These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers

First post First post
Author
#301 - 2013-07-18 15:44:41 UTC
Tsubutai wrote:
darius mclever wrote:
Tsubutai wrote:
I'd rather see the Cerb lose its silly drone bay and have the kinetic damage bonus swapped to an all-flavor damage bonus in exchange, but I think it'll be in a pretty good place overall as long as the double range bonus is applied to light missiles as well as heavies and HAMs, and that it should be a very viable skirmisher. The double range bonus is excessive for heavies, but it's excellent for lights and HAMs.


cerb has a drone bay?


The OP wrote:

CERBERUS
...

Drones (bandwidth / bay): 15(+15) / 15(+15)


ugh that lol dronebay is annoying on the caracal/sacri atm.

decent drone bay/bandwidth (25/25) or leave it out. imho.
C C P Alliance
#302 - 2013-07-18 15:44:50 UTC
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.

@ccp_rise

#303 - 2013-07-18 15:46:34 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.

What about drones in general? Has that even been brought up during a discussion?

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Rote Kapelle
#304 - 2013-07-18 15:47:08 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.
Make sure and chat about its (and other) lol bonuses too!

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Gallente Federation
#305 - 2013-07-18 15:48:01 UTC
what they should of did is of the 2 HACS for each race make one for this gawd awful AHAC role, And one for nano kiting role.
#306 - 2013-07-18 15:48:02 UTC
why has the zealot still no dronebay?

i'm REALY miss the old stuff. 

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=24183

Federation Uprising
#307 - 2013-07-18 15:48:12 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.


I was just about to ask for the stats on how many times Ishtar has been mentioned in this thread compared to the other ships ;-)
#308 - 2013-07-18 15:48:53 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.

What about drones in general? Has that even been brought up during a discussion?


We, the Gallente, have been forgotten about in regards to our secondary dps type: drones.

The interface hasn't changed at all in how many years? While the guns et all get fancy tooltips and crap.

[b]THE KING OF EVE RADIO

If EVE is real, does that mean all of us are RMTrs?[/b]

#309 - 2013-07-18 15:49:33 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.


Hey since you're turning the Vaga into an active brawler can you up its cargobay
#310 - 2013-07-18 15:49:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.


How about asking them ... whats the differences between HACS and HICS? and then
What is the specific specialization of the HAC? and is this better than other options out there?
What unique role could we give to HACS?

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

#311 - 2013-07-18 15:50:47 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright I've been pretty busy today but I'm trying to catch up on feedback. Here's some initial thoughts:

I'll look at the Ishtar fitting. To me it seems like one of the stronger HACs already and it gained a bonus to damage projection and application so I didn't see a need to give it even more buffs. I don't think of it as a ship that ought to be running medium sized mods in all its high slots. All that said, I'll have another look.


Have a look at the fit I posted with the old stats. It is still valid because the CPU has not changed at all.
It has ions, a small neut, and a small vamp.
And a CPU upgrade unit, a CPU rig, and faction shield extenders, BECAUSE THE CPU ON THE BOAT IS GARBAGE.
So who says anything about using all med mods on a ship? The PG and cap would not support it anyway.
Plus, will be real interesting trying to fit 4 medium guns in the 4 turret slots on the Ishtar. But are you seriously saying we should not fit med guns to a cruiser hull?

Quote:

On a related note: someone commented that because HACs with MWD active have larger sig than battleship gun resolution the role bonus is useless. This is not true and I recommend you hop over to the medium weapon balance thread and read some of the explanation for the way tracking works to find out why.


I am not talking about tracking speed.
And yes, I have read the part in Azual Skoll's blog before where he pulls up a formula where the percentage chance of a hit is defined by the inverse square of the sig res of the gun / sig radius of the ship.
If you are going to tell me that decreasing the sig of the ship from 600% when the ship has MwD on, to 350% when the MwD is on, when the sig of the ship is STILL LARGER than the sig res of he guns, I remain firmly unconvinced. Oh, and BTW, this older post of Azual's indicates that the ease of tracking a target becomes pretty much irrelevant when the sig of the target is larger than the sig res of the guns. http://www.evealtruist.com/2011/12/truth-about-signature-resolution.html

Quote:

Generally on the role of HACs I think theres a lot of disagreement because people seem to have different ideas of what they are supposed to do. The easiest thing to say on this is that they are not supposed to out-perform t1 or faction cruisers in every way. With this role bonus addition we are really emphasizing that they are supposed to be harder to kill than t1 or faction variations, which is true also for Assault Frigs. They have much better effective HP coming from both base HP and resists. This lends them to both large fleets, where they can be very difficult to kill, or small engagements where they provide a great platform for both primary damage and anti-support which isn't nearly as easy to kill as lower tech variations.


