Player Features and Ideas Discussion

A few remarks:

1. If you want useful feedback, post your modded version of Pyfa so that people can actually experiment with fitting the proposed ships. We are not computers and can't make sense of a vomited text-list of base ship stats.

2. Stop removing utility high-slots-- it makes the ships less useful and more predictable. It's a stupid idea.

3. One of the Sac's biggest problems is it's total inability to do decent damage to anything using any weapon system available to it. Your proposal does nothing to address that (though you did a good job of nerfing its ability to active tank with the -1% resist change). How does this solve anything?

4. Your comment regarding the speed increase on the Cerb is downsy: it is ships that have a narrow damage projection envelope that rely on good speed / agility to kite. Something that can start more than 100km from its targets can afford to run away relatively slowly. Personally I have a hatred for slow ships, so I won't complain about this change, but your reasoning there kind of sucks.

5. I don't know, these ships look pretty crappy to be honest. Thanks for buffing T1 stuff to death while giving us next to no reason to fly ships that cost 10x as much. I guess the AFK ratting crowd will be pleased with the Ishtar change. Oh, and way to go with that Vaga change-- I really look forward to everyone and their dog becoming an elite, solo-PVP hero by using the new Vaga in conjunction with the already-ridiculous ASBs. You know, because those setups needed a boost (get it? A boost? See what I did there?).

My bottom line: if you're going to maintain a class of cruiser that costs 10x as much as a T1 cruiser, but you don't want to contribute to power creep by giving them massive tanking or DPS output increases, then at least give them a more flexible slot layout. There has to be some compelling reason to fly these things over cheaper T1 options: there's a reason I haven't flown a HAC in several years, and I don't see these changes doing anything to change that.

When is all this scheduled to hit the test server so we can fiddle with it and break it?

@Alek
How exactly is the new Eagle a better brawler?
You're not gaining much hp, since you now need to fit an injector in that free mid instead of a nos.
You don't have the fitting to run a traditional XL booster or anything like that.

The blaster damage output is still sub-par (and relatively unchanged, because it doesn't have the grid to sport bigger guns AND a comparable tank. The Cerb should lose those drones, and the Eagle should remain how it is but gain 5 lights and some grid.

This whole *buff* is all over the map, I can't even begin to comprehend where the Devs' heads are at.

ZEALOT needs drones!!!
What about Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25 ????
Also it required more capacitor.

I've posted modified data files for EFT containing new HACs + med turret changes here: http://failheap-challenge.com/showthread.php?11380-Odyssey-Changes-Rebalanced-Navy-Cruisers-T1-Cruisers-%28and-EFT-files%29&p=748288&viewfull=1#post748288

My thoughts on it:

Sacrilege:

God, this is a sexy ship now. (Sadly, not sexy enough to dethrone Legions though.)

The five medium drones provide either extra DPS OR some ECM, the extra grid makes it a lot easier to do HAM fits with a plate, and it's a hair more mobile. And it retains its option high. The capacitor, which was already ridiculously good, is now even better. I'd almost say that this is the new Deimos.

The HML bonus is a cute idea, but it's ultimately not useful -- the total DPS for an HML fit with 3x BCS goes up from 250dps to 300dps. This isn't enough to matter at either small gang or fleet sizes. HAMs or GTFO.

Unfortunately, as good as the Sacri's tank is, it's still not good enough for fleet work. The HAM Legion will still probably dominate fleets -- in large gang for its tank, and in small gang for its massive neut bonus (i.e. Rote's Heropig comp).

Zealot:

Not much has changed. It's still cheap and decent en masse for small-to-medium gang. Large fleets will still prefer the Legion due to its superior tank. Soloers will continue to skip on it due to its lack of drones, lack of option high, and only three mids.

About the only thing of note is that the Shield Beam Zealot does a little more alpha now -- however, it's actually worse at blapping frigs due to the tracking nerf. (And as far as I know, that was the only role that this fit was currently serving.)

Cerb:

It's interesting, but the changes are ultimately ineffectual. No reason to use it over a Tengu, save for cost.

The extra launcher gives it some real DPS (with CN ammo: 425 @ 140km with HMLs, 590 @ 45km with HAMs) -- about the same as a five-launcher Tengu. The addition of three light drones is nice, I suppose. However, the tank is still thin as hell -- 40k EHP for a single-LSE MWD kiting fit, 50k EHP for a double-LSE AB doctrine fit. The capacitor is still an issue too; an MWD kiting fit can only burn around for about one minute nonstop. Soloers might get a kick out of it, but I suspect that small fleets will continue to prefer skirmish-range turret ships, and large fleets will continue to prefer the Tengu for its additional tank and higher DPS.

