These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#41 - 2013-07-29 12:59:32 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:

Bad change, also vaga is op and ffs no the biggest problem with the vagabond isnt the cynabal, they both are **** because of range and power creep and of course cause of t3s and because you buff brawling out of its ass and enrf kiting to hell.

The cynabal needs a big buff (and yes other priate cruisers abr the gila need one as well) and the vaga needs a even bigger buff, but not one making it a op brawler (600dps and over 80k ehp, before impalnts/links) but one making it a good kiter.


I bolded the the parts of that post that I believe reached a new level of stupid.
Either you're trolling or you're the more ignorant EVE player to post on this thread.

Vaga needs a better buff though, it doesn't have the PG to perform its job properly.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
sten mattson
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#42 - 2013-07-29 13:02:07 UTC  |  Edited by: sten mattson
the sac just lost its cap bonus as it wasnt incorprated into the hull compared to the other HAcs , or rather , everyone else got it too , which makes the sac less interesting now. got fixed

tbh we werent interested in the range bonus , an explosion velocity bonus would have suited us just fine btw, or make it 10% like the rest of the range bonuses got fixed as well :P

zealot still lacking some way to deal with frigs when tackled , be it utility high , or 4 mids , or a flight of light drones.

i find it funny that only the cerb, zealot and eagle dont have drones. i can understand why the caldari dont have them but the amarr are supposed to be the lazors+drones race. Hek! even the minnies have more drones and utility highs!

also since when should the zealots sensor strengh be equal to that of the minnies?

aside from that , love the changes!

IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2013-07-29 13:02:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Akturous
Having to right this whole thing again because the forum swallowed itCry

Role changes:

Nice move giving them all capacitor and sensor strength, that will be appreciated.

50% mwd bonus is still lackluster, your own graphs show how little it does against a talos and for a lot of the HACs they'll only be using their MWD to get to the target then it's off. Take your time and come up with something better. Sigs on all the hacs should be LESS than T1 to follow the T1 frig/AF continuation.

Sac:
Did you integrate some of the cap bonus on top of the new cap bonus to all of the HACS?
Still needs it's utility high put to a low slot. I would have preferred damage over projection, but it's still a decent bonus.

Zealot:

Needs fitting to fit beams, it's ok I suppose that's more a problem of t2 ammo balance/long range med weapons balance (which btw your beam damage buff will do nothing to address, you can't fit beams and amour which means you can't fit them at all).

Diemos:
Signature is still way too big. AF's have a lower sig than their t1 counterparts. Gallente have lower sigs than Caldari. Here you are violating two rules, not only is the sig massive compared with the Thorax (30m bigger), but it's HIGHER than the Eagle, needs changing.

You can't think of anything to replace the mwd cap bonus (which is now more useless because all the hacs will have good cap), 7.5%/lvl tracking, there you go, free idea, who cares if it's the same as the thorax, it's good.

A bit extra fitting wouldn't be bad and reverse the hp nerfs.

Ishtar:

Thank the lord there's some CPU. Integrating the drone bay bonus was a good idea, but I don't understand why you nerfed the tracking/range bonus to give it a speed bonus. Since heavies are soooo crap and slow, if it was 50% it wouldn't be overpowered. As it stands the T1! dominix will be better at being a drone boat than the Ishtar. Make that speed bonus 20%/lvl or I'd rather have back the extra 2.5% tracking and range/lvl on the other bonus.

To put this in perspective, after the changes an Ogre II will do 1507m/s, which is slower than the slowest T1 cruiser, so drones than can be 3 shot by any ship with a web and a brain are slower than cruisers. I hope you realise how badly combat drones need an overhaul.

Vagabond:

You keep saying the new bonuses won't affect it's ability to be used as it was (a kiter), but it's role was overtaken by both tier 3's and the TE nerf, which forced you into using Barrage all the time. You don't even have enough PG to fit 425's with 2 LSE's. It needs enough PG to fit arty, then it can now do kiting or the role you've stuck it in which is dual 180 xl asb brawler, because it isn't good at anything else/doesn't have the fitting to do it.

