I was pushing late last year for the Gallente T3 destroyer to be a drone ship like the Algos but meaner, which would have left the hybrid weapons for the Caldari version, but CCP followed weapon schema A instead of B so I'll just have to settle for a meaner Catalyst.
Really, I'm not too upset about that.
The current SISI stats are interesting, albeit still too early to say definitively:
 |
| From http://www.schildwall.info/ , click for larger image. |
Regardless, I'll be buying a whack of them and using them in fleets.
Soon, soon.
Well, that's depressing.
ReplyDeleteSo, a slightly better catalyst, at 6 times the price! *People will buy this for sure*
There I was, hoping for a Gallente *tactical* destroyer, but obviously the only valid tactic will be a kamikaze brawl. CCP has obviously learnt that creating a ship that might do well in more than one role is *bad*, and is now back-pedalling as hard as physically possible.
There doesn't even seem to be a niche for combat scanning, considering the total lack of utility highs.
A Hull-tanked Cata gets 480dps (neutrons and void) heated, goes 1.8k and has 8k ehp. It costs 10 mil. It even gains another 2k hp from the AAR! That's the competition.
Will a *tactical* destroyer compete? I very much doubt it.
But alas, the Gallente came last, so must take the beating we apparently deserve.
Rob K.
(Indulging in bitter-vet-hood as we speak)
I mean seriously! 2 Mids! Uuuurgh...
DeleteNo mid for a web or a cap booster. You may as well tie them to the small FW plex button already. Why even risk a 60 million isk ship that will be so utterly outclassed by every other D3? I can have 6 catalysts, and even if I lose all of them, my KB won't look as bad, and I'll probably have more fun, too!
(Note, I know the Confessor is ~30 million, but the average loss-mail cost seems to be around 60.)
Once again, it seems, Gallente hybrid destroyers are designed to be worse than Minmatar equivalents. I can only conclude that a cabal of Gallente Senators organised this to help the Minmatar state's industries back on the right track.
____________________
There's a small possibility that a kite-ing Hecate fit with a mwd and point might have some value, but what's the point when other ships will be faster, more agile, and be so much cheaper? Perhaps CCP has a plan, I can only hope that we see a radical change in slot layout.
Dear fellow Gallente Pilots, let us pray.
Pray that CCP has, in their infinite complexity and limitless wisdom, a plan...
Stop that snickering at the back!!!
etc,etc...
Rob K.
It is purty though.
ReplyDeleteOne of the things CCP has got right here is the 'modularity' of the Hecate. It looks good in all 3 modes. There's no super-massive sensor array, no bizarre contortion of the hull. It looks like it can adapt, but it doesn't have to fundamentally reorganise itself.
DeleteI do notice that there's no 'hull resistance bonus' that was previously mentioned. I also hope they give it a Hull rep cycle and amount boost. That might be going a little too far...
Rob K.
It looks to me like it's so preliminary that they just copied-and-pasted the Cat.
ReplyDeleteIt looks like they did...
Delete*whoops*. I was wondering why the stats looks so similar. My fault for leaping to a conclusion. I should probably have noticed due to the lack of the hull resistance bonus.
Thanks for spotting that :)
Rob K.