These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

Ideas for resurrecting assault frigates from the dead

Author
Tornii
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-12-10 19:11:33 UTC
In a clear demonstration of how tricky the EVE ship balancing structure is, the interceptor bubble immunity and the recent introduction of tactical destroyers have pushed the assault frigate class to the brink of complete uselessness. Their MWD role bonus counts for nothing now, and they have no niche role, which - in the complicated system that involves so many ships of similar performance - is the only way to make all ships more or less worthwhile.

So, I believe some advanced brainstorming on ideas to make this ship class viable again would be welcome and timely. I hope to see suggestions based on reasoning, i.e. what would give AFs a unique role and encourage pilots to pick them over other ships, while also not dissuading people from bringing other ships - for their own unique roles - to fleets?

I will contribute with my own ideas in a subsequent post in this thread.

P.S. I searched for recent threads on assault frigs but the only one that's still open for replies was exclusively on their comparison to HACs, while this thread I hope will serve a broader discussion.
FT Cold
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2015-12-10 19:29:00 UTC
AFs are still pretty good if you avoid t3ds. They're still the best frigates for brawling and fighting up ship. The current RLML plague is an issue too, but I think if we wait for a t3d balance pass (and hopefully nerfs to the svipul and confessor) we'd be a little better poised to see how AF balance really stands in the meta. That would be the appropriate time to give them a polish pass.
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2015-12-10 20:17:06 UTC
Would a blanket reduction in sig radius (in addition to their MWD penalty reduction) help? This would work well with the new logi frigates in being very hard to hit and would only compound when using a MWD as there is even more reduction in sig size.
Valacus
Streets of Fire
#4 - 2015-12-10 20:27:27 UTC
Remove T3Ds from existence. Problem solved.

/thread
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#5 - 2015-12-10 21:34:37 UTC
One thing AF need is a cap buff/overhaul. Is that all they need? Probably not, but lets see what happens after t3d rebalance and how it settles.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#6 - 2015-12-10 22:16:17 UTC
AF's are largely fine, some minor tweaks with some ships bonuses/stats perhaps, but the main issue is OP D3's and RLML's

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

FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#7 - 2015-12-10 22:17:51 UTC
Valacus wrote:
Remove T3Ds from existence. Problem solved.

/thread


This is not a viable or constructive answer. Now, it might be fair to say that T3D's should never have been introduced, but removing them now would do more harm than good.

Giving Assault Ships some form of mild afterburner bonus or web resistance are possibilities that have been thrown out before. Both these solutions probably require CCP to fix the oversized AB cancer (which would also fix T3D's and T3C's).

Another suggestion would be giving them mild forms of electronic warfare resistance. This, making sensor dampeners, ECM, webs, weapon disruption, and neutralizing 15-25% less effective against Assault Frigates might go a long way towards giving them a viable role.

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

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#8 - 2015-12-11 00:07:09 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
Valacus wrote:
Remove T3Ds from existence. Problem solved.

/thread


This is not a viable or constructive answer. Now, it might be fair to say that T3D's should never have been introduced, but removing them now would do more harm than good.

Giving Assault Ships some form of mild afterburner bonus or web resistance are possibilities that have been thrown out before. Both these solutions probably require CCP to fix the oversized AB cancer (which would also fix T3D's and T3C's).

Another suggestion would be giving them mild forms of electronic warfare resistance. This, making sensor dampeners, ECM, webs, weapon disruption, and neutralizing 15-25% less effective against Assault Frigates might go a long way towards giving them a viable role.


Honestly i think they're decent assuming you dont fight t3ds, but do need some massaging in certain areas (cap as mentioned earlier). Some of the traits being tweaked would be good too.

Examples on wolf/jag.

Roll the double damage bonus into 1 trait. So instead of 2 25% bonuses. Give it one 50% bonus (10% per level) and use the new trait slot for shield boost bonus on jag and maybe a second falloff bonus on the wolf. Give the wolf a bit more cpu and the jag a bit more grid.

