These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Combat frigate changes for Inferno

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mizz Wolf
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#241 - 2012-05-02 21:30:29 UTC
Thanks for listening to us and actually having a discussion about some of this. :)
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#242 - 2012-05-02 21:41:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova Fox
Pulling from my military background to come up with idea for eve class standarization.

Attack - A craft that specializes in killing stuff that isn't its type.
Icon - Chevron
Bonuses - Multiple Damage Systems
Built in - Improved Navigation Electronics and Defenses are built in.
Engineering - Because they're built in slot and cpu layout is not as flexible as others.

Escort - These are designed to attack targets smaller than itself thus prioritize reach and accuracy.
Icon - Shielded Chevron
Bonus - Weaponization and Accuracy
Built in - Improved Offensive Electronics and Improved Defenses than normal attack types.
Engineering - Similar to standard attack this does however afford slightly more electronic assistnce slots.

Strike - These are specializing in attacking targets larger than itself and prioritizes pain and suffering
Icon - Double Chevron
Bonus - Single Focus Damage System
Built in - Improved Defensive Electronics and Improved Navigation than normal attack types.
Engineering - Similar to standard attack does have slighlty more room for attack assistance

Combat - A craft that specializes in killing stuff of its own size and survive to tell the tale.
Icon - Crosshair
Bonus - Defensive and Weapon Bonus
Built in - Reliant on Ship fitting
Engineering - Due to the ever changing battlefield more fitted was alloted to allow flexibility

Fighter - A craft that specializes in killing stuff its own size, forgoes some defenses for navagional advantage
Icon - Circled Crosshair
Bonus - Stronger Weapon Bonus Weaker Defense Bonus
Built In - Faster Navigation at the cost of defense.
Engineering - slighlty less flexible than standard combats in defense layer

Assault - A craft that specizlies in killing stuff while taking a beating
Icon - Shielded Crosshair
Bonus - Strong Defense Bonus Weapon Bonus
Built In - Improved Defenses and Electronic Defense at the cost of Navigation
Engineering - Less flexiable than standard combat in navigation area

Intercept Fast Craft designed to stop and prevent escape of targets.
Icon - Arrowhead
Bonus - Navigational and Attack
Built In - Unmatched Speed at the cost of defenses.
Engineering - Very inflexible aside from navigation and electronics.

Interdict A fast craft designed to get in and make sure the enemy doesnt escape.
Icon - Shafted Arrowhead
Bonus - Navigational and Electroncis
Built in - Slightly slower speed but superior defense electronics
Engineering - Very inflexible

Skirmish - A craft deisgned to get in do dirty business and get out.
Icon - Double Arrowhead
Bonus - Strong Attack and Navigation.
Built in - Superior offensive electronics, slightly slower.
Engineering - Very inflexible.

Bombarder - A craft designed to hit slower targets peferrably stationary.
Icon Bullet
Bonus - Double Damage Bonus
Built in - Slow but well armed and armored
Engineering - Inflexible but supportive for as many weapons and damage as possible including altering range or damage

Battery - A craft designed to hit slower moving targets that could shoot back.
Icon Bullet Formation
Bonus - Damage and RoF
Built in - Fast ship at the cost of some defenses from standard bombardment.
Engineering - Flexible to allow a choice between going higher speed or high damaga

Projector A long range ship meant to seige hostile positions from afar.
Icon Streaking Bullet
Bonus - Damage and Range.
Built in - Very Fast ship with superior electronics at the cost of weak defenses, reliant on range for its primary defense.
Engineering - Generous to support additional weapons and speed.

Support A class of ship designed to help out other friendly ships.
Icon Wings
Bonus - Support Defense or Support Offense and Defense
Built in - Strong Defenses and flexible fitting
Engineering - Flexible to allow an assortment of roles to fullfill

Logistics A class of ship designed to help other ships repair
Icon Cross and Wings
Bonus - Remote Repair support and Defenses
Built In - Strong Defenses, tougher electronics and flexible fitting.
Engineering - Flexible to allow an assorment of mission roles.

Fire Conrol A class of ship designed to assist others in attacking
Icon Sword and Wings.
Bonus - Offensive Remotes (ie Remote Sensor Booster) and defense.
Built in - Strong Defeneses and electronics with flexible fitting.
engineering - Flexible to allow and assortment of mission roles.

Electronics A class of ship designed to degrade enemies ability to fight
Icon Pulse Bracket
Bonus - Electronic Systems and Navigation.
Built in - Weaker defenses allow for additional electronic support and navigation and built in electronics
Engineering - Not refiend and very nit pickey unable to unfit its role.

