These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kane Fenris
NWP
#201 - 2013-07-29 15:59:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Kane Fenris
CCP Rise wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:
@ CCP


so you wont fix the vagabond problem that it has to use barrage to do any dmg?
this problem keeps it from fullfilling its role as point range kiter, but it seems you feel diffrent about this.

and i strongly believe the stats of beeing one of the most used cruisers is just an afterglow of its former glorious days



Rise is happy with a brawling Vaga because of his precious XLASB vaga that he made a video about. Too bad we aren't all Kil2.


Would love to see this video if you can link it for me =)

Generally pretty happy with this feedback. Little nervous about Ishtar and Cerb because of everyone being so happy, but hopefully we haven't gone too far.

For those of you concerned with Vaga I have to say your expectations are a bit over the top, except the complaint that the Cynabal is too good relative to Vaga, which I already said I agree with.

Sacrilege folks seem a bit divided depending on how they imagine using it and I promise to keep an eye on the active capabilities following the cap adjustment once people get to start using it, but I think it will be fine.


over the top? ( i never meant to restore it to its op times opness)
i woul trade in a lot for just haveingt better dmg/ ammo choice while flying the vaga.
i hate barrage cause its a curse to minmatar ship design.
id love to have more flexibility in ammo (sure some purposes would need to use barrage) but esp since the nerf (but not just because of it) barrage is the only choice you have cause its the only way to make most intresting minnie ships work.


some kind off toppic...:
the only thing barrage should be is a ammo which allows to shoot acs a little but further in case of emergencys.
not being the only way to kite effective.
my ideas how to fix this by giveing med arty the role of med range kite weapon (would need some fixes) but would add amo flexibility and nice alpha vs trade of ppl could get under their guns which should be the counter to a true kite ship rather than to outlast it

[edit]
i m not implying that arty would be the only way to fix the problem so if you dont like the idea dont tell me my proposal is **** if you agree with the problem
Kais Fiddler
Perkone
Caldari State
#202 - 2013-07-29 16:00:13 UTC
Tuxedo Catfish wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Why is a tracking bonud compelling on a thorax but not a diemos?


Because Thorax doesn't also have a falloff bonus and a second damage bonus. The combination would just be way too much on the Deimos.


I missed this the first time around.

The Muninn has a double damage, range, and tracking bonus, and yet remains a niche doctrine ship at best. I really don't see how the Deimos, with inferior alpha and a falloff bonus instead of optimal, would end up being overpowered in the same context.

CCP Rise could you address this? I don't see a real concern over the deimos getting a tracking bonus. I'd love to try using a deimos as an anti-support ship, but as it stands its only use is as a quickly killed brawler which gets a quirky cap bonus if using an MWD. Not exactly something you'd see often in anything other than a gate camp gang in null sec.
Bishop Xsi
Hotel Culiacan
#203 - 2013-07-29 16:01:18 UTC

Quote:
All HACs will gain 7-8 sensor strength, putting their average Sensor Strength at 22 which is right around combat battleship range.
All HACs gain 15k to 25k lock range
All HACs have their cap recharge per second set to around 5.5 rather than the former 3.5 - 4.5 cap/sec


I really like these buffs coupled with the MWD sig radius bonus. The combination allows these hulls to mitigate -- but not eliminate -- various ewar effects, which gives them a greater degree of freedom in choosing engagements.

That's exactly the kind of balancing I want to see for specialized ships (even though I didn't know I wanted it until now).
Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#204 - 2013-07-29 16:01:28 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Pesadel0 wrote:
Lul our expectations are a bit over the top on a ship that is supposedly shield tanking with 4 meds?And really nerfing the cyna wont make people fly more the vaga , what will make them is move to better ships at speed/agi skirmish.

What you dont seem to grasp is , if you want the vaga to brawl take one low and put one med, or leave it has is and give it another bonus, agi,speed, whatever.

Ships are shield tanking with 4 med slot for years with great success...



Ohh really..
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#205 - 2013-07-29 16:02:05 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
CCP Rise wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:
@ CCP


so you wont fix the vagabond problem that it has to use barrage to do any dmg?
this problem keeps it from fullfilling its role as point range kiter, but it seems you feel diffrent about this.

and i strongly believe the stats of beeing one of the most used cruisers is just an afterglow of its former glorious days



Rise is happy with a brawling Vaga because of his precious XLASB vaga that he made a video about. Too bad we aren't all Kil2.


Would love to see this video if you can link it for me =)

Generally pretty happy with this feedback. Little nervous about Ishtar and Cerb because of everyone being so happy, but hopefully we haven't gone too far.