Muninn:

This ship is still just rubbish. I explained ad-norsium in the older thread why it needs an extra turret (instead of the utility high) and the PG to fit the extra 720+some more. I will take a loki or a Sleipnir every time over this piece of junk. It doesn't have the DPS to do a brawl AB HAC setup, it hasn't got the pg or the alpha to do arty+armour effectively and it hasn't got the mids to do shield, it's a bloody abortion and I really wish you'd stop gimping this lame dog.

Faildari:

No comment, I cants FIRE THE MISSILES!

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8
Ro'Dauqa
All Things Dead.
#44 - 2013-07-29 13:03:48 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:



DEIMOS

For the Deimos we are bumping the speed up some more, lowering the Signature Radius slightly and of course adding the electronics and cap changes. We did look closely at the MWD cap use bonus and in the end decided that there wasn't any replacement compelling enough to warrant a change.


Please DONT EVEN THINK OF CHANGING MWD BONUS ON DEIMOS!!! was scrolling slowly all the way down to deimos hoping the bonus still there... i would probly rage quit for a month or smthing if it was changed : D
please leave mwd bonus alone!

otherwise great stuff hacs got some love finaly! ty great job
Pertuabo Enkidgan
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2013-07-29 13:04:32 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2863135#post2863135

So is this off the table? Just curious, would be difficult to pull off for some of the ships by the looks of it.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#46 - 2013-07-29 13:04:36 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:

Bad change, also vaga is op and ffs no the biggest problem with the vagabond isnt the cynabal, they both are **** because of range and power creep and of course cause of t3s and because you buff brawling out of its ass and enrf kiting to hell.

The cynabal needs a big buff (and yes other priate cruisers abr the gila need one as well) and the vaga needs a even bigger buff, but not one making it a op brawler (600dps and over 80k ehp, before impalnts/links) but one making it a good kiter.


I bolded the the parts of that post that I believe reached a new level of stupid.
Either you're trolling or you're the more ignorant EVE player to post on this thread.

Vaga needs a better buff though, it doesn't have the PG to perform its job properly.


Cyna sucks bad atm (vaga does so as well), if you think the cynabal is good you havnt flown one in ages.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#47 - 2013-07-29 13:05:01 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:

  • vaga is op
  • the vaga needs a even bigger buff, making it a good kiter.

  • the biggest problem with the vagabond isnt the cynabal
  • cynabal needs a big buff


    • Fire CCP Rise and hire this guy right here

    while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

         _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

    }
    Akturous
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #48 - 2013-07-29 13:05:52 UTC
    Ro'Dauqa wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:



    DEIMOS

    For the Deimos we are bumping the speed up some more, lowering the Signature Radius slightly and of course adding the electronics and cap changes. We did look closely at the MWD cap use bonus and in the end decided that there wasn't any replacement compelling enough to warrant a change.


    Please DONT EVEN THINK OF CHANGING MWD BONUS ON DEIMOS!!! was scrolling slowly all the way down to deimos hoping the bonus still there... i would probly rage quit for a month or smthing if it was changed : D
    please leave mwd bonus alone!

    otherwise great stuff hacs got some love finaly! ty great job


    Please bury yourself in the sand. It was moderately useful before he changed the cap on all the HACS, as it gave you substantially more cap to get your fat arse to the target, now it's not needed and I'd like 7.5% tracking/lvl like the thorax and some extra pg so you can role round with 250mm rails and 1600 plate+mwd snuffing fools.

    Vote Item Heck One for CSM8
    SkyMeetFire
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #49 - 2013-07-29 13:06:09 UTC
    Like it. Much better across the board than before. Focusing on the Sacs biggest weakness of power projection will help significantly to make it a more useful ship across the board. I seriously think that one little bonus change moves it from one of the weakest HACs to at least middle of the pack. HAM Armor HACs time?

