14) / .571 / 11750000 / 9.3s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 80km(+25km) / 294 / 6(+1)
Sensor strength: 21 Ladar(+8)
Signature radius: 125(-5)

Ahhh the Muninn. When I first got access to HAC's I bought a single Muninn along with about 2-3 Vagabonds. After all it's still a HAC, it can't be THAT bad right? Well I think everyone already knows the answer to that, except in a few niche situations, a-la Black Legion in a big enough fleet of this sexy ship fit with arty, there was never a huge demand for this t2 spanish Galleon. Has the rebalance changed this?

The main changes on the Muninn appear to be the loss of one high in favor of another low. Wow, that's a seriously good change for the Muninn. Before there was always questions about what to do with the 'extra' high slots of the Muninn after you fit your 5x 720mm t2 arty. Now with the loss of that extra high and the addition of it as a low it's going to change this ship greatly for the better. The muninn still retains it's optimal range bonus, so lends itself towards arty, especially with the rail and Arty changes and the Muninn's other bonus to turret tracking could make it quite a sexy new FOTM (because I need more reasons to fly Minmatar). Further helping the Arty fit for the Muninn is a new +25km lock range bonus giving it a base range of 80km! Finally enough to not need a sebo just to use this ship in medium ranged engagements.

With that extra low, the often maligned autoMuninn might just gain the extra tank needed to move it from the "not really viable but people fly the unexpected" over to the "Mainline fitting doctrine." With 6 lows the Muninn will now be a viable addition to AHAC or MWDHAC fleets and be able to stand and fight with a similar tank to a Deimos or Ishtar, if fewer of those two ships inherent upsides. The muninn also retains it's 25m3 drone bay and bandwidth.

Command Ships

Now over to the Minmatar Command ships. Previously the Claymore was another projectile based ship with the Sleipnir being the 7 gunned steed of gods. Overall their changes move them both apart from each other and distinctly enhances each.

SleipnirMinmatar Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage (was 5% RoF)
7.5% bonus to shield boosting amount
Command Ships skill bonuses:
10%(+5) bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret falloff
3% bonus to strength of Siege Warfare and Skirmish Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H (-1), 5 M, 5 L, 5 turrets (-2), 2 Launchers (-1)
Fittings: 1300 PWG (-160), 475 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 4500(+176) / 3600(-244) / 3500(+137)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 75(+12.5) / 60(+10) / 40 / 50
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 90(+5) / 67.5(+8.13) / 25 / 10
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2625 / 583s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 165 / 0.704 / 12800000(+300000) / 12.49s (+0.3)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25(-15) / 25(-15)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km (+25) / 220 / 7(+1)
Sensor strength: 20 Ladar (+4)
Signature radius: 240
Cargo capacity: 475

Right away we see that the bonuses have been changed around on the Sleipnir and then we drag our eyes down to the all important 7 guns and find them nerfed down to 5!!! OMG WORLD ENDING...

Oh, right back to the bonuses to figure this all out.... Look, it's not the end of the world. The Sleipnir is still the bullet spewing beast it ever was, it's just trying to save you on ammo costs! The new bonuses make up for the loss of two turrets by dramatically increasing the damage output of the remaining guns, giving 10 percent bonus to damage in both the BC skill bonus AND the Command ships Skill bonuses. Otherwise the changes show a loss of the RoF bonus (replaced with the 10% damage bonus) and a new change that gives a 3% bonus to the strength of Siege Warfare AND Skirmish Warfare links! Sweet.

So now Command ships aren't just giving a bonus to one type of link, they are giving a better bonus than the T3 command cruisers end up with. About time! Other changes include the loss of a single high (7h), a slight nerf to powergrid to make up for those two lost guns, but retains it's CPU... An addition to the mass of the ship, making it slower to align and get into warp, combined with a nerf down to 25m3 for the drone bay. CCP Rise and Fozzy must not like the 40m3 bandwidth ships, I keep seeing them getting knocked off one by one. Fair enough. These are offset by bonuses to Sensor Strength, longer lock range, out to 70km, and more locked targets.

Something of an overlooked change is the Sleipnir's Shield and armor resists have actually been increased to match the, up until now, tankier Claymore's bonuses. This is huge because it allows the Sleipnir to have even more inherent tank. More tank means more time on field and more time on the field means more rounds fired.

Overall, will the Sleipnir be changed? Yes, of course, it won't be the dominant Autocannon spewing machine of death that it was before, but now it will have the ability to fit Autocannons, links and a strong tank (as always) OR be able to fit a decent artillery broadside witch will be devastating at range given the bonuses to turret damage. Good changes here.