Recon A class of ship designed to cripple and wittle away enemies.
Icon Pulse Bracket with Crosshair
Bonus - Electronic systems and Weapons
Built in - Weaker defenses at the cost of superior electronics and mobility.
Engineering - Refined to allow weapon support but not good enoughf or defenses.

Sentry A ship class designed to cripple the enemies ability to fight while under fire.
Icon Pulse bracke with Shield.
Bonus - electronic Systems and Defenses.
Built in - Unusually strong defenses combined with strong electronics sap away navigational and defensive electronics
Engineering - More focus on defenses and less offending ability.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
Ogopogo Mu
O C C U P Y
#243 - 2012-05-03 00:11:53 UTC
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
MERLIN:

Again, good comments regarding the ship general role and range bonus, so it has been replaced with the old good school shield resistance bonus to turn it back into the heavy tackler / brawler you all learned to care about and love fondly.


  • New bonuses: 5% bonus to Small Hybrid Turret damage and 5% to shield resistances per level
  • Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 350 / 175 s / 2
  • Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 310 / 3.6 / 997000 / 3.36 s
Holy crap! Dmg bonus AND Resist bonus?!! Merlin may very well become an over-powered ****-machine! Me likes! No more running away whenever a Rifter shows up.


Merlins were already good vs Rifters due to optimal/null bonuses and better tank, assuming you could dictate range. The damage bonus change just means you have to fly them more like Gallente now (facemelt and pray). Changes the game slightly in that ranging isn't as strong, but you have a better shot of blapping scout/tackle and getting away assuming you can snare them.

If this coincides with a 3 turret/no launcher or util high, this removes 7km range control even more as you don't have rockets. It also makes MSB/cap fits more attractive since the web loses a tiny bit of utility (as a rocket enhancer).

At least this change makes the Merlin different, not terrible. May be interesting to test it out.
Axel Kurki
Aseyakone
#244 - 2012-05-03 06:02:37 UTC
Well, looking better now.

However, like people have noted, there's some character involved in the "good" T1 ships. It's not that they're shoeboxed in some roles. Of course, this mostly means that they're the tier 3 ones, simply because the others are pre-nerfed.

Also, on the previous crude shoeboxing in the roles, I'd be somewhat concerned about trying to make the Bantam into the "tech one interceptor" role, which, for the last few years, has been held by the Condor. (Admittedly, not very well, but still.) That's just like someone just applied a template saying "all attack-type frigates must have turrets", and noticed that Condor has missile bonuses. Perhaps, even if this causes problems about people wanting to build their own sand castles instead of subscribing to a CCP theme park, some of the "combat" ships should have their role defined by their fittings.

At the moment, the role division (with some roles nerfed by the "lower tier means it sucks") seems to be (and some suggestions):

Combat (race, main weapon):
Breacher (M, missiles) -> Generic missile ship
Incursus (G, turrets) -> Turret focused, perhaps speed for range control for blasters?
Inquisitor (A, missiles) -> Generic missile ship
Kestrel (C, missiles) -> Generic missile ship
Merlin (C, turrets)
Punisher (A, turrets)
Rifter (M, turrets)
Tristan (G, turrets) (Used as a basis for missile ships, though.)

Attack (race, main weapon):
Atron (G, turrets) -> Perhaps shift to drones to give racial flavour?
Condor (C, missiles) -> If kept as a tackler, then perhaps lose the range bonus and add RoF. (Though range means it can use rockets beyond web range.) Perhaps needs midslots.
Executioner (A, turrets)
Slasher (M, turrets) (Military experts call this "firing two uzis while going down the stairs on an office chair" ship.)

EW:
Crucifier (A)
Griffin (C)
Maulus (G)
Vigil (M)

Exploration:
Heron (C)
Imicus (G) (Also technically a drone frigate.)
Magnate (A) -> Am I the only one wishing for three turrets, even if they'd not be very useful? OCD about symmetry.
Probe (M)

And finally, the mining frigates, which I would suggest to repurpose into a new "secondary" weapon (but, assuming tutorials are not changed, need to maintain turret slots and cargo space):
Bantam (C) -> If Condor is fast & short range, then long range missile frigate (or the other way, no one says Condor couldn't be dual-role of fast tackle and a long-range sniper) Keep Kestrel, though, as something that can be technically fit into both ranges.
Burst (M) (Sorry, not really familiar with Minmatar on how the Breacher flies.)
Navitas (G) -> Fill in for the more warlike (in comparison to Imicus) drone frigate?
Tormentor (A) (Need to see how that turret/drone combo works out.)