    Slightly ancillary question, but I asked it before so I might as well try again - are you going to start moving Khanid away from damage bonii to only short range missiles? They are the only racial provider that gets such a limited bonus and that is part of the reason Amarr has been such a non-versatile race for the last few years. You guys have done great to increase versatility in the recent re-balances (especially with the Amarr drone line), and it'd be great if the Malediction, Vengeance, Heretic, and Damnation all got the same treatment the Sacrilege gets here.
    CCP Rise
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #50 - 2013-07-29 13:07:30 UTC
    The sac recharge rate is actually wrong in the OP, will fix it. Forgot to adjust it after we removed the bonus.

    The Cerberus kinetic bonus is not a relic in the same way that the Sacrilege recharge bonus or the Ishtar drone bay bonus were. We talked a lot about the role of damage specific bonuses with the CSM, as they raised the same concerns. Its obvious that the bonus is a bit of a handicap from the perspective of the Cerberus pilot, but we like the gameplay it adds and so we would only want to remove it if the Cerb was really needing more power, which isn't the case.

    Knowing what kind of damage your opponent is likely to do is just as interesting as knowing which kind of damage your opponent is likely to be weak to. It lets creates interesting decisions for both the Cerb pilot and the Cerb's opponents and we like that.

    @ccp_rise
    Jerick Ludhowe
    Internet Tuff Guys
    #51 - 2013-07-29 13:09:26 UTC
    HiddenPorpoise wrote:
    I like it, but why is the Diemos(t) loosing tank?


    Obviously the Deimos was far too survivable....
    Tsubutai
    Perkone
    Caldari State
    #52 - 2013-07-29 13:10:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Tsubutai
    Why does the sacrilege only get a 5%/level missile velocity bonus when all other range-bonused missile hulls get 10%?
    Capqu
    Half Empty
    xqtywiznalamywmodxfhhopawzpqyjdwrpeptuaenabjawdzku
    #53 - 2013-07-29 13:10:39 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    The sac recharge rate is actually wrong in the OP, will fix it. Forgot to adjust it after we removed the bonus.

    The Cerberus kinetic bonus is not a relic in the same way that the Sacrilege recharge bonus or the Ishtar drone bay bonus were. We talked a lot about the role of damage specific bonuses with the CSM, as they raised the same concerns. Its obvious that the bonus is a bit of a handicap from the perspective of the Cerberus pilot, but we like the gameplay it adds and so we would only want to remove it if the Cerb was really needing more power, which isn't the case.

    Knowing what kind of damage your opponent is likely to do is just as interesting as knowing which kind of damage your opponent is likely to be weak to. It lets creates interesting decisions for both the Cerb pilot and the Cerb's opponents and we like that.


    preach it

    the cerb would be too strong if it didnt have SOME kind of weakness, and kinetic damage is a small price to pay for 350 perfectly applied dps @ 105k while cruisin' at 2kms

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5tVbVu9Mkg
    MeBiatch
    GRR GOONS
    #54 - 2013-07-29 13:10:52 UTC
    Why is a tracking bonud compelling on a thorax but not a diemos?

    There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

    Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
    Berluth Luthian
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #55 - 2013-07-29 13:10:53 UTC
    Would this make vagabonds part of a tinker team?
    Anariasis
    The Tuskers
    The Tuskers Co.
    #56 - 2013-07-29 13:11:27 UTC
    Deimos needs a bonus like "will stay in space after it exploded for 5 seconds" so everyone can make it on the killmail :)
    Akimo Heth
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #57 - 2013-07-29 13:12:57 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    The sac recharge rate is actually wrong in the OP, will fix it. Forgot to adjust it after we removed the bonus.

    The Cerberus kinetic bonus is not a relic in the same way that the Sacrilege recharge bonus or the Ishtar drone bay bonus were. We talked a lot about the role of damage specific bonuses with the CSM, as they raised the same concerns. Its obvious that the bonus is a bit of a handicap from the perspective of the Cerberus pilot, but we like the gameplay it adds and so we would only want to remove it if the Cerb was really needing more power, which isn't the case.

