These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#41 - 2013-07-18 12:00:36 UTC
Capqu wrote:
David Kir wrote:
Capqu wrote:
hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts?

please fix rise 3/10 see me after class


Because they are not straight up improvements of T1 hulls.
They are specialized ships.
0,0029834/10, read up some stuff.


if you look at how t2s all started this isn't true, they all (except stealth bombers i think - but they fixed that when they gave them a unique model) had exactly the same bonuses as t1 but with an added t2 bonus and maybe a role bonus because they were improved/specialized versions of the t1 ships, hence why they show up in variations of that t1


Forcing the T2 base hull bonuses to be the same as the T1 hulls has never been a hard rule, and it is not something we're going to start enforcing now.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
BadAssMcKill
Aliastra
#42 - 2013-07-18 12:00:55 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
these or therefore lack of will have virtually no impact on there usage.

I was expecting a more extreme buff perhaps more like the navy attack cruisers ... boy i was WRONG.....
15 slots only its T2 why not the +2 slots that the AF's get over T1 frigs .. where's the advantage over navy here?
50% is too low without reducing there sig radius especially on shield HACS
For the 150-200mil price tag these come with making them compete with Navy bc's for tank is stupid.. competing with sniping ABC's is even worse idea.

Overall CCP Rise back to the drawing board here


Considering that we've been shouting at the top of our lungs for a year that T2 won't get buffed as much as T1 was, I don't know why you're surprised.


Yeah but when they still feel underwhelming compared to T1/Faction that's a problem no?
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#43 - 2013-07-18 12:02:05 UTC
BadAssMcKill wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
these or therefore lack of will have virtually no impact on there usage.

I was expecting a more extreme buff perhaps more like the navy attack cruisers ... boy i was WRONG.....
15 slots only its T2 why not the +2 slots that the AF's get over T1 frigs .. where's the advantage over navy here?
50% is too low without reducing there sig radius especially on shield HACS
For the 150-200mil price tag these come with making them compete with Navy bc's for tank is stupid.. competing with sniping ABC's is even worse idea.

Overall CCP Rise back to the drawing board here


Considering that we've been shouting at the top of our lungs for a year that T2 won't get buffed as much as T1 was, I don't know why you're surprised.


Yeah but when they still feel underwhelming compared to T1/Faction that's a problem no?


We can't control how you feel, we can only control how powerful the ships are, and they're quite powerful.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
David Kir
Hotbirds
#44 - 2013-07-18 12:02:34 UTC
Capqu wrote:
David Kir wrote:
Capqu wrote:
hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts?

please fix rise 3/10 see me after class


Because they are not straight up improvements of T1 hulls.
They are specialized ships.
0,0029834/10, read up some stuff.


if you look at how t2s all started this isn't true, they all (except stealth bombers i think - but they fixed that when they gave them a unique model) had exactly the same bonuses as t1 but with an added t2 bonus and maybe a role bonus because they were improved/specialized versions of the t1 ships, hence why they show up in variations of that t1


Ok, I'll put it this way.
The Sacrilege used to be a short ranged laser boat.
Zealot was a sniper.
You know what happened?
People slapped pulses on the Zealot, and rolled with it.
That's why the Sac is now a missile boat.
Would you prefer the two ships stepping on each other's toes?
What do you want?
Two identical armor/laser ships?

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2013-07-18 12:02:45 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU

The vexor is gun bonused and sort of expected to use them, the ishtar is not. You can fit a 1600mm plate based tank and "basically anything you want" to the vexor already if you don't make much use of the highs, or you can fill your highs with utility modules at the cost of a lighter tank and tighter fitting. It's a fair trade off.

And what is the reason the navy vexor has the same power grid and +10 CPU over the vexor yet only has 2 unbonused turrets, where as the Ishtar got an extra turret.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#46 - 2013-07-18 12:03:43 UTC
CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus?
seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ?

look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos....
missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship

Also more speed on these things please

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
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#47 - 2013-07-18 12:05:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
Also a vaga shield tanking with 4 mids still..... i was expecting another mid here also more cpu might help with cpu hungry ASB's
also it could do with a little more dps say a 10% damage bonus.

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
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
#48 - 2013-07-18 12:05:38 UTC
with the sac. how about removing the utility high and adding a low slot.

OMG when can i get a pic here
Max Ventrue
U-208
#49 - 2013-07-18 12:06:02 UTC
If you want to have the Sac maintain its role as heavy tackle, why not drop the cap recharge bonus for a 5 or 10% web bonus to either range or velocity?

All in all +1 for the changes.
David Kir
Hotbirds
#50 - 2013-07-18 12:07:29 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus?
seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ?

look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos....
missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship

Also more speed on these things please


Speed belongs to the Minmatar rustbins.
Want speed?
Then the Minmatar should get an appropriate chunk of it.

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.
Capqu
Half Empty
xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
#51 - 2013-07-18 12:08:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Capqu
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Capqu wrote:
David Kir wrote:
Capqu wrote:
hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts?

please fix rise 3/10 see me after class


Because they are not straight up improvements of T1 hulls.
They are specialized ships.
0,0029834/10, read up some stuff.


if you look at how t2s all started this isn't true, they all (except stealth bombers i think - but they fixed that when they gave them a unique model) had exactly the same bonuses as t1 but with an added t2 bonus and maybe a role bonus because they were improved/specialized versions of the t1 ships, hence why they show up in variations of that t1


Forcing the T2 base hull bonuses to be the same as the T1 hulls has never been a hard rule, and it is not something we're going to start enforcing now.


yuck, muh lore

you better give inties some goddamn lockrange to make up for this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#52 - 2013-07-18 12:09:36 UTC
David Kir wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus?
seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ?

look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos....
missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship

Also more speed on these things please


Speed belongs to the Minmatar rustbins.
Want speed?
Then the Minmatar should get an appropriate chunk of it.


