These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Attack frigate changes

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#141 - 2012-06-27 16:22:21 UTC
they sound ok although rate of fire on light launchers would be better bonus and nerf range a little on light missiles and change the t2 penalties they nerf the small sig fast ships too much.

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
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#142 - 2012-06-27 16:32:46 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
That's good points regarding the rockets; the missile changes are most likely to be delayed until after the Attack Frigate overhaul anyway, but thought it wise to bring it to the discussion now to see what the player base thinks about it. If it's crazy over the top it won't make it past this thread.

if you like to buff rockets, think about reducing/removing the ship speed penalty of long range rockets.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#143 - 2012-06-27 17:07:55 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
That's good points regarding the rockets; the missile changes are most likely to be delayed until after the Attack Frigate overhaul anyway, but thought it wise to bring it to the discussion now to see what the player base thinks about it. If it's crazy over the top it won't make it past this thread.

if you like to buff rockets, think about reducing/removing the ship speed penalty of long range rockets.


I agree that the T2 missiles that have a speed reduction are a bit extreme when multiplied together. I mean those penalties get pretty ridiculous. Maybe it should just be a flat penalty not multiplied when you have 1 launcher loaded with that ammo...?

Where I am.
Murashu
Dead and Delirious
Brotherhood of Spacers
#144 - 2012-06-27 17:15:18 UTC
I believe Rockets are pretty well balanced since the last buff they recieved. Light Missiles could use some love but reducing the ROF opens up a whole new can of worms.

Using the T2 variant the unbonused ROFs are:


  • 4.0 Rocket launcher
  • 12.0 Light Missile launcher
  • 9.6 Rapid Light Missile launcher


If you reduce the ROF of the Light Missile launcher, you have to do something to make the Rapid Missile Launcher worth the extra fitting requirements or it becomes obsolete.
Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#145 - 2012-06-27 17:26:24 UTC
Murashu wrote:
I believe Rockets are pretty well balanced since the last buff they recieved. Light Missiles could use some love but reducing the ROF opens up a whole new can of worms.

Using the T2 variant the unbonused ROFs are:


  • 4.0 Rocket launcher
  • 12.0 Light Missile launcher
  • 9.6 Rapid Light Missile launcher


If you reduce the ROF of the Light Missile launcher, you have to do something to make the Rapid Missile Launcher worth the extra fitting requirements or it becomes obsolete.


Rapid LML are pretty extreme DPS for frigates when put on ships like the caracal/drake. They make those ships basically oversized Destroyers setups and the bonus should be removed from them that applies to Rapid LML. If that is the case, I don't mind the Rapid LML getting a little bit of a bonus if the LML gets a bit of a bonus to launcher ROF.

Even 1 seconds on the LML is enough to give the 10% bonus they're looking for and make it feel less extreme.

Where I am.
Nevigrofnu Mrots
Goonswarm Federation
#146 - 2012-06-27 17:35:29 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
That's good points regarding the rockets; the missile changes are most likely to be delayed until after the Attack Frigate overhaul anyway, but thought it wise to bring it to the discussion now to see what the player base thinks about it. If it's crazy over the top it won't make it past this thread.


rockets, a increase of 5% is good and you should stop there, change, measure and then if need (I have my doughts) give it more...

for ligth missiles, the changes are excelent and might be what they need to be used again, only if the light missile launchers CPU usage could drop 1 or 2 CPU points per launcher...Smile to make this perfect...
Sine DeusNomine
Chimera Guardians
#147 - 2012-06-27 19:54:53 UTC
I do agree with rockets being okay already would not mind a 5% increase to them seems they still lack a little behind others on applied DPS.

For light missiles that 10% more damage will be very much enjoyed and well needed.

Ouch sad to see my condor is still out performed by the other attack frigates. be nice to see them taken down to its limitations. or at least give it its agility slowest speed and crappiest agility come on we know caldari are known to have agile ships because they depend on shield tanking. Only to be bested by the Minmatar ships in that area.
Onslaughtor
Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#148 - 2012-06-27 22:01:33 UTC
A 10% bonus to rockets does not seem to over kill to me. If a frig got 100 dps it would then get 110 dps. That could be a little much but i would like to see rockets and light missles get a natural damage bonus. A 7.5% bonus would make a good starting point. Then if its not enough you increase to 10%, and if it is to much to drop to 5%.

A good way to possibly test this would be to add 5% 7.5% and 10% rocket and light missile damage boosters to SISI so that we can test them in the flesh when you get the ships on there.
Takamori Maruyama
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#149 - 2012-06-27 22:04:00 UTC
Could use a new T1 armored combat Rocket boat.
The only one that fit somehow in the description is the Kestrel.
Why the Khanid don't make a cheap version of the vengeance?

