These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Focus Group] Tactical Destroyers

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Feyrin
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#101 - 2015-10-13 17:54:12 UTC
Hi All,

So my ideas for T3 Destroyer balancing include ideas for Assault Frigate re-balancing also, because I believe that one of the key complaints against T3 Destroyers is that they currently largely invalidate the Assault Frigate class, with a couple of exceptions like the sniper Harpy.

There are currently 4 major issues with the T3 Destroyers that I see regularly posted.

  1. T3 Destroyers are too cost effective for their flexibility and firepower. I believe that CCP are already on top of this issue with the change to insurance payouts. It's a good solution because it does not affect production costs but achieves the goal of making the wallet hit larger for losing one.
  2. T3 Destroyers have few counters inside Small FW plexes aside from numbers, distorting the FW environment and preventing good fights. CCP have already stated T3 Destroyers will be prevented from entering small plexes fixing this issue.
  3. T3 Destroyers are too powerful in comparison to T1 cruisers.
  4. T3 Destroyers invalidate all classes of ships smaller than them.

I want to address point 3 and 4 together because they are linked into the role of the T3 Destroyers. The role as a flexible (and powerful) anti frigate and destroyer platform. The issue vs. T1 cruisers is that certain fits have comparable DPS & EHP to T1 cruiser fits but with better battlefield agility, damage mitigation and application. (We are looking at you double MSE AC Svipuls, and 10MN AB Confessors) The issue vs smaller ships is slightly artificial, their role is as an anti frigate platform if the ships were not very effective vs. smaller ships then they would not be fulfilling their role.

However there is a caveat to the above, Assault Frigates.

  • Covert-Ops have cloaks
  • Interceptors have nullification and speed
  • Electronic attack frigates have EWAR.
  • T1 Frigates are cheap.
  • Pirate Frigates have special faction bonuses.
  • Assault Frigates have nothing.

Assault frigates have nothing to really offer that T3 Destroyers don’t, being of comparable speed, with inferior resilience and firepower.

As such I propose refocusing the T3 Destroyers in their anti frigate role, by making their signature radius significantly larger, increasing base Signature Radius by ~20-25, making the class more vulnerable to cruiser sized weaponry, this does not affect their ability vs. frigates who won't see a significant boost in application but should make T3 Destroyers more vulnerable to their natural predators cruisers.

In order to address the AF class I recommend doing the reverse, significantly reducing AF signature radius to around 20-25, giving AF’s a new defined role as heavy tackle vs cruisers and larger. To further augment this role I would change the AF bonus to MWD bloom, to a new bonus, reduced effectiveness of stasis webification against the AF. Initially thinking 30-50% here. This will give AF a valid role on the battlefield different from the T3 destroyer as a hard tackle vs larger ships, whilst encouraging the use of varied fleet compositions.

I am sure the numbers need balance but I think the ideas above are a solid starting place.

Thanks,

Feyrin.
d0cTeR9
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#102 - 2015-10-13 21:01:54 UTC
Reminds me of the linked svipul that tanked a AF and a RHML raven with web/points/painters on the svipul... and a heavy neut.

Good to see CCP want to fix t3 dessies!

Been around since the beginning.
Nou Mene
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#103 - 2015-10-14 06:13:22 UTC
Would it be unbalanced/stupid to give modes a short (on activation) effect and a "passive" effect? would it make changing modes advantageous?
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#104 - 2015-10-14 14:48:05 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Esnaelc Sin'led wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
suggestions

- make all prop mods size specific
- nerf all modes a little
- nerf all base stats a little
- nerf fittings a little
- remove 50% damage role bonus
- remove T2 resists

so the end result should mean they cant outperform any T2 ships like AF's etc at what they do best but they will still have the adaptability and generalisation that is meant too be the point rather than having stronger than T2 power on top of the T3 design


1- Nope. It would kill lots and lots of particular fits around this principle.
2- Nope. ABs are good as they are, even if a bit too slow, they can't be cut off by a point. MWDs have significant fitting and capacitor penalty.
3- This has been done already.
4- Maybe for the Svipul only, but it would kill its Arty version.
5- That's a destroyer class ship. It is MEANT to deal damage.
6- What ?

