These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Technology and Research Center » Player Features and Ideas Discussion » Best way to make HACs mighty again? remo...

Topic is locked indefinitely.

Previous page1234Next page

Best way to make HACs mighty again? remove rigs from tech 3 ships
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

Furry Armada 30
Furry Commander Furry Armada Likes received: 30	#41 - 2012-09-20 02:48:22 UTC true, look at some of the rohk fleet doctrines...

Sigras

Conglomo

Likes received: 1,109

#42 - 2012-09-20 08:43:05 UTC | Edited by: Sigras

Maybe im missing something . . .

comparing this vagabond

[Vagabond, PVP - 22KM Falloff/Medium Neut]
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Damage Control II

Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I
Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Warp Disruptor II

220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm Vulcan AutoCannon II, Barrage M
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Medium Core Defense Field Extender I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I

Hobgoblin II x5

436 DPS
32,821 EHP
2,717 m/s
3.1+32 range

vs this loki

[Loki, Speed Tanking Cheap]
Overdrive Injector System II
Overdrive Injector System II
Damage Control II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II

Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I
Large Shield Extender II
Stasis Webifier II
Medium Shield Extender II
Warp Disruptor II

425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
Medium Energy Neutralizer II

Medium Projectile Ambit Extension I
Medium Projectile Ambit Extension I
Medium Ancillary Current Router I

Loki Defensive - Adaptive Shielding
Loki Propulsion - Chassis Optimization
Loki Engineering - Supplemental Coolant Injector
Loki Electronics - Immobility Drivers
Loki Offensive - Projectile Scoping Array

Warrior II x5
Hobgoblin II x5

the loki does

435 DPS - one less
41,061 EHP - 25% more
2,931 m/s - 7% faster
3+35 range - 3 km more fall off

But it also gets, an extra web at 25 km, overloads far better with the loki bonus and the supplemental coolant injector and an extra set of drones (probably use ECM drones)

Another fit i came up with didnt have the web but was still faster, did way more damage, and had more HP

How is this not better in every way?

Sigras

Conglomo

Likes received: 1,109

#43 - 2012-09-20 09:06:29 UTC

Astroniomix wrote:

Vaga is faster than the loki

This is simply not true, see my last post.

Astroniomix wrote:

zealot is faster than the legion

This is also not true, both in an AHAC gang configuration, running a 1600 plate and an AB, even with the legion running 3 armor rigs, and the zealot only running one, the zealot still only goes 557 to the legions 565

The zealot is a touch smaller which is something, but i think this is more than offset by the fact that the legion has better utility (more mids) more damage, twice the HP, and a much easier fit

Astroniomix wrote:

muninn is a better arty platform than the loki but gets outclassed by the tornado.

The only thing I can tell that the Muninn gets over the loki with an arty fit is a flight of light drones and an extra utility high, both of which IMHO arent that helpful to a sniper ship.

Astroniomix wrote:

Sac active tanks better than the legion

I disagree, the best tank Ive ever been able to get out of a HAM sac (and still put tackle and weapons on it) is 553 DPS, i have a legion getting 776

I will admit though, that the sac does have more utility with an extra high, and three drones that a similarly fit legion does not have.

Tarn Kugisa

Kugisa Dynamics

Likes received: 558

#44 - 2012-09-20 11:21:08 UTC

Furry Commander wrote:

i would rather see CCP make the jury rigging skill effect calibration points so there is a point to train level 5, and tweak the rest of the rigs (particularly the drawbacks) to make them less similar.

I agree. I can't be bothered to train rigging skills past 1 because I never need to bother about the drawbacks and because T2 rigs are expensive as hell

Be polite. Be efficient. Have a plan to troll everyone you meet - KuroVolt

Xiaodown

Caldari Provisions

Caldari State

Likes received: 111

#45 - 2012-09-20 13:28:46 UTC

Nariya Kentaya wrote:

Ok, straight off, any ship without rigs will enver be used in pvp,

You do realize rigs didn't always exist, right? And even when they did exist, there weren't small, medium, and large rigs - there were just rigs, and they were twice as expensive as current large rigs, and T2 rigs were literally hundreds of millions of isk? Rigs weren't always a requirement.

Astroniomix

School of Applied Knowledge

Caldari State

Likes received: 881

#46 - 2012-09-20 14:50:02 UTC

Sigras wrote:

Your speed numbers are off. That loki fit does 2349 m/s and has lower agility (compounded by the fact that you had to put TWO overdrives just to get it close to the vaga's speed)

And then the fact that you had to blow two rig slots to get the vaga's falloff. (this has more to do with the fact that a single tracking enhancer matches the effectivness of TWO falloff rigs, seeing as the loki has more base falloff)

Astroniomix

School of Applied Knowledge

Caldari State

Likes received: 881

#47 - 2012-09-20 14:57:53 UTC

Xiaodown wrote:

Nariya Kentaya wrote:

Ok, straight off, any ship without rigs will enver be used in pvp,

Double post but I feel like this needs to be addressed on it's own.

Yes we know rigs didn't exist for a while and then they were stupid expensive to use when they first got thrown in.