Eagle:

First big WTF in this list.

First off, they've killed the Beagle. Dead in the water, it's done. It already was kinda iffy with no drones, but now that it has no neut or nos, it's absolutely done.

So, let's talk rail fits. First off, it's painfully short on grid -- you can't fit a full rack of 250mm guns without a ACR or PDS. (PDS ends up being ideal -- the added ROF on medium rails means increased cap draw, and the Eagle's cap was already ****** before the changes.) From there, one asks -- what is this ship's role? It's certainly not alpha. With the biggest medium rails and 3x MFSes, you're putting down 1400 alpha with CNAM at 50km. So Eagle is certainly not a frig-swatter.

As far as I can tell, the ideal for the new Eagle is to be a 60-70km skirmisher. Fit a MWD, double LSE, double invuln, load up Thorium, and put out ~375dps per ship at 70-80km, with better tank and effective tracking than a Naga/Rokh but half the damage.

Frankly, though, I don't buy it. Ultimately, given the isk and SP cost for an Eagle, you are ultimately better off getting a Tornado, Talos, or Naga. Yes, these ships have worse tracking due to the increased target signature (400m vs 125m). But, what is the shape of the field when you're fighting a skirmishing fleet? Skirmishers are kiting -- they're pulsing MWD to maintain 70km distance and drawing their enemy out behind them. Transversals in a skirmishing fleet are intentionally kept minimal. Look at the wrecks left behind on the field whenever skirmishers fight -- you can draw a line straight through them.

Ultimately, the constraints of FCing mean that tracking really isn't an issue for skirmishing fleets in practical use. As long as this is the case, the T3 BCs are going to continue to wipe the floor with comparable medium-turret ships. Especially in the case of the Eagle, which struggles to remain capstable while kiting, and has to use Thorium to reach out to skirmish range. "But the Eagle tracks better" is an argument that is both A) true, and B) irrelevant to Eve reality.

Deimos:

RISE, WHY ARE YOU DESTROYING MY FAVORITE SHIPS. :(

So, it's a little bit faster now. It gains a fourth mid, but loses the option high. What does this get us?

First off, blaster deimos is a little more hairy. It continues to be tight on grid, so you struggle to fit a 1600mm plate + prop mod + ions. The option slot loss makes armor setups a lot less useful:
* With no medium neut, it's a lot less useful to gangs.
* With no medium nos to help counteract neuts / run MAARs, it's a lot less useful to soloers -- and you don't have the grid for a medium injector unless you switch to an 800mm plate and/or electrons.

In theory, you can use the fourth mid for a double-LSE shield blaster boat. This is pretty sexy, other than the fact that you have a 0% EM shield resist (i.e. two T2 anti-em rigs are mandatory) and you're instantly dead in the water if you get neuted.

Shield rail deimoses are viable now, but the medium rail tracking nerf, plus the fact that the Deimos has no tracking bonus, makes them unlikely. On TQ today, you can fit up a 250mm rail Deimos and orbit at 20km, and you won't be able to hit a stationary target; the tracking nerf to medium rails will only make that worse.

Armor rail deimoses will require two ACRs. Not even thinking about it.

As for the Vagabond:

PART I: F**K YOUR TANK BONUS

First off, the Vaga's worse for conventional tackling than it was before. They didn't fully roll the speed bonus in.

Old Vagabond: 239m/s base + (0.05 * 5) = 298.75m/s
New Vagabond: 290m/s

It's a ~100m/s loss under MWD -- from 2746m/s to 2665m/s. On top of that, the cap is a tiny hair weaker.

PART II: BRINGING BACK (DYING WHILE TRYING TO) SOLO

I took Kovorix's old dualprop vaga fit -- add a Standard Bluepill, and pray you don't get the shield-hp or tracking penalties. (If you do, just dock up and come back to Eve in an hour, because this ship needs both.)

Buffer: 13k EHP with a big explosive hole. (78/65/63/56).
Active tank: 1222dps. Boosts 1778 raw HP per cycle, which is about 75% of your raw shield HP.

It's, to say the least, a knife-edge. Your shield buffer is 6.2k EHP, so realistically, you're repping 5K of pre-resist damage every 4 seconds. It has the same problem as the Kovorix vaga: you have to worry about someone bleeding into your armor with some off-cadence DPS. Except, it's now a little worse, because if you hit your XLASB any earlier than 25% shield, you're wasting the bonus.

