These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance

First post First post First post
Author
Jezza McWaffle
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#521 - 2015-09-24 07:44:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Jezza McWaffle
I've looked at some of these changes now in Pyfa so I can get an idea of what is viable and what isn't. The tank on the Navy Drake (shield) and the Navy Brutix (hull) is insane, and I think the other ships need to be buffed slightly in base HP to compensate, when you can easily hit the 100K mark on the Navy Drake yet the Harb for instance lacks behind massively it feels at odd ends.

The Fleet Cane needs more PG and especially CPU in my opinion, I had trouble getting an arty fit to work that included any tank, and thats without putting anything in the 2 spare highs, and with an armour auto fit I had exactly the same problem.

The regular Harb feels like it could do with a slight PG buff (maybe by +60) to make beams viable, it can get a semi decent fit with Pulses but it doesn't feel like any difference before the buffs.

Edit: Just to add, I do think more PG and CPU buffs to all the ships would increase the viability and flexibility. Obviously some ships need more buffs than others.

Wormholes worst badass | Checkout my Wormhole blog

Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#522 - 2015-09-24 07:54:01 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Actually the new fleet cane will blow a muninn out of the water as a doctrine fit. Shield fit cane will have double the EHP of shield fit Muninn (which is the last doctrine i saw for alpha muninns). The fleet cane will have more tracking than the muninn and with a combined 25% optimal/falloff bonus, will have very similar projection, but much larger alpha.

The cane has 6 turrets + 50% alpha, whereas the Muninn has 5 turrets + 25% alpha and RoF. DPS will be less on the cane, but alpha will be considerably more.

Navy drakes can utilize omni damage, where as T1 drakes are stuck with kinetic damage. A drake fleet would get murdered by an ishtar/vulture/tengu doctrine. Not saying a navy drake would fair better, but at least it could shoot into their resist holes. Small gang would have a role for it as well, since its fairly quick/agile, and paired with MJD + HML, could be decent with proper support.


I understand the points you're trying to make, but I disagree with your conclusion. I don't see enough additional performance in the fleet ships over the tech 1 battle cruisers to justify the additional cost. I see tracking bonuses as mostly wasted as fleet engagements tend to happen at ranges where tracking isn't going to be a major issue.

I would agree with what some people said earlier about the ship that's going to come out of this as a fleet concept being the ferox, but it's not going to be the go to sov war fleet.
Alek Row
Silent Step
#523 - 2015-09-24 11:17:39 UTC
I know this problem is not new - the low/high fitting costs of acs/arties
There are lots of minmatar ships where an arty fit is very difficult to achieve without too many fitting mods.

Also, everybody needs a tank, some races have to install fitting mods just to install guns and a mwd, the race that benefits the most with hull rigs doesn't need ONE fitting mod to get their guns and mwd running, not one, and they are not only sporting a 60% tank across the board but also also have all mids and lows to play with whatever they want.
Pretty please, think of a penalty for those hull rigs.

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#524 - 2015-09-24 13:09:06 UTC
Ersahi Kir wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Actually the new fleet cane will blow a muninn out of the water as a doctrine fit. Shield fit cane will have double the EHP of shield fit Muninn (which is the last doctrine i saw for alpha muninns). The fleet cane will have more tracking than the muninn and with a combined 25% optimal/falloff bonus, will have very similar projection, but much larger alpha.

The cane has 6 turrets + 50% alpha, whereas the Muninn has 5 turrets + 25% alpha and RoF. DPS will be less on the cane, but alpha will be considerably more.

Navy drakes can utilize omni damage, where as T1 drakes are stuck with kinetic damage. A drake fleet would get murdered by an ishtar/vulture/tengu doctrine. Not saying a navy drake would fair better, but at least it could shoot into their resist holes. Small gang would have a role for it as well, since its fairly quick/agile, and paired with MJD + HML, could be decent with proper support.


I understand the points you're trying to make, but I disagree with your conclusion. I don't see enough additional performance in the fleet ships over the tech 1 battle cruisers to justify the additional cost. I see tracking bonuses as mostly wasted as fleet engagements tend to happen at ranges where tracking isn't going to be a major issue.

I would agree with what some people said earlier about the ship that's going to come out of this as a fleet concept being the ferox, but it's not going to be the go to sov war fleet.