Claymore:
Minmatar Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile rate of fire (was MPT RoF)
7.5% bonus to shield boosting amount
Command Ships skill bonuses:
5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile rate of fire (was link bonus)
5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile explosion velocity (was MPT tracking)
3% bonus to strength of Siege Warfare and Skirmish Warfare links
Fixed Bonus:
Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H (-1), 6 M, 4 L, 2 turrets (-3), 5 Launchers (+2)
Fittings: 1100 PWG (-290), 525 CPU (+10)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 4700(+376) / 3800(-44) / 3400(+37)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 75 / 60 / 40 / 50
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 90 / 67.5 / 25 / 10
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2625 / 583s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 170 / 0.7(-0.004) / 12500000 / 12.13s (-0.07)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50(+10) / 75(+35)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km (+20) / 220 / 7(+1)
Sensor strength: 22 Ladar (+6)
Signature radius: 240
Cargo capacity: 575 (+100)

The Claymore has undergone some serious refactoring in this patch. Looking we can see it is now a heavy missile and HAM platform instead of another Projectile weapon based ship. It's lost two turrets, but gained 2 more launchers, bringing it up to 5 Launchers and 2 turrets. Enough to fill it's new loadout of 7 highslots with bristling weapon systems, but let's face it, those last two slots are often going to be links and the Claymore doesn't dissapoint here either, fielding the same new bonus sported by the Sleipnir, that is a 3 percent bonus to Siege Warfare and Skirmish Warfare links!

The Claymore's newer bonuses help those 5 new launchers become something really quite terrifying, especially if you happen to be approaching it in a smaller ship. 5% bonus to rate of fire comes from the BC skill so a automatic boost of 25% RoF will have missiles screaming out of their launchers already, and another possible 25% bonus from the Command BC skill will leave a terrifying swarm of missiles headed in your direction. Combine that with a Command BC bonus to explosion velocity and nobody's going to be safe from either the HML or HAM version of this ship.

Recap

Well honestly it would be a clean sweep if only the Vagabond was able to return to it's former glory in some aspect. But overall it's making me wonder just how my wallet is going to handle all these ships I'm going to want to buy. Most market hubs have already gone crazy with speculation.

Source links

HAC changes
CS changes
Armor Rep Changes
Domi Tracking bonus change
Gang bonus changes
Rail/Arty Changes

SCL4 - Fourth Tournament announced.

With ATXI now in the books, it's time to get back to the excitement that is the SCL. Fourth iteration for the SCL is starting the weekend of September 14th and 15th. Full details can be found on the post by community rep for the SCL, Aegon Blackfire, in the Eve Alliance tournament subform.

A quick breakdown of the ruleset follows:

• Teams will be 10 players, as opposed to the 12 in ATXI, and point limit for teams will be 85 points versus the 100 for the AT.
• Energy transfers will be limited to logistics ships to cripple the remote energy "tinker" teams that slowed much of ATXI down, and had a significant impact in SCL3.
• Tournament prize ships cannot be used, mostly because the SCL takes place on a test server, so everyone would have access to the prize ships, making it even less realistic.
• 12 teams will compete with the top four from SCL3 being granted slots, while the other 8 slots will be picked at random, should there be more than 8 remaining entrants.
• 1b isk entry fee to be paid on TQ after teams are selected to participate, which will be rolled into the prize fund.
• Double elimination series similar to ATXI will be employed. (hopefully with something to break up the finals so it's not one match per hour)
• Banning rules will be in effect from the first match.

More specific details can be found on the thread but the usual website for the SCL is offline. Bracket can be found here.

When more is announced I will cover teams as well. Until then, get your applications in and your banning strategies ready.

BB #48 : Lore-in it up!

Welcome to the continuing monthly EVE Blog Banters and our 48th edition! For more details about what the blog banters are visit the Blog Banter page.
* * * * *

This month's topic is a request from CCP Sisyphus who wants to know how important is Lore in EVE Online? 

"How important is “fluff” in Eve online? Would eve online be the same if it were purely numbers and mechanics, or are the fictional elements important to the enjoyment of the game? Would a pure text, no reference to sci-fi or fancy names still be an engaging game? Should CCP put more or less emphasis on immersion?"

************

From an on-again, off-again roleplayers angle, Eve online lore, for me, is sometimes very important, and other times nothing at all.

Let me explain. When I start roaming the interwebs for games to play, lore built up around a game is one of the deciding factors. If the game developers can't, don't, or won't come up with a convincing or at least semi-good reason for their game universe it speaks a lot to their dedication as a company towards that title.