If the issue comes out when you compare T3Ds to AFs, the issue are the AFs, not the T3Ds.
Why ?
Because AFs were ALREADY not that good before T3Ds were introduced.
And honestly i've flown each T3Ds (at my level), and i could only see the Svipul standing over the others, by far du to its 'wide' fitting capacity.


2 - i said modes not prop mods, i.e. def/prop/sharpshooter modes.
3- they barely touched them
4- depends perhaps a little on 1 but its well noted just how strong their pg is.
5 - a hecate doing 750dps OH is sooo OP, and why should they get such a OP bonus for nothing anyway its bad design
6 - T2 resists should be exclusive too T2 , T3 T1 and navy should all have the base resists only.


Harvey, are you the old CCP? Do you know of any other method of balancing other than nerfing something into oblivion? I see your posts, and for every topic its a list of nerfs everytime.

A hecate is not OP, id actually say its one of the better balanced t3d. The dps it can shoot is only good to about 2-5km unless you go into sharpshooter mode. Ive killed hecates in ac nados, kiting them at 7-10km and ruining them. Hecates are slow as hell, put a web or two on them, get around 7-10km and get a KM. Even easier if youre in a bigger ship with neuts.

Please look at the other numbers in eft besides dps, and you will see the hecate is well balanced. Svipul mainly needs either a bigger sig or slower base speed or speed bonus from prop mode


there are lots of OP things in eve that need nerfing FACT, i just point them out like other people do, i have done threads about buffing various things from time too time and in various threads, but people do tend too focus on things that effect them and them ONLY, which as we know doesn't lend itself too a balanced state of affairs.


Lots of OP things? What you mean like your unhealthy obsession with rocket and HAM range? You are the only person ive seen mention this as an issue. Rockets have fairly low dps on most ships in comparison to turret based ships. See corax/talwar compared to algos, thrasher, coercer, catalyst etc. Their range is the only thing that makes them semi viable/flexible.

If you are trying to insinuate that im protecting my precious T3D, you are way off base. Ive flown T3D 3 times since their release and havent flown them since. The svipul is broken and i feel cheap flying it. The svipul needs to be pulled in, but you suggesting 5-6 nerfs at the same time is silly and will make it useless to those who still like flying it. Even once T3D are reigned in, i still wont fly them because small ship meta is boring to me.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#105 - 2015-10-14 15:35:54 UTC
at stitch

actually fozzie accepted the point about rockets/HAM's range as performing too well, i have offered various options too change them and some buffs too their weaker dps and ive even mentioned about the exp radius being too good on some of the small missiles aswell, i haven't been the only one who has mentioned them though.

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
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#106 - 2015-10-14 16:15:16 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
at stitch

actually fozzie accepted the point about rockets/HAM's range as performing too welli have offered various options too change them and some buffs too their weaker dps and ive even mentioned about the exp radius being too good on some of the small missiles aswell, i haven't been the only one who has mentioned them though.


Source for the bolded?

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Ray P
Unquestionable Prosperity
Commonwealth Vanguard
#107 - 2015-10-14 18:20:57 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
at stitch

actually fozzie accepted the point about rockets/HAM's range as performing too well.


Rubbish
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#108 - 2015-10-14 19:02:23 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Esnaelc Sin'led wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
suggestions

- make all prop mods size specific
- nerf all modes a little
- nerf all base stats a little
- nerf fittings a little
- remove 50% damage role bonus
- remove T2 resists

so the end result should mean they cant outperform any T2 ships like AF's etc at what they do best but they will still have the adaptability and generalisation that is meant too be the point rather than having stronger than T2 power on top of the T3 design


1- Nope. It would kill lots and lots of particular fits around this principle.
2- Nope. ABs are good as they are, even if a bit too slow, they can't be cut off by a point. MWDs have significant fitting and capacitor penalty.
3- This has been done already.
4- Maybe for the Svipul only, but it would kill its Arty version.
5- That's a destroyer class ship. It is MEANT to deal damage.
6- What ?