Ishkur

Just let it use 5 drones from the start, change that trait to armor rep amount.

Just a couple examples. I think addressing them more in making them flexible rather than having another "special" gimmick that is unique to one class of ship is the better route.
Tom Gerard
Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
#9 - 2015-12-11 00:24:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Tom Gerard
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
Valacus wrote:
Remove T3Ds from existence. Problem solved.

/thread


This is not a viable or constructive answer. Now, it might be fair to say that T3D's should never have been introduced, but removing them now would do more harm than good.

Giving Assault Ships some form of mild afterburner bonus or web resistance are possibilities that have been thrown out before. Both these solutions probably require CCP to fix the oversized AB cancer (which would also fix T3D's and T3C's).

Another suggestion would be giving them mild forms of electronic warfare resistance. This, making sensor dampeners, ECM, webs, weapon disruption, and neutralizing 15-25% less effective against Assault Frigates might go a long way towards giving them a viable role.


Honestly i think they're decent assuming you dont fight t3ds, but do need some massaging in certain areas (cap as mentioned earlier). Some of the traits being tweaked would be good too.

Examples on wolf/jag.

Roll the double damage bonus into 1 trait. So instead of 2 25% bonuses. Give it one 50% bonus (10% per level) and use the new trait slot for shield boost bonus on jag and maybe a second falloff bonus on the wolf. Give the wolf a bit more cpu and the jag a bit more grid.

Ishkur

Just let it use 5 drones from the start, change that trait to armor rep amount.

Just a couple examples. I think addressing them more in making them flexible rather than having another "special" gimmick that is unique to one class of ship is the better route.


Yeah FLEXIBLE T2 ships

and SPECIALIZED T3 ships...

This is the exact opposite of what was proposed by CCP.

I think it is clear that Assault Frigates need a Specialization as they are T2.
+ I think a cool idea would allow them to run MWDs even while scrammed, would be niche and powerful
+ Immunity to Stasis Webifiers would be amazing.
+ A 50% E-War Resistance (like the balanced capitals are getting)

I think it is clear that T3Ds are Flexible and that was the intent of the T3 design.

Now with 100% less Troll.

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#10 - 2015-12-11 00:41:45 UTC
Tom Gerard wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
FT Diomedes wrote:
Valacus wrote:
Remove T3Ds from existence. Problem solved.

/thread


This is not a viable or constructive answer. Now, it might be fair to say that T3D's should never have been introduced, but removing them now would do more harm than good.

Giving Assault Ships some form of mild afterburner bonus or web resistance are possibilities that have been thrown out before. Both these solutions probably require CCP to fix the oversized AB cancer (which would also fix T3D's and T3C's).

Another suggestion would be giving them mild forms of electronic warfare resistance. This, making sensor dampeners, ECM, webs, weapon disruption, and neutralizing 15-25% less effective against Assault Frigates might go a long way towards giving them a viable role.


Honestly i think they're decent assuming you dont fight t3ds, but do need some massaging in certain areas (cap as mentioned earlier). Some of the traits being tweaked would be good too.

Examples on wolf/jag.

Roll the double damage bonus into 1 trait. So instead of 2 25% bonuses. Give it one 50% bonus (10% per level) and use the new trait slot for shield boost bonus on jag and maybe a second falloff bonus on the wolf. Give the wolf a bit more cpu and the jag a bit more grid.

Ishkur

Just let it use 5 drones from the start, change that trait to armor rep amount.

Just a couple examples. I think addressing them more in making them flexible rather than having another "special" gimmick that is unique to one class of ship is the better route.


Yeah FLEXIBLE T2 ships

and SPECIALIZED T3 ships...

This is the exact opposite of what was proposed by CCP.

I think it is clear that Assault Frigates need a Specialization as they are T2.
+ I think a cool idea would allow them to run MWDs even while scrammed, would be niche and powerful
+ Immunity to Stasis Webifiers would be amazing.
+ A 50% E-War Resistance (like the balanced capitals are getting)

I think it is clear that T3Ds are Flexible and that was the intent of the T3 design.