In short, if there is no backstory, then I usually won't play the game. Besides, what am I going to be reading while the game downloads and installs. This goes back to the olden days for me where I would pour over every word in a game's manual, looking for insights into the game while it installed. Then I may or may not have never looked at that manual again.

Once in Eve the lore becomes less important, UNLESS you end up RPing at all. Not just troll RP people. If you choose a character you have to submerge yourself in the lore for a while to get to a point where every other statement you make is either wrong or everyone ignores you.

Otherwise I think that Lore pretty much falls under the "nice to have" but not required to play category.

On the other hand, what would Eve lose if there was no Lore? I think it would lose a lot of the allure that attracted me to the game. But on top of that, I think it's important to have a good story. If, as some others have said, it was just "+5 damage to blasters" or something more generic in skills and descriptions of ships, well then it'd be pretty boring. I do spend time in game, almost every time a new ship is released, or new modules, like a huge nerd, reading the information about the new item. Both in game and in the wiki. It's fun to read all the quasi-science output by CCP.

Additionally the sci-fi names, and fancy backstories for nearly everything in the game adds quite a lot of interest because of the sci-fi background it adds. For instance, if this was just space game one and not called Eve online, and all it was ended up being the spreadsheets in space and a combat game, do you think it would have lasted as long as it has? Would it have developed the same backstory that it has? I don't think so.

So long ATXI

And thanks for all the win.

Sunday saw the end to the Alliance tournament, and another win for PL after coming back from a 0-2 deficit in a best of five versus Hydra Reloaded. Quite a fight but lessened by the immense time between active matches. If one thing can be said, it would be that a third place match should have been held to fill the dead air between each match.

In fact while we are at it, let's break down all the things that could be better next time.

1. Third place matches to break up the finals. Perhaps exhibition matches scheduled between the finals matches to prevent 30-50 minute breaks between any action. Maybe even best of (so far) matches, or a look-back rebroadcast of some earlier matches to keep viewers interested.
2. More features. As in try to appeal to a bigger range of audience then just the e-sport inclined. Even though the majority of the changes that were broadcast in ATX never went live, it was still a good filler towards the end and during mid-day breaks.
3. This one is on the Eve community. More commercials for corps and alliances. Hell, even people or pvp videos, streaming channels, blogs, whatever. More player created content would be fun.
4. Repeats or even graphics outlining what exactly a tinker or remote setup is, why it's so powerful, even if in just very broad terms. Use of those graphics should be frequent and varied. Twitch chat was filled with "What is a tinker setup" and other similar questions that could have been more simply answered.

How about things that were more successful in ATXI than previous tourneys.

1. Of course I am going to mention the commentators. But not just the Rote Alliance guys, but everyone. Dolan, for the first time, appeared better informed and more composed in front of the camera, providing good commentary even if it was not perfect, it was at least as close as he's ever gotten. I appreciated Shadoo's self-proclaimed "passion" especially during critical bits in the match. Where Brent and Bacch took the more subdued, but excited route during matches Shadoo was excited and loud. Loved it. Fozzie, Soundwave and Rise all were their normal amazing selves, especially Fozzie, who I thought was able to retain the title of most knowledgeable and best spoken of all the CCP commentators. Rise was maybe the only downside, and only for a few moments, mostly when not doing match-time commentary. He seems adverse to taking a positive happy view, one might even consider him a bit of a bittervet.
2. Graphics - Wow, finally guys, this was so needed. Lists of ships being brought, points, explantations, not to mention previous teams beaten by who and brackets. Good stuff here.
3. Replays - Usually not a huge fan of replays when they take away from the action, but giving the commentators the sometimes worthy ability to call out critical moments and maneuvers and discuss why that second or that minute was so important really helps the eve-rookie understand the intricacies of the tournament when otherwise it just looks like exploding spaceships. With the replays and the breakdowns in combat it helped me, even as a seasoned bittervet follow bits of the action I had missed before.
4. Double elimination bracket - Simply the best, makes a lot of matches mean a lot more, and for those people who are not really competing at a very high level, it lets them exit early on.
5. Bans - Should be extended to every weekend instead of giving a cheater weekend where the best setups are noticed and then banned the next week. Gotta keep on evolving this idea.

I think the overwhelmingly positive reaction to this tourney was because so many things were done right, and because, even with the drop off in tempo towards the end of the last day, it moved at a break-neck pace. Often with 5-10 minutes between matches, and often with one good match after another.

For me this was the best presented AT, even if AT8 is still my favorite of all time.

Until next year, or rather next MONTH for the SCL, thats it for my tourney coverage.

AT XI - First weekend over, start of second.

Second weekend of ATXI
What a beautiful thing!