So the 25% more alpha, 50% more tracking, and more EHP over t1 doesn't add up to "additional performance" for you? Combine those bonuses with the 25% optimal/fall-off. It will already knock the muninn out for being the better alpha doctrine, and is about the same price. Muninn is around 130m, and fleet cane is about 150m. The thing with the fleet cane though, is if an alliance has members in FW who farm LP, they can get them even cheaper (around 80m).
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#525 - 2015-09-24 13:24:28 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Ersahi Kir wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Actually the new fleet cane will blow a muninn out of the water as a doctrine fit. Shield fit cane will have double the EHP of shield fit Muninn (which is the last doctrine i saw for alpha muninns). The fleet cane will have more tracking than the muninn and with a combined 25% optimal/falloff bonus, will have very similar projection, but much larger alpha.

The cane has 6 turrets + 50% alpha, whereas the Muninn has 5 turrets + 25% alpha and RoF. DPS will be less on the cane, but alpha will be considerably more.

Navy drakes can utilize omni damage, where as T1 drakes are stuck with kinetic damage. A drake fleet would get murdered by an ishtar/vulture/tengu doctrine. Not saying a navy drake would fair better, but at least it could shoot into their resist holes. Small gang would have a role for it as well, since its fairly quick/agile, and paired with MJD + HML, could be decent with proper support.


I understand the points you're trying to make, but I disagree with your conclusion. I don't see enough additional performance in the fleet ships over the tech 1 battle cruisers to justify the additional cost. I see tracking bonuses as mostly wasted as fleet engagements tend to happen at ranges where tracking isn't going to be a major issue.

I would agree with what some people said earlier about the ship that's going to come out of this as a fleet concept being the ferox, but it's not going to be the go to sov war fleet.


So the 25% more alpha, 50% more tracking, and more EHP over t1 doesn't add up to "additional performance" for you? Combine those bonuses with the 25% optimal/fall-off. It will already knock the muninn out for being the better alpha doctrine, and is about the same price. Muninn is around 130m, and fleet cane is about 150m. The thing with the fleet cane though, is if an alliance has members in FW who farm LP, they can get them even cheaper (around 80m).


How cheaper you can get them might rely a lot on how much more used it gets and that is valid for all the navy BC receiving a buff right now. Feeding the soon to be increased market will drive LP demand up unless something else's demand drop. Unless you make your member "farm it for free"...
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#526 - 2015-09-24 13:28:21 UTC
Alek Row wrote:
I know this problem is not new - the low/high fitting costs of acs/arties
There are lots of minmatar ships where an arty fit is very difficult to achieve without too many fitting mods.

Also, everybody needs a tank, some races have to install fitting mods just to install guns and a mwd, the race that benefits the most with hull rigs doesn't need ONE fitting mod to get their guns and mwd running, not one, and they are not only sporting a 60% tank across the board but also also have all mids and lows to play with whatever they want.
Pretty please, think of a penalty for those hull rigs.



Hull tanking require less modules but also offer less options. You can't self rep worth **** and logi support is also impossible. It's good for short term engagement with repair facility available close by. It's bad for other stuff like roaming in space where you can't dock or long engagement where the DPS will end up eating that large buffer over time anyway.
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#527 - 2015-09-24 14:12:47 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
So the 25% more alpha, 50% more tracking, and more EHP over t1 doesn't add up to "additional performance" for you? Combine those bonuses with the 25% optimal/fall-off. It will already knock the muninn out for being the better alpha doctrine, and is about the same price. Muninn is around 130m, and fleet cane is about 150m. The thing with the fleet cane though, is if an alliance has members in FW who farm LP, they can get them even cheaper (around 80m).


Yeah, that's pretty much what I'm saying.

In fleet fights the EHP is nice, but if you're resists aren't good the logi support isn't going to catch reps on you. Battle cruisers also have a large sig radius which makes them far more vulnerable to bombs. The cane has a 50% tracking bonus, but the muninn has 37.5% bonus so it's not like it's getting blown out of the water there. The alpha fleet doctrine has also been out of style since medium rails and sentry drones took over.

I don't know why you got into the FW farm part. Large alliances don't care if you farmed for the ship or not, they're going to pay SRP based on the difference between the hull cost and the insurance payout. For battleships this cost difference is easy to cover, for T2 and faction ships it's harder. If a titans worth of SRP goes into the field you had better believe that it better outperform what it may come up against.

