Category Archives: Guides

Nooblets Guide: 21 Days to Glory

So, one of the things that tends to hurt new players is they can be made to feel really helpless really fast.  I’m assuming that most new players who find their way to this blog will find their way here because they have a friend who plays the game.  I’m also going to assume that their main goal will be to find fun things to do, and while PvE can be a lot of fun, new players who can contribute in PvP tend to do a lot better.

So our goal today is to find a fit that will put the player in the opportunity to fly a real PvP ship, in a fleet towards the end of their trial.  I’m going with the armor version because I’m still working towards a couple of fits that will go well with a shield version.  Here we go:

Finish the Tutorials on day 1, with all the skills you need for that, NEXT:
Racial Frigate to level 4
Small (Hybrid, Projectile, Laser, whatever) to 4
Drones to 4, with scout drone operation to 2
Electronics to 4
Engineering to 4
Gunnery 3
Afterburner 3
High speed maneuvering 3
Racial Cruiser 3
Hull Upgrades 4
Medium guns 3 (again, the one for your race)
Propulsion Jamming 3
Weapon Upgrades 4
Drones to 5
Energy Systems Operation 1

This will get you into something like this:

[Maller, t1]

5x Focused Anode Pulse Particle Stream I (Multifrequency M)

Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Disruptor I

2x Adaptive Nano Plating II
1600mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
2x Heat Sink I

3x Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

3x Warrior I

If you can find someone to rig it, and while the DPS is, frankly, anemic, clocking in at under 150, it’s a ship that will get a new player into a fight, other alternatives include the more aggressive, but more fragile Thorax:

[Thorax, Cruiser 4 T1 Guns]

5x Anode Electron Particle Cannon I (Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M)

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I (Navy Cap Booster 200)
Stasis Webifier II
Warp Scrambler II

800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
2x Prototype Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane I
Magnetic Field Stabilizer I
Damage Control II

3x Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

5x Hammerhead I

or the Rupture, giving a bit more speed, less tank, than the Maller, but more damage:

[Rupture, Cruiser 4 T1 Guns]

4x 220mm Medium Prototype Automatic Cannon (Republic Fleet Fusion M)

Medium Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I (Navy Cap Booster 200)
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Disruptor II
Stasis Webifier II

800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Damage Control II
2x Prototype Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane I
Gyrostabilizer I

Medium Anti-Explosive Pump I
2x Medium Trimark Armor Pump I

4x Warrior I
1x Hammerhead I

These aren’t perfect, refined fits, these are solid “Blue Collar” fits.  They can be handled by a nooblet, and can get them into a fight where they can have fun and see ships explode, including, quite probably, their own.  My next guide will talk about how to get into all modes of PvE in a more controlled, sustainable fashion, building from some of the skills trained here, and some new ones more focused on PvE.

Some notes:

THESE AREN’T POLISHED FITS AND SKILLPLANS I ENCOURAGE AND HOPE THAT YOU CAN AND WILL GIVE ME YOUR CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK.  Constructive feedback means “You can do this with the lasers and this with the plate to get this and this in the maller” not “take a shower you fungal faced wookie dung”

These ships are meant to be used in fleets.  Logistics and ewar support can come from more experienced people.

Yes I want nooblets out pew pewing sooner, this will be sort of a “welcome to week three, grab your diploma, your lasers, and start killing shit” culmination of the free trial period.

I'm using it every time I can

I’m using it every time I can

How to Run an AAR

The most important part of many operations is figuring out what the hell actually happened.  No matter how well or poorly a battle goes, there is an absolute wealth of knowledge to be gained from going through afterwards and getting different perspectives on events.

There’s 3 main ways of doing AARs.  Hotwashes, Leader Review, and Write-Ups.


Hotwashes are when everybody involved gets together, usually on voice, for a moderated discussion.  They can be enormously valuable because every perspective is brought to bear.  Even the most incredible noob might bring something priceless to the discussion.  They work best when done IMMEDIATELY after the op ends.  Fleet breaks up, people dock and start talking.