And yes, these roles should be wide enough to allow some changes in fitting. T2 is the specialized stuff. The cookie-cutter setup might be optimal, but at times, there might be some surprises.
Debir Achen
Makiriemi Holdings
#245 - 2012-05-03 07:18:58 UTC
Possible issue: definition of "roles" is misleading.

It seems to me that the following "roles" currently exist for T1 PvP frigates:

Solo (brawler): all the big 4, very rarely others. Tristan and Rifter often use AB / point / cap injector; SAR / suitcase / ... .

Solo (kiter): typically MWD, disruptor, long-range weapons. Kestrel can do this; not as familiar with other races.

Fleet (swarm tackle): Speed and tackle, guns almost irrelevant.

Fleet (swarm DPS): damage, speed tank, point. Unlike solo brawlers, repair isn't as useful, as you tend to die fast if you get targeted. Might used massed EW.

Stuff like fleet anti-kiter work tends to be done better by AFs or combat inties.

Note: solo can also include small gang work. My contention is that fitting a frig for solo / small gang fiting is very different from fitting it to be part of a fleet. The same ships might be able to fit both roles, and currently tend to because it's mostly just the big 4 that are decent in combat.


In terms of "balance", I think what is most important is that each race has (at least) 2 viable "solo" frigates - emphasising different ways of fighting - and one viable fleet frigate (swarm tackle and swarm DPS are matters of fitting priority, as long as you have sufficient mids). Note that these don't necessarily need to be symmetrical across races. It's OK for Caldari to have a long range (light missiles) / close range (rockets) kiting kestrel and buffer fit brawling merlin, while Gallente has a drone-kiting incursus and active rep super-close-range brawling tristan, and Amarr have one active fit and one buffer fit brawler. In fact, I'd like that a lot better than the current situation with some T2 ships, where every race has a functionally equivalent X (where X = stealth bomber / cov ops / ...).

I'm also very against a policy that says "every race has a kiting missile ship", "every race has a brawling gunship", ... . Missiles vs guns shouldn't be different classes of weapon systems, just different ways of dealing damage. I'd rather a situation where T1 ships are bonused for weapon type 'X', and leaving players to decide whether to fit short or long range variants and how to fly them. And it's OK for one race to do with two hulls what another does with three, as long one of those two hulls can't be equally good at multiple roles with a single fitting.

Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature?
Debir Achen
Makiriemi Holdings
#246 - 2012-05-03 07:29:27 UTC
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
The resist and range bonus is a staple of Caldari gunboats... Merlin -> Moa -> Ferox -> Rohk. Makes sense, and you are used to it as you advance thru the ship classes.
And three of those four are useless in the "sniper" role, unless you add artificial restrictions to prevent them getting popped by the next size up (whether Caldari or another race).

Tier 3 BCs work only because they use oversized weapons. They are super-light battleships, not heavy cruisers (to CPP: might want to think whether BCs in general should be renamed heavy cruisers, or at least conceived as such). They have sufficient range to out-range common battleships. In contrast, a "sniper merlin" (or "sniper kestrel", for that matter) sits at a range and speed where most mid-range cruisers can comfortably turn it into paste. Same with Moa or Ferox against battleships. Ignoring E-War, the only real defenses a smaller ship has against a larger are (1) getting in close where tracking matters or (2) not being on grid long enough to get shot back.

Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature?
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#247 - 2012-05-03 09:28:37 UTC
Nova Fox wrote:
Pulling from my military background to come up with idea for eve class standarization.

... more than a dozen roles ...

Nova Fox did a great job (perhaps, unintentionally) of pointing out that trying to separate ships into specific "roles" may not be such a sharp idea.

There are too many possible "roles" and attempting to shoehorn a handful of ships into a subset of the roles is going to result in one or more roles being left without a ship. For example, I think that someone already pointed out that the initial proposal would have left the Amarr without a mining frigate. Oops.

Given the limited dev resources, CCP isn't likely to add a hundred or so new ships to fill all of the possible roles, so multi-role or general-purpose ships would seem to make more sense.

Also, assigning specific and limited "roles" to ships is an attempt to tell the players how to play the game - ex. you are supposed to use the "attack" frigate for 1v1 PVP, but not the "support" frigate. So, if I *can* fit a "support" frig to consistently pwn the Rifter, is it going to get nerfed 'cause it doesn't fit its "role"? Hmm....

The players - not the devs - should figure out what ships are best suited for specific roles, depending on in-game circumstances, based upon EFT experiments and trial-and-error in the game. This is what the "sandbox" is supposed to be, and well-represented in the posts made in this thread, which bring up many issues and many situations that the devs have not considered.