    Knowing what kind of damage your opponent is likely to do is just as interesting as knowing which kind of damage your opponent is likely to be weak to. It lets creates interesting decisions for both the Cerb pilot and the Cerb's opponents and we like that.


    Doesn't it take away decisions from the Cerb pilot and add them to the opponent with a net of zero added gameplay? In light of the LR weapon buff not applying to missiles, I disagree that it isn't going to be in need of dps in 1.1.
    Sir John Halsey
    #58 - 2013-07-29 13:14:15 UTC
    CCP Rise wrote:
    The sac recharge rate is actually wrong in the OP, will fix it. Forgot to adjust it after we removed the bonus.

    The Cerberus kinetic bonus is not a relic in the same way that the Sacrilege recharge bonus or the Ishtar drone bay bonus were. We talked a lot about the role of damage specific bonuses with the CSM, as they raised the same concerns. Its obvious that the bonus is a bit of a handicap from the perspective of the Cerberus pilot, but we like the gameplay it adds and so we would only want to remove it if the Cerb was really needing more power, which isn't the case.

    Knowing what kind of damage your opponent is likely to do is just as interesting as knowing which kind of damage your opponent is likely to be weak to. It lets creates interesting decisions for both the Cerb pilot and the Cerb's opponents and we like that.



    Maybe, but still ... it doesn't make sense... anyway: what about ceberus + shield extenders + mwd = huge a** sig = certain death.
    Why not raising the shield resistance the same you did with eagle?
    Akimo Heth
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #59 - 2013-07-29 13:14:57 UTC
    Capqu wrote:
    CCP Rise wrote:
    The sac recharge rate is actually wrong in the OP, will fix it. Forgot to adjust it after we removed the bonus.

    The Cerberus kinetic bonus is not a relic in the same way that the Sacrilege recharge bonus or the Ishtar drone bay bonus were. We talked a lot about the role of damage specific bonuses with the CSM, as they raised the same concerns. Its obvious that the bonus is a bit of a handicap from the perspective of the Cerberus pilot, but we like the gameplay it adds and so we would only want to remove it if the Cerb was really needing more power, which isn't the case.

    Knowing what kind of damage your opponent is likely to do is just as interesting as knowing which kind of damage your opponent is likely to be weak to. It lets creates interesting decisions for both the Cerb pilot and the Cerb's opponents and we like that.


    preach it

    the cerb would be too strong if it didnt have SOME kind of weakness, and kinetic damage is a small price to pay for 350 perfectly applied dps @ 105k while cruisin' at 2kms


    Learn how explosion velocity works and how it is really low on HM's preventing "perfectly applied dps" @ 105k on a non-stationary target.
    Crysantos Callahan
    Imperial Shipment
    Amarr Empire
    #60 - 2013-07-29 13:15:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Crysantos Callahan
    First of all, thx for the new iteration and feedback. The problem I still have is the following - many people aired their concerns about the position of HACs as T2 spec in comparison to T1 cruisers and Tier 3 BC - for long range engagement the BC will still be the cheaper and more viable option, for close range combats many HACs lack the ability for killing small stuff. Maybe you could address that issue with the next iteration, we're on a good way.

    I like many changes, I still would like to see the following to make the ships work better:

    - all missile based ships should get ROF not racial dmg type boni, see cerberus kinetic dmg
    - Sacrilege wants that 6th launcher like cerberus
    - Zealot could use 25m3 drone bay for frigs

    The reason for the MWD/AB discussion isnt only the dmg/sig bloom issue but the "invulnerability" to scrams for its speed. This is why I'd like to see it on the HACs or at least part of the HACs, like the zealot.

    as usual my complaint:

    - substitute the HAC prereq of Energy Upgrades V with something useful, depending on the role it should fulfill (for example AB/MWD 5, Acc Control 5, Hull Upgrades 5, Energy Management/Operations 5 etc. stuff that makes sense for this group to make it work)