Also CCP could get us piloting Fighters :P

Loud and clear...
Mira Lynne
State War Academy
Caldari State
#150 - 2012-06-27 23:57:59 UTC
Kalaratiri wrote:
Snip

Alternate Solution: Buff Rocket and Light Missile DPS by 20%, Reduce Damage Bonuses on Ships (10%/Level becomes 5%/Level, Hookbill Damage bonus increased to 25%/Level and Launchers Reduced to 2)
Pros:
-Less Skill intensive
-More Reason to fit rockets on non-bonused ships (as opposed to Neuts, Nos, etc)
-(With the Above Stats) Minor Hookbill Nerf.
Cons:
-Balancing Maybe?

Takamori Maruyama wrote:
Could use a new T1 armored combat Rocket boat

Inquisitor. Granted it sort of sucks right now.

CCP Ytterbium wrote:

CONDOR:

  • Frigate skill bonuses: changed to +10% kinetic damage to rocket and light missile damage per level (original thread post forgot to mention the damage was only applying to kinetic, apologies for the unintentional trolling people Blink)
  • Powergrid: reduced from 40 PWG to 34 PWG
  • Targeting range: reduced from 32.5km to 30km


ATRON:

  • Powergrid: reduced from 42 PWG to 37 PWG
  • Targeting range: increased from 22.5km to 25km


SLASHER:

  • Targeting range: increased from 20km to 22.5km



-Is the Condor's new 10% Damage/Level in Addition to the 10% Velocity/Level, or does it replace both the previous bonuses?
-What was the reasoning behind reducing its PG? It now has less than the slasher, in addition to needing more to fit weapons of any sort
-What was the reasoning behing reducing its lock range, while at the same time increasing the Slasher's?

Its still the slowest, second largest, slowest locking, least agile and the most major of its few advantages just got reduced.
Correct me if im wrong - but judging from the above, it seems to be more Combat oriented than Fleet/Tackle Oriented.

[u]I, too, horse frogs.[/u] Support the Return of Realistic Module Icons! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=114818&find=unread
Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#151 - 2012-06-28 02:18:20 UTC
Interesting approach with the Tormentor vs Punisher - it makes sense.

Rockets... don't really need that damage buff tbh, are you sure about this? They're awesome enough already methinks!

Light missiles definitely need more of a damage buff, but as for the ROF buff that others have asked for, I'm actually fine with their current rate of fire, because I think all the long range guns/missiles should be high volley damage/low ROF like artillery. So my position is to make sure the light missiles have a solid punch, and don't worry about the ROF, as it's pretty much ideal at the moment (so long as damage is increased adequately).

Oh, and the speed penalty on precision missiles should be reduced or eliminated too, definitely take a look at that.

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#152 - 2012-06-28 08:09:02 UTC
I think rocket should not get more than 5% dps boost. Considering the range, they are already very powerful at 8km and beyond ; this weapon can kite *any* short range weapon (yes, even bonused pulse if you use rigs) and don't have tracking so no long range weapon is a threat.

As long as a rocket ship is able to dictate range, it can take on *any* target. Yes it lack a bit of dps compared to the others, and a bit of speed and mobility too ; but give it one or the other, and it will be as OP as a tengu or a drake, if not even more !
Kalaratiri
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#153 - 2012-06-28 08:53:29 UTC
Mira Lynne wrote:
Kalaratiri wrote:
Snip

Alternate Solution: Buff Rocket and Light Missile DPS by 20%, Reduce Damage Bonuses on Ships (10%/Level becomes 5%/Level, Hookbill Damage bonus increased to 25%/Level and Launchers Reduced to 2)
Pros:
-Less Skill intensive
-More Reason to fit rockets on non-bonused ships (as opposed to Neuts, Nos, etc)
-(With the Above Stats) Minor Hookbill Nerf.
Cons:
-Balancing Maybe?


Interesting idea, but the hookbill currently has a 20% bonus to kinetic rocket damage per level, and 3 launchers. All the other navy frigates have a 20% weapon damage bonus per level and 2 turret slots. Rockets are already pretty solid dps as stated above, due to no tracking requirements and easily increased range with rigs. So, I wouldn't mind a rocket damage buff (I do fly some rocket ships P ) but I really don't want the hookbill becoming more imbalanced compared to the other navy frigs than it already is.

Also, sorry for turning the thread into a discussion about hookbills.

She's mad but she's magic, there's no lie in her fire.

This is possibly one of the worst threads in the history of these forums.  - CCP Falcon

I don't remember when last time you said something that wasn't either dumb or absurd. - Diana Kim
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#154 - 2012-06-28 09:53:42 UTC
John Nucleus wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

TORMENTOR:


So a 4-3-4 slot layout? This looks damn good... plus 2 drones...