So, rather than completely redesigning all of the ship specs, the devs should consider focusing on the "least possible" minor adjustments to PG, CPU, cap, etc. which would allow most, if not all, of the under-utilized ships to be more useful and/or flexible. This is what "balancing" is all about, and not the wholesale changes which have been proposed.

Making wholesale changes should only be done when all ships can be adjusted simultaneously, as was done with the speed rebalancing (which was a damn fine job, IMHO). Thus, in this case, minor adjustments are much more feasible, given the admittedly limited dev resources. If we're going to be limited to five (5) updated ships per release, it is going to take 3 years just to update the frigates - and another 3 years to do the cruisers. Ouch.
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#248 - 2012-05-03 10:08:27 UTC
Perhaps just balancing the current frigate lineup against the Rifter in terms of slots, agility etc, varying for race, is enough. Players can determine the role they want the ship to fulfil from there.

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#249 - 2012-05-03 11:40:28 UTC
Or give players the option to select a role (or configuration) for their ship when assembling it which will give it a bonus in that role.

For Example:
(New)
Drake: 5% HML/HAM RoF and 10% Missile flight time per level
>>>>>Combat role: gives a role bonus of 5% resistances per level
>>>>>Attack Role: gives 10% missile explosion velocity per level
>>>>>Bombardment role: gives 10% missile velocity per level

Each race can have fairly specific role bonuses, some ships are better suited for some roles than others and as stated; ships are not shoe horned in and players CHOOSE their ships role.

The only way to change a ships configuration would be to repackage and reassemble it.

Also, there are so many roles as Nova has stated. Not every race should be able to fill every role in their ship class but be spread over many ship classes

Different races should also favour different roles. Example:
Amarr favour Combat and Attack
Cadari favour Combat and Bombardment
Gallente favour Combat and Attack
Minmatar favour Attack and Bombardment
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#250 - 2012-05-03 13:45:38 UTC
Stop trying to get me to fit blasters on caldari.
Antlpater
#251 - 2012-05-03 14:22:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Antlpater
Congrats Merlin-lovers! Looks like you whined the loudest and the Merlin gets a buff.

Ship balancing - looks like random buff/nerf love to me - should start at the top (giant space-d* anyone?) where it matters!

IMHO the Rifta is not op, even when compared directly to the current T1 frigs (1v1).
For real PvP :-p
I dare say the small niche left for t1 frigs is tackle, which has to be as fast and tanky as possible while also having the 3+ mids.
BTW Tackle is an actual role, that helps your fleet, not some stuff made up by marketing like: "Combat" "Assault" ...


P.S. Good luck with your T1-Tackler when most CRs/BCs are faster than you, while actually doing dps!


^^ and i'm not getting into a Tormentor - that ship needs a hull redesign more than anything.
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#252 - 2012-05-03 16:52:15 UTC
Jesus ******* christ, take or hands out of the Merlin frigate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rebalance broken stuff!!!!! Like the Worm pirate frigate!!!!



DON'T TOUCH THE MERLIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My favorite blaster/rocket/buffer shield tank ship!!!!!!

The Tears Must Flow
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#253 - 2012-05-03 16:58:23 UTC
Vaju Enki wrote:
Jesus ******* christ, take or hands out of the Merlin frigate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Rebalance broken stuff!!!!! Like the Worm pirate frigate!!!!



DON'T TOUCH THE MERLIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! My favorite blaster/rocket/buffer shield tank ship!!!!!!




I don't want to fly a bad version of a blaster harpy :(

The Tears Must Flow
Javius Rong
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#254 - 2012-05-03 18:18:35 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
[u]

BOMBARDMENT DOESN'T FILL A ROLE, IT IS A MEAN TO ACHIEVE A ROLE: Indeed, that was a compelling argument, and after some internal discussion, we are rebalancing the rebalancing plan. In its current shape, the "bombardment" classification has been removed. Missile, turret and drone ships will now be sorted in either "combat" or "attack" depending on their role instead of relying on an artificial classification. We may even refine or remove that further with time.

[


I would be very careful about using defined roles. I think is unnecessary and I personally don't understand what the different is between an attack frigate and a combat frigate it. Instead of roles, I think the focus should be on the ships intended usage.

The redefined Merlin is great example. At first you had it intended usage as a long range rail frigate. But why would anyone every fly that? Its intended usage had no place in the current game mechanics where frigates are utilized to tackle other ships. Now the Merlin is a nice little tanked tackler.

The removal of Tiers within a ship hull class is great. Each ship should be good in its intended usage. Right now there are too many under utilized hulls since they don't fill their intended usage well (other ships do similar jobs better). Now the trick is it properly define roles for each of the hulls and balance.

