These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc.
The Fourth District
#481 - 2013-07-18 20:38:22 UTC
Some notes:

- velocity of some HACs seems too low for cruiser size ships

- Isthar CPU seems a bit too small

- MWD fitted cruisers generally have capacitor problems, so to make full use of new MWD bonus it would not hurt if you'd increased capacitor amount for all HACs

Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows...
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#482 - 2013-07-18 20:39:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:

It'd be a great idea to have missile ships represented--even using the sort of dual damage bonus a Scythe FI gets, but I think it's too tricky to bake that into a hull that gets 4x damage/application bonuses. I think the stat overload on have 4x missile bonuses and 4x projectile bonuses would be too much visually, too much to balance around, etc. I'm fairly certain that the Claymore changes (making it into a missile boat) is what CCP is going to say is the "interim" missile boat for Minmatar, along with the aforementioned Scythe FI, of course (and likely an updated Huginn I'd wager (Super Bellicose, anyone?).

Besides, the two Minmatar HACs do represent two aspects of Minmatar playstyle: one is a fast, kitey monster (which is absolutely Minmatar), while the other performs well as a high range, high alpha arty monster. Notice, though, that they both are monsters :)


Muninn is definitely not a monster, its terrible, the Tornado outclasses it and its alpha is weak at best.

The Vagabond is a kiting superfast monster? One word: Cynabal.


yes the tornado phenomenon has come about because muninns are very niche and unexceptional ...
even after the buffs to muninn and medium arties i don't see much changing until ABC's get a proper rebalance (nerf).
Also large Arties alpha is insanely OP which doesn't help much either

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
Legion40k
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#483 - 2013-07-18 20:41:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Legion40k
so to justify using an ASB Vagabond to take advantage of the new bonus it'll have to be an XL..

and break the ship

i was so hopeful they'd make HAC's absolute beasts too

diemost will now diemore!?

=/
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#484 - 2013-07-18 20:41:10 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC?


You have too much money and or you dont like flying ships that don't suck


Ships that don't suck? Have you SEEN the T1 cruisers? They are far superior to HACs when cost is considered. In some cases they are simply better than their T2 variants, cost be damned.

Apparently the applied damage with the buffed medium weapons will be superior to the applied damage from an ABC's large guns vs medium/small targets

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
XvXTeacherVxV
Be Nice Inc.
Prismatic Legion
#485 - 2013-07-18 20:45:40 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
It'd be a great idea to have missile ships represented--even using the sort of dual damage bonus a Scythe FI gets, but I think it's too tricky to bake that into a hull that gets 4x damage/application bonuses. I think the stat overload on have 4x missile bonuses and 4x projectile bonuses would be too much visually, too much to balance around, etc. I'm fairly certain that the Claymore changes (making it into a missile boat) is what CCP is going to say is the "interim" missile boat for Minmatar, along with the aforementioned Scythe FI, of course (and likely an updated Huginn I'd wager (Super Bellicose, anyone?).

Besides, the two Minmatar HACs do represent two aspects of Minmatar playstyle: one is a fast, kitey monster (which is absolutely Minmatar), while the other performs well as a high range, high alpha arty monster. Notice, though, that they both are monsters :)


I wouldn't do a double damage type because HACs are specialized boats, not just superior. Two weapon systems moves away from their specialized nature.

And I have to second some of the other posts here, the muninn is NOT a monster. Show me a fit for a Muninn and I'll show you another ship that does whatever it's trying to do better. I've tried to make it work, it just doesn't.
Can you see the rapier?: http://imgur.com/aFelCpv,GH6lqDE
Sarkelias Anophius
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#486 - 2013-07-18 20:45:56 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:

It'd be a great idea to have missile ships represented--even using the sort of dual damage bonus a Scythe FI gets, but I think it's too tricky to bake that into a hull that gets 4x damage/application bonuses. I think the stat overload on have 4x missile bonuses and 4x projectile bonuses would be too much visually, too much to balance around, etc. I'm fairly certain that the Claymore changes (making it into a missile boat) is what CCP is going to say is the "interim" missile boat for Minmatar, along with the aforementioned Scythe FI, of course (and likely an updated Huginn I'd wager (Super Bellicose, anyone?).

Besides, the two Minmatar HACs do represent two aspects of Minmatar playstyle: one is a fast, kitey monster (which is absolutely Minmatar), while the other performs well as a high range, high alpha arty monster. Notice, though, that they both are monsters :)


Muninn is definitely not a monster, its terrible, the Tornado outclasses it and its alpha is weak at best.