This year my coverage of ATXI certainly has been slower than last year. Let me recap the highlights- The first weekend went well, almost as if CCP has been practicing in the offseason. The HUD and commentary continues to impress, most notably the improvement of CCP Dolan's commentary overall, but he might need to take pointers from, SCL commentator, Seldarine for funny one liners.

After the advent of banning over the course of the last year, I have to say my mindset has alreayd changed to favor banning style matches, despite my last years hate against he mechanic, though many things have changed since that banning mechanic was thought of. I am already bored of the set-piece matches of the first weekend! Strange how quickly I have adapted to the banning meta-game and the extra layer of complexity it adds. Obviously strong setups will be banned by most teams now in some form or another. I expect the Dominix trio to be the hardest hit, but with other options out there for the trio of drone boats, creative alternatives including Ishtars, Gila, Navy Issue Vexors, Sin's or even Armageddon Swarms, I don't think we have seen the last of Drone heavy setups.

The double elimination bracket is also working well, making each match more important and actually worth watching. I'll be the first to admit that not every match was a joy to watch, and good teams, especially those teams that competed in the SCL are doing remarkably well. Now is it because these teams got extra practice via the SCL? Or is it because of the excellent pilots on each team? It's an interesting question, one that might never be answered fully.

***Obligatory Rote cheerleading***

As a member of Rote Kapelle I have to admit that I am looking forward to our rematch with last years champions, Verge of Collapse on Saturday. They put us out of the tourney last year as well and I get the feeling that this will be this years Rote vs Pandemic Legion moment(hopefully with the same outcome, but that's yet to be determined). So far it appears as if both Rote and Verge have been on near auto-pilot, Showcasing effective fleet comps and dismantling opponents with record speed, and minimal losses. It's a testament to the teams and captains that their fits and pilots are performing this well.

***END***

As for the second weekend, I expect to see even more disparity between teams that have dealt with banning before (SCL teams and NEO teams) vice those that have not.

Here is the meta game as I see it for banning. Right now most tournament teams know the strength of the Dominix setup, or even Drone setups in general, it could be a key setup, if not the king setup for this year. Because of this, in the second weekend, I am expecting to see an early trend towards bans of Dominix due in part to their popularity in the first weekend and their obvious strengths.

Here is where bans get interesting, not to mention an effort in double think. A competent team captain will recognize that a Dominix/Drone setup will likely be banned and plan another group of setups without including obvious drone ships or perhaps unexpected drone setups. Alternative ships are aplenty, as there are multiple ships that can field 5 heavy drones, and with only a two ship ban, not all the setups can be removed. Just to name a few: Gila, Ishtar, and Rattlesnake, not to forget setups that could a mix of support drones and still do respectable damage or EWAR. So then the shoe is on the other foot, as a team captain, do you waste a ban on a strong ship that might not even be a potential opponent, or do you use the ban to focus on another strong setup like cruise missile fielding ships, Sleipnir rush, Machariels… Or is there an as yet unseen  "Dominix Killer" setup and then purposefully not ban Dominix just in the hopes of engaging them?

I think Captains new to the banning meta will tend to ban Dominix, and other drone bans, while more aggressive, maybe even brash, captains will ban other setups and try to cajole opponents to take the field in a Domi setup.

Some other strong setups I don't think we will see the end of are cruise missile based setups with their recent buff, as well as a continued use of the always strong Minmatar(sleipnir) rush, Vindicator, Kronos, and Machariel based teams.

As we have seen in previous tournaments, weapon systems with the highest native resistance to in game EWAR get the most use.

Drones - Immune to tracking disruptors (for the most part), highly resistant to sensor damps as drones can be aggressed by damps being active on their ship, same for ECM, and only helped by Target painters

Missiles - Immune to tracking disruptors (still waiting for that TD change), FOF can be used to some effect against heavy sensor damps, but strong native lock ranges of Caldari ships, and stronger sensor strength make Sensor damps less effective overall and depending on the setup can be negated by sensor boosters, and missile based platforms often have the extra mids to use 1-2 sensor boosters while retaining effectiveness. ECM can also be spoofed by FoF missiles though it remains fairly effective.

Blasters - Sensor damps aren't all that effective against short ranged blasters…. is what you would think if you were not thinking, but really with the scan res script loaded, damps can make and effective break, forcing bigger ships to take 30-40 or even out to a minute + before they can lock and apply DPS. Tracking disruption is devastating to blasters for obvious reasons. While ECM remains as effective as always.