Was about to ask for a bigger drone bay but I feel bad asking for more...


Actually this iteration gives it one extra turret but no extra highs. So 3h-3m-4l with 3 turret slots.


Mira Lynne wrote:

-Is the Condor's new 10% Damage/Level in Addition to the 10% Velocity/Level, or does it replace both the previous bonuses?
-What was the reasoning behind reducing its PG? It now has less than the slasher, in addition to needing more to fit weapons of any sort
-What was the reasoning behing reducing its lock range, while at the same time increasing the Slasher's?

Its still the slowest, second largest, slowest locking, least agile and the most major of its few advantages just got reduced.
Correct me if im wrong - but judging from the above, it seems to be more Combat oriented than Fleet/Tackle Oriented.


The 10% Kinetic Damage/Level replaces both previous bonuses in this version.

We will be continuing to take feedback and will keep an eye on the Condor's performance as we go forward.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Madbuster73
State War Academy
Caldari State
#155 - 2012-06-28 10:29:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Madbuster73
I am fighting with frigates on a daily bases and I found that:

Merlin and Incursus are WAY overpowered at the moment.

I have been in situations where a dual medium ancillary shield merlin can tank over 330 dps (without bonuses) and do more then 150 dps. Even a buffer tanked merlin can have almost 8k tank (with web-scram-ab) with over 210 dps overheated wich is insane.
Same goes for dual rep Incursus wich can tank 150 dps capstable without a problem.
As it stands now those two frigates can easily beat any Faction frigate and even T2 Assault ships.
As for the Rifter that is completely useless now with it's pathetic 130 dps and 4.5k tank compared to the Merlin and Incursus mentioned above.

I have not trained all my skills to see my Faction Frig or T2 Assaultship be pwned by a T1 frigate.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#156 - 2012-06-28 10:33:10 UTC
Just echoing that rockets are already basically okay, and the Hawk and Hookbill in particular do not need buffing. A blanket rocket change would be a painfully bad idea, with the ships benefiting most being the ones that do not deserve boosting.

Light missiles, however, are a bit lacklustre. They're quite hard to fit, and there damage is significantly mitigated against unwebbed frigates (and if you're inside web range in a LM frigate then you're in trouble!). OTOH, they have remarkable range , particularly in conjunction with the classic Caldari missile velocity bonus - but that velocity bonus is kinda necessary to get them able to effectively engage fast targets...

The difficulty in fitting is probably justified - ships fitting long-range weapons are supposed to have to give up on tank (unless you're a Drake or using Scorch L?). The reduction in explosion radius is probably a good idea as it helps damage application in the intended use of LMs, against untackled frigates, without any side effects of altering damage against larger stuff.
John Nucleus
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#157 - 2012-06-28 10:52:28 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
John Nucleus wrote:
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

TORMENTOR:


So a 4-3-4 slot layout? This looks damn good... plus 2 drones...

Was about to ask for a bigger drone bay but I feel bad asking for more...


Actually this iteration gives it one extra turret but no extra highs. So 3h-3m-4l with 3 turret slots.




Thought so, it was quite a buff. Any ETA on those changes?
John Nucleus
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#158 - 2012-06-28 11:17:45 UTC
Btw, about capacitor bonus on amarr ship, couldn't you just drop the cap needs of lasers by half? Or increase capacitor regeneration rate of the ship instead? Maybe on frigs only...

Is the cap bonus a legacy thing that used to be necessary and no longer is or is it still a very important balance fix? It kinda sucks to always lose a bonus for it.
Mike Whiite
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#159 - 2012-06-28 11:44:09 UTC
Here to agree upon the no need to boost rockets, My Hookbill is already one of my favourite ships, o need to over do it.

Just a few requests:

Could we just do bonuses on small missiles instead of the rockets and light missiles, like the merlin does a bonus to hybrides (I know it's one ammo type) I think it is quite confusing to new players.

Or make the ships rocket or Light missile ship as a base, especialy when it will be very hard to fit a certain type of launcher, like this condor will have a hard time fitting standaard launchers (not saying it should not be possible, but more like Blaster and Rail ships)

So the Condor will be the short range tackler and the Kestrel more the long range bombadier.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#160 - 2012-06-28 11:55:34 UTC
John Nucleus wrote:

Is the cap bonus a legacy thing that used to be necessary and no longer is or is it still a very important balance fix? It kinda sucks to always lose a bonus for it.

Laser turrets are the mightest outside of short range. Capacitor usage is basically their only drawback at these range, with non selectable damage type. Even without a damage bonus, they are close from other bonused weapons. The capacitor bonus allow them to not cap out themselves while fireing. Without this cap usage, they would completely obsolete railguns which already suffer from the comparison.