If the issue comes out when you compare T3Ds to AFs, the issue are the AFs, not the T3Ds.
Why ?
Because AFs were ALREADY not that good before T3Ds were introduced.
And honestly i've flown each T3Ds (at my level), and i could only see the Svipul standing over the others, by far du to its 'wide' fitting capacity.


2 - i said modes not prop mods, i.e. def/prop/sharpshooter modes.
3- they barely touched them
4- depends perhaps a little on 1 but its well noted just how strong their pg is.
5 - a hecate doing 750dps OH is sooo OP, and why should they get such a OP bonus for nothing anyway its bad design
6 - T2 resists should be exclusive too T2 , T3 T1 and navy should all have the base resists only.


Harvey, are you the old CCP? Do you know of any other method of balancing other than nerfing something into oblivion? I see your posts, and for every topic its a list of nerfs everytime.

A hecate is not OP, id actually say its one of the better balanced t3d. The dps it can shoot is only good to about 2-5km unless you go into sharpshooter mode. Ive killed hecates in ac nados, kiting them at 7-10km and ruining them. Hecates are slow as hell, put a web or two on them, get around 7-10km and get a KM. Even easier if youre in a bigger ship with neuts.

Please look at the other numbers in eft besides dps, and you will see the hecate is well balanced. Svipul mainly needs either a bigger sig or slower base speed or speed bonus from prop mode


there are lots of OP things in eve that need nerfing FACT, i just point them out like other people do, i have done threads about buffing various things from time too time and in various threads, but people do tend too focus on things that effect them and them ONLY, which as we know doesn't lend itself too a balanced state of affairs.


The difference is you haven't a clue what you're talking about and you're nearly always wrong.
Azazel The Misanthrope
Oblivion's Pendulum
Top Tier
#109 - 2015-10-14 21:02:11 UTC
Azazel The Misanthrope
Oblivion's Pendulum
Top Tier
#110 - 2015-10-14 23:18:57 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
at stitch

actually fozzie accepted the point about rockets/HAM's range as performing too well, i have offered various options too change them and some buffs too their weaker dps and ive even mentioned about the exp radius being too good on some of the small missiles aswell, i haven't been the only one who has mentioned them though.


I will admit that rockets are by far one of the most effective small based weapon platforms, missile disruptors could see a change in that though.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#111 - 2015-10-15 01:40:08 UTC
Ray P wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
at stitch

actually fozzie accepted the point about rockets/HAM's range as performing too well.


Rubbish


oh you've so disproved what i said, oh wait... Roll

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
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#112 - 2015-10-15 05:38:07 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Important information from the focus group so far:

I'll start us off with one tidbit that we've already decided on (so that it doesn't derail other discussion): We plan on reducing Tactical Destroyer insurance payouts to T2 levels (30% of current payout) in the December release.

As mentioned in the latest CSM summit minutes, we are also planning on removing Tactical Destroyers from Small FW complexes.


that kind of suggests you're going too barely touch them, when we all know they need as big a nerf bat as T3 cruisers do.


I'm just glad your name wasn't on that list.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#113 - 2015-10-15 06:17:53 UTC
Dmitry Kuvora wrote:
the biggest problem with t3d is off grid links, they are too cheap and powerfull when have sig and rep bonuses

something like that(cost just 150mil):
https://zkillboard.com/kill/49289380/

under 2 webs, can tank cerberus and rapier, both with faction EM rapid missiles


i think:
1) svipul and confessor should be forced to fit mwd
2) t3d hull price around 80mil
3) and maybe some signature increase
4) fix insta warp trick


sry for english Twisted


Disqualified!!
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#114 - 2015-10-15 06:19:31 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Important information from the focus group so far:

I'll start us off with one tidbit that we've already decided on (so that it doesn't derail other discussion): We plan on reducing Tactical Destroyer insurance payouts to T2 levels (30% of current payout) in the December release.