Projectile turrets - share many of the same weaknesses of blasters in respect to Sensor damps, but add a bit of range so now range scripts effect their locks as well, preventing effective kiting from minmatar auto cannons or artillery. Tracking disruption are similarly effective against Projectile turrets, while of course ECM retains it's effectiveness.

Railguns - Often forgotten are effected like artillery by the various forms of ECM, With a bit more range than blasters, they are susceptible to both range and lock time scripts. Tracking disruptors can easily kill their effective DPS similar to their effect on any turret based weapon system.

Lasers - Also suffer from the effects of EWAR on a more level scale. That is they operate in short to mid ranges (pulse) and mid to long range (Scorch pulse, and beams). Sensor damps can limit their engagement envelopes by preventing locks in all but a close range battle or preventing timely locks. Tracking disruptors are great at removing Lasers from the fight, removing their ability to dominate at range and track in close.

Clearly it can be said that Missiles and drones, two weapon systems that might be slightly less used in PvP in eve proper, get the EWAR advantage in a tournament setting.

The stage is set for some epic battles this weekend with another quarter of the overall competition sure to be eliminated by Monday morning. As always Eve-bet and Monocle Madness continue to provide outlets for those of the better persuasion, and are worth a look if you are interested. I prefer Monocle madness, but both are excellent avenues.

Expect especially hard gambling around some of the following matches:

Verge of Collapse vs Rote Kapelle
Late night vs TEST
Hyrda vs Inappropriate footwork
PL vs Agony - Two tournament heavyweights here fighting it out. Should be great.
Outbreak. vs CO2
CVA vs Perihelion
Heretics vs Pizza

(To name just a few)

Eve Overview Improvements

The tide of the battle is turning. Hostile ships are crumbling, the battle is turning in your favor. It's the breaking point in the battle where a smart FC on the losing side tries to get as many ships out alive as possible, understanding defeat. Calls to spread points fly across fleet chat, secure as many kills as possible, stop those hostiles from escaping. Garbled 'I have a point on the dr---' or 'point ca--' fill fleet comms, it's utter chaos, and more than 3/4 of the remaining enemy fleet makes it to warp despite being in scramble and disruptor range from more then enough points to do a full lock-down. It's sometimes followed by muted silence and then utter amazement on how in the hell all those ships got out.

'Must have all been fitting stabs' - Chuckles follow that. But the FC isn't happy, there were more kills out there, but it doesn't matter now.

"Spread points"

This is thee most ambiguous command in the Eve FC's dictionary, this basically means, put points on everything in range, top value stuff first, to secure the most expensive kills. In reality, it's left up to fleet members to look at the tactical situation and figure out what to put their point on. In reality, while the blingy t2 cruiser might always get pointed, it gets 10 points while everything else gets none.

What I mean to say is -

I guess all of this is a long route to get to the simple point. Unlike in countless other MMO's where current effects on a target are called out by status indicators under the mob or player. In Eve we only have a system where we show our modules and their effects on the target. I think the UI team should take a close look and figure out a way to indicate if a target is being jammed already, if he already has a TD on him, and more importantly, is there a point on that guy?

Too much detail could cause a huge amount of clutter on the UI, but just a few indicators could be important. Something like a single icon or a nested icon showing how many of each module type is active on a target would be hugely useful, not just in a "Spread Points" scenario, but also in a pitched battle where ewar teams are doing their best to spread their trade around the entire enemy fleet.

To implement, it would be hard to represent these items without adding a lot of clutter to the UI, but I would like to see perhaps "ghost" images of a warp scrambler icon or EWAR icon under the target if someone else is already engaging that target with EWAR or whatever. In my opinion gun icons would be ridiculous in almost any non-solo battle, but the ewar and warp scrambler icons would actually be very useful.

Imagine if you were able to tell at a glance what one of your targets had or didn't have points on them. Spread points would no longer end up with all but the most doomed targets escaping. Flow of pointing would be a different meta, allowing FC's undedicated the command "Tackle on primary" and instead allow the fleet members to coordinate points on their own.

Warp bubbles could have their own icon or just show as a warp scramble effect on targets inside the bubble. (for you 0.0 readers who don't worry about tackle unless they are in a dictor/hictor). Let's keep moving forward with a better, more intuitive, UI.

SCL4 postponed!

SCL4 has been postponed by the organizers. Pushed off until after ATXI. Official post came from the punning Seldarine on June 20th. Should have checked there this weekend. SCL website continues to retain the information from SCL3.

I am quite shocked there hasn't been an official post made to announce we are postponing the SCL4 until after Alliance Tournament XI.

So yeh, SCL 4 will be sometime after the AT. 

Everyone else organising the SCL (apart from Elendar I hope cos he is terribad) is either commentating for the AT or part of a team for the AT, so it was decided democratic style to postpone.

