These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon 1.3] T1 Frigate and Cruiser Balance Pass

First post First post
Author
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#221 - 2014-03-01 22:04:26 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Milton Middleson wrote:
Quote:
Or nos/neuts can't compete with the extra range that OGB links allow?


So, you're saying we should give rifters and punishers a fitting bonus to warfare links? I'm okay with this.


Scram range is 9km. Overheated it's 10.8 km. Add links and you're pushing 13km+ or something silly. The 6.3 km range for small neuts/nos was thought up in a completely different era. Maybe it's time to rebalance their range. (8km?)

No, man, see, CCP nerfed skirmish links 3% and they are toooooootally balanced now.

Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Deerin wrote:
Can you guys also take a look at Vigil. It is the single most useless t1 frig atm. 15mbit/30m^3 drones maybe?


Minmatar e-war will be questionable unless the tracking formula is revised with more emphasis on sig radius.

Not sure that's a good idea, especially since tiny sig radius stuff is already hell to track. Not sure it's a bad idea either, though. Something does need to be done about signature radius mechanics. As they are now, they are flat values that matter fairly little outside of a situation where you're being TD'd.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Milton Middleson
Rifterlings
#222 - 2014-03-01 23:23:13 UTC
Quote:
Not sure that's a good idea, especially since tiny sig radius stuff is already hell to track. Not sure it's a bad idea either, though. Something does need to be done about signature radius mechanics. As they are now, they are flat values that matter fairly little outside of a situation where you're being TD'd.


I think you're somewhat underselling how sig radius interacts with the tracking formula. A bigger issue is how sig radius' impact scales with the size of a brawl. Any nominally speed/agility-oriented brawler (e.g. a slasher or rifter) is going to run into two issues. First, that once a fight scales past about three people on a side, the primary can expect to be scrammed and double or triple webbed or more. For an afterburner fit, that's going to cost you about 85-90% of your speed and pretty much obviate the use of your AB. Second is that the larger a brawl gets, the more difficult it becomes to maintain significant transversal vs enough enemies to justify a low-sig brawler.

Quote:
Scram range is 9km. Overheated it's 10.8 km. Add links and you're pushing 13km+ or something silly. The 6.3 km range for small neuts/nos was thought up in a completely different era. Maybe it's time to rebalance their range. (8km?)


Not sure about that. That seems more like a reason to make the effect of links less ridiculous. Increasing the range of small neuts has quite a knock-on effect (see sentinels and dragoons). On the other hand, noseferatus should probably cost less to fit, and utility high slots could stand a wider range of useful modules to go there, because right now the selection is not terribly impressive. I'm not sure what that could be, though.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#223 - 2014-03-01 23:41:53 UTC
Milton Middleson wrote:
Second is that the larger a brawl gets, the more difficult it becomes to maintain significant transversal vs enough enemies to justify a low-sig brawler.

Perhaps make sig radius a bit important in solo / small gang stuff to compensate for it not being important in big fights? That might lessen the variety of ships seen in both kinds of fight, though...

Milton Middleson wrote:

Not sure about that. That seems more like a reason to make the effect of links less ridiculous. Increasing the range of small neuts has quite a knock-on effect (see sentinels and dragoons). On the other hand, noseferatus should probably cost less to fit, and utility high slots could stand a wider range of useful modules to go there, because right now the selection is not terribly impressive. I'm not sure what that could be, though.

Seems like a perfect way to fix target painters. As a mid slot, they are redundant with webs and are almost never worth using instead of another form of EW. Move TPs to high slots, and ships that normally have nothing to fit there other than maybe a salvager can get a neat little bonus to their tracking.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#224 - 2014-03-01 23:53:56 UTC
I like the Amarr concept- they are supposed to be bricks, it makes sense that they get reduced penalties for doing so. This is an excellent direction to go.

Disappointed with the Punisher. It doesn't have anything to do with the proposed changes, which I'll be honest are very good. Instead it's due to the core design of the ship. It has a split personality. On the one hand, it seems purpose built for medium-range (5-10km) frigate fighting and range dictation, using the flexibility of lasers and high HP to fight in an opponents falloff and simply out last them. On the other side, it has only two midslots and low base speed and has absolutely no ability to dictate range.