For those of you concerned with Vaga I have to say your expectations are a bit over the top, except the complaint that the Cynabal is too good relative to Vaga, which I already said I agree with.

Sacrilege folks seem a bit divided depending on how they imagine using it and I promise to keep an eye on the active capabilities following the cap adjustment once people get to start using it, but I think it will be fine.


All right, someone did a video with a dual prop XLASB Vaga, and it did well. Ofc these videos are done by people who could fly an eagle and kill a 20 man blob.

We'll see how the new Vaga performs but I'm not getting my hopes up for something that beats the Cynabal in the original kiting role.

The sensor strength bonus was a good move though. I don't see it making HACs worth the price though, especially given how good T1 cruisers and ABCs are when cost is considered.

Edit: I do think the Vaga should be a viable kiting ship, something that it can't currently do (*cough* Cynabal) effectively, but it also isn't a particularly effective brawling hull, not with an ASB.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#206 - 2013-07-29 16:03:23 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
Question Rise.. can you tell us what are the LIKELY next classes that you shall visit? (not askign for ay time, just which direction.. completing t2 cruisers before moving of size? )


I can't be specific, but I can tell you that you should be watching for a post from Fozzie coming up soon =)


Soon or Soon (TM)? Smile

Edit: Aww someone beat me to it. *Facepalm*

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#207 - 2013-07-29 16:07:01 UTC
Zdat job on Ishtar: very good, I still have trouble with definition of this HAC using battleship guns (sentries/heavies) but looks sexy now

Zdat job on the Sac: me likes, dmg projection and application was a serious issue on top of being a slug, now it's clearly better.

Zdat job on Vagabond: Zip Zap yabadaba doo !! 295m/s base speed? - looks at Cynabals :sharkteethsmile:

Zdat job on Cerberus: so if I understood correctly "Missile bonus" means RL/HM/HAM? -and zdat little speed boost, very good.

Deimos, you know when you see something ok but you don't know why you're not satisfied? - looks better for that little speed bonus, while the overall EHP loss me thinks it's a bit too heavy, mixed feelings here.

Eagle: well rails/mwd fitted doesn't matter how fast it goes but how agile (turn maneuver warp off etc) still looks the HACs red haired child (no disrespect or mocking), blasters will have a nice dmg projection, good tank, maybe in numbers can be a very good alternative to Deimos "in tha face" setups

Zealot: well as you said it's a very good ship, it has always been so it's just getting better, faster and getting better guns so, good.

Also: Mr Rise, why do you guys have the feeling HACs don't deserve a 3rd rig slot? -common opinion is taht this wouldn't make them any more versatile at their role than T3's but would reinforce one of their major abilities, either more dmg or tank and thus help them make their place more comfortable vs T3's dps abilities (T2's should have more dmg but not sustainable because T3's can mitigate quite well incoming dmg with sign/resists and buffer while delivering decent dps)

Thx for taking some time to answer this rig point eventually.



removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Nyancat Audeles
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#208 - 2013-07-29 16:07:03 UTC
Chessur wrote:
I am very, very shocked by the complete disregard to any of the advice given to you on the forums.

Sac: Again, 50% MWD bonus is a waste (you even admit this yourself)
- No damage application bonus. HAM / HML Is useless unless you have hard tackle on a target
- Speed: Still one of the slowest cruisers out there.
- Missile velocity bonus: Again CCP, why do you need increased velocity if they only thing this ship can do is brawl? Really another poor, and barckward choice.
- Needs another low slot.

Zealot:
- No change in its pathetic cap
- Still slow as hell, completely eclipsed by the Nomen
- MWD sig bonus is wasted here again, because most zealots used in fleet are AB

Vagabond:
- I am easily the most shocked with this change.
- The fastest cruiser by far
- Still retains the OP shield boost bonus

Start training for your vagas boys.


THIS
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#209 - 2013-07-29 16:10:36 UTC
I like the clearer role distinction and the bonuses you added across the board. They add some bang for your buck that the 50% MWD sig role bonus does not.

I think your graph clearly illustrates that there is a very minor, temporary and situational bonus imparted with a seemingly large 50% number.

I think your graph also clearly illustrates how hard you guys nerfed the **** out of HML drakes*.

I think the Ishtar is happier now than the last round, and improved overall. But I saw what you did there reducing 10% into two 7.5% bonuses that can never be used at the same time. Ishtar will still has unhappy for missing bonuses AND missing a slot.