They all need more speed the eagle at 175m/s is shockingy slow ... what about people who would like to use a blaster setup instead of Rails? .. some light drones would help too

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
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#53 - 2013-07-18 12:12:00 UTC
Also is the cost being considered here?
any reduction on there cost?

you will certainly have too if you want people to use them over navy cruisers which just seem plain better at being cruisers...

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
David Kir
Hotbirds
#54 - 2013-07-18 12:13:24 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
David Kir wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus?
seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ?

look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos....
missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship

Also more speed on these things please


Speed belongs to the Minmatar rustbins.
Want speed?
Then the Minmatar should get an appropriate chunk of it.


They all need more speed the eagle at 175m/s is shockingy slow ... what about people who would like to use a blaster setup instead of Rails? .. some light drones would help too


It's kind of got an astonishing range bonus, which makes it golden with antimatter, so range control shouldn't be much of an issue.

I'd boost its agility, instead: its sniper role would benefit from fast warp in/warp out capacity.

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.
Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#55 - 2013-07-18 12:14:53 UTC
As written, the cerberus' flight time bonus only applies to heavy and heavy assault missiles but not lights fired from rapid light launchers - is this intentional?
Luscius Uta
#56 - 2013-07-18 12:15:18 UTC
Kinda weird to see 50 m^3 drone bay on a Sacrilege, when 25 m^3 should be enough by all senses, but I suppose the ship needed a buff (even though my senses say that giving it a bonus to explosion velocity would be more logical that giving it a unusually large drone bay for a non-Gallente ship).

Eagle still has a duplicate optimal range bonus. If 100% bonus to optimal range was so great more people would fly Rail Tengus I suppose. Therefore I would replace the range bonus from HAC skill with a bonus to tracking, damage or maybe even shield hitpoints.

Also, I don't think that falloff bonus on Hybrid boats is much useful, no matter if you use Blasters or Rails. So I would remove the falloff bonus from Deimos and replace it with a 7.5% bonus to either tracking or armour repair amount (or maybe even 10% optimal, which I would like to see on a Gallente boat for once).

And Ishtar, while being changed for the better, still has the same CPU :(

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Alsyth
#57 - 2013-07-18 12:16:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Alsyth
- slower than most T1 cruisers still, which is a real problem
- base hp so low that tank cannot rival faction cruisers except under heavy reps.
- munnin still bad, why not get rid of these utility hi like the deimos, and have a truly versatile 5/4/6? that along the very small buff to arties compared to the others makes Munnin really poor. Only 3 med slots, really... Even the Deimos has 4!

- could really hurt the tier3 BC and that's a good thing
- awesome job on the vaga, will be a great solo ship with ASB (OP even, imo)
- nice for the deimos, ishtar. Ishtar still lacks CPU though.
- awesome for the eagle except it's still much too slow
- awesome for rapid light missile launcher cerberus, but still no use for hml, and horrible to fit. One of the few with a decent speed.
- sacrilege I don't understand. still meh (HML being so useless don't help), and the cap bonus, really?
- Zealot will be nice, the damage buff will make it really powerful with beams. But too slow.



Edit:
Overall, not enough differentiation from T3. Eagle, Vaga and Ishtar are the only one really better than their T3 counterpart at what they do, the other still fail to find a role a T3 can't do better.

Give them speed like you did with T1/Faction, and all of them will find their role: being fast, what BC/T3 cannot do. Right now 100MN AB T3s (I want all of them dead btw) have better sig-tanking and enough speed to make these HACs not worth looking at.

And if you look at pricetag, then most of them could be efficiently replaced by their faction counterpart which are much faster, and generally have more tank. Unless you want a fleet with heavy reps in which case base resistances help, true. But then T3...
David Kir
Hotbirds
#58 - 2013-07-18 12:17:41 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
Kinda weird to see 50 m^3 drone bay on a Sacrilege, when 25 m^3 should be enough by all senses, but I suppose the ship needed a buff (even though my senses say that giving it a bonus to explosion velocity would be more logical that giving it a unusually large drone bay for a non-Gallente ship).

Eagle still has a duplicate optimal range bonus. If 100% bonus to optimal range was so great more people would fly Rail Tengus I suppose. Therefore I would replace the range bonus from HAC skill with a bonus to tracking, damage or maybe even shield hitpoints.

Also, I don't think that falloff bonus on Hybrid boats is much useful, no matter if you use Blasters or Rails. So I would remove the falloff bonus from Deimos and replace it with a 7.5% bonus to either tracking or armour repair amount (or maybe even 10% optimal, which I would like to see on a Gallente boat for once).

And Ishtar, while being changed for the better, still has the same CPU :(


Rail Tengus weren't flown because:
a) Rails used to suck
b) the Accelerated Ejection Bay is OP as hell.
c) Rails used to suck

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#59 - 2013-07-18 12:18:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
It looks to me like it will still be the same old go too HACS ... Vaga for mobility and killing little things now with a strong tank ASB.
Zealot and muninn for 0.0 AHAC gangs.... and ishtar for drone guys now even better than before.

Its a shame i was hoping caldari HACS would be worth bothering with.. :(
sacrilege potential is still wasted on tanking obsession yet didn't get the extra low it needs
Deimos will still be over-expensive and slow version of thorax which tracks better and is much quicker.. or ofc Talos which is plain better and won't be much speed difference it seems.

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
Tuxedo Catfish
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#60 - 2013-07-18 12:18:53 UTC
... you're buffing the Vagabond?

What, were people not using them or something?

I like the Ishtar change and about half the Deimos change. I wish you'd replaced the MWD capacitor bonus with something useful though, maybe tracking?