Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Alright so the Vagabond. hrm. The main problem I have with the change to its bonus is the quirk it gave the ship. The 5% bonus per level to Max Velocity did some strange things when you bolt on an MWD, giving it a further speed boost above and beyond what your calculator would say (EVE Maths). This removal puts the altered hull at least 100m/s disadvantage to what it is now.

-_-

so ill suggest this

Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret rate of fire
7.5% bonus to shield boost amount 5% bonus to max velocity

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret falloff
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage

Slot layout: 6H, 5M (+1), 5L; 5 turrets, 1 launchers(-1)
Fittings: 855 PWG, 395 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1650(+97) (-3) / 1400(+63) / 980(-4)
Capacitor (amount) : 1080(-2.5)(+17.5)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 260(+51) (+21) / .504 / 11590000 / 8.1s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 50km / 330 / 6(+1)

More hot topics of debate!
- Give it the max velocity bonus back. This ship will benefit more from being quicker than boosting its shields. ASB shield Vagabond won't happen because 2x LSE buffers the ship from large volleys which is important with the role of the ship to dart in and out of fleets, catching vulnerable support ships. No buffer = blapped
- Ill even propose to slightly improve the ships top speed a little. This increase goes a long way with the MWD and Max Velocity bonus so we'll see how that goes
- 5 Medium Slots. Yup. Currently you have to make the critical decision of either dual LSE MWD + Disruptor or drop an LSE for a Web. Its a fair option for more utility but what throws this balance out the window? Stabber Fleet and Cynabal, outperforming in Armour and Shield respectively. Everyone is loving the Faction ships right now
- More Capacitor because it struggles at the best of times

To give the Vagabond back its edge, it needs these changes otherwise it is simply inferior

=[

If the calculator lies, fair enough, but as I explained theres a quirk with this bonus and prop mods to achieve such a high speed. Take a look, its..odd

im pretty sure 239 x 1.25 is 298.75 m/s not 290m/s like stated in the new base stats of the vaga, so unless there is some other special dev maths going on its going to be a little slower

(everyone is linking the stats showing 260 m/s not the 290 m/s now showing so maybe ccp rise ninja edited op. )

Rise, can you update us on balance status concerning our inquiries?

Ah the vaga. The ship I have a lot of fond memories of. So please forgive any bias.

I probably will not be brawling with the vaga. I don't mind the changes too much but the vaga, to me, is all about nano and tackling and roaming etc.

But What I would like to see Is some sort of cap reduction mwd bonus that the rax and Deimos get. Although personally I think these ships don't need this bonus and the vaga does, especially when not brawling:

• A Deimos needs to burn its mwd for a few cycles to get in range and then spam it occasionally to keep range for blasters.

• A vaga operating in its original role of fast attack/fast tackle need to burn its mwd constantly with disrupter to keep target pointed so that it can keep up its transversal to tank, while doing less damage than a Deimos.

Which leads me onto my second topic:

• The Vaga needs more damage!!

• Vaga as close range brawler v Deimos comes out at 170dps less with full rack of 425/Neutrons with Close range t2 ammo and 2 damage mods.

• With 2 damage mods fitted on Deimos and Vaga this leaves the Deimos with 4 tanking slots.

Which leads me onto my third topic:

The MWD and SCRAM = -2 mid slots leaving two slots for tank on an active tanking brawler ship!


I think overall we need more vaga dps, more cap stability to roaming and tackling vagas, and for the love of god we need more mids!!!

CCP Rise, once again, you have disappointed me thoroughly with your fist pass at balancing.
This is Gallente BS pass one all over again, poorly thought out and poorly understood.

HACs as a class need a reconsideration, and by crushing their power scale comparatively to navy and t1 cruisers, you remove their ingame value in almost its entirety.
This is especially with the FW changes that enable the procurement of navy cruisers at such minimal cost to those involved in FW.

While I understand the power spike that needs to be shifted down scale in order to enable younger pilots to compete competitively in EVE at less cost in order to keep them in the game, we need not **** so heavily on the higher skilled and higher requirement ships to do this.
In 6-9months time, when these newb pilots have worn out their 'kiddie' ships, they will want something powerful and worth their money to get into. Your proposed changes completely remove that option for them.

Seriously, lets take a look at this legitimately and intelligently, like people who have jobs about this and not kids on the playground goofing around.

First:
-50% MWD sig reduction role bonus
Are you mental? This is a practically useless bonus. I can think of 2 ships in all 8 that will make legitimate enough use of this for it to even be considered slightly helpful. Old Vagabond and old Cerberus.
Deimos doesnt run its MWD long enough to consider it useful. Ishtar just picks up sentries and warps, or its brawling you with ogres anyway. Muninn warps to a new tac and alphas you from it. Eagle will warp to a new tac and rail you from there. Zealots never use MWDs, and a Sacrilege acts like a Deimos with its MWD.
This role bonus is ridiculous, frivolous and quite honestly, an insult. What works for AFs will not necessarily work for HACs or any other class for that matter.
What this should be is: [one of the following]
-25% reduction in efficiency of EWAR modules against you [webs, tps, damps, ecm, tds]
-50% reduction in efficiency of opposing racial EWAR modules against you [min=TD, amarr=web, gal=ECM, cal=damp]
+10% to received fleet bonuses
+15% to incoming remote assistance modules
{reserved for other ideas}

Sacrilege:
To be frank, these changes are not badddd, but they dont fix or solve any of its issues either. A dual rep sac with the current changes to MAR, can easily fit a MWD, med cap booster, med neut, 5x HAM II, 2x MAR II and a Med Aux Pump rig with plenty of grid to spare. The sacrilege does not need more grid. If anything a touch more cpu, 15-25 points, would be far more beneficial, especially now that the CPU intensive HMLs are available weapon choices.
The cap recharge bonus is a diamond in the rough. I flew the ship for a long while, and the bonus is excellent and shows greatly during actual play and combat. Perma-running a MWD or med neut off cap regen alone, while maintaining tackle is not to be underestimated by the masses of fools that have no experience in the ship.
I would personally keep all the current changes to it, except perhaps modifying the amount of grid it is given and compensating with a slight CPU increase. The mass reduction is good as well. However, sig should be reduced to attack cruiser level, as benefits a HAC, not a t1 combat cruiser.
Zealot:
You didnt touch it, so you couldnt f--- it. What aint broke, dont fix.

