These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Hyperion] Heavy Assault Cruiser tweaks

First post First post First post
Author
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#461 - 2014-07-30 04:53:09 UTC
Trader Vinney wrote:
To the point of the Abaddon need for change possibility this may not be the ship itself but actually the weapon systems and as some have pointed out the tough fitting requirements for this ship. For instance has anyone noticed the lack of use when it comes to the Tachyon Beam Laser II? There is a reason for this and out of the 6 ships in the game that have bonuses to this weapon system only two of them can actually fit them without going over powergrid with just the guns.

APOC and Abaddon 8 T2 Tachs fit 101.81% PG
Armageddon Navy 7 T2 Tachs fit 106.91% PG
Nestor 5 T2 Tachs fit 118.78% PG
Navy Apoc 8 T2 Tachs fit 97.19% PG
Nightmare 4 T2 Tachs fit 73.73% PG

I am not saying that the Tach is the best option for these ships well because Scorch owns but just another thought since Battleships are in discussion.




You forgot the Oracle which is bonused toward large energy turret and can fit them unless you have terrible skill.
Liam Inkuras
dead.Orbit
#462 - 2014-07-30 05:12:35 UTC
Deimos cargo buff to 400 m3 please.

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone

Trader Vinney
KoKaine Kowboys
#463 - 2014-07-30 05:22:24 UTC
[/quote]

You forgot the Oracle which is bonused toward large energy turret and can fit them unless you have terrible skill.[/quote]

Oracle slipped my mind completely for sure and I like that freaking thing just been awhile since I have been in one good call.
Altrue
Exploration Frontier inc
Tactical-Retreat
#464 - 2014-07-30 05:30:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Altrue
CCP Rise wrote:

We expect that some of you will feel this is far too gentle on the Ishtar, and we understand that (it's what we heard from the CSM as well), but we get releases very often now and we're happy to be conservative here, rather than nuke it out of the game, and just make more changes if they're needed in the following release.


Well considering that they've been so much overused recently, nuking them out then slowly buffing them wouldn't hurt, but fair point :D

On the other hand, don't you think that nerfing them a bit more would help diversify the PvP landscape of the game when it comes to HACs? (Its not just about not nerfing things to the ground, its about balancing Ishtars to give players more reasons to use other HACs in PvP.)

About the changes, I feel like they are needed but a bit underwhelming. But again, I guess that its intended since you can make changes very quickly with the new release cycle.


This speed buff on the eagle got me thinking though... My corp and I always loved to use shield blaster ships, but its always been painfully hard, especially since the Naga's speed and agility has been heavily nerfed after crucible (granted, previous stats might have made the rail version too threatening). So my question is, don't you think that there would be room for a caldari blaster ship with a real shield tank ? I can of course find some gallente HAC (or Attack Battlecruiser) and fit it with shields, but the slot layout and bonuses aren't optimal nor really viable.

Signature Tanking Best Tanking

[Ex-F] CEO - Eve-guides.fr

Ultimate Citadel Guide - 2016 EVE Career Chart

Captain Semper
FAYN Industries
Initiative Associates
#465 - 2014-07-30 05:41:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Semper
Ok CCP, listen:

Problem with Ishtars not cuase of their range or speed.
Tbh problem not with Ishtars. Problem in sentry drones themselfs! Can you understand, that cruiser with LARGE weapon (and 5 sentry is a large weapon) just broken. Let zealot fit large pulses, why not? And check resualt. This is Ishtar. Tank like a HAC (sig+armor or shield( yeah, variability and flexibility), damage like BS, pretty immune to ECM.

So, what can you do?
As i see 2 ways here (i you wont change sentry themselfs):

1) Make penalty to all crusiers while they fit sentry drones (like -30% damage (or 20) with sentry, becuase cruiser hull cant provide full support for sentry systems)
2) Change heavy drones bandwidth requirement to 20 and lower bandwidth ishtars/navy vexor/vexor to 100/100/65 (certainly it influences bigger quantity of the ships and they need a lit change)

Becuase it simple - if you nerf ishtars hard, most fleets will use domix or even slowcats. Sentry drones realy op for cruisers and pretty broken in fleet pvp.
Diivil
Magellanic Itg
Goonswarm Federation
#466 - 2014-07-30 06:31:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Diivil
CCP Rise wrote:

We expect that some of you will feel this is far too gentle on the Ishtar, and we understand that (it's what we heard from the CSM as well), but we get releases very often now and we're happy to be conservative here, rather than nuke it out of the game, and just make more changes if they're needed in the following release.


Someone said this already before but it needs repeating. You say that you are doing this and then there was not a single ship balancing change in Crius. You are not off to a good start. CCP never keeps these kinds of promises anyway and we have a decade long track record to prove it. At least make a meaningful change to Ishtar now because we are sure to be stuck with it at least until January.
Adrie Atticus
Circle Mercs
#467 - 2014-07-30 06:36:48 UTC
Good morning Rise & Fozzie, how's the weather?

