These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

HACs + MWD sig bonus?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kaikka Carel
Ziea
#1 - 2012-04-09 13:44:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaikka Carel
It worked out for AFs could it work for HACs?

Their sig still goes above L-guns' resolution though - 125*3.5=437.5.

Could anyone give mechanics wise explanation?

Quote:
My guess is that some HACs don't have a proper speciallization. Deimos, Zealot, Sacrilege have nothing special over BCs except for their cruiser format and T2 ressists. That is why ppl try to fit them as brawlers where they inevitably encounter BCs which are better and more affordable disposable.

In this regard the only redeeming quality is T2 ressists which could ensure ships survivability under logi support.

That is why I think that HACs need something special, some kind of Role Bonus which would stress out their intended role without making them OP.

I'm not sure if MWD sig bonus is the way to go that's why I asked your opinion.

In theory combined with their stronger capacitors it could allow them to fight with a better maneuvrability with more cycles of MWD instead of "burn till you're in optimal" or engage quickly with less risk.
Tanya Powers
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-04-09 13:51:23 UTC
Kaikka Carel wrote:
It worked out for AFs could it work for HACs?

Their sig still goes above L-guns' resolution though - 125*3.5=437.5.

Could anyone give mechanics wise explanation?



Wise, is not a word of Eve Universe. Weasel is.
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#3 - 2012-04-09 14:34:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahega Amielden
HACs are fine. The problem is that battlecruisers are bullshit and, if I remember CCP Ytterbium's post correctly, due for changes.

The reason AFs got a MWD sig bloom bonus is because without it, kite-fit AFs and heavy tackle AFs get their faces raped off by any cruiser-class ship with any amount of range.
Uppsy Daisy
State War Academy
Caldari State
#4 - 2012-04-09 16:05:58 UTC
Not a terrible idea in my opinion.

Would give HACS a bit more of a unique niche without necessarily overpowering them, provided it came with other tweaks.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#5 - 2012-04-09 16:30:23 UTC
If you need to give a MWD bonus to every class of ship below BC, I think the good solution is somewhere else...
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#6 - 2012-04-09 16:33:55 UTC
Kahega Amielden wrote:
HACs are fine. The problem is that battlecruisers are bullshit and, if I remember CCP Ytterbium's post correctly, due for changes.

The reason AFs got a MWD sig bloom bonus is because without it, kite-fit AFs and heavy tackle AFs get their faces raped off by any cruiser-class ship with any amount of range.


No they didn't.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Muad 'dib
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2012-04-09 16:35:29 UTC
A good idea, HACs do need a little love and giving them a bloom reduction would not change their effectiveness in close range or ab circumstances.

However ask yourself how effective the mwd bloom reduction was for AFs?

I dont think anyone really noticed.

Cosmic signature detected. . . . http://i.imgur.com/Z7NfIS6.jpg I got 99 likes, and this post aint one.
JoeTwo PointOh
Did he say Jump
Deepwater Hooligans
#8 - 2012-04-09 22:16:00 UTC
Muad 'dib wrote:
A good idea, HACs do need a little love and giving them a bloom reduction would not change their effectiveness in close range or ab circumstances.

However ask yourself how effective the mwd bloom reduction was for AFs?

I dont think anyone really noticed.



I personally differ regarding the AF bloom reduction. I feel this has given AFs a tremendous, and much needed boost. Since the change, I've rarely seen AB fitted AFs used, and have personally seen quite a few very interesting and effective setups that wouldn't have been possible or as effective before.

Not sure how it would transfer over to HACs considering their initial sig size, but it seems they need a little something, somewhere to help them out.
Kaikka Carel
Ziea
#9 - 2012-04-10 03:20:20 UTC
My guess is that some HACs don't have a proper speciallization. Deimos, Zealot, Sacrilege have nothing special over BCs except for their cruiser format and T2 ressists. That is why ppl try to fit them as brawlers where they inevitably encounter BCs which are better and more affordable disposable.

In this regard the only redeeming quality is T2 ressists which could ensure ships survivability under logi support.

That is why I think that HACs need something special, some kind of Role Bonus which would stress out their intended role without making them OP.

I'm not sure if MWD sig bonus is the way to go that's why I asked your opinion.