Talk about being triggered. Did you spit out your cheetos and mountain dew when you saw "flexible"?

What i recommended literally changed nothing about what theyre specialized in. They are still heavy tackle and those changes would make them even better at that role. What i mean by flexibility is in how they fit. Meaning theyre still heavy tackle, but opens more fitting options so they can perform that role better.

As to your recommendations.. are you high? MWD sig reduction and cant be scrammed? So.. no defense unless you have 2 webs and neuts? Geez.. that sounds an aweful lot like t3ds. You know, that class of ship you were raging about just now. Creating a new cancer meta is not the desired result.

And you are really disconnected if you want all those bonuses at the same time (immune to scram/webs and 50% EWAR).
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#11 - 2015-12-11 01:13:12 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Stitch, you know better than I do, since I never fly Assault Frigates. I have owned many of them, but every time I think I might want one, I end up flying an Interdictor or Interceptor instead. I do not usually join Harpy fleets (and those have been replaced with Svipul fleets anyway). For the small 0.0 gangs in which I usually participate these days, the specialties of the Interdictor and the Interceptor are just too powerful to ignore.

Edit - Out of curiosity, I just checked my stats for my small ship specialist pilot. She has Assault Ships trained to V. She has never lost an Assault Frigate or killed anything with one, but she has lost 59 Interdictors and 17 Interceptors. I'd say that is a decent reflection on the state of Assault Frigates in small gang 0.0 PVP.

I do think they need a specialization, but one that is not just a straight buff to existing stats. In other words, I would rather see neutralizers or webs be slightly less effective against them, than give them more cap recharge or base speed or whatever. It does not need to be that over the top.

Or, if you did give them a larger bonus to electronic warfare resistance, separate it by racial specialties. So, just as Amarr ships have a high base resistance to Minmatar damage types, the Amarr Assault Frigates could get an electronic warfare resistance to Minmatar electronic warfare. And vice versa. Or something like that.

With that said, if you have one race resistances to webs and another resistances to neutralizers, that would pretty much automatically make those the two best races for Assault Frigates, since those two modules are very common and nearly universal.

So, what I might do is as follows:

All Assault Frigates get e-war resistance to webs and neutralizers. I am a Marine, not a mathematician, so I would say no more than 10-25%, depending on how you do the math, and how it balances out. Then for each race, give them a niche:

Amarr - target painters are 10-25% less effective.
Minmatar - weapon disruption is 10-25% less effective.
Caldari - sensor dampeners are 10-25% less effective.
Gallente - ECM is 10-25% less effective.

Could be interesting... Just spitballing to see what sticks.

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

Zimmer Jones
Lightspeed Enterprises
Goonswarm Federation
#12 - 2015-12-11 01:52:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Zimmer Jones
This topic has been brought up before, so instead of my knee jerk response of l2s, I'll just repeat the idea I had last time:

Be able to fit and have bonuses for cruiser sized weapons. Ishkur would be the loser here, but brawling is what they were for(assfrigs), so give them all lead lined gloves.

Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.

Linna Excel
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2015-12-11 02:04:11 UTC
Make a small weapon that works well against Teddies (T3Ds), then make sure only AFs can equip them. Balance it so that the two types are roughly evenly matched.
Amarisen Gream
Pleasant Peninsula Productions
Digital Vendetta
#14 - 2015-12-11 06:32:39 UTC
I used to enjoy flying AF

Now I normally fly hero/crazy tackle.

I don't know numbers, but CPU/PG probably needs looked at.
And I do throw my voice behind immunity to MWD scram vs the sig reduction.
A heavy frigate tackle, that only gets slower by webs/neuts would be great.

"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1

#NPCLivesMatter #Freetheboobs

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2015-12-11 06:47:52 UTC
Keep pouting about how AFs are no good, and just don't fly them. I'll keep using my cheap T2 pocket destroyers thank you very much.