I apologize if this is actually the first official announcement from us to this effect, and I hope you all have a great AT and come back to us after!

So much for a training grounds! Looks like the ramp up to ATXI is officially on!

ATXI Schedule released

Looks like the silent auction winners are up and Rote made it in! Schedule for matches has also been drawn up and can be found at this link : http://community.eveonline.com/community/alliance-tournament/schedule/

For those of you who don't want to go to the Eve website, I have cleaned it up a bit and pasted it below. Predictions will be incoming.

Day 1

Saturday July 20th

13:30 Circle-Of-Two vs SCUM.

13:45 Of Sound Mind vs YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT

14:00 Curatores Veritatis Alliance vs R.E.V.O.L.U.T.I.O.N

14:15 THE R0NIN vs CAStabouts

14:30 Goonswarm Federation vs Sleeper Social Club

14:45 Verge of Collapse vs Outbreak.

15:00 Wormhole Holders vs Rote Kapelle

15:15 Perihelion Alliance vs The Fourth District

15:30 D3vil's Childr3n vs Late Night Alliance

15:45 Clockwork Pineapple vs Rainbow Dash Friends

16:00 RAZOR Alliance vs Babylon 5..

16:15 Sicarius Draconis vs Test Alliance Please Ignore

16:30 Moist. vs Transmission Lost

16:45 Surely You're Joking vs Nulli Secunda

17:00 Exiled Ones vs Choke Point

17:15 JIHADASQUAD vs Exodus.

Break

18:00 Noir. Mercenary Group vs Shadow Cartel

18:15 HUN Reloaded vs DarkSide.

18:30 Darkness of Despair vs Quebec United Legions

18:45 M.I.F vs Angeli Mortis

19:00 Kill It With Fire vs Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork

19:15 The G0dfathers vs Urine Alliance

19:30 SOLAR FLEET vs HYDRA RELOADED

19:45 End of Life vs Darkspawn.

20:00 Heretic Initiative vs No Holes Barred

20:15 WHY so Seri0Us vs RvB

20:30 W-Space vs Mildly Sober

20:45 The Obsidian Front vs The Initiative.

21:00 Confederation of xXPIZZAXx vs Dead Terrorists

21:15 Sadistica Alliance vs Agony Empire

21:30 Pandemic Legion vs Synthetic Systems

21:45 The Kadeshi vs Drunk 'n' Disorderly

Day 2

Saturday July 20th

13:30 Winner of Series 1 vs Winner of Series 2

13:45 Winner of Series 3 vs Winner of Series 4

14:00 Winner of Series 5 vs Winner of Series 6

14:15 Winner of Series 7 vs Winner of Series 8

14:30 Winner of Series 9 vs Winner of Series 10

14:45 Winner of Series 11 vs Winner of Series 12

15:00 Winner of Series 13 vs Winner of Series 14

15:15 Winner of Series 15 vs Winner of Series 16

15:30 Winner of Series 17 vs Winner of Series 18

15:45 Winner of Series 19 vs Winner of Series 20

16:00 Winner of Series 21 vs Winner of Series 22

16:15 Winner of Series 23 vs Winner of Series 24

16:30 Winner of Series 25 vs Winner of Series 26

16:45 Winner of Series 27 vs Winner of Series 28

17:00 Winner of Series 29 vs Winner of Series 30

17:15 Winner of Series 31 vs Winner of Series 32

Break

18:00 Loser of Series 1 vs Loser of Series 2

18:15 Loser of Series 3 vs Loser of Series 4

18:30 Loser of Series 5 vs Loser of Series 6

18:45 Loser of Series 7 vs Loser of Series 8

19:00 Loser of Series 9 vs Loser of Series 10

19:15 Loser of Series 11 vs Loser of Series 12

19:30 Loser of Series 13 vs Loser of Series 14

19:45 Loser of Series 15 vs Loser of Series 16

20:00 Loser of Series 17 vs Loser of Series 18

20:15 Loser of Series 19 vs Loser of Series 20

20:30 Loser of Series 21 vs Loser of Series 22

20:45 Loser of Series 23 vs Loser of Series 24

21:00 Loser of Series 25 vs Loser of Series 26

21:15 Loser of Series 27 vs Loser of Series 28

21:30 Loser of Series 29 vs Loser of Series 30

21:45 Loser of Series 31 vs Loser of Series 32

SCL4 aka ATXI dress rehersal!

As mentioned in my last post the SCL will be streaming the next in their tournaments starting on Jun 22nd and 23rd. Great news because this means the SCL will run with the full ATXI ruleset and play more like a dress rehearsal for some of the top teams, likely including PL, Hydra, as well as others.