In theory combined with their stronger capacitors it could allow them to fight with a better maneuvrability with more cycles of MWD instead of "burn till you're in optimal" or engage quickly with less risk.
Argaral
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2012-04-10 03:28:37 UTC
I believe it's too general a fix. While it will vastly aid some ships(Sac), others will benefit far too much from it(Vaga). CCP imo should revisit them individually rather then as a whole.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#11 - 2012-04-10 04:19:38 UTC
I don't feel like this is a narrowly tailored enough fix. On the whole, it just doesn't seem right to me. It doesn't seem to address the fundamental problem with HACs right now, which is simply cost effectiveness vs. BCs.

On the other hand, it could be a fix for SOME of the HACs. Certainly the Deimos, Sacrilege, and Vagabond could all benefit from it to an extraordinary degree. The Eagle could arguably benefit from it as well, in a Beagle fit. If permamicrowarpdriving Drakes blobs can do a good job, theoretically a Cerberus fleet that was more mobile, had missiles arrive on target faster, had better resists, and smaller sig radius could do better (but at what price difference, I wonder).

Whatever, you can theory craft it all you want, but it just doesn't seem right to me.

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

Baneken
Arctic Light Inc.
Arctic Light
#12 - 2012-04-10 06:59:39 UTC
Only HAC that would need an MWD sig reduction would be diemost.
Crellion
Nano Rhinos
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#13 - 2012-04-10 08:28:03 UTC
You know it might work if you gave them different mwd bonus for each hac... like so:

Ishtar + Sac = mwd speed bonus

Deimos + Zealot = mwd cap reduction / usage bonus

Eagle + Munin = mwd fitting powergrid bonus

Carberus = mwd sig bonus

Vaga = mwd ... visual effects bonus PPPPPPP
Cfiloruz Xilocient
Not Quite So Sinister
Shadow Empire.
#14 - 2012-04-12 07:34:56 UTC
Crellion wrote:
You know it might work if you gave them different mwd bonus for each hac... like so:

.......

Vaga = mwd ... visual effects bonus PPPPPPP


nyan nyan cat engine trails?
Darthewok
Perkone
Caldari State
#15 - 2012-04-12 07:47:15 UTC
DEV Ytterbium should declare which is the next class that will be looked at and when the rebalancing is coming out.
This is so we don't keep on getting irrelevant posts every day on classes which will not be looked at for a long time.

No need to commit to some kind of detailed schedule exactly when each class will be fixed. Just post when the next 1-2 classes will be fixed so people can direct their analysis to that class.
Or we will keep getting every day excited posts to fix BS, fix BCs, fix recons, fix Gallente, fix X, fix Y

CAVEAT RICHARDUS VOLVERE - YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0
Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2012-04-12 10:31:16 UTC
Kaikka Carel wrote:
Their sig still goes above L-guns' resolution though - 125*3.5=437.5.


This doesnt matter, you need to compare speed:size ratio, a mwd bonus makes them speed tank almost as good as a AB fit.

AB 125 m / 583 m/s = ~0,21
Bonused MWD 437,5 m / 1457 m/s = ~0,3
Unbonused MWD 750 m / 1457 m/s = ~0,51

This value shows how easy it is to track your ship at max angular velocity, this shows that a mwd bonus is a great way to get a fast ship with decent speed tanking and is exactly what this ship type is supposed to do compared to BCs.
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#17 - 2012-04-12 17:18:32 UTC
The above implies you're getting your full velocity. That is very, very hard when running a MWD
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#18 - 2012-04-12 17:23:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Kahega Amielden
DP
Nalha Saldana
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2012-04-13 13:53:15 UTC
Kahega Amielden wrote:
The above implies you're getting your full velocity. That is very, very hard when running a MWD


Im more thinking about fleet fights where you are following a anchor, orbiting is kinda stupid in anything bigger then a frigate. In any other case the speed:size ratio will play in and will work fine.
The speed can enable you to really fly the ships as you would want to, either close range, sniping or skirmish just like the hulls were designed to do without getting destroyed for having those MWDs.
Kaikka Carel
Ziea
#20 - 2012-04-14 02:01:15 UTC
Argaral wrote:
I believe it's too general a fix. While it will vastly aid some ships(Sac), others will benefit far too much from it(Vaga). CCP imo should revisit them individually rather then as a whole.


Oh well isn't Vaga obsoleted by Cynabal at current meta? Such bonus could give an edge.
12Next page