These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Attack frigate changes

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#321 - 2012-07-24 15:06:02 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Tallest is currently doing the mining barge rebalance for Inferno 1.2



if you would be so nice as to ask him if after that will he finish/interate on the weapon balance he was doing before he went on pat leave in Jan?

There were several things he was looking into enhancing for hybrid ammo i was really keen on...

Quote:
We are here and we are reading your feedback.

We will be iterating on our balancing efforts based on the feedback in this and other threads and will release some more balancing in early 2012.


Quote:
As you may have noticed, I have been afk for the last week or so.
I am back at work now and will try to address the concerns that have been expressed while I was away.

As Soundwave and Affinity have explained for me in my absence, the cutoff date for changes that make it into the Crucible expansion has already passed (and had already passed when I went away).

As it turned out, I only had time to do one extra pass on the changes after they hit SISI. These changes (to the changes) were based on your feedback from this thread. There were many other suggestions here that I would love to do, but didn't have enough time to do them properly for this release. In the future, I will make sure that I have more time to make changes based on your feedback. The feedback that you was posted after the cutoff is far from worthless. I've read every single post and written down notes for future reference.

What we have now is a start. After Crucible come out, I will definitely be doing further balancing.
Here are some of the things relating to hybrid ships that we will be looking further into in the coming weeks/months:

* Further tweaking of individual ships.
* Tech II ammo needs a better look at, especially Null-Scorch-Barrage.
* Active tanking vs passive tanking. And by extension, armor tanking vs shield tanking.
* Small and Medium Webifier drones.
* Give tech I hybrid ammo variations for each range, like projectile ammo. Maybe the same for lasers.
* Something to help blaster ships get into range. There are several good suggestions on how to do this; Webifier range bonus, MWD speed bonus, change the armor rig penalty, increase base speed or even a new type of module. We might do some of them, all of them or something completely different.

p.s. I have also updated the OP with the final list of changes.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Salpun
Global Telstar Federation Offices
Masters of Flying Objects
#322 - 2012-07-24 15:07:09 UTC
Changes are live on Sisi

If i dont know something about EVE. I check https://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/ISK_The_Guide

See you around the universe.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#323 - 2012-07-24 15:12:22 UTC
Is this tormentor thing happening? I have a thing for lasers, but the punisher is ****.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#324 - 2012-07-24 15:27:01 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=135064&p=3 How about drones/mods they need some work i think this forum thread explains most issues?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Tanaka Aiko
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#325 - 2012-07-24 15:31:54 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
In the meantime, I will start looking at the destroyer class as mentioned in the last ship balancing blog and will post changes in this forum section when they are ready for external review.

totally forgot the ORE frigate from this blog, will this one be ready with the barges changes or later ?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#326 - 2012-07-24 15:34:54 UTC
Tanaka Aiko wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
In the meantime, I will start looking at the destroyer class as mentioned in the last ship balancing blog and will post changes in this forum section when they are ready for external review.

totally forgot the ORE frigate from this blog, will this one be ready with the barges changes or later ?


It will be coming in a later release.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Fidelium Mortis
Minor Major Miners LLC
#327 - 2012-07-24 15:49:23 UTC
Bubanni wrote:
Tex Bloodhunter wrote:
How about balancing Interceptors at the same time? Looking at the T1 hulls without considering the T2 variants can hardly be done without creating inconsistencies. For example a Condor with 4 med slots has super strong range control, allowing it to kill quite a few T1 and T2 frigs with ease. Although advanced range control is a sensible thing to have on a dedicated tackler it seems odd that the T1 hull performs better at its task than its T2 variants. There have been quite a few other inconsistencies reported in this thread.

If you consider combat frigs and assault ships (Rifter vs. Jaguar/Wolf) you can see a strong increase in performance. The T1 hulls are not even nearly as good as their T2 variants. You don't have to think twice if T1 or T2 is the better choice here. With the new attack frig chances there actually isn't that much of a difference between the ships anymore. Basically Interceptors have twice the EHP (which assault ships have even more of) and the sig bonus (which assault ships get as well). Is that what makes the Interceptor a dedicated and highly specialized ship class? There should be a more distinct difference.


Your forgetting one specially little bonus that makes the t2 interceptor better than this t1 version still... signature reduction for interceptors is mega awesome and perfect as it is.

I personly feel that interceptors er perfectly fine right now as they are, at maximum they only need some small tweaking, but nothing huge

only thing I can think of is to make interceptors accelerate faster in warp to max warp speed, and come to complete stop faster when comming out of warp (perhaps a 15-20% bonus to acceleration/deacceleration of warp speed per level)


Agreed. The interceptors still get a significant EHP/resist and sig bonus, that makes them more adept at their specialized role. Some of the combat interceptors could probably use a little tweaking, but that's more in response to recent changes to destroyers, frigs, and AFs.

ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon
Hoogalish
Doomheim
#328 - 2012-07-25 03:39:10 UTC
If your gonna give the condor the least ammount of armor and hull then it should have the smallest sig, the fastest align time and the highest top speed. . . . rockets and missiles still dont do any damage how about like 10% damage, giving fall off to a ship is gonna greatly increases its worthyness over the others. and what good is tracking speed for minmatar guns?

The speeds and hulls should all be equal. two should be short range point/ brawler - i dub the amarr/gallente ships for this as they play this roll very well, armor tank low, mids for prop jamming. Then you need a long range point, i dub the caldari/minmatar for this its lack of lows means it need to fit for max speed, and what ever if any meds left over for some extra buffer. Couldnt hurt to increase the range of rockets so they can hit to like 30km and give this a bonus to the point out to somthing like that 30km with lvl 5 frig. so like 1.2km range bonus per level to warp disrupters for say caldari and minmatar, and make the gallente and amar increased range on scrams, i mean really 10km isnt cutting it for anyone. so boost theirs the same so they get a 15km scram.

Then fix intercepters so they are more useful for how frail they are. maybe apply these same concepts but increased resits and speed across the board. maybe ad in a bonus to web range as well. intercepters shouldnt be less useful than a daredevil with a faction web and long point.

The whole point of the intercepter is to be fast and tackle, and it can do that okay but in any kind of larger fleet they dont got much gusto. The intercpeters with the prop jaming range bonus are okay but the ones without need severe help and reworking. maybe bild a short and long for each race.
Ischtar Grey
#329 - 2012-07-25 07:14:52 UTC
just a stupid idea but, we have so much frig and cruiser hulls why not making one of each hull type per race dedicated for pve?

lets say gallente frig hull "X" has a 5% dmg bonus on serpentis npc's or something like that.

flame on Twisted
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers
#330 - 2012-07-25 11:11:29 UTC
i really hope the T1 frigs and dessies get done soon, im REALLY looking foward to being able to use an Omen again and it not taking several low slots of fitting mods just to fit some decent lasers with near no tank/buffer
Sang-in Tiers
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#331 - 2012-07-26 02:00:11 UTC
The changes I've seen so far looks nice, so gj there.
However I hope you will take time and look at the amarr ships because they are imo quite ******* terrible, I don't see why I would pick amarr over other races ships in most cases having problem with cap in a fight especially since it leaves you sitting just waiting to get your face smashed in unable to do anything in many cases. I feel like I really did pick the worst of the races to specialize in when I started playing and happily I've started to specialize in other ships recently but that is just because I can't stand being in such a bad spot anymore.

GL.
Mechael
Tribal Liberation Distribution and Retail
#332 - 2012-07-26 03:45:46 UTC
Sang-in Tiers wrote:
The changes I've seen so far looks nice, so gj there.
However I hope you will take time and look at the amarr ships because they are imo quite ******* terrible, I don't see why I would pick amarr over other races ships in most cases having problem with cap in a fight especially since it leaves you sitting just waiting to get your face smashed in unable to do anything in many cases. I feel like I really did pick the worst of the races to specialize in when I started playing and happily I've started to specialize in other ships recently but that is just because I can't stand being in such a bad spot anymore.

GL.


To be fair, Amarr ships a really badass in large fleets. Guardians really make those ships shine. They're just not that great for small gang work (along with Caldari) ... but I think that's by design. Whether it's good design or not, I'm still undecided on.

Whether or not you win the game matters not.  It's if you bought it.
Lili Lu
#333 - 2012-07-26 03:52:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
Lots of people ITT asking for cherries on top of their favorite ship or race of ships.Ugh

Anyway, good to hear you have 3 people working on it. Blob it more please and get to the BCs. Drakes are still blobbing everything else. BTW Ytterbium, I still think you should consider interim changes. And I hope you realize all the buffs you are giving to T1 frigs are going to induce more power creep or calls for it. Please let it stop at Cruisers. Last thing we need is buffs to BCs.
Tom Gerard
Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
#334 - 2012-07-26 04:28:16 UTC
Please do not buff rocket boats, there is a solid need for soft targets and rocket boats fill this niche nicely. Seriously I would never use a weapon system other than ACs and it should stay that way.

If rockets were as effective as ACs it would nerf players who did their homework, if your dumb enough to train rockets you earned your lossmail.

Now with 100% less Troll.
Sang-in Tiers
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#335 - 2012-07-26 09:44:34 UTC
Mechael wrote:
Sang-in Tiers wrote:
The changes I've seen so far looks nice, so gj there.
However I hope you will take time and look at the amarr ships because they are imo quite ******* terrible, I don't see why I would pick amarr over other races ships in most cases having problem with cap in a fight especially since it leaves you sitting just waiting to get your face smashed in unable to do anything in many cases. I feel like I really did pick the worst of the races to specialize in when I started playing and happily I've started to specialize in other ships recently but that is just because I can't stand being in such a bad spot anymore.