But now that they are practical to use and have such a significant effect on how ships perform, taking anything that isn't a throwaway ship out to pvp is a good way to just end up dying.

Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation 43
Uris Vitgar Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation Likes received: 43	#48 - 2012-09-20 15:51:00 UTC 1 This idea is brilliant and makes perfect sense. Very little is wrong with t3s apart from the ridiculous tanks they can create, and the very concept of rigs is specialisation and minmaxing which is supposed to be the opposite of what tech III is about.

Airto TLA

Acorn's Wonder Bars

Likes received: 66

#49 - 2012-09-20 17:39:24 UTC

Sigras wrote:

Just for aurgument sake what happens to the Vaga fit if you spend the hull price difference on a little pimping the vaga? It would seem some of these diffrence would dispappear with some reasonable priced faction gear and you have quite a bit of a difference to spend.

Aiifa

The Scope

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 55

#50 - 2012-09-20 18:29:09 UTC

Anhenka wrote:

Rigs provide far too much to just across the board remove them from all t3's.

Anything that a rigged t3 currently does better than a rigged t2, an unrigged t3 will do worse than a rigged t2.

[[
Hey! That's exactly my point! CCP intended the generalist Tech3s to be not as good at the jobs the hyper specialised tech2 cruisers are meant to be best at. So removing, rigs, as you say, will rightly make them worse than a rigged tech2. Can you see how this is a desirable and efficient course of action for CCP?
]]

Plus the poor loki and proteus. The only thing making them viable outside of the stealth pve hunter role is that they are tougher alternatives to existing ships that use a different defense type. Armor Loki vs Shield Hughin, and Armor Proteus Vs meh armor/shield Lachesis.

A webbing fleet Loki without trimarks? Pfff... no. Would get damn near volleyed. Wouldn't have much more ehp than a rigged hughin.

A heavy tackle Proteus without trimarks... Pfff.. not likely at those prices. Armor tanked Lachesis at 1/4 the price, near the same effectiveness, and no loss of SP on death.

Before this patch, I might have said rigless tengu would still be better than the rigged drake, but with the HML nerf a rigless tengu would be horrifically bad.

If you want to directly nerf the t3 line by removing rigs, you have to build a section of the rigs functionality back into the subsystems.
Flat our removing 40-45% of the primary buffer for all trimarked/extended combat t3's would be a nerf that makes the HML nerfs look harsh. Even moreso considering the purpose of the buffer is to allow logistics to lock you in time. a 40% decrease in armor = dying before logis can even lock 90% of the time in fleet fights.

TLDR: losing all 3 rigs and the accompanying versatility is a poor way to nerf a ship who's main selling point is it's versatility.
T3's being worse than all their t2 counterparts regardless of fitting on top of risking skill points and 600+ mil isk, not supported.

They could use their lows exclusively for tank, like how the recons use their lows and most of their mids exclusively for tank.

Problem solved, balance restored.

They'll remain versatile.

Astroniomix wrote:

Aiifa wrote:

the loki has a monster tank, the legion can move at serious speeds if it so chooses, and the tengu can actually brawl.

You got those out of order.

Nope, you fail at reading.

I was noting the contrast that you outright ignored in this post:

Astroniomix wrote:

And the hacs that don't see use have pretty much never seen use as they have had the same problems since inception. The introduction of t3s didn't change much. Especialy because many of the t3s suffer from the same problems as their hac counterparts.

I was correcting you. The chief problem of gall hacs was always pg and sig. Prote can have loads of pg and smaller sig.

Amarr hacs, speed. Legion can fit fuel cat or just mwd all day long with the monster cap.

Min hacs, tank. Loki. Oh that tank. That sig and that damage and that tank.

Cald hacs, lolbrawling. Tengu can brawl.

Look at these tech3 ships being so versatile that they completely leave behind their racial specifications. AND THEY DON'T EVEN NEED RIGS TO DO IT.

Astroniomix wrote:

Taking anything that isn't a throwaway ship* or a supported tech3 with resist bonuses, larger buffer than racial counterparts, small sig and high ab speed out to pvp

if AHAC mode tech3s are so hideously vulnerable without their t2 trimarks, how on earth did all those old style AHACs that had barely a third the damn armour buffer and less resists ever survive?

Stop drinking the logi lock time koolaid. It's bullshit. Have your logi pay more attention.

And when you want a tackle prote, don't expect it to be a dps dealer at the same time. Double plate it and faction resists, everyone else does.

Sigras

Conglomo

Likes received: 1,109

#51 - 2012-09-20 19:23:47 UTC

Astroniomix wrote:

Herp Derp . . . i forgot to unload my snake set . . . sorry . . . but i would still take the loki because it has a 25 km web

That being said, i cede the point that the vaga is faster . . . but the statements about the other ships still hold true

Astroniomix

School of Applied Knowledge

Caldari State

Likes received: 881

#52 - 2012-09-20 19:27:40 UTC

Sigras wrote:

Astroniomix wrote:

It's been a while since I've flown any of them. I concede they need some love. But gutting rigs isn't a good balancing mechanic.

