These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Tuxedo Catfish
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#261 - 2013-07-29 17:11:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Tuxedo Catfish
Marlona Sky wrote:
Tuxedo Catfish wrote:
Morwen Lagann wrote:

Deimos: I can't really express how glad I am to see the Deimos keeping its MWD cap penalty reduction bonus (the Thorax losing it as part of the first round of Tiericide made me very sad), though I will miss that utility highslot a bunch.


Would you still be sad if it were simply rolled into the hull?


That MWD capacitor bonus is a joke. Here is a 'compelling' bonus that is more useful:

+5% to hull resistances

Now it might actually be called a Deimos instead of a Diemost. Besides, any brawler Deimos will be using the 4th mid slot for a cap injector, which means the cap bonus from the MWD is pointless.


I'm sure CCP would make it 4% to stay in line with the other armor resist bonuses, but the thought of a Gallente ship with a defensive bonus that's actually GOOD instead of this armor repair nonsense would be worth giving up my tracking bonus crusade.

EDIT: I misread hull for armor. Now I'm not really sure if I still agree. An armor bonus would be great, though!
Darco Aldent
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#262 - 2013-07-29 17:12:01 UTC
I think some people escpect too much from HACs, i even saw someone say : i would rather have a legion or a sleipneir then a... , i mean come on, its still a cruiser. and with all the bonuses i cannot belive how some people still say that T1 is stronger . Maybe Hacs were used allot before T3 ships and attack bc-s but now they are not, do not espect rise to buff them soo much so that everyone starts to fly them again like years ago in small gank. Time will tell. Great job Rise for listeting to people, i really like the buffs to fittings(cap recharge for mwd is great) and the mwd bonus
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#263 - 2013-07-29 17:12:10 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Rise, any comment on the Ishtar's Heavy drone bonus and its effect on the Navy Vexor? 7.5%/lvl outclasses Navy Vexor's 5%/level, and it largely seems like the Ishtar, with its stronger sensor str, faster & better tracking drones, larger bay, T2 resists, etc. make it a clear winner.


The VNI will still be used as a cheaper alt, for the Ishtar. I think that good place for, a happy medium between the T1 and the T2.

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Sven Viko VIkolander
In space we are briefly free
#264 - 2013-07-29 17:13:59 UTC
What many people seem to want every time balance iterations come around is more buffs--better tracking, better range, particularly. But the power creep has gotten out of hand, especially when fighting up. Tracking, especially, has exploded since the T1 cruiser changes. Pretty soon what will be needed is a re-re-balance of frigates etc. IMO what's needed is a fundamental change to the way tracking works in this game. The ability to, say, spiral out of tracking of larger guns gets less viable every update.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#265 - 2013-07-29 17:15:35 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Rise, any comment on the Ishtar's Heavy drone bonus and its effect on the Navy Vexor? 7.5%/lvl outclasses Navy Vexor's 5%/level, and it largely seems like the Ishtar, with its stronger sensor str, faster & better tracking drones, larger bay, T2 resists, etc. make it a clear winner.


Navy Vexor is faster and more agile, has extra tracking and speed for drones smaller than heavies, and is (depending on FW warzone status) cheaper.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#266 - 2013-07-29 17:15:49 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Rise, any comment on the Ishtar's Heavy drone bonus and its effect on the Navy Vexor? 7.5%/lvl outclasses Navy Vexor's 5%/level, and it largely seems like the Ishtar, with its stronger sensor str, faster & better tracking drones, larger bay, T2 resists, etc. make it a clear winner.

It is supposed to outclass the Vexor Navy Issue.
The biggest problem with the Ishtar iteration 1 is it was completely out classed by the Vaxor Navy Issue.


I think actually they're supposed to be different somehow.

The T2 are supposed to be more specialized than all other varations, CCP Fozzie decided to make navy cruisers more specialized than there T1 counterparts, while maintaining some flexability.
So the Vexor Navy Issue gets 5% to all drone tracking and MWD velocity, the Ishtar gets 7.5% to heavy drone MWD velocity and tracking, also 7.5% to sentry optimal and tracking.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#267 - 2013-07-29 17:16:08 UTC
Also would you stop balancing these things around the stupid ******* talos?

Thats one of the biggest issues with all of these changes, its being balanced around of class of ships thats ******* broken. The what those graphs show is basically how a talos murders the Hac at pretty much any range. Yes the sensor strength is awesome, yes the cap is nice but none of these long range hacs will be worth **** until the ABC's either get a reduction in speed or like a 25% tracking penalty.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#268 - 2013-07-29 17:16:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Phox Jorkarzul
RISE how about a RoF bonus over the MWD one

EDIT

Or tell me why that was not a good call...

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#269 - 2013-07-29 17:17:33 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
Wish cerb would lose that kinetic damage bonus. If will prevent it from ever being a fleet ship. Enemy spies see you are using cerbs? Tank for kinetic and GG.


Also 15 m3 drone bay? Comon now, Either remove this and buff the missile a little bit more or make it 25 m3.

Waiting for HAC changes 3.0 :)



lvl5 HAC = +25% dmg and this bonus was never a problem when using Drakes or Tengus, it will be less of one using RLs or HAMs, it is one with overnerf HM's still

15m3 drone bay = 3 ECM drones and unless your target is specifically ECCM fitted you should be able to put at least one jam cycle on it (training skills helps)
I can barely see this new Cerb using something else than HAMs or RL's unless HM's get buff to new LR med weapons level.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Boris Amarr
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#270 - 2013-07-29 17:18:50 UTC
Zealot without drones again!!! Why ???
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#271 - 2013-07-29 17:19:46 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:
@ CCP


so you wont fix the vagabond problem that it has to use barrage to do any dmg?
this problem keeps it from fullfilling its role as point range kiter, but it seems you feel diffrent about this.

and i strongly believe the stats of beeing one of the most used cruisers is just an afterglow of its former glorious days



Rise is happy with a brawling Vaga because of his precious XLASB vaga that he made a video about. Too bad we aren't all Kil2.