If a fleet cane doctrine did come up I can guarantee that they wouldn't remain at 150m. We're talking about thousands of ships to get the doctrine up with hundreds of replacements for losses a week. I know that when the tempest fleet issue was a doctrine ship the cost went significantly up, and that was a doctrine that was held in reserve and not used much.
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#528 - 2015-09-24 16:09:36 UTC
patch notes are out, soo.... what can i say, another great example of using player feedback? op success?
Alek Row
Silent Step
#529 - 2015-09-24 16:10:06 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:

Hull tanking require less modules but also offer less options. You can't self rep worth **** and logi support is also impossible. It's good for short term engagement with repair facility available close by. It's bad for other stuff like roaming in space where you can't dock or long engagement where the DPS will end up eating that large buffer over time anyway.


In reality, thanks to better pg/cpu, a secondary tank is also possible.
I understand the problems in fleet/null but I think it is a bit to much. Maybe it made sense when nobody used railguns, now it looks more like the cherry on top. If you take into account not only null sec and fleet work, does the arty alpha justifies the heavy fiting costs? And is the cargo space an enough drawback to hull rigs? Honest question, I may be wrong and not seeing the whole picture.

o7
Faren Shalni
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#530 - 2015-09-24 16:42:42 UTC
gascanu wrote:
patch notes are out, soo.... what can i say, another great example of using player feedback? op success?


I saw the patch notes and just facepalmed......lets hope nothing ends up being too strong otherwise it will be another few years before its fixed

also why is it I need fitting mods to fit beams and arty's its really stupid

So Much Space

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#531 - 2015-09-24 16:51:53 UTC
Alek Row wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:

Hull tanking require less modules but also offer less options. You can't self rep worth **** and logi support is also impossible. It's good for short term engagement with repair facility available close by. It's bad for other stuff like roaming in space where you can't dock or long engagement where the DPS will end up eating that large buffer over time anyway.


In reality, thanks to better pg/cpu, a secondary tank is also possible.
I understand the problems in fleet/null but I think it is a bit to much. Maybe it made sense when nobody used railguns, now it looks more like the cherry on top. If you take into account not only null sec and fleet work, does the arty alpha justifies the heavy fiting costs? And is the cargo space an enough drawback to hull rigs? Honest question, I may be wrong and not seeing the whole picture.

o7


I think part of the issue comes from how many ship fot the hull tank module (DCU) anyway because of how good it is which then make the hull tanking ships feel a bit like they didn't even take that slot because there would be a DCU there anyway. The tank gain to fitting cost ratio is rather high.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#532 - 2015-09-24 17:53:26 UTC
Hull tanking is well-balanced at the moment. It really only works for the all-or-nothing brawler. If it catches you with web and scram, you are probably dead. If it doesn't, then it is dead.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Gramps Pljugi
Black Rabbits
Black Rabbit.
#533 - 2015-09-24 19:32:31 UTC
Feels like talking to a wall, CCP please do consider reiterating the buffs on prophecy and myrmidon, they are frontline brawlers and tanks, they engage in close range, the mwd bonus on drone speed is useless 95% of the fights that will happen.. I fly prophecy and myrm a lot and considering the other ships, their main buff is useless...
While I do understand you do not want to overpower the boats please do reconsider and give them something they can actually use in a role they are most used in..
Alek Row
Silent Step
#534 - 2015-09-24 21:17:49 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Hull tanking is well-balanced at the moment. It really only works for the all-or-nothing brawler. If it catches you with web and scram, you are probably dead. If it doesn't, then it is dead.


I really don't agree that they are well-balanced. With time this may be a topic to be reviewed (or not).

The other question:
mwd + arties = fitting mods
mwd + railguns = still lots of powergrid to play with
mwd + beams = ?
In the arties case, the alpha is big, but it have lower dps, isn't that enough to keep it in check?
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#535 - 2015-09-25 01:50:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Soldarius
I had a chance to play around with the DNI today. It's a little light on CPU with HMLs. Needs 2x Overclocker rigs and perfect fitting skills just to fit it with 8 launchers, long point, Quad-LiF MWD, MGC, 2x hardeners, L-ASB, 3x BCS, and meta 4 DC. Leaves only 1 rigging slot available. So I put medium aux thruster I rig in to make it faster.