*HML-anything really

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
HazeInADaze
Safari Hunt Club
#210 - 2013-07-29 16:11:28 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:


Generally pretty happy with this feedback. Little nervous about Ishtar and Cerb because of everyone being so happy, but hopefully we haven't gone too far.

For those of you concerned with Vaga I have to say your expectations are a bit over the top, except the complaint that the Cynabal is too good relative to Vaga, which I already said I agree with.



I think the cerb and Ishtar are now upgrades like the zealot is over the omen. And I think that us just fine - climbing into a HAC should feel like power.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#211 - 2013-07-29 16:12:10 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

Would love to see this video if you can link it for me =)

Generally pretty happy with this feedback. Little nervous about Ishtar and Cerb because of everyone being so happy, but hopefully we haven't gone too far.

Don't worry about it. We were all devastated when the first iteration came with the same bad CPU, and we are all just jumping for joy because it got what it should get.

It can only ever use 3 bonuses as well (yeah guys it's "bonuses" not boni. Get it right), so that limits it a bit. And drones can go pop :)

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#212 - 2013-07-29 16:12:40 UTC

Why is the diemos' HP/EHP taking such a huge hit?

While the "extra" shields certainly help shield versions, the TWEED version (dual prop AHAC essentially) really focuses on close range brawling. Losing 20% of it's hull (-536 of 2536), and 15% of its armor HP (-290 of 2040) seems like pretty hefty hits for an extra 190 shields.

What is your reasoning for such a brutal reduction?
Edward Pierce
State War Academy
Caldari State
#213 - 2013-07-29 16:12:58 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

Let me say a few things here about the shield boost bonus and why we chose it. We wanted to replace the outdated base speed bonus with something that would be fun and interesting but wouldn't have a huge effect on the power of the ship, as it was already the second most used HAC. CCP Fozzie suggest shield boost amount because it matches up nicely with other Minmatar ships, provides some fun new potential, and is relatively low risk because of its small impact at larger scales. For some reason this has been interpreted by many as a repurposing of the Vagabond as a brawler. IT IS NOT, I PROMISE. If I was going to use the new Vagabond, I would be looking to do the same exact thing that its always been good at - skirmish. However, I would be excited about the fact that you can replace one of your large shield extenders with a large ancillary shield booster, which in one reload creates more hitpoints than the extender (before links/boosters/heat which make it even better), but can be reloaded over the course of a long fight. The Vaga is actually extremely good at taking advantage of that potential because of being able to control its time in the engagement with its impressive speed. If this doesn't sound attractive, ignore the active bonus! The ship will perform exactly as it always has with the double extender fit except now it mitigates tons of damage because of the role bonus.

Vagabond gets to lose it's outdated bonus but not the Deimos?

The Deimos should lose that MWD cap bonus and have it integrated into the hull; replace it with another "harmless bonus" like active armor rep bonus so it doesn't get terribly unbalanced.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#214 - 2013-07-29 16:13:04 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Generally pretty happy with this feedback. Little nervous about Ishtar and Cerb because of everyone being so happy, but hopefully we haven't gone too far.

It is only because I was still in bed ;)

The Ishtar still suffers from the (ridiculous) -1 slot, in this case a low slot.
It was welcomed to see the MWD bonus only apply to the heavy drones as a 7.5% bonus really screws with my light drones on my Proteus. With a single DNC it puts Ogre II MWD velocity up to 1800m/s which is fast enough to catch most cruisers.

The Deimos could have used the 10% falloff changed to 7.5% tracking, a much better bonus IMO

If I may ask, will you be removing 1 slot form all advanced cruisers? If not why are HAC not getting +1 slot all around?

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Lucien Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#215 - 2013-07-29 16:14:20 UTC
DeadDuck wrote:
Lucien Cain wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
So, the Sacrilege still has a useless high slot, and no ability to tank in the lows if it wants any level of decent damage... awesome.

Remove the high slot, add a low slot. It's currently -2 low slots on the zealot, and has a bonus that only recovers one of those slots tank wise. How can you expect it to be a brawler if it's tank is garbage. You already hurt it's tank with the resist bonus changes.


I suppose we can all agree that adding a 6th low(without removing the 6th High) would be the most appealing change to the whole SAC issue. A very doable adjustment i might add. :-)


Actually let it stay with the current slot layout. Adds a ton of flexibility to the number of valid setups that you will be able to use in TQ.