GL.


To be fair, Amarr ships a really badass in large fleets. Guardians really make those ships shine. They're just not that great for small gang work (along with Caldari) ... but I think that's by design. Whether it's good design or not, I'm still undecided on.


Well sucks that I was never told that when I started training it then. "WARNING THIS RACE SUCKS FOR SOLO/SMALL SCALE!" would have been appropriate, especially as I like smallscale pvp and have essentially all my ship skills/weapon skills in amarr/lasers thinking that CCP would have this under perfect control as balance is something quite crucial. :/
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#336 - 2012-07-26 10:09:39 UTC
Sang-in Tiers wrote:

Well sucks that I was never told that when I started training it then. "WARNING THIS RACE SUCKS FOR SOLO/SMALL SCALE!" would have been appropriate, especially as I like smallscale pvp and have essentially all my ship skills/weapon skills in amarr/lasers thinking that CCP would have this under perfect control as balance is something quite crucial. :/

Infact, you were warned in some way in the description of the race when you chose it.

BTW, amarr are not the best at solo/small scale dont mean they cannot do it, just they are not ideal. Consider them to be the frigate hard mode. And they also have crazy options, like the arbitrator.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#337 - 2012-07-26 15:16:17 UTC
Tom Gerard wrote:
Please do not buff rocket boats, there is a solid need for soft targets and rocket boats fill this niche nicely. Seriously I would never use a weapon system other than ACs and it should stay that way.

If rockets were as effective as ACs it would nerf players who did their homework, if your dumb enough to train rockets you earned your lossmail.


Rofl, people are so bad..

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Kitt JT
True North.
#338 - 2012-07-26 16:50:05 UTC
Tom Gerard wrote:
Please do not buff rocket boats, there is a solid need for soft targets and rocket boats fill this niche nicely. Seriously I would never use a weapon system other than ACs and it should stay that way.

If rockets were as effective as ACs it would nerf players who did their homework, if your dumb enough to train rockets you earned your lossmail.


Rocket hawk will tear apart any AC wolf or jag, but gg anyways.

As for the changes themselfes...

Look good, seems to me that t1 hulls will become increasingly relevant (cruisers plox :D)

I think the role bonus is supposed to compensate for low-skill pilots having problems with cap management. When you have a toon with all fives in engineering, it can be hard to appreciate just how much cap those tackling mods take.
Mira Lynne
State War Academy
Caldari State
#339 - 2012-07-26 17:41:57 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
1- CCP is caving quite willingly to Caldari calls for removal of the kinetic missile bonuses for rof or damage bonuses it seems, which is also another stealth Gallente nerf.

2- Condor - meant to be fast and inconguruously close range damage. So limiting the Condor's pg pushes a pilot away from making it another light missile sniping ship. It appears to be rockets and kiting with the rocket range bonus is the intent. Also, the light grid use of shield tanking mods mean grid should be limited.

1: No they arent. Condor still has Kinetic specific damage bonus.
Regarding Gallente Resists- Hybrids deal Kin/Therm, and they are used by 2 Races
2- You are reading something wrong. Limiting its PG also restricts fitting DPS/Tank/Prop, wich pushes people away from using it at all as opposed to using it in some configuration you feel is 'wrong'
Also - It has no range bonus.

Lili Lu wrote:
1-[Caldari Snipers]
2- [Drakes]


1-I have to agree with this. Depending on how you view things, Snipers shouldnt be monopolised by Caldari, and Caldari shouldnt be shoehorned into Sniping. Give Caldari More Brawlers, give other races more Snipers.

However, some things you are forgetting:
-100km Range is the ONLY Redeeming Factor of the Cormorant. Remove this, sure, but buff it in another area (say - brawling?)
-Range and Resists are conflicting bonuses, and benefit brawlers and snipers half as much as they potentially could. Range Tank needs no resists, Brawlers dont need more Range.
-What would you think is a better bonus for the Naga (instead of Damage)? Resists? On a ship type that is supposed to be max gank/no tank?
-As i said before, Condor is keeping its Kinetic Damage Bonus, and Gallente T2 Resists are Fine. Infact, they are in a better state than amarr T2 Resists.

2- Yes, we know you dont like Drakes and Tengus. The Problem is Heavy Missiles (And Partially the Tengu), but the Drake only needs MINOR nerfs

Lili Lu wrote:
Lots of people ITT asking for cherries on top of their favorite ship or race of ships

And one person trying to make sure that the only one with Cherries is themselves.

[u]I, too, horse frogs.[/u] Support the Return of Realistic Module Icons! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114818&find=unread
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#340 - 2012-07-26 17:50:07 UTC
Lili Lu wrote:
And I hope you realize all the buffs you are giving to T1 frigs are going to induce more power creep or calls for it. Please let it stop at Cruisers. Last thing we need is buffs to BCs.

Improvements to the tier 1 battlecruisers is something we very much need.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.