These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#901 - 2013-07-19 20:45:04 UTC
nikar galvren wrote:
Ben Yahtzee Croshaw wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage.

Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense.

Easily the best idea by far. Smile


Continuing to run with the idea of roles, why not have the 'combat/tank' hulls have the Target Spectrum Breaker role, and the 'attack/DPS' hulls have a role bonus to fit MJD? This allows combat hulls to engage multiple targets, and attack roles to Hit&Run effectively.

EDIT: minor typo

Definitely. I think the role bonus is the key to unlocking a role for HACs that is not easily done by another ship class. If the reduction of MWD is so important than just reduce the sig of all the HACs to compensate. Or give HACs two role bonuses if they are worried about AB HACs becoming too OP.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#902 - 2013-07-19 20:46:20 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Well these changes clearly show that t3 is going to be almightily nerfed. If you took T3 out the game most of these hacs would have a role and purpose. Of course they wont take it out of the game, but they will nerf it hard while probably making it more adaptable (i.e. easier to change subs/rigs etc).



If T3s were removed WHers would be screwed, but more to the point, HACs would still be utter ****

Nobody is looking at these changes going "Wow these suck, I'll keep flying my Loki/Proteus/Legion Fleet" because T3s aren't overpowered (outside of boosting)

HACs suck now, with these changes they will continue to suck, nerfing T3s into purgatory won't make HACs better.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Ja'ho sun
Series of The Ridiculous
#903 - 2013-07-19 20:57:27 UTC
[quote=Arazel Chainfire]I Cerberus:
The cerb gets another launcher, a fairly nice buff to its CPU and powergrid, a minor buff to its capacitor, a pretty decent buff to its speed, a smidge of drone bay, and its hp's rounded to whole numbers. The powergrid buff is basically enough to allow it to actually fit its new 6th launcher, while the CPU buff gives enough for the launcher and a bit more besides.

Overall, these changes give it a nice bonus to being a kiting HAM ship, with HAM's able to hit out to 45km using standard missiles. Combined with the recent buffs to HAM's, and this ship actually becomes an upgrade to the caracel. In this role, the cerberus gets a 200dps boost, a 15km range boost, and a 15k ish EHP boost over the caracel. Adding to this the bonus for sig radius using MWD, and we may actually see Cerbs in use. The heavy missile build for the cerb still has unnecessarily excessive range, and after the recent changes does fairly pitiful damage. It may still see niche useage, but with the great range the cerb has with HAM's, it probably won't be seen often. I would call this a good change.

[quote]


the cerb has always had this ability and its more of a 75 maybe 100 dps boost not 200. the PG boost is not eough to fit the new launcher fit . it would need another 5 PG to make it fit (barely).
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
#904 - 2013-07-19 20:58:04 UTC
Ben Yahtzee Croshaw wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage.

Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense.

Easily the best idea by far. Smile



I'm personally not a fan of this idea.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
Lykouleon
Noble Sentiments
Second Empire.
#905 - 2013-07-19 20:58:40 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
If T3s were removed WHers would be screwed, but more to the point, HACs would still be utter ****

Nobody is looking at these changes going "Wow these suck, I'll keep flying my Loki/Proteus/Legion Fleet" because T3s aren't overpowered (outside of boosting).

Name one T3 that does worse at the HAC role than the current HACs.

Proteus - does amazingly better than a deimos
Legion - does faily similarly to a zealot
Tengu - ...cerberusAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Loki - better vagabond/muninn

T3s are meant to be modular, and not specifically good at anything. They currently work exceptionally better than the T2 counterparts in almost all scenarios. T3s need a nerf back to the original design point of being able to do everything, but not amazingly well.

Lykouleon > CYNO ME CLOSER so I can hit them with my sword
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#906 - 2013-07-19 20:59:35 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Ben Yahtzee Croshaw wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage.

Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense.

Easily the best idea by far. Smile



I'm personally not a fan of this idea.


i also think its a waste of a 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
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#907 - 2013-07-19 21:01:22 UTC
Alivea Starborn wrote:
So: why doesn't one of the Gallente HACs have an armor repair bonus?

Please don't screw us Gallente pilots over again. Big smile
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#908 - 2013-07-19 21:05:17 UTC
Cearain wrote:
Ben Yahtzee Croshaw wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage.

Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense.

Easily the best idea by far. Smile



I'm personally not a fan of this idea.
I think it's a good, unique and interesting idea. I don't like that the spectrum breaker is indiscriminate in breaking locks of friendly logi or enemies. You may break a lock at an inopportune time and get popped. I really prefer allowing HACs to fit MJDs. At least then kiters could jump away and brawlers could jump in close.