Great news for viewers because we get even more tournament action! SCL tends towards smaller fights, running a 70 point max in comparison to the 100 point max used by CCP in AT. This will provide plenty of chances to get a handle on the new banning mechanics, well, more in-line with the CCP AT banning mechanics, as well as new ships, point values, and possible setups. Hopefully not too many turtle tanks, which are always a gambit chance in these kind of tournaments.

In any case, a good end to the month. The SCL can be found streamed on Twitch, and it's website, here.

Now onto the issues I still have with the SCL.

Honestly when the SCL started they seemed to be billing as a bit of a monthly tournament with ongoing standings and results. Yet the majority of the attendee's of the monthly tournaments have been in and out of the tournament, and no apparent standings or record of previous SCL tournaments can be found on their website.

I know it would take a lot of work, but perhaps in the coming season, post ATXI, SCL can step up and do a better job of coming up with a standings bracket, and in fact I think this would go a long way in helping them get repeat teams, because after all if a team took a month or two off they would fall correspondingly behind in the rankings and would need to fight their way back to the top.

Past SCL's need to be completed for editing, allowing viewers and perspective viewers to see all the matches in each SCL. Hopefully after ATXI, the SCL will be able to make these changes and move above and beyond it's current state.

Catching up

So much to write about since I've been gone, well not gone, just not blogging. Had some life stuff come up, but hey, who cares!

Eve Online released Odyssey this past week, one of the better expansions in my opinion. Even if just for the small things, like the apparently never going to get old system transition animation change (which I try to watch almost every time). Not to mention the reduced load time between systems, can't even say just how cool I found the two changes. Reduction in loading screens? Yes please!

Now I bet pretty heavily in some pre-change market speculation that tier 1 BS, specifically the Geddon, Typhoon, and Scorpion would be going up in price and so far that seems to be panning out pretty well. Hopefully prices will continue to rise a bit more before I cash in everything I bought. At least I know I won't be taking a loss.

The changes to those ships have made them all effective choices for pvp, but let's face it, the BS sized weapons are the ones that got the real boost, especially on ships like the CNR, cruise missiles are scary good right now! Tinkerhell and friends swung by TXW to say hello in a small group of CNR's with long point/web support in the form of a loki and a few Arazu and damn near killed an interceptor in 3 volleys almost before he was able to dock. That alone speaks volumes not only for the changes to missiles but also to changes to CNR's in general. Explosion radius bonuses are OP!

A few other things I have noticed since the Odyssey expansion is that some PI items are going crazy, both crashing in price (robotics) or steadily climbing (Polyaramids). So if you haven't made your fortune in PI yet, now might be that time. These changes in price seem to be related to t2 production chains, as well as fuel for POS for all the new moon goo heading out onto the market. I expect to see price hikes across all t2 products, as predicted by A Scientist's life in Eve.

Lots of moving parts to this expansion, so I plan on investigating a few more of them in detail.

As everyone probably knows, Rixx Javixx over at Evoganda has left the Tuskers, or been kicked, depending on how you look at it I suppose. And created a new corp in the eve-piracy scheme. They call themselves "Stay Frosty" and remain in Hevrice right next to the Tuskers. They appear to be doing well, with their current membership at around 60 or so peeps. Not bad for the first month and I wish Rixx luck!

Lei Harper has made a huge the impact with his entrance into Eve Online, his Reddit post near-instantly becoming an eve-internet sensation. The post reflects his first four days in Eve and has since branched out into continued writing at his newly founded Blog, that can be found at this link. The keep track of his experience as he progresses and have thus far been quite a good read.

Specifically, his attitude and excitement has translated well into his writing, and I've been quite impressed to follow his adventures so far in Eve. I wonder how long before he's running around with three to five alts! He certainly already has the cash to do so!

"Has it seriously already been a year since the last tournament?" Said my wife in great anger when I reminded her that it was tourney practice time!

While I still haven't been able to sneak on for a practice, rest assured that the rest of Rote will be making a showing in the upcoming Tourney. The ruleset was released by CCP, as well as the commentator selections (more on the ruleset later)! These include two alliance mates being added to the mix. Bacchanalian, who is a lead commentator for the SCL series, and who's experience there should be well tested by the AT, his appearance, nearly a twin of Goon's Mittani, should also provide a good source of laughs. As well as Apathetic Brent, another SCL staffer and part time SCL coordinator and commentator.

Live random drawings will take place today, Jun 11th at 1700 UTC/GMT/Eve time. Can be watched on Twitch if you are interested, details can be found here....