Cerberus:
WHOOHOOO 6TH LAUNCHER THAT WE DONT HAVE THE FITTINGS FOR!
Seriously, I'm starting to use the meme :Rise: for anything that lacks common logic amongst my EVE friends, and they get it and laugh.
The cerberus seriously lacked a moderately effective tank to even start with, and now you give us less fittings than the new launcher will cost and expect us to field a better or equal tank with less resources to do it with. I are disappoint.
Around 150ish more PG instead of 85, 50 CPU should be fine. Consider a straight 10% dmg bonus on CalCruiser and think about an explo velocity bonus instead of the RoF bonus. Heavier volley, slightly less dps, far better applied dps.
Eagle:
Extra mid + rail changes mean only good things for this ship (if only you hadnt slapped rails with that horrid tracking nerf, more on that in the relevant thread). However, the absolutely paltry/pathetic speed with which you have bestowed this ship appears more insult to injury than the changes do good. A pathetic 175m/s? What are we expecting, the enemy to be perma-webbed by something that may never actually be there? Give it at LEAST 195m/s, and reduce the sig while you're at it. This may be the t2 combat cruiser, but that doesnt mean it should be as bad as its t1 counter-part at its actual job.
I'd also suggest a 15-20% optimal bonus per level on CalCruiser and perhaps a tracking bonus on HAC in place of the 2nd optimal bonus.

Deimos:
YAY, speed! YAY, extra mid! YAY, I just lost 10% armor! YAY, I just lost 20% structure!
...Wait, what?
God no. This is not just a "thorax with better resists and an extra bonus or two," THIS is a exponentially more expensive, SP intensive nich t2 thorax. However, you seem to prefer the former, while making the Nexequror better. :gg:
Replace the lost armor and structure at least, consider a tracking bonus instead of the MWD, consider making the MWD cap bonus inherent (like Vaga's speed bonus, that you stealth nerfed), increase the fitting heavily. Deimos SHOULD be able to do Neutrons +1600 + MWD with just enough grid for the rest of the slots (no capbooster, double web) @V skills.
<

Overall a step in the right direction but the meat and bones of some of the details of some of the changes worry me a bit.

For instance the diemos I've always considered slightly under tanked for the role, dropping it back even further doesn't make sense to me - not a great fan of it losing the utility high either but the extra mid wouldn't go amiss.

Dang, pretty much all of this makes me smile. Would have liked keeping the 5th highslot on the Ishtar and encouraged getting rid of turret slots, to go along with the dropping of the hybrid damage...otherwise...yes, yes, yes, and yes!!

A bit late to the party. I'm not really WOW'd by these changes, but mostly because the balance team seems to have become a victim of its own success. T1 frigs saw tons of ****** frigs just get completely changed into new, exciting, fun roles. Same for T1 cruisers. T1 BS, which were largely fine, got some /completely/ new bonuses and designs. So I was sitting on the edge of my seat hoping for some FANCY PANTS changes to complete dumpster babby ships that haven't really ever been used (I'm looking at you, Eagle, Sacrilege, and Cerberus).

But instead we get this really pragmatic, functional, and probably really good set of changes - but they're boring. It's a stupid criticism, I know, but I still feel like it's boring. Maybe I was hoping for something like a Cruiser MJD that only HACs can use, bomb-immunity (holy **** how cool would that be), or something that I didn't even know I wanted - like the changes to the Geddon. I had no idea I wanted it to be a neut-range drone boat, but I apparently wanted it something fierce.



AFs - completely changed the way small-ship PvP was played
Tier-3 BC - pumped life into the dying "roaming" gameplay, added sniping gameplay
T1 rebalance + tier 2 destroyers- essentially created a deep, meaningful, low-isk alternative to PvP. Made lowsec fun, made getting drunk and roaming around a reality, allowed lower-SP players not only be relevant but powerful in all stages of combat.
Battleship rebalance - completely changed the face of nullsec PvP. Like, completely. Almost nobody is flying what they used to be flying any more.
HAC changes - will creep into the tier-3 BC wheelhouse, will probably be really enjoyable, and nullsec PvP may add a Sacrilege or Cerberus doctrine to replace the dead Drake doctrine.


The Sacrilege, Ishtar, and Cerberus are big winners here. The Vaga, Deimos, Muninn, class will still be good. Zealot will still be the Zealot...I don't actually think it's very good currently and now it's going to be really interesting fitting beams and an MWD. Eagle may be cool with the Hybrid changes, will have to put some time in when the changes hit SiSi to see how it flies rather than stare at numbers and try to imagine.


Either way - changes look like an all-around improvement on a ship class that is looking more and more out of date by the day. Can't wait to try them on SiSi

PS you can have the bomb-immune and cruiser MJD ideas free of charge.