So is it your position that HAC's are supposed to have more EHP than their T1 counterparts, and DPS is not a factor?
Or are HAC's to be superior to their T1 counterparts in a small gang or solo confrontation, when factoring in survivability and DPS, and tackling capabilities?

How do YOU define the role?

Quote:

Keep it coming, glad that a lot of you seem excited


I am sure that Marie Antoinette was "glad that a lot of you seem excited" when she saw the mob coming for her.
#312 - 2013-07-18 15:50:55 UTC
TheButcherPete wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.

What about drones in general? Has that even been brought up during a discussion?


We, the Gallente, have been forgotten about in regards to our secondary dps type: drones.

The interface hasn't changed at all in how many years? While the guns et all get fancy tooltips and crap.

Well I just checked the thread in my sig, it has been around for almost a year now.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Goonswarm Federation
#313 - 2013-07-18 15:51:05 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.



please say your also chatting about the now worst hac the sac

OMG when can i get a pic here

Caldari State
#314 - 2013-07-18 15:52:08 UTC
All HACs should come with a special ship maintenance bay that holds only the associated AF. So when you die, you are launched out in the AF to immediately seek revenge. Twisted
Quam'Nocent
#315 - 2013-07-18 15:52:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Enthes goldhart
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Enthes goldhart wrote:
For the Deimos PLEASE DONT TAKE MY 6TH HIGH SLOT! It desperately needs this for NOS due to the amount of neuts in the game. You did this for the Megathron and it worked as Megathrons always have cap boosters fitted due to the MWD, however with the cap bonus to the MWD the Deimos doesn’t need a cap booster taking away that high slot forces it to have one or risk being shutdown. This would really hurt the passive Deimos setups.


The rest of the changes look good mostly though i feel they might not have gone far enough compared to their T1 and navy counterparts. (I would have liked to see and increase to sensor strength to stop those pesky ecm drones)
ooster taking away that high slot forces it to have one or risk being shutdown


A medium nos is only an effective counter to 1 small neut, and it uses up pretty much all of your powergrid. Utility highslots are going to continue to be worse than mids/lows for the forseeable future.


I run a small nos and it works perfectly. If it can cycle twice (3 second cycle timer compared to med neut's 12) it allows you to fire all your guns allowing you to stay in a fight and keep something tackled. This is one of the few ships a Utility highslot is valuable as a brawler.
Gallente Federation
#316 - 2013-07-18 15:52:37 UTC
im not against heavy drones as a prime weapon system. The problem is mediums are fast enough but totally blows for dps to the tune of would need more of a drone damage bonus currently on any ship to work. but that bonus would ofc overpower heavies. The other problem is heavies have good damage, but cannot in anyway chase down and apply damage to BC's and below cept armor brick tanks.
Minmatar Republic
#317 - 2013-07-18 15:52:45 UTC
Gustav Mannfred wrote:
why has the zealot still no dronebay?


Because it already has the best damage application in the class, as well as one of the best tanks.

Drones would make it overpowered.

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.

#318 - 2013-07-18 15:53:17 UTC
Smoking Blunts wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.



please say your also chatting about the now worst hac the sac


I would still bet on the eagle being the worst.

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

Rote Kapelle
#319 - 2013-07-18 15:53:34 UTC
Gustav Mannfred wrote:
why has the zealot still no dronebay?
Because the Zealot was and is damn-near perfect. Not every ship is meant to be a solo boat.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Shadow Cartel
#320 - 2013-07-18 15:54:26 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I'm currently chatting with CSM and some other game design folk about working on the Ishtar a bit. Probably no update on what we come to as a conclusion until tomorrowish.


You should probably ignore what the CSM say, they're all bad at pvp.
Forum Jump