Would love to see this video if you can link it for me =)

Generally pretty happy with this feedback. Little nervous about Ishtar and Cerb because of everyone being so happy, but hopefully we haven't gone too far.

For those of you concerned with Vaga I have to say your expectations are a bit over the top, except the complaint that the Cynabal is too good relative to Vaga, which I already said I agree with.

Sacrilege folks seem a bit divided depending on how they imagine using it and I promise to keep an eye on the active capabilities following the cap adjustment once people get to start using it, but I think it will be fine.


The problem with the vaga is that med autocannons are awful for kiting and it doesnt have anything close to the grid needed to fit artillery
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#272 - 2013-07-29 17:19:47 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Rise, any comment on the Ishtar's Heavy drone bonus and its effect on the Navy Vexor? 7.5%/lvl outclasses Navy Vexor's 5%/level, and it largely seems like the Ishtar, with its stronger sensor str, faster & better tracking drones, larger bay, T2 resists, etc. make it a clear winner.


Navy Vexor is faster and more agile, has extra tracking and speed for drones smaller than heavies, and is (depending on FW warzone status) cheaper.
Ok, I guess Fozzie could have responded, too. <3

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

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

Tuxedo Catfish
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#273 - 2013-07-29 17:19:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Tuxedo Catfish
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:
RISE how about a RoF bonus over the MWD one

EDIT

Or tell me why that was not a good call...


A triple damage bonus on a blaster ship would be kind of silly.

Michael Harari wrote:

The problem with the vaga is that med autocannons are awful for kiting and it doesnt have anything close to the grid needed to fit artillery


Medium autocannons awful for kiting? Have I accidentally started posting in mirror universe eve-o?
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#274 - 2013-07-29 17:22:16 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Also would you stop balancing these things around the stupid ******* talos?

Thats one of the biggest issues with all of these changes, its being balanced around of class of ships thats ******* broken. The what those graphs show is basically how a talos murders the Hac at pretty much any range. Yes the sensor strength is awesome, yes the cap is nice but none of these long range hacs will be worth **** until the ABC's either get a reduction in speed or like a 25% tracking penalty.


The one in the graph is also completely stationary, rather than zeroing transversal with its overpowered speed and agility to hit for full damage.
Gneeznow
Ship spinners inc
#275 - 2013-07-29 17:24:12 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Lol again @ that damage graph

tier 3 BCs totally balanced guys, they still totally wreck hacs at all ranges, just very slightly less


This. Haven't seen a muninn or eagle since tornados were introduced to the game, why would anyone bother? Tier3 BCs just outperform all sniper hacs by a mile and are cheaper to boot.
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#276 - 2013-07-29 17:25:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Phox Jorkarzul
Tuxedo Catfish wrote:
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:
RISE how about a RoF bonus over the MWD one

EDIT

Or tell me why that was not a good call...


A triple damage bonus on a blaster ship would be kind of silly.

Michael Harari wrote:

The problem with the vaga is that med autocannons are awful for kiting and it doesnt have anything close to the grid needed to fit artillery


Medium autocannons awful for kiting? Have I accidentally started posting in mirror universe eve-o?


Well it can lose one of the Damage for a tank or tracking, or 5% increase to speed for the MWD....which wouldn't be that bad

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Tuxedo Catfish
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#277 - 2013-07-29 17:28:23 UTC
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:

Well it can lose one of the Damage for a tank or tracking, or 5% increase to speed for the MWD....which wouldn't be that bad


I absolutely agree. :)
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#278 - 2013-07-29 17:28:47 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
The mwd cap bonus is a joke. Look at the new nos. Furthermore you would think a tech ii mwd would be better on a diemos due to more base cap but the meta mwd is actually better due to less cap activation cost.

To me the mwd us akin to cap recharge or max speed... They are all lazy bonus that should be built in but at for some reason you dont want to fix.

At the very least make it a duel bonus like 7.5% to cap and mwd velocity increase.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#279 - 2013-07-29 17:28:58 UTC
Except for the Deimos, seems everybody is ok with the changes, minus personal tweaks.

I see the intention of the Deimos though, they don't want it as a point blank brawler. They want this gallente ship to use rails.

The thorax, both rail and blaster platform, decentish tank, it dies no big deal.

The Deimos. Rail platform (the Ishtar would never make a viable pure rail platform, (rail sentry sure but not pure rail). Blasters is somewhat considered suicidal. Tank issues

Proteus, blaster platform (cause most don't fit rails), good tank for surviving at point blank.

If the above was the intention of CCP in regards to the Deimos, thorax and proteus... Great job, balance and you gave the ships identity.

If (and if that was your intention), with the gallente race, you nailed it.

Yaay!!!!
Grarr Dexx
Blue Canary
Watch This
#280 - 2013-07-29 17:30:20 UTC
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:
Tuxedo Catfish wrote:
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:
RISE how about a RoF bonus over the MWD one

EDIT

Or tell me why that was not a good call...


A triple damage bonus on a blaster ship would be kind of silly.

Michael Harari wrote:

The problem with the vaga is that med autocannons are awful for kiting and it doesnt have anything close to the grid needed to fit artillery


Medium autocannons awful for kiting? Have I accidentally started posting in mirror universe eve-o?


Well it can lose one of the Damage for a tank or tracking, or 5% increase to speed for the MWD....which wouldn't be that bad


You're a ******* idiot, do you know that?