Nice, nice...

Now back to work, fix sentries:

You need to be within 5000m of a sentry drone to issue commands to it.

PvE: not affected
PvP: affected
Ishtar: bombed
QT McWhiskers
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#468 - 2014-07-30 07:23:33 UTC
I have two ideas for the ishtar.

1. Decrease the bandwidth from 125 to 100. This way it can only deploy 4 sentries or heavies. (apply this change to vexor and vexor navy as well.)

2. Remove two mid slots and give it two low slots.

The first is simply a way to nerf the dps it can throw it to make the ship less desirable. The second would turn the ship into an armor tanker. Slower moving and more easily killable as it cant outrun most cruisers on field.
Obsidian Hawk
RONA Midgard Academy
RONA Directorate
#469 - 2014-07-30 07:27:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Obsidian Hawk
Ok after 24 pages of whining and complaining i have come to one conclusion

People whine over everything and post some stupid solutions. Over 8 years the ishtar has always been a great ship and its ability to use all sorts have drones and wide variety of fits have made it perfect for almost any situation. On that note with the the extreme usefulness of it with sentries there is a logical solution.

Fitting / slots - Nothing wrong with these, there has never been anything wrong with these since the isthar was put into the game. Don't fix what isnt broke.
Bandwidth - nothing wrong with it. nothing to change here.

Now what to do about the isthar.... The most whining comes about sentry drones. So what is the best solution?
ArrowAdjust the tracking bonus on the isthar
ArrowAdjust tracking on sentries

Maybe change the bonus to 3.5% on the ishtar for sentry tracking and lower sentry tracking speed by 3.5% also.

It's a nerf but not a nerf to uselessness. Sentries would become only really useful against BC / BS and CAPS leaving smaller ships to take on the ishtar itself.

Or if that doesnt work. just a 3.5% to sentry range and tracking, this would still limit the range and keep targets to the larger variety and sniper bs would be able to take them on.

However with the reduction to 5% i do think you will see a visible change in all aspects of combat.

Remember the goal is balance, not nerf the ship out of the game just because you dont like it.

/ishtar pilot since 2008

Why Can't I have a picture signature.

Also please support graphical immersion, bring back the art that brought people to EvE online originaly.

Azure Rayl
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#470 - 2014-07-30 07:41:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Azure Rayl
Why not drop the ishtar's drone bandwidth to 100mbit/sec . Nothing else would need to be changed then :P
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#471 - 2014-07-30 07:42:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Liafcipe9000
making the ishtar slower is really against the idea of HACs being fast and versatile. I don't mind the tracking bonus reduction but speed reduction really goes against what HACs should be, especially when it comes to Minmatar and Gallente ships.

I did hope that the Vagabond would get a damage INCREASE, given the fact that 3 gyros still give it less than 600 DPS. (At least for me it does.) this is a bad thing IMO due to the fact that other HACs can deal at least 20% more DPS at a longer range than the Vagabond, which seems to make it basically one of the lowest DPS and shortest range HACs in existence currently.

take for example the Ishtar. with its 100KM targeting range and extremely long drone control range which goes beyond its targeting range when fitted with 2 drone control range augmentors and your Gardes can do over 700 DPS at more than twice the falloff range of the Vagabond and Bouncers deal over 600 DPS at 4x longer.

And don't get me started on the range that Heavy Missiles get with the Cerberus.
Skia Aumer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#472 - 2014-07-30 07:43:21 UTC
A simple test to know if enormous drawback is working as intended.
If tomorrow they reduce sentry drone EHP by 50%, would you still be using them?
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#473 - 2014-07-30 07:44:09 UTC
The Ishtar is currently so overpowered that there are pretty much only three reasons to ever fly any other non frigate subcap:

1. Cost. Its 200m and doesn't insure well.
2. SP. You need a ton to fly it effectively.
3. You need a ship with cloaking, ewar, or tackle bonuses.

Other than that, Ishtar is king.

The extreme amounts of SP needed for the Ishtar is also a real problem. Most ships cap out in effectiveness after you invest a few million SP, the Ishtar does not. You can easily dump 20m SP into Ishtar related skills and still have room for significant improvement. A great example of this is exploration, it can scan down and then run 10/10s by itself.....if you have all V probing skills to scan down 1/80 complexes in an unbonused ship.
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#474 - 2014-07-30 07:45:11 UTC
Skia Aumer wrote:
A simple test to know if enormous drawback is working as intended.
If tomorrow they reduce sentry drone EHP by 50%, would you still be using them?

I would because range.
Danny John-Peter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#475 - 2014-07-30 07:55:27 UTC
The Vagabond continues to be a **** kiter with only a Niche for super linked 100MN fits or killing bads.