The Vagabond is a kiting superfast monster? One word: Cynabal.



ASB Vaga > Cynabal.
Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#487 - 2013-07-18 20:46:38 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
darius mclever wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
and the comment that vaga can brawl seems ridiculous to me even with the ASB bonus which must be hard too fit i would imagine. the vaga is built on speed and kiting .. just remove the shield booster bonus and just buff its damage bonus to 10% so 3 more useful bonuses instead of 4 weaker and odd bonus combos


did you miss that many people already fly ASB vagas?


but do they brawl with them?


Yup

[High Slots]
Dual 180mm Autocannon II
Small Neut/Nos

[Mid Slots]
10mn Experimental Microwarpdrive
10mn Afterburner II
X-Large Ancillary Shield Booster
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler

[Low Slots]
Damage Control II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Nanofiber Internatl Structure II

[Rig Slots]

Medium Ancillary Current Router
Medium Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer


Requires a 1% PG implant, 400 DPS without drones
MWD - 2700m/s
AB - 1000 m/s
Slowboat - 408m/s
12k EHP
750 DPS tank with overloaded ASB (Should be closer to 1000 with the new bonus, higher still with crystals)

Can catch kiting ships, can get under battleship guns, works well for what amounts to basically a one slot tank.
I think Garmon also did a video with one of these... one of those elite PvPers did a video with it at least.



Lol and this fit is better then a cyclone?
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#488 - 2013-07-18 20:47:33 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC?


You have too much money and or you dont like flying ships that don't suck


Ships that don't suck? Have you SEEN the T1 cruisers? They are far superior to HACs when cost is considered. In some cases they are simply better than their T2 variants, cost be damned.

Apparently the applied damage with the buffed medium weapons will be superior to the applied damage from an ABC's large guns vs medium/small targets


Idk who thought this would happen but thats not whats going to happen.


You bring in a t2 hac snip fleet adn the other guy brings in a t3 ABC snipe fleet and you trade shots, at the end of the day your t2 dead hac fleet is worth 5 times the same amount of dead t3 ABCs, and the result will be the same as now: people will simply fly t3 ABCs because you're GOING to die eventually.

I understand that price can't be the sole balancing factor but if CCP can't admit that in some cases players will always take price into account then the balancing they're doing on t2 ships is simply a waste of time.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#489 - 2013-07-18 20:52:07 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC?


You have too much money and or you dont like flying ships that don't suck


Ships that don't suck? Have you SEEN the T1 cruisers? They are far superior to HACs when cost is considered. In some cases they are simply better than their T2 variants, cost be damned.

Apparently the applied damage with the buffed medium weapons will be superior to the applied damage from an ABC's large guns vs medium/small targets


I'm skeptical, look at the EFT damage graph. 135m sig and 1750m/s? Thats not a reasonable speed for that sig (MWD speed without MWD sig?)

Plus a Muninn has about a 3k alpha, vs a 1400 Nado you get about 15k

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#490 - 2013-07-18 20:52:42 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I think the Cerberus is going to be really powerful. It can now do the extremely long range thing with HML as well as added capacity to be an amazing HAM skirmisher. The role bonus means it has a lot of added survivability while it establishes or maintains range for both roles.

Why do the devs still think that missiles are a good sniping weapon? They're not. Flight time delay means that you lose a significant amount of dps after your target dies. Nobody needs or wants 160km range on HMLs (~16s travel time).

Take one of the range bonuses off the Cerb and switch it to a tanking bonus.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#491 - 2013-07-18 20:53:10 UTC
Pesadel0 wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
darius mclever wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
and the comment that vaga can brawl seems ridiculous to me even with the ASB bonus which must be hard too fit i would imagine. the vaga is built on speed and kiting .. just remove the shield booster bonus and just buff its damage bonus to 10% so 3 more useful bonuses instead of 4 weaker and odd bonus combos


did you miss that many people already fly ASB vagas?


but do they brawl with them?


Yup

[High Slots]
Dual 180mm Autocannon II
Small Neut/Nos

[Mid Slots]
10mn Experimental Microwarpdrive
10mn Afterburner II
X-Large Ancillary Shield Booster
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler

[Low Slots]
Damage Control II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Nanofiber Internatl Structure II

[Rig Slots]

Medium Ancillary Current Router
Medium Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer


Requires a 1% PG implant, 400 DPS without drones
MWD - 2700m/s
AB - 1000 m/s
Slowboat - 408m/s
12k EHP
750 DPS tank with overloaded ASB (Should be closer to 1000 with the new bonus, higher still with crystals)

Can catch kiting ships, can get under battleship guns, works well for what amounts to basically a one slot tank.
I think Garmon also did a video with one of these... one of those elite PvPers did a video with it at least.