The big things to cover are What went well, What didn’t go well, and what people would improve the next time out.  For this to be successful the people involved have to take the activity seriously, and be able to communicate openly, honestly and without malice.

Openly means being able to say what they need to say without fear of repercussion.

Honestly means being objective about strengths and weaknesses.  Admitting to what happened and not what “Should” have happened.

Without Malice means not taking things to a personal level.

By openly talking through what people think went well and what needed to be improved and how it can be improved while the events in question are still fresh in people’s memory you can get a whole lot of fairly rough information.  You can get insights that people may not remember, or think to voice up later, and you get people feel like they are more involved in their experience.

However the discussion does need to be moderated, personal attacks cannot be tolerated and once a point has been made, it has been made and it’s time to move on.  If a hotwash isn’t moderated or the people doing it don’t take it seriously for whatever reason than it loses a lot of its effectiveness.

Leader Review

Leader Review is a meeting between key leaders, whether it’s FC and sub FCs, FCs and CEOs, FCs CEOs, Scouts, or other designated personnel to have a serious going over of the events.  Again the participants need to be open, honest and without malice, and while they may lose some input from lower-level members, they should gain a great deal of focus.  This type of AAR tends to focus more on leadership actions and usually takes place at a greater remove in time than a hotwash.  These reviews are usually less fractious and easier to control than a hotwash as well.  They don’t tend to take as long and there’s less need to “mine for gold” to get the good information, but there is also the possibility of losing good input with the smaller pool of people involved.


A write-up is a written report on the actions taken from the point of view of the leader doing the writing.  Who does them is up to alliance rules, although typically it’s the lead FC and anyone else who took over for a significant length of time.  Additionally other FCs who were in the fleet but not taking over might comment on the write-up or do their own.

This write up has the same requirements as the others with regards to how open the author must be.  In addition the writer must focus on things that went well, that need to be reinforced so they happen again, and things that went poorly and steps that can be taken to improve on it the next time around.  The advantage you get with a write-up is a far deeper look from the view of one person, and they can control the discussion initially, and get all their points off, if done on forums it can be replied to, again with a complete write up.  However if there are disagreements on the facts, as can happen, or the writeup is less than completely intellectually honest, the whole process is derailed at the beginning.

My Own Rules/Philosophies

The only name I will name in an AAR is my own.  There’s two reasons for this:  #1 I’ll happily admit my own mistakes, and no one else needs their name dragged through the mud unless they want to give a mea culpa.  #2 Multiple people might have made a mistake, or thought they made a mistake and “People need to be very careful to avoid shooting at non primaries” is something everyone can think “Shit… was I shooting a secondary?  Better check that” as opposed to “Hong Weiloh was shooting secondaries before primaries were down” in which case everyone NOT named Hong Weiloh is going to A: Ignore the comment and B: make fun of Hong.  This is counter-productive.  Additionally “We did a good job shifting damage to secondaries and getting damage on them fast to beat reps” is a lot better than “Shootin’ Star was on the ball calling targets and getting damage switched to beat their reps” because it’s an issue where everyone had a say, and while pumping up the target caller’s ego is good, getting everyone a bit of credit is better.

At least two of these actions should take place.  I prefer a hotwash and a write-up.  It gives both the highest and lowest levels a say, and makes sure that issues aren’t missed and that any action that takes place gets proper coverage.  In addition using a hotwash gives people a voice, and a reason to support the conclusions and changes that might come about because of the AAR process.

Do it fast.  Hotwashes should be done right after, Leader Review and Write-Up no later than 48 hours later.  Don’t let the lessons cool, strike while the iron is hot.

Don’t squash people because you think that what they say is stupid.  It might be an issue people need to think about.  Don’t let anyone else call out a “stupid” idea either.  The idea is to encourage input.

In public discussions keep comments short.  Think then talk.  In forums or written formats go ahead and be verbose.  You don’t want to TL/DR (or really TL Didn’t Think) when it comes to improving your game.

I’m using it every time I can