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

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

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#909 - 2013-07-19 21:06:13 UTC
Lykouleon wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
If T3s were removed WHers would be screwed, but more to the point, HACs would still be utter ****

Nobody is looking at these changes going "Wow these suck, I'll keep flying my Loki/Proteus/Legion Fleet" because T3s aren't overpowered (outside of boosting).

Name one T3 that does worse at the HAC role than the current HACs.

Proteus - does amazingly better than a deimos
Legion - does faily similarly to a zealot
Tengu - ...cerberusAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Loki - better vagabond/muninn

T3s are meant to be modular, and not specifically good at anything. They currently work exceptionally better than the T2 counterparts in almost all scenarios. T3s need a nerf back to the original design point of being able to do everything, but not amazingly well.


Name one role that T3s replace the T2 variant. I dare you. (Again, boosters aside, I agree T3 boosters need a nerf.)

There isn't one. HACs are replaced by their T1 counterparts or battlecruisers. People don't fly T3s often because of their cost, and people don't fly HACs often because they suck.
HACs need an actual buff that makes them worth the price before they will get some use.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Fredric Wolf
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#910 - 2013-07-19 21:06:55 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Alivea Starborn wrote:
So: why doesn't one of the Gallente HACs have an armor repair bonus?

Please don't screw us Gallente pilots over again. Big smile


I agree 100% I would be more in favor of the other 3 ships with a tanking bonus to have it removed for a diff bonus.
Leppales Beddelver
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#911 - 2013-07-19 21:11:24 UTC
The Ishtar really needs more base targeting range. Right now its max targeting range is 75km while with scout drones operation to 5 and e-war drone interfacing and HACs to 4 you get 77km drone control range.
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#912 - 2013-07-19 21:11:25 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Alivea Starborn wrote:
So: why doesn't one of the Gallente HACs have an armor repair bonus?

Please don't screw us Gallente pilots over again. Big smile
Eh.... Armor repair bonus on the Ishtar wouldn't be bad (if it had the PG/CPU to support it). Would certainly be better than the "oh hai! ur even moar of a PvE/Blob boat now!". Granted, there are tons better bonuses it could get, but repair is still better than the tracking, control range, or drone bay bonuses.
The Ironfist
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#913 - 2013-07-19 21:17:37 UTC  |  Edited by: The Ironfist
ISHTAR - We are replacing the medium hybrid damage bonus with a drone bonus and removing one high slot to put its total 1 below the rest of the class, as is standard for drone-focused ships.

Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty

Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to drone tracking and optimal range(was 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage)
10% bonus to drone hitpoints and Damage

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
5 km bonus to Drone operation range per level
50 m3 extra Drone Bay per level

Slot layout: 3H(-2), 5M), 6L(+1); 3 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 700 PWG, 355 CPU(+70)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1400(-6) / 1600(-18) / 2300(+191)
Capacitor (amount) : 1300(+175)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 185(-6) / .52 / 11700000 / 8.43s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 125
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 60km / 294 / 7
Sensor strength: 16 Magnetometric
Signature radius: 145


A slot layout like this and the CPU to actually support a drone boat would make it viable for more then just PVE crapfits.

Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Alivea Starborn wrote:
So: why doesn't one of the Gallente HACs have an armor repair bonus?

Please don't screw us Gallente pilots over again. Big smile
Eh.... Armor repair bonus on the Ishtar wouldn't be bad (if it had the PG/CPU to support it). Would certainly be better than the "oh hai! ur even moar of a PvE/Blob boat now!". Granted, there are tons better bonuses it could get, but repair is still better than the tracking, control range, or drone bay bonuses.


No local rep bonus's suck ass because they have no place in fleet pvp at all and I doubt anybody gives a **** about a few people that might use it for solo pvp.
Arsikere
Loner Nomads
#914 - 2013-07-19 21:24:06 UTC
I seem to be one of the few here who is actually glad about the new Sac changes. I use it as a PVE ship against angels in lowsec and this makes it quite a bit better than what it is now. There are some situations in which I cant brawl, for the DPS is wayyy too high, and so i swap to heavy missiles. With this new bonus (plus the drone bay increase, THANK YOU!) this is going to be an even more effective PVE ship for what I use it for.

I appreciate the changes to the Deimos as well. It's a ship I've always wished was a bit better, and with the MWD sig decrease, plus the extra mid, it's actually going to be something that I wont tell myself not to buy :P

Good changes guys. It's these little tweaks that make the game, for me, still worth playing. Not just to ships, per se, but little tweaks in general.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#915 - 2013-07-19 21:24:55 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:


Name one role that T3s replace the T2 variant. I dare you. (Again, boosters aside, I agree T3 boosters need a nerf.)

There isn't one. HACs are replaced by their T1 counterparts or battlecruisers. People don't fly T3s often because of their cost, and people don't fly HACs often because they suck.
HACs need an actual buff that makes them worth the price before they will get some use.


You are so completely out of touch with the game that I dont even know where to start.