Lol and this fit is better then a cyclone?


Situationally, yes. Normally, no.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#492 - 2013-07-18 20:54:01 UTC
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:

It'd be a great idea to have missile ships represented--even using the sort of dual damage bonus a Scythe FI gets, but I think it's too tricky to bake that into a hull that gets 4x damage/application bonuses. I think the stat overload on have 4x missile bonuses and 4x projectile bonuses would be too much visually, too much to balance around, etc. I'm fairly certain that the Claymore changes (making it into a missile boat) is what CCP is going to say is the "interim" missile boat for Minmatar, along with the aforementioned Scythe FI, of course (and likely an updated Huginn I'd wager (Super Bellicose, anyone?).

Besides, the two Minmatar HACs do represent two aspects of Minmatar playstyle: one is a fast, kitey monster (which is absolutely Minmatar), while the other performs well as a high range, high alpha arty monster. Notice, though, that they both are monsters :)


Muninn is definitely not a monster, its terrible, the Tornado outclasses it and its alpha is weak at best.

The Vagabond is a kiting superfast monster? One word: Cynabal.



ASB Vaga > Cynabal.



Show me the ASB kiting vaga that beats the kiting Cynabal. (Legitimate request, I would like to run the numbers, and I haven't seen an ASB kiting vaga that wouldn't get alpha'd by any ABC)

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#493 - 2013-07-18 20:57:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Aliventi
Are we going to see a cost rebalance? Using the CCP Rise's patented "Linear power increase for exponential cost" balancing theorem they should be more expensive for their power increase. But 10x T1 cost is a little much IMO for the power increase over t1. Maybe 5-6x the T1 price and these will be heavily used.

Derp. Confused CCP Rise and Fozzie. Sad
Gyttfryd
Bundesamt fuer Raumflug
#494 - 2013-07-18 21:01:05 UTC
Why not change the MWD sig bonus to an AB % boost amount bonus similar to the fual catalyst sub on T3s ? it would greatly benefit HACs for sigtanking, especially the "brawler" HACs such as sac and diemost which'll end up scrammed and a sitting duck very often.

It has been brought up before, why don't the HACs have more slots as their T1 variants (they currently only have 1 more, whereas AFs currently have +2 compared to their t1 bretheren) ? Maybe giving them all 16 slots would justify their not really good cost/performance factor a bit more.

If you really want the sac in the role as a tanky brawler, which by all means is fine by me, please consider giving it a 6th lowslot/swapping slots around since it's in dire need of it.
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon
#495 - 2013-07-18 21:01:51 UTC
Why is the Deimos so fat? 160m sig radius (Zealot 125m; Muninn 130m). For a traditional close range brawler under neuts, scrams, webs, every ewar type under the sun, etc. you really believe it needs to be significantly easier to track/get kicked in the nuts by rage/fury missiles as well?
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#496 - 2013-07-18 21:02:30 UTC
Aliventi wrote:
Are we going to see a cost rebalance? Using the CCP Fozzie's patented "Linear power increase for exponential cost" balancing theorem they should be more expensive for their power increase. But 10x T1 cost is a little much IMO for the power increase over t1. Maybe 5-6x the T1 price and these will be heavily used.



Thanks to fittings making up a lot of the cost of small and medium ships right now, the hull cost is not the factor to measure shipcosts with. For example, a Thorax hull is like what, 10m? fitted and rigged it's ~40m. So thats 30m for the fitting, which will also apply to HACs. So a HAC will cost what, 160m for the hulll, + 30m fit, which makes them ~200m? Oh would you look at that, 5 times the price of a tech 1 cruiser!
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#497 - 2013-07-18 21:05:07 UTC
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
It'd be a great idea to have missile ships represented--even using the sort of dual damage bonus a Scythe FI gets, but I think it's too tricky to bake that into a hull that gets 4x damage/application bonuses. I think the stat overload on have 4x missile bonuses and 4x projectile bonuses would be too much visually, too much to balance around, etc. I'm fairly certain that the Claymore changes (making it into a missile boat) is what CCP is going to say is the "interim" missile boat for Minmatar, along with the aforementioned Scythe FI, of course (and likely an updated Huginn I'd wager (Super Bellicose, anyone?).