Seriously, there's nothing wrong with AFs. Tactical destroyers are a little OP and so they are kind of beating everything except RLML ships because RLMLs are OP, which leads to tactical destroyers and RLML cruisers online, and that is not a healthy environment for AFs.

AFs are fine. OP stuff isn't fine.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Tom Gerard
Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
#16 - 2015-12-11 07:19:41 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Keep pouting about how AFs are no good, and just don't fly them. I'll keep using my cheap T2 pocket destroyers thank you very much.

Seriously, there's nothing wrong with AFs. Tactical destroyers are a little OP and so they are kind of beating everything except RLML ships because RLMLs are OP, which leads to tactical destroyers and RLML cruisers online, and that is not a healthy environment for AFs.

AFs are fine. OP stuff isn't fine.


I agree AFs might need a nerf, I highly suggest removing T2 resists and reducing their speed significantly

Now with 100% less Troll.

Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#17 - 2015-12-11 09:22:46 UTC
There's a few needing fitting help.

Which made me wonder, what would happen if we gave them extra slots and fitting...You know, like the opposite of drone hulls -1 slot, give them some extras. Give them the space for more toys and the fitting to use them or a bonus to fitting things to stop mega tanks or not, mega tanked frigs are awesome.
Kasia en Tilavine
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#18 - 2015-12-11 12:12:28 UTC
What do EAF's do?
A: they provide harsh Ewar power.

What do Interceptors do?
A: they catch people trying to get away (on grid, or in warp).

What do AF's do?
A: ???

You can't balance ships in the dark. you have to answer that question first. Do they bring blistering dps in a frig platform? Probably not helpful when Dessie's (t2 &t3) will always do more dps in a small portable platform. Or T1 cruisers. Do they heavy tackle? That's a viable role for them... What about survival. Most frigs have a hard time living in hard situations with lots of scrams webs and light missiles.

What about changing the mwd bloom to a scramble immunity so they can't be screened from hard tackling with other frontline ships. Then re bonus them for a little bit of dps, with huge tank bonus's. A format like this:

T1 ship skill:

10% to damage per level (3 guns on all of them)
4% to resists to tank type

AF ship skill:

7.5% to boost/ rep amount to tank type
_______ racial flavor bonus.

Hybrid tracking for the enyo
Drone tracking for the ishkur
Optimal for the harpy
Explosion velocity for hawk
Falloff for the wolf
Tracking for the jaguar
Optimal for the retribution
Cap recharge for the vengeance

With a mwd scrambler immunity role bonus instead of a wig bloom.
Rek Seven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2015-12-11 12:35:23 UTC
I never agreed with the MWD sig reduction bonus and argued for them to have a bonus to AB velocity instead. However, CCP obviously didn't agree and thus, these things are what they are.

That said AF's are fine. They can take on other frigates and cruisers (depending on the fit) but they are countered by destroyer, as intended.

Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#20 - 2015-12-11 12:43:12 UTC
The problem with AFs, and with frigates in general, is that the new destroyers outperform them in every way that matters in this game. (Let's not even pretend like cost is a factor at that ship size)

The major reason for this is the speed the new destroyers are capable of attaining. It is reasonable for T3 and the new T2 destroyers to outpace most frigates in tank and firepower, they are a larger ship class after all. But what is not reasonable is their speed.

In addition to this, AFs very badly lack a niche of their own, they are designed to be tankier, shootier versions of T1 frigates. This means that they are sorely outclassed and invalidated by the new destroyers in every way.

Solutions?

#1. Ban oversize prop mods from each and every ship in the game. Notably, this solves more problems than just T3 destroyers, it solves T3 cruisers and a few others as well.

#2. Assault frigates no longer use cap for activating an afterburner(-100% use of cap role bonus). This gives them a niche, albeit a minor one, staying power. They're not just popping in and out for bursts of speed, instead they are relentless pursuers.

#3. A sensor strength boost or preferably a big helping of that new ewar resistance. Assault Frigates should be like an attack dog, you can't shake them off, you have to kill them.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

123Next pageLast page