Fit was actually more than viable. Decent range (locking range was limited because no links available at the time. Could run the MWD pretty much continuously. Did decent damage with good application. Could tank well enough to kite for a bit then close in for the finish. (Barring any surprise hull tanks.) The enlarged drone bay was a big help in the dps department since it lacks any dps bonuses. But it heats the launchers like no tomorrow. Burned them out twice.

I was also able to 1-shot an orbitting whiptail using MGC with precision script and precision mjolnir heavies. Application on this thing is really good. And it has the option of swapping to fury ammo for bigger targets. The resist bonus is a big help for survivability. And the improved manuverability/agility allowed me to slingshot out of tackle easily.

Cap is an issue if you are running everything. But running just the MWD and hardeners is not a problem. It can MWD around for quite a while. But turn on that long point and ouch. Like most Caldari ships it is vulnerable to neuts. But you shouldn't be running into neut range with this right off the bat anyway. And you can exchange the MGC for a cap booster. But the added application from the MGC is really strong on top of the hull application bonus.

Its a pretty solid ship now if you have the skills to fit it.

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

Mario Putzo
#536 - 2015-09-25 04:12:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
FT Diomedes wrote:
Hull tanking is well-balanced at the moment. It really only works for the all-or-nothing brawler. If it catches you with web and scram, you are probably dead. If it doesn't, then it is dead.


No its not really comparable at all to shield or armor. To hull tank you have to pretty much give up your lows and rigs. EHP bonuses from hull boosting modules are not on the same level of Shield or Armor, especially considering the Resist boosting options available to these other tanks...sure DC is nice, but it also boost Shield and Armor independent of other resist mods so...

Adding on to the fact its already providing a reduced EHP from additional mods (while sacrificing Damage modules, or utility modules) hull repair is well below the threshold of Shield or Armor repair...and non existent in Remote Logistics Repair and it is clearly inferior to armor or shield tanking by a very very large margin in any sort of group play.
Tiddle Jr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#537 - 2015-09-25 06:01:57 UTC
Sorry if it was already said but could we have 5 turrets slots (bonusless) on Cyclone please. Adding Rapids to ships HAM & HM would be also great.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#538 - 2015-09-25 17:02:05 UTC
Tiddle Jr wrote:
Sorry if it was already said but could we have 5 turrets slots (bonusless) on Cyclone please. Adding Rapids to ships HAM & HM would be also great.


It's not meant to use guns so no.
Yasuo Aldent
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#539 - 2015-09-25 17:30:35 UTC
I'm definitely liking the drone speed buffs. Though, I'm curious since it was mentioned that it was a buff to "drone microwarpdrive" speed if it's literally a buff to how fast drones get to their targets, not how fast they orbit the target (as drones orbit targets MUCH slower than they reach said target). If this is the case then tracking isn't much of an issue.

Also, I'm loving this buff since I can get my precious drones out of the way of those pesky sleeper frigates that apparently can hit your little drone from 30km away while it's traveling at close to 5km per second.
Yasuo Aldent
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#540 - 2015-09-25 17:39:16 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
Hull tanking is well-balanced at the moment. It really only works for the all-or-nothing brawler. If it catches you with web and scram, you are probably dead. If it doesn't, then it is dead.


No its not really comparable at all to shield or armor. To hull tank you have to pretty much give up your lows and rigs. EHP bonuses from hull boosting modules are not on the same level of Shield or Armor, especially considering the Resist boosting options available to these other tanks...sure DC is nice, but it also boost Shield and Armor independent of other resist mods so...

Adding on to the fact its already providing a reduced EHP from additional mods (while sacrificing Damage modules, or utility modules) hull repair is well below the threshold of Shield or Armor repair...and non existent in Remote Logistics Repair and it is clearly inferior to armor or shield tanking by a very very large margin in any sort of group play.


Make Gallente ships specialize in hull tanking. WIth their already good chunk of structure HP they would make great hull tanking candidates. Just swap all the armor bonuses to hull and maybe give a role bonus to all gal ships to decrease CPU usage of hull reppers and buffer mods (excluding DC). This would make gal ships differently fitting than all the three other races which would be better to be honest since gal armor tanking is currently pretty much a copy of amarr armor tanking, While Minmatar ships are fit nothing like any of the other races.

Aka. Gallente - Hull, Caldari - Shield, Amarr - Armor, Minmatar - kitchen sink/speed