Besides, the two Minmatar HACs do represent two aspects of Minmatar playstyle: one is a fast, kitey monster (which is absolutely Minmatar), while the other performs well as a high range, high alpha arty monster. Notice, though, that they both are monsters :)


I wouldn't do a double damage type because HACs are specialized boats, not just superior. Two weapon systems moves away from their specialized nature.

And I have to second some of the other posts here, the muninn is NOT a monster. Show me a fit for a Muninn and I'll show you another ship that does whatever it's trying to do better. I've tried to make it work, it just doesn't.
The dual weapons system idea was (bolded and underlined) the type of bonus where it's either/or. Obviously, no one would be advocating for a split weapons system where you have to use both to apply effective dps.

The Muninn totally has its place in the long range field when you want a smaller sig radius, high alpha platform. Does this mean that there aren't other ships that can perform sniping roles? Of course not. I'm aware that Nado fleets (called something?) can wreck ships from sniping distances. It doesn't invalidate a Muninn fleet, however. Is a Muninn a monster on its own, solo? Of course not. But Arty alpha at Muninn distances with the smaller sig of the cruiser hull and the Muninn isn't as terrible as some posters are making it out to be.

Besides, my post wasn't particlarly speaking to Muninn's effectiveness should these changes go through. I was more pointing out that an either/or weapons system would be a messy option on a hull with 4x bonuses and that it's not so terrible, all things considered.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Aliventi
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#498 - 2013-07-18 21:08:59 UTC
Syrias Bizniz wrote:
Aliventi wrote:
Are we going to see a cost rebalance? Using the CCP Fozzie's patented "Linear power increase for exponential cost" balancing theorem they should be more expensive for their power increase. But 10x T1 cost is a little much IMO for the power increase over t1. Maybe 5-6x the T1 price and these will be heavily used.



Thanks to fittings making up a lot of the cost of small and medium ships right now, the hull cost is not the factor to measure shipcosts with. For example, a Thorax hull is like what, 10m? fitted and rigged it's ~40m. So thats 30m for the fitting, which will also apply to HACs. So a HAC will cost what, 160m for the hulll, + 30m fit, which makes them ~200m? Oh would you look at that, 5 times the price of a tech 1 cruiser!

Doesn't matter that fitting makes up a lot of the cost. CCP Fozzie noted that BS hulls were 5 times the cost of a BC hull using the Linear power increase for exponential cost increase theorem. Feel free to dig for the quote.
Syrias Bizniz
some random local shitlords
#499 - 2013-07-18 21:11:51 UTC
Aliventi wrote:
Syrias Bizniz wrote:
Aliventi wrote:
Are we going to see a cost rebalance? Using the CCP Fozzie's patented "Linear power increase for exponential cost" balancing theorem they should be more expensive for their power increase. But 10x T1 cost is a little much IMO for the power increase over t1. Maybe 5-6x the T1 price and these will be heavily used.



Thanks to fittings making up a lot of the cost of small and medium ships right now, the hull cost is not the factor to measure shipcosts with. For example, a Thorax hull is like what, 10m? fitted and rigged it's ~40m. So thats 30m for the fitting, which will also apply to HACs. So a HAC will cost what, 160m for the hulll, + 30m fit, which makes them ~200m? Oh would you look at that, 5 times the price of a tech 1 cruiser!

Doesn't matter that fitting makes up a lot of the cost. CCP Fozzie noted that BS hulls were 5 times the cost of a BC hull using the Linear power increase for exponential cost increase theorem. Feel free to dig for the quote.


...


You said 'If HACs cost like 5 times more than Tech 1s they will be heavily used, but 10 times is to much!!1'. I showed you how HACs basically cost only 5 times the price of a Tech 1 cruiser. I don't care what a battleship costs, it fulfills a whole different role than a battlecruiser - Being able to take heavy fire and survive in fleet fights.
XvXTeacherVxV
Be Nice Inc.
Prismatic Legion
#500 - 2013-07-18 21:15:40 UTC
I don't think anyone suggested an either/or weapon system for the Muninn. Again, that directly contradicts the specialized nature of the Muninn. I think you're arguing with thin air, if that's what you're arguing against.

Would love to see some of your Muninn killmails, Maximus Andendare, otherwise I think you're EFT-warrioring instead of telling us about your actual experiences with the ship.

I'd still rather have a Hurricane any day of the week.
Can you see the rapier?: http://imgur.com/aFelCpv,GH6lqDE