Another thing to think about... Are their just too many ships?
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#255 - 2012-05-03 18:57:56 UTC
Debir Achen wrote:
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
The resist and range bonus is a staple of Caldari gunboats... Merlin -> Moa -> Ferox -> Rohk. Makes sense, and you are used to it as you advance thru the ship classes.
And three of those four are useless in the "sniper" role, unless you add artificial restrictions to prevent them getting popped by the next size up (whether Caldari or another race).

Tier 3 BCs work only because they use oversized weapons. They are super-light battleships, not heavy cruisers (to CPP: might want to think whether BCs in general should be renamed heavy cruisers, or at least conceived as such). They have sufficient range to out-range common battleships. In contrast, a "sniper merlin" (or "sniper kestrel", for that matter) sits at a range and speed where most mid-range cruisers can comfortably turn it into paste. Same with Moa or Ferox against battleships. Ignoring E-War, the only real defenses a smaller ship has against a larger are (1) getting in close where tracking matters or (2) not being on grid long enough to get shot back.
Funny that. Large long range ships beating small long range ships at... long range. Who'd of thunk it?! Roll

Next week on Brilliant Insights we will compare a neutron blaster frigate against a dual-180AC Ruppie! Who will win? Find out next episode!
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#256 - 2012-05-03 19:05:44 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

  • WHY STARTING THE BALANCING WITH SHIPS THAT WORKED WELL?: Because we wanted to see how robust our plan was with familiar, functioning ships before moving to more difficult to fix hulls. It may not look like it, but thanks to this discussion, we gathered valuable information that will help us avoid future problems (especially with the "bombardment" removal P).


For the purposes of discussing theory, this is ok. But, for the purposes of actual implementation, it is a poor strategy.

First off, don't fix what ain't broken. You admit to having limited resources, and fixing something that already works is not an efficient nor effective use of those resources.

Second, you are encouraging yet another unnecessary ragefest. Changes to popular ships always affects a large (and vocal) group of players negatively - whether you end up nerfing one particular ship, or buffing rival ships to kill it. This should be readily apparent from several of the posts in this thread.

If you do opt for making sweeping changes to the core of the game - ie. redesigning the ship stats from scratch - and really do plan to implement it piecemeal rather than wholesale (ie. only 5 ships at a time, rather than the entire class), then you'll be far better off by starting with the least-utilized ships.

The robustness of your plan can then be judged, in-game, by two simple criteria:

  • Are these under-utilized ships becoming more popular?
  • Are these ships being used in the new roles for which we designed them?

If your plan is successful, in actual practice, with these ships, then you'll know it is safe to proceed with the more popular ships. But, if your plan has any critical flaws, then the damage will be minimal.

For reference, I suggest starting with the ships at the bottom of this list:

The Altruist: Know Your Enemy - T1 Frigates
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#257 - 2012-05-03 19:22:59 UTC
Another thing to consider when making any changes to ship specs: power creep.

Over the years, since the ships were first designed and released, the effective power of the combat ships has been increasing. Where it once used to be challenging to run a L1 mission solo in a frig, or to take on a group of NPCs in a high sec belt, this is not so much the case anymore. Now, it is easy peasy... pop, pop, pop. This applies, ofc, to all of the ship classes (which is why I can now AFK solo most L4s in a T1 fit BS).

Do you really want to make it possible someday to gank haulers and miners with a T1 frig? (Don't answer this, Goons... lol)

Balance includes moving stats down, not just up. Again, I refer you to the successful speed rebalancing, which addressed the speed creep.
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#258 - 2012-05-03 19:58:28 UTC
I also hope you don't ruin frigate PvP with this changes, i only play this game to fly frigates, i don't want to fly any other ships type, please don't ruin it Cry

Also lol at people that say frigates are the less used ships. OMG frigates are the most used ships in solo PvP, for exemple in lowsec, please don't forget this. This game is more then nullsec big ship blobs!

The Tears Must Flow
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#259 - 2012-05-03 20:03:02 UTC
Hmm... so the Incursus gets a bit of a speed nerf, along with losing its falloff bonus, while the Rifter gets a bit of a speed buff.

It was tough enough getting an Incursus into blaster range of a Rifter already. Why make it worse?
Vaju Enki
Secular Wisdom
#260 - 2012-05-03 20:09:27 UTC
I just can take this out of my mind, why are you messing with a balanced class of ships like the T1 frigates?

If you wanted to start balancing frigates, you should have started with the broken pirate frigates, the Worm for exemple is underpowered compared with the other pirate frigates(Dramiel is overpowered), and does less damage then some T1 frigates.

The Tears Must Flow