Ganthrithor

School of Applied Knowledge

Caldari State

Likes received: 927

#53 - 2012-09-20 23:03:52 UTC

Astroniomix wrote:

Ganthrithor wrote:

If there's one thing CCP needs to do it's to stop attempting to balance ships around fleet fights. There are way too many variables involved in determining the winner of a fleet fight to make ship balancing decisions around the results except in the most egregious of cases.

I tend to agree with you on this point. However I do agree with CCP's belief that "drakes should not be a viable fleet doctrine".

And while we are at it, since tier 3 BCs beat the sniper hacs in terms of actual sniping ability and speed. Should we remove rigs from them?

In kil2's interview with Fozzie from the other day Fozzie definitely implied that CCP are looking to nerf the effectiveness of large, LR guns vs smaller targets, largely to give sniper HACs a niche again.

Ganthrithor

School of Applied Knowledge

Caldari State

Likes received: 927

#54 - 2012-09-20 23:08:55 UTC | Edited by: Ganthrithor

Sigras wrote:

Both your fits suck. There's no point comparing ships on the basis of objectively horrible fittings. You unironically fit a medium shield extender to a cruiser. Way to shoot your own argument down, holy crap.

e: while we're at it, now that you've admitted you used a snake set when calculating the Loki's speed (and it's actually slower than the Vaga), why don't you [tell] us about its align time while fitting zero agility mods?

Lin-Young Borovskova

Doomheim

Likes received: 1,145

#55 - 2012-09-20 23:17:41 UTC

OP:

You're dam right!!

Your idea will not make HAC's other than already mighty Zealots better but clearly annihilates T3's once and for all.

So you don't want to spend time training for T3's or too lazy to do it, you don't like something you don't even know how it looks like to use because some awesome videos and rumours told you those "are OP"

Roll

First hurricane nerf while Brutix will still be a good crap, now this...holy sh...

brb


Astroniomix School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State Likes received: 881	#56 - 2012-09-20 23:32:40 UTC 1 Ganthrithor wrote: why don't you [tell] us about its align time while fitting zero agility mods? It's 10 seconds with the mwd on, 6.6 with it off.


Ganthrithor School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State Likes received: 927	#57 - 2012-09-21 04:55:17 UTC Astroniomix wrote: Ganthrithor wrote: why don't you [tell] us about its align time while fitting zero agility mods? It's 10 seconds with the mwd on, 6.6 with it off. Yup. That's pretty bad. Gotta love how many people come in here and post stupid arguments about ships they have never flown, don't know how to fit, or both.

Dante KamiyaX

STARK INDUSTRIES.INCX

Likes received: 14

#58 - 2012-09-21 07:31:11 UTC

Aiifa wrote:

work in progress

In anticipation of more bumbling and overzealous rebalancing, I look to the still pretty viable and innocent Assault Cruisers with a mixture of fondness and fear.

Strategic Cruisers were meant to be Jacks of all Trades and masters of none. Sadly, the huge price and crazy subsystem bonuses (particularly defensive ones) made throwing isk at them to give them battleship tanks viable; and greater turret slots than their HAC counterparts giving them almost battleship damage making most other ship choices unappealing.

The skillpoint loss is a disincentive, but it's not a damn balancing mechanic. You nutters.

HACs can still do unique things. Zealots, vagas and diemosts are quite nimble, ishtars are pve queens, sacrileges make superb station game boats or so I hear. But their niches have been impinged upon by the pocket battleships that strats have become.

And I argue that most of what makes strats so painfully ubiquitous and mudflatedly essential is the rigs stacking with the tanks. Or the powergrids.

Removing rigs from strats would remove trimarks from already base armour hp bonused legions and protes, while still giving them sizeable tanks if needed. It would also make 100mn ab strats much harder to fit, in line with other cruisers.

And what's more, it would mean that one tech3 could really fit multiple roles, as tech3s were originally meant to. The specificity and permanence of rigs, once removed, could mean that a loki really could carry around the equipment required to switch from AHAC mode with long range webs to ratting mode with a killer xlasb tank.

B.S and NO

Aiifa

The Scope

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 55

#59 - 2012-09-21 12:28:37 UTC

Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:

mindless crap from some hysterical school dropout's alt

no this will mostly just make tech 3 tanks on par with the quite beefy tech2 tanks. It will also remove some ohsoexploitable features of tech3s.

I can fly all four tech3s and love them and use them daily. Apart from the prote, it's not so hot.

Dante, feel free to outline your counter-argument.


Astroniomix School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State Likes received: 881	#60 - 2012-09-21 23:16:25 UTC 1 Aiifa wrote: Lin-Young Borovskova wrote: mindless crap from some hysterical school dropout's alt feel free to outline your counter-argument. We can't outline a counter-argument when there isn't an argument to counter. The only thing you have gotten right so far is that t3s have better tanks than hacs.

Previous page1234Next page

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Furry Armada

Conglomo

Kugisa Dynamics

Caldari Provisions

Caldari State

School of Applied Knowledge

Caldari State

Center for Advanced Studies

Gallente Federation

Acorn's Wonder Bars

The Scope

Gallente Federation

School of Applied Knowledge

Caldari State

Doomheim

STARK INDUSTRIES.INCX