T3's outclass hacs in every single possible way. There is no HAC that does the role of DPS or tank better than a T3 cruiser configured to do the same.

And as for them not being flown often, well...

Aside from the full fleets of t3's that are really common (legions lokis proteus and tengus all have very common large fleet appearances) this BR from yesterday called and said you should probably get a clue:

http://zkillboard.com/related/31002460/201307182200/

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#916 - 2013-07-19 21:36:37 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hey guys, I'm back at work after having nightmares all night of running out of Ishtar CPU

We're reading all this, as usual, and will iterate based on it, as usual. We have some time (because everyone here is on vacation so I can do what I want #yolobalancing) so I want to wait until after the weekend to commit to anything. I might post again in a bit about some of our high level strategy as there is clearly some frustration about the contrast between HACs and the nice powerpoints about T2 specialization.

Please keep up the discussion and I'll be back soon with more info.


That's because the game design team's whole notion of "T1: generalists, T2: specialists" is crap. First you un-generalized T1 stuff by turning their formerly-generalized bonuses (to RoF or damage, for example) into more specialist bonuses (like falloff on the Stabber, which naturally caters to AC fits rather than arty-- just to give an example) while buffing the **** out of them.

Now that you have basically pigeon-holed the T1 ships into certain fitting paradigms while buffing them a lot, what do T2 ships have to offer? HACs are geared for the same types of setups as their T1 cousins now, only you refuse to allow them to actually perform significantly better in those roles, because that would constitute "power creep."

If a more expensive hull can't do the "same" things significantly better than the T1 hulls, then they need to provide some other kind of benefit, like increased flexibility. Just turning HACs into 10% improvements over a T1 cruiser-- while maintaining their price difference of around 10x-- doesn't offer any compelling reason to use them over a T1 or Navy cruiser. Your balancing strategy sucks.

On the other hand, if HACs performed similarly to a T1 cruiser in terms of primary stats (DPS output, range, speed, EHP, etc) but gained T2 resists (making them better for active tanking and receiving reps) and more flexible fitting options (read: more slots than T1 and more grid / CPU to work with), that might represent a compelling reason to drop 200M isk. They wouldn't be much better at ~*fill in the blank*~ than their T1 equivalents, but maybe you could do ~*blank*~ while also fitting a NOS or a cloak, or a target painter in your extra mid-slot. Whatever.

If you're not really going to allow specialization, then make HACs more adaptable. Alternatively, actually make them good at some specific thing. Hint: a useless role bonus that drops their sig radius from "gigantic" to "huge" while MWDing isn't the right answer.
KatanTharkay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#917 - 2013-07-19 21:38:16 UTC  |  Edited by: KatanTharkay
It would be better to use the class role as a fine balancing tool rather than having the same flat bonus on all HAC's. Something like Sacrilege needing a little bit more range for HAM's, Ishtar a MWD drone bonus, a signature size reduction for the the brawling Deimos, speed for Vaga & Cerberus and tracking for Eagle & Muninn.

The Deimos is one of the ships that need most help tbh. It's true you can now shield fit one, but the big signature size will make it easier to hit while trying to get close to the opponent. You could replace the MWD capacitor bonus with a repair amount or armor hitpoints bonus (fit 800mm plate so it dosen't make it too slow).
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#918 - 2013-07-19 21:46:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Il Feytid
Harvey James wrote:
Cearain wrote:
Ben Yahtzee Croshaw wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage.

Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense.

Easily the best idea by far. Smile



I'm personally not a fan of this idea.


i also think its a waste of a bonus

It is a hundred times better use of a role bonus compared to a mwd bonus.
Ganthrithor
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#919 - 2013-07-19 21:48:45 UTC
Also, just a thought, but some of the ships on this list just suck so horribly that they should probably just be re-imagined from scratch. I know you guys love the word "iterate," but maybe a little reincarnation would be more appropriate in some of these instances. I think you guys need to sit down and actually try and remember how EVE combat works and actually design ships that cater to roles which actually exist.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#920 - 2013-07-19 21:48:58 UTC
KatanTharkay wrote:
It would be better to use the class role as a fine balancing tool rather than having the same flat bonus on all HAC's. Something like Sacrilege needing a little bit more range for HAM's, Ishtar a MWD drone bonus, a signature size reduction for the the brawling Deimos, speed for Vaga & Cerberus and tracking for Eagle & Muninn.

The Deimos is one of the ships that need most help tbh. It's true you can now shield fit one, but the big signature size will make it easier to hit while trying to get close to the opponent. You could replace the MWD capacitor bonus with a repair amount or armor hitpoints bonus (fit 800mm plate so it dosen't make it too slow).



It needs a tank if its a blaster fit, a huge one.
Rail fit I think it will be ok, though still questionable

Yaay!!!!