Or add a 5th Mid and turn it into a veritable shield Tanker! Maximum flexibility there. Now that would be ridiculous....right? Seriously, all the SAC needs is a 6th low and it will be perfect without making it OP.
NetheranE
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#216 - 2013-07-29 16:15:41 UTC  |  Edited by: NetheranE
The only positive changes I am taking away from this after my first read are this:

>Sensor strength buffing was an excellent idea to help their EWAR capacity

>The Ishtar fitting additions are beautiful

>You rolled the bay bonus into the hull on the Ishtar

>Bringing the Vaga's speed back up was a calculated nod to us bittervets

>You didnt shitter on the Zealot


However, the negatives I took are still far more numerous. These changes are still not quite enough.

>They still have crap EHP

>Buffing their sensor strength, lock range and a bit of cap DOES NOT give them a distinct "role"

>You stuck with the terrible MWD bonus. Seriously, half these ships wont be running that module under any tolerable fire, 'cause they'll in the thick of it.... Much "hurr" with this one.

>You gave the Ishtar a fair slap in the face with the weird sentry/heavy bonus split. This makes it worse than the Domi, and the Ishtar is a SPECIALIZED drone ship, and the Domi is a GENERALIZED combat battleship. :CCPRISE:

>Velocity bonus on the Sacrilege, and you took away it superior cap? FFS RIIISEEEEEEEEEE

>What the hell with the Eagle's speed? Seriously, its not hard to buff it to being around 190. Why is this a problem, or are you getting paid by the CSM Nullbears to make it a purely NullSec fleet ship?

>"No compelling bonus" for the Deimos? Tracking?

>Seriously, velocity on the Sacrilege? I think I'm going to cry myself to sleep tonight.

>Lawl. Muninn. That should be slang for "runt" or "pathetic animal" in EVE.


While I applaud you for Round 2's signs of slightly more potential, but I'm beginning to think this is really no better on a ship-by-ship basis. Actually in someways, I'm thinking its worse...
Hell, at this point, at a ship by ship basis, I think this is worse than what you did in Round 1.
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#217 - 2013-07-29 16:18:50 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

For those of you concerned with Vaga I have to say your expectations are a bit over the top, except the complaint that the Cynabal is too good relative to Vaga, which I already said I agree with.


A sensible PWG boost isn't really "over the top", considering the possible Vagabond fits all require a ridiculous amount of fitting implants/T2 ACRs and whatnot.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#218 - 2013-07-29 16:18:56 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

Why is the diemos' HP/EHP taking such a huge hit?

While the "extra" shields certainly help shield versions, the TWEED version (dual prop AHAC essentially) really focuses on close range brawling. Losing 20% of it's hull (-536 of 2536), and 15% of its armor HP (-290 of 2040) seems like pretty hefty hits for an extra 190 shields.

What is your reasoning for such a brutal reduction?
Obviously because Deimos is vastly overpowered on TQ.

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

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

Lord Sheer
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#219 - 2013-07-29 16:19:20 UTC
Much improved, although I still think the high cost of HACs justifies a little more EHP.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#220 - 2013-07-29 16:19:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
RISE

close but no cigar.. here's why 15 slots is still workable if you gave stronger damage bonuses like bc's got 10% and would free up slots for lows or mids as ships like sacrilege and eagle need an extra low.
Damage in general is still not very compelling for the extra price over navy cruisers or ABC's etc.
Also is price being considered as 150-200mil is too much even with the improvements.

Eagle
you're missing a playstyle out here the blaster 20km kiter is very difficult to achieve with poor damage(no drones don't help) and the still shockingly low speed and the extra low for a TE or nano is needed.

Sacrilege
is still missing the 6th low it needs and more mobility combined with better dps would be nice but grats on the bonus change.

Muninn
have you considered a falloff bonus here? a armour vaga as arties still work well with falloff bonus.a la Tornado

Cerberus
is better it needed speed but i would still switch its useless flight time to explosion velocity.. seriously 200km HM's why?????

Deimos
replace mwd cap bonus with a falloff bonus or remove it and increase the falloff bonus to 15%. also its still too slow for blaster boat

Ishtar
very pleased you listened here it needed some proper attention.. CPU especially and the 7.5% instead of 10% as the domi's is OP really.. which brings me too sentries in general .. well gardes and curators .. as they do what ogre's do but with much better range and more applicable dps without the danger of being smartbombed or picked off by frigs and the travel time.

Last thing is the sig radius is still too low irrelevant of using mwd 150 on deimos is mad!!!
Have you considered any new skills to reduce sig radius (Extenders/mwd) which i have mentioned but got no reply in other thread?

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