SCL 4 is going to be a dress rehearsal for ATXI, using the same ruleset, if slightly smaller teams. The announcement post has been made over on the forums, and as usual I will be very excited to see this move forward. I will also be addressing this more later.

-------------------

Wow that turned quickly into a junk drawer kind of post! Well good news is that I plan on posting more to cover the SCL, as well as the run up to ATXI in my usual over-zealous fashion.

SCL3 tournament Announced!

After another successful showing of the SCL on Apr 6, and 7th, whose match replays can be found at the SCL site here(Will be updated with SCL2 footage shortly), the Pandemic Legion team, led by tourney champion Admiral Goberius had a thriller best of five Final(Full stream footage linked there) against the Reputation Cartel team, a mix epic posters from the Failheap-Challenge forums. Well worth the watch, and a blast down to the last match.

Good news, the team behind the Syndicate Competitive League is up to their old tricks and preparing for SCL #3!

Currently scheduled for May 11th and 12th, numerous rule changes have been made from SCL #1 to SCL #2. The biggest change was going from a longer double elimination bracket with best of three matches down to a single elimination bracket with best of three matches except the final which is a best of five. In SCL 1, the double elimination, best of three matches format left some teams up well into the night and early hours of their mornings, not that it slowed down the SCL 1 Hydra team at all, who still were victorious against the Exodunks team in SCL 1.

Back to SCL #3 aka SCL3, the rules are once again being modified by the SCL team to allow for better setups, changing meta and hopefully a bit of a shake-up to the turtle and ECM tank teams we saw in SCL2. Details post from one of the Tourney front men, Bacchanalian, is located on the eve-o forums here.

In short they are making a few ship-point changes.... but one of the bigger changes listed isn't something obviously important to the casual fan. That is "Only one Remote Energy Transfer module may be fitted per ship. They may be fitted on any and all ships, but only ONE per ship is allowed." Unless you are familiar with the SCL or even previous alliance tournaments, this change may seem a little pointless.

However, this change was needed because as the popularity of turtle cross tanking setups rose, due to their effectiveness, there was a chance where two "turtle" teams would face each other in a stand off that would exceed the match time with no kills. Making it very difficult to score the round or to provide needed resolution. This simple change should result in more explosions and less 'invincible' Golem, Sin, Vargur and other shield spider turtle tanks.

There will be a new third place determining match, best of three that will happen just before the championship match on Sunday.

Additionally the SCL is looking for another commentator for their booth.. In their words

Ever considered being a commentator? Think you have what it takes? The SCL staff is looking for one more voice to bring on board. Applicants need to demonstrate ample PvP experience, and a high level of past tournament participation is recommended. The ability to commit to both days of the weekend and multiple SCL dates is requested, and it is also asked that you not participate in the SCL in any way should you opt to become a commentator-we don't want active competitors "in the booth". Contact Seldarine for details.

Well beyond that, the winners of SCL1 and SCL2 have been invited to compete in SCL3, that would be the mostly Hydra team of "Warlords of the Deep" and the Pandemic Legion Team. Creates quite the match-up

 Now as for improvements I think still need to be made,

• If this really is meant to be a season vice just fights once a month, then some kind of points system and season needs to be considered. I think the SCL team is looking into this already, but it would be good to know it was in the works. Perhaps they just can't decide on a way to do the standings and are working that out and will apply whatever system they figure out to the past winners and participants when they do get a system in place.
• A season would need to be defined, IE monthly fights that start to count using the above system from this month to this month next year.

Common questions or rather, common thoughts about the SCL and why "it's not worth watching."

1. It takes place on SiSi, making ship costs immaterial reducing the immersion of the SCL into the Eve universe!  A: my response to this is simple. The teams that are fighting in the SCL would raise the money anyways, additionally it levels the playing field for the people who would not be able to raise the money, allowing the SCL to reach out to a wider participant base at a lower cost than NEO or AT's past.
2. Since not as much is at risk, it seems like security measures aren't as extreme as for the NEO or AT, why is that? A: This question seemed often asked, to me at least. In past AT's, most specifically AT6 through 10, there was no banning, so setups that could be thought up and tested out and worked well could be used, and thus finding out about a teams preferred setups gave insight into what your team might be facing if facing them. With the advent of banning, all setups must be more fluid and much more adaptable. Because of this, spying becomes less important as banning makes it difficult to predict exactly what fleet you might see. Teams have to train against and with far more comps than just coming up with one solid comp and sticking to it.

In any case, I look forward to SCL3! May seems a long way off at this point, but not over the horizon, just on the other side of Fanfest.