I've been trying for ages to think of a way to make it effective without giving it a 3rd midslot, and really haven't come up with one. Neut's are good in concept to disable enemy tackle and let you dictate, and the naturally high (soon to be higher) capacitor plays into this idea. Unfortunately neut range is too short compared to scram/web range, and neut time is too long to be meaningful in most frigate fights. Current frigate DPS so high and frig v frig kill time is so short that the the old neuts have no place. An extra 500-1k base EHP on all frigates might help, by making frig v frig fights longer and thus making tactical tools (like neuts or ewar) more desirable.

In summary, either move the Punisher's utility high to midslot to let it compete with other frigates in the current paradigm, or do a rebalance on small neuts and frig v frig kill time.
Benito Arias
Angry Mustellid
Lost Obsession
#225 - 2014-03-02 01:38:10 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
RIFTER:
Removed +7.5% Small Projectile Turret tracking bonus
Added +10% Small Projectile Turret falloff bonus
+10 m/s velocity
+0.01 inertia

Funny, how many times has the Rifter been kicked in the guts? TE nerf, Attack Frigates, Combat Frigates iteration, Light Missiles? Not sure if this is enough to revive it.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#226 - 2014-03-02 15:06:36 UTC
Can't we just change the utility high on the punisher to another gun?

Its not like it has a lot of dps.. Especially not applied dps.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Naomi Anthar
#227 - 2014-03-02 23:53:41 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Can't we just change the utility high on the punisher to another gun?

Its not like it has a lot of dps.. Especially not applied dps.


I agree here completly, it's not like punisher is going to be good even with 4th gun. But sure it will suck less.
Phaade
Proioxis Assault Force
Rogue Caldari Union
#228 - 2014-03-02 23:56:14 UTC
Icarus Able wrote:
You are giving the Omen a speed buff....Its already possibly the best cruiser with excellent damage projection and enough lows to nano and Armor tank, while already having decent speed.

If anything the rupture needs a slight buff in speed and the stabber needs a bit more DPS.



Lol, the Vexor is the best cruiser. Far and away.

Omen cannot brawl, either.
Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#229 - 2014-03-03 05:42:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Zarnak Wulf
Benito Arias wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
RIFTER:
Removed +7.5% Small Projectile Turret tracking bonus
Added +10% Small Projectile Turret falloff bonus
+10 m/s velocity
+0.01 inertia

Funny, how many times has the Rifter been kicked in the guts? TE nerf, Attack Frigates, Combat Frigates iteration, Light Missiles? Not sure if this is enough to revive it.


The problem with the Rifter more then anything else is it's fitting grid. It has (base stats, no skills) 38 PG and 125 CPU. 38 is a god awful low PG for a combat frigate. Only the Breacher (missile and also Minmatar) and Tristan (9 slots) have lower PG as combat frigates at 35 each. Of the attack frigates -

Atron - 37
Executioner - 45
Condor - 35
Slasher - 35

The Rifter's CPU the lowest of all attack and combat rifters save the Punisher- which is about to be buffed past it anyways.

The Rifter in general can't fit similar to the other Combat frigates. The Incursus can fit 150mm rails or Neutron Blasters with a SAAR and not need a fitting mod or rig. The Merlin? One fitting mod to get neutrons and an MSE or MASB. The poor Rifter not only needs a fitting mod for an MSE / MASB but also has to settle for second tier 150mm AC. It probably will also fit a nano or OD simply because it's out of CPU.and arty? LOL
Goldensaver
Something Went Wrong
#230 - 2014-03-03 14:59:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Goldensaver
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Benito Arias wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
RIFTER:
Removed +7.5% Small Projectile Turret tracking bonus
Added +10% Small Projectile Turret falloff bonus
+10 m/s velocity
+0.01 inertia

Funny, how many times has the Rifter been kicked in the guts? TE nerf, Attack Frigates, Combat Frigates iteration, Light Missiles? Not sure if this is enough to revive it.


The problem with the Rifter more then anything else is it's fitting grid. It has (base stats, no skills) 38 PG and 125 CPU. 38 is a god awful low PG for a combat frigate. Only the Breacher (missile and also Minmatar) and Tristan (9 slots) have lower PG as combat frigates at 35 each. Of the attack frigates -

Atron - 37
Executioner - 45
Condor - 35
Slasher - 35

The Rifter's CPU the lowest of all attack and combat rifters save the Punisher- which is about to be buffed past it anyways.