Drop Shield boost bonus for second falloff bonus TIA.
QT McWhiskers
Brave Newbies Inc.
Brave Collective
#476 - 2014-07-30 07:59:02 UTC
Azure Rayl wrote:
Why not drop the ishtar's drone bandwidth to 100mbit/sec . Nothing else would need to be changed then :P


Other than gimping the DPS down quite a bit. All level 5 with 2 dda do 621 with garde 2. You take away 1 garde and it does 497. Thats 124 dps taken away. A fleet of 30 ishtars lose 3720 dps. This is a significant hit.


This also is a soft nerf to the ishtar making the ship only slightly less desirable while at the same time removing the ability for smaller numbers of ishtars to accomplish what they were once used to. Still a powerful ship, just not as powerful.
Captain Semper
FAYN Industries
Initiative Associates
#477 - 2014-07-30 08:11:24 UTC
Obsidian Hawk wrote:
Ok after 24 pages of whining and complaining i have come to one conclusion

People whine over everything and post some stupid solutions. Over 8 years the ishtar has always been a great ship and its ability to use all sorts have drones and wide variety of fits have made it perfect for almost any situation. On that note with the the extreme usefulness of it with sentries there is a logical solution.

Fitting / slots - Nothing wrong with these, there has never been anything wrong with these since the isthar was put into the game. Don't fix what isnt broke.
Bandwidth - nothing wrong with it. nothing to change here.

Now what to do about the isthar.... The most whining comes about sentry drones. So what is the best solution?
ArrowAdjust the tracking bonus on the isthar
ArrowAdjust tracking on sentries

Maybe change the bonus to 3.5% on the ishtar for sentry tracking and lower sentry tracking speed by 3.5% also.

It's a nerf but not a nerf to uselessness. Sentries would become only really useful against BC / BS and CAPS leaving smaller ships to take on the ishtar itself.

Or if that doesnt work. just a 3.5% to sentry range and tracking, this would still limit the range and keep targets to the larger variety and sniper bs would be able to take them on.

However with the reduction to 5% i do think you will see a visible change in all aspects of combat.

Remember the goal is balance, not nerf the ship out of the game just because you dont like it.

/ishtar pilot since 2008

So... Large weapon on cruiser size is ok? Well, i want large pulses on zealot.
PS: Medium sentry is a realy good idea.
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#478 - 2014-07-30 08:11:35 UTC
Mr Rive wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

"Battleships are not in a good place, you crazy Rise" - an important distinction here is that I meant battleships are in a relatively good place WITHIN the class. Whether or not they are healthy relative to other classes is more complicated, but if there's issues there (because of bombers for instance) we would more likely want to deal with that problem from the other direction (by making changes to bombers for instance) rather than changing every BS to compensate. Between Duckslayer's insults he mentioned MWD cap use on BS being a problem which I agree with and I may try to get a change for that in shortly.



Keep it comin


You're going about this in completely the wrong way dude. You can't say that battleships are okay within the class, as battleships are designed to be versatile and cheap enough to engage other kinds of fleet comps. They aren't either of these things. Its goddamn crazy that a tengu costs as much to buy and fit out as an abaddon, for instance.

I wrote this really long post about why battleships need boosting or making cheaper, but it's gotten lost because CCP's forums are terrible.

Tl;DR, battleships have and will never exist within a vaccum, and in the current meta they are goddamned terrible and anyone who uses them in a fleet is an idiot. They need buffing, and making cheaper.

inb4 ye olde 50 mil isk domi and laser geddons
Claud Tiberius
#479 - 2014-07-30 08:12:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Claud Tiberius
8/4/7 Tempest sounds good. Make it so.

Speaking of HACs .. the Vag needs some love. Lol Maybe more shield/shield regen (signature stays the same).

Edit: On second thoughts, I don't think the slot change is enough for the tempest. It needs a bigger buff.

Once upon a time the Golem had a Raven hull and it looked good. Then it transformed into a plataduck. The end.

Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#480 - 2014-07-30 08:22:48 UTC
Taleden wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
Why isn't anyone discussing Eagle changes, is it because no one cares about Eagles.


i have in this thread and the original thread .. i got ignored then and will probably now..

some drones and plenty more speed for a blaster option too be viable..


The Eagle does also need some love beyond a nominal speed increase. A 25m3 drone bay and a better damage bonus to put its rail DPS on par with the Deimos would go a long way.

As it stands, is there *ever* a compelling reason to use an Eagle over a Deimos? I can't see a niche for cruiser gun sniping, since at snipe ranges the sig/tracking of the guns doesn't matter so much, so wouldn't you just snipe in a Naga instead?

EDIT: The Eagle/Deimos comparison is even stranger as I think more about that drone bay. The Deimos is tailored for blasters which can hit smaller targets, and also gets the bay and bandwidth for light or medium drones for the same purpose; meanwhile the Eagle is tailored for rails which cannot hit small targets up close, and is also denied any drones at all, making it doubly vulnerable to smaller attackers. What's the logic there?

It's the same 'logic' of denying the Zealot a drone bay when the omen and the ONI get comparably large drone bays.