These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#441 - 2013-07-29 22:41:54 UTC
Alticus C Bear wrote:
Ok I have now fiddled with the latest EFT file.

I do like the electronics buff and the cap makes a big difference.

Ishtar will be my first choice HAC (always was) and has basically sat in the hanger from the point where I no longer needed it’s T2 resists for the old DPS heavy FW complexes.

Not completely convinced by the bonus to heavy drone speed, will need a further Navi comp and to not use ogres I think for heavies to be used in that fashion and be viable.

Fitting buff is huge so I will not complain about the odd bonuses.

Like the cap bonus on the Deimos gives it a great run time.

Sac may have lost some of its uniqueness and strength without the cap bonus, honestly it was a very strong ship when used correctly already.

Eagle could still do with 20% optimal and gaining a tracking bonus.

I do like the Vaga. 425mm Autos plus pulsing a LASB for tank at skirmish range with reduced sig.

I think these are generally improved combat wise and sitting at the correct level, more and they will out shadow other ships by far.

It is however a missed opportunity.

They are just another combat vessel nothing really unique, I will have a couple lying round but there is nothing really to justify the cost.

Some of the previous thread ideas such as scram immunity, microjump drives may have been overpowered but there was still a spot here for a unique bonus to shake up the meta and I think that is still missing. I would have gone for immune to non-targeted interdiction and I am not even a nullsec/wormhole player.


I agree with you that they are missing a uniqueness, but it is not the immunity. I don't quite get why people want combat ships to be immune to bubbles, scrams, etc.

They could add something unique to these ships though, as these are the only ones CCP can really just go nuts with regarding unique, distinctive bonuses.

Yaay!!!!
Lua Mioukl
Threatening Kitten Aura
#442 - 2013-07-29 22:42:36 UTC
Ah! now these are good changes!

Muninn still look somewhat inflexible but overall all ships probably will be flown extensively.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#443 - 2013-07-29 22:45:32 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Diemos is still a flying coffin with the words (I brought it on the field and I have blasters, kill me please) written on it.


Well considering medium Railguns are about to do near blaster level dps (******* fail ccp), I'd just fit those