As mentioned in the latest CSM summit minutes, we are also planning on removing Tactical Destroyers from Small FW complexes.


Should I start requesting my SP reimbursement now or after they've been obliterated?
Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#115 - 2015-10-15 06:34:17 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
OMG destroyers are good at killing frigates? Shocked NEEEERF


My jackdaw made a prophecy run away.



The fact that it was able to run away means you failed, right?
Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#116 - 2015-10-15 06:38:14 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Important information from the focus group so far:.


Supported. Would you also consider buffing Assault Frigates to make them less inferior to T3Ds? Maybe add them some unique role, like +1 or +2 bonus to warp disruption strength, so they can catch stabbed plexers more easily.

Another thing that I object to T3Ds is that they are super-fast to train into. Even adding few more short skills as a prerequisite - like Mechanics V, Navigation V and Gunnery V (or Missile Launcher Operation V for Jackdaw) - would be a step forward.



Why? TD3s are supposed to be superior to AFs.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#117 - 2015-10-15 06:52:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Harvey James wrote:
suggestions

- make all prop mods size specific
- nerf all modes a little
- nerf all base stats a little
- nerf fittings a little
- remove 50% damage role bonus
- remove T2 resists

so the end result should mean they cant outperform any T2 ships like AF's etc at what they do best but they will still have the adaptability and generalisation that is meant too be the point rather than having stronger than T2 power on top of the T3 design


Just please delete yourself from this forum. Who the hell in their right mind would even bother to fly TD3s if they got obliterated like this???
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#118 - 2015-10-15 07:03:51 UTC
Moac Tor wrote:
Bienator II wrote:
i don't quite see how t3ds are in any way related to AFs, because before t3ds we flew interdictors if we wanted something solid and also can enter small plexes.

People who used to use AFs now use T3s. There are only a few edge cases where it is worth using an AF over a T3. Also AFs would be dangerous to a T3 if they were half decent as they counter one of the main advantages of the T3 which is its low signature. So once AFs are in a good place that will naturally balance T3s in the overall meta.


This would be the best thing for CCP to do. Rebalance the AFs first, review, then make further adjustments to the AFs, and then finally the TD3s.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#119 - 2015-10-15 07:13:57 UTC
d0cTeR9 wrote:
Reminds me of the linked svipul that tanked a AF and a RHML raven with web/points/painters on the svipul... and a heavy neut.

Good to see CCP want to fix t3 dessies!


Just means the Svipul pilot was highly skilled (probably passive tanked) and the assailants not so, your point is??
Ares Desideratus
UNSAFE SPACE
#120 - 2015-10-15 19:42:32 UTC
The main problem for me personally with T3Ds, is that I have flown the Confessor a lot and it totally outshines pretty much the entire frigate line-up of laser ships. Even pirate frigates like the Succubus, is totally overshadowed by the Confessor. The entire advantage of flying a Succubus, is that you can reach relatively high speeds with an AB which is great for range control and speed tanking, yet the Confessor can easily fit a 10mn AB and go faster than a Succubus with far better tank, damage and range (including the ability to switch modes). The Confessor is also significantly cheaper and so there is very little reason to fly a Succubus when you could fly a Confessor.

So not only are they great at killing frigates, but they actually make better frigates themselves in a lot of cases, especially if you compared them to the combat frigates like AFs and pirate frigs, and they can even align as fast as Interceptors, say what? PLUS they got the damage, tank and especially mobility to still be competitive with cruiser sized ships.

Overall T3Ds were a terrible idea in the first place. Its kind of mind blowing that such a bad ship design actually made it into the game. Were stuck with them now, but at least its been fun. Im sure everything will turn out OK anyway