So, it's a ridiculously knife-edge tank, and one that you can run for ~50 seconds before you hit your reload -- at which point, you collapse like a flan in a cupboard. And trust me, you'll need that full 50 seconds: the Kovorix vaga can only pack D180mm ACs with two Gyros, so you're putting out 400-500dps max at 500m.

VARIATIONS ON SUICIDE

Can we do anything else? We've got four mid slots. We don't have the cap to run a normal XLSB, even with a medium injector. That means that we only really have three possible layouts that use the active tank bonus:

1) Dualprop, scram, XLASB. (Kovorix fit)

See above.

2) Single prop mod, scram, DG or deadspace LSB, med injector. 2x T2 resist rigs to patch kin/exp holes.

This is capstable as long as you have injector charges... but it only tanks 475dps overheated. And a medium nos (even a faction or deadspace one) isn't sufficient to keep a DG LSB, so we can't swap out the injector for an invuln. It's just not enough mitigation. Rejected.

3) Single prop mod, scram, XLASB, and LSE or invuln

This has some minor potential... but not enough.

If you take an LSE instead of the dualprop, that bumps your buffer up to 20k EHP and allows you to drop to 50% instead of 25% instead... but it's still the same pile of bones in the end. You've got moderate close-range DPS at best, you boost like a madman for 50 seconds, and if the target isn't dead by then, you die. (If there's a single Tornado on the field, or more than 1500dps on the field, then you just proceed straight to dying, do not pass go, do not upload to youtube.)

If you go to Invuln, you need a 3% cpu implant; your buffer goes up to 15k EHP, and your effective tank with bluepill starts approaching 1900dps. However, you're still vulnerable to alpha or to high enough DPS.

Plus, with both of the above variations, you're giving up dualprop for that extra tank, so you have less non-tank mitigation. Either you fit AB (in which case you can't reapproach gate or rush into scram range), or you fit MWD (in which case, once you apply scram, you can't sigtank).

It just doesn't work, unless you're doing 1v1s with someone in a same-size or larger ship. There's a reason that Kovorix stopped flying his dualprop ASB vagas once they nerfed XLASBs.

As an aside: Any XLASB Vagabond needs to be compared with a Cyclone. The Cyclone's cheaper, has five mids (meaning more tactical options for tank and tackle), has a lot more buffer, has two option highs and the grid to use them, and it has more DPS that isn't tracking-sensitive.

PART III: THE ELEPHANTITIS IN THE ROOM

If the active tanks fits all suck... in theory, it's still a viable heavy tackler. Except: did they do anything to the Vagabond to make it compare favorably with the Cynabal?

NOPE.

Cynabals are 200M. Vagabonds are 165M.

Forget PL and URINE, because Cynabals are the REAL Kings of Lowsec.[/quote]

It went from "lol why are you flying that" to "slightly suboptimal."

Don't get me wrong: I would be shocked if anyone seriously flew any of the new HACs. The changes will do nothing to make these ships relevant. But I'm trying to be constructive here -- and the Sacrilege changes, no matter how insufficient, are at least a step in the right direction.

(Unlike the Vagabond changes, which are just mind-boggling.)

This mwd role bonus is so silly.These are not AS-s where you can run your mwd nonstop and sigtank nearly every enemy as you orbit between scam and point range.
What ships would use it out other than the vaga and maybe sac?
The role bonus contradicts with its name,as it doesnt help hacs to do their role,btw what is their role ?:O
Probably Im not the only one who have no idea what these ships general role is as they are so different.

So this role bonus only helps the vaga which was one of the best hac to begin with besides zealot the other hacs are so crappy atm.
And the overpowered cynabal is the reason why people dont use the vaga, cause cynabal does everything just a little better at the same price range. Except super em resist for some very niche role.

The others HACs kite from longer ranges or just goes into scram range where they cant rely on mwd running all the time.
Why give hac-s a role bonus which only helps 1-2 hacs in their jobs and just marginally good for the others?

Imho just find a different role bonus for HACs , or just drop the idea of the role bonus and give each one a different treatment.

Also all this talk about how the Gila is better than an Ishtar just means they'll nerf the hell out of it when they do the pirate ship balance pass.

So i'd stop.

Damn. You killed Ishtar. Where should i complain ?

Also you obviously forgot +30 cpu on "almost forgotten" Ishtar.

C'mon CCP you can do it better i know.