The Rifter in general can't fit similar to the other Combat frigates. The Incursus can fit 150mm rails or Neutron Blasters with a SAAR and not need a fitting mod or rig. The Merlin? One fitting mod to get neutrons and an MSE or MASB. The poor Rifter not only needs a fitting mod for an MSE / MASB but also has to settle for second tier 150mm AC. It probably will also fit a nano or OD simply because it's out of CPU.and arty? LOL


I'm going to disagree with you in regards to the grid being poor, with it more than capable of fitting what you say it can't (MSE and 200mm's), but I will agree with regard to the **** poor CPU.

For example, you can fit it with 200mm's, an MSE and MWD with only one fitting rig:
[Rifter, Autos]
Gyrostabilizer II
Damage Control II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction

200mm AutoCannon II, EMP S
200mm AutoCannon II, EMP S
200mm AutoCannon II, EMP S
[empty high slot]

Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Small Core Defense Field Extender I
Small Ancillary Current Router I


Or you can put a Neut in the utility high for the low, low cost of an MAPC (not worth it!):
[Rifter, Autos and Neut]
Gyrostabilizer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Micro Auxiliary Power Core I

J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction

200mm AutoCannon II, EMP S
200mm AutoCannon II, EMP S
200mm AutoCannon II, EMP S
Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Small Core Defense Field Extender I
Small Core Defense Field Extender I

Even an arty Rifter isn't too bad to fit assuming you aren't trying to fit a 280mm blap cannon, only needing one fitting mod for an MSE, MWD and a full rack of 250's:
[Rifter, Arty]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core II
Tracking Enhancer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Warp Disruptor II

250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, EMP S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, EMP S
250mm Light Artillery Cannon II, EMP S
[empty high slot]

Small Polycarbon Engine Housing I
Small Core Defense Field Extender I
Small Core Defense Field Extender I



I will however have to agree that the CPU is quite low. In every fit I had to use a CPU mod or forgo a normal low and instead put in a Nano/OD. That's without even mentioning the fact that most of the mods I used were meta so as to ease up on the CPU.

The grid just isn't that bad considering that Autocannons are the easiest to fit, even the largest using the same grid as the smallest Blasters, and less grid than the smallest Pulse lasers with the largest Pulse lasers using more PG than 250's and almost as much as 280's.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#231 - 2014-03-03 20:54:05 UTC
The complaint against the Punisher is that it is bad solo. The same thing can be said about the incursus in large gangs (repping bonus vs resist bonus).
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#232 - 2014-03-03 21:36:46 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
The complaint against the Punisher is that it is bad solo. The same thing can be said about the incursus in large gangs (repping bonus vs resist bonus).


It's not that great in gangs, either. Without a scram/web combo or high dps, it does nothing for a gang that another hull doesn't do better. It might have use as an alpha resistant long-point platform, but it's low speed removes it from this role as well.

Punisher by nature is ideally suited to solo/small scale engagements. It's a brick that wins by attrition. That doesn't work in gangs, because you just get focused down. Unfortunately the Punisher lacks the required tools to operate in a solo environment.
Koujjo Dian
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#233 - 2014-03-03 21:50:42 UTC
If you want to fix the Punisher, give small neuts/nos more range. Right now any other frigate with a web and a TD will kite it to death, which is just about every frigate in FW.
Flyinghotpocket
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#234 - 2014-03-03 22:21:30 UTC
fozzie something that needs to be addressed sooner rather than later is the tristan.

As mostly only faction warfare see's this happen in massive frigate battles.

With the proposed changes to the cruor coming out. The tristan is impeding on the cruors roll. In any faction warfare battle with frigates. Tristans with 3-2 neuts dominate the fields while still having the same dps as cruors will being a meer fraction of the price. with tristans having the same ability as the cruor the cruor will almost never be used.

Someting must be changed, either the tristan gets some reduction to it cant fit 3-2 neuts or the cruor needs a significant buff to its neuting power. Most likely change is the tristan needs a reduction.

just pointing that out ccp

Amarr Militia Representative - A jar of nitro

Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#235 - 2014-03-04 00:17:40 UTC
Ines Tegator wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
The complaint against the Punisher is that it is bad solo. The same thing can be said about the incursus in large gangs (repping bonus vs resist bonus).


It's not that great in gangs, either. Without a scram/web combo or high dps, it does nothing for a gang that another hull doesn't do better. It might have use as an alpha resistant long-point platform, but it's low speed removes it from this role as well.

Punisher by nature is ideally suited to solo/small scale engagements. It's a brick that wins by attrition. That doesn't work in gangs, because you just get focused down. Unfortunately the Punisher lacks the required tools to operate in a solo environment.


The Punisher is to frigates what the Maller is to cruisers. Get a group together, back it up with logistics and perhaps links, and you have a monster. The concept just doesn't shrink down very well from the cruiser to frigate level. It's more of a lolfleet. (Who wants to run 40 14k+ EHP punisher's tonight. Guys? Guys?)
Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
Team Amarrica
#236 - 2014-03-04 00:40:25 UTC
Goldensaver wrote:


I will however have to agree that the CPU is quite low. In every fit I had to use a CPU mod or forgo a normal low and instead put in a Nano/OD. That's without even mentioning the fact that most of the mods I used were meta so as to ease up on the CPU.

The grid just isn't that bad considering that Autocannons are the easiest to fit, even the largest using the same grid as the smallest Blasters, and less grid than the smallest Pulse lasers with the largest Pulse lasers using more PG than 250's and almost as much as 280's.


The current Incursus Meta:

High:
150mm rail II x 3
Mid:
AB II
Meta scram
Meta web
Low:
F-85 DC
Adaptive nano II
SAAR
TE II
Rigs:
Hybrid Burst
Hybrid Collision

With a warrior II and faction AM overheated you are looking at 156 DPS at 10km. Buff at least one of the rifter's stats if you want it to compete with that. CPU is fine.
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#237 - 2014-03-04 01:56:52 UTC
Phaade wrote:
Icarus Able wrote:
You are giving the Omen a speed buff....Its already possibly the best cruiser with excellent damage projection and enough lows to nano and Armor tank, while already having decent speed.

If anything the rupture needs a slight buff in speed and the stabber needs a bit more DPS.



Lol, the Vexor is the best cruiser. Far and away.

Omen cannot brawl, either.


I have a sideline making Vexors and Thorax, the Vexor sells exceptionally well in gallante space.

The Ammar Abitrator, nice drone boat that it is, pales in comparison. Plus the Vexor gets a navy version. Time to give the Arbitrator some lovin' i beleive.
Ronny Hugo
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#238 - 2014-03-04 02:17:38 UTC
I'd be happier if you balanced the price of the stuff instead of the stats, having everything cost as much as it gives in performance would be a balanced gameplay. If you want to risk more isk, you can have more performance.
Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
#239 - 2014-03-04 04:12:04 UTC
Both the stabber and its t2 counterpart the vagabond needs help, other than the stabber fleet issue, the stabber and especially the vaga are shield ships.

With that being said, why does the vagabond have the slot layout of an armor cruiser? 4 midslots on a shield hac that has a shield boost bonus? It really seems dumb Im not suggesting shield bonuses for the stabber, rather a slot rearrangement. More specifically +1 midslot -1 highslot? The vaga could use an extra mid as well. The idea fits quite well with the mimatar ideal: agility ,speed, versatilty, among other things.

Another important fact: That -0.000000000000000000000000001 agility your giving the caracal is just downright offensive. Comical at best.

The caracal needs more pg and more cpu. Hams take up 70-75% of powergrid and cpu. have to use nealy all rigs, a low, and meta 4 with 3% pg implant plus genolutions.






plus, the stabber does need a bit of more dps
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!
Goldensaver
Something Went Wrong
#240 - 2014-03-04 06:26:22 UTC
Ronny Hugo wrote:
I'd be happier if you balanced the price of the stuff instead of the stats, having everything cost as much as it gives in performance would be a balanced gameplay. If you want to risk more isk, you can have more performance.

Gee, what a brilliant idea. If only there were Navy Faction and Pirate Faction ships that were exactly like that! Wouldn't that be great?

You do understand that's literally what they JUST FINISHED DOING, right? Tiericide? Killing the tiers where we had high tier, higher performing, more expensive variants of some ships? You know, how it was just a few years ago? When there was one frigate and one cruiser worth using (the Rifter and Rupture respectively). Do you remember that? I do. I'm more than glad that's changed. Rifters online was more than a little ********.

And before you go complaining that the increase in effectiveness for pirate ships for the ISK cost is too high, that's how it's supposed to be. You spend increasingly larger sums of money for decreasingly greater gains. Same thing goes for faction modules that only have a couple percentages on their Tech 2 counterpart. Tons of money for a tiny gain, because even that tiny gain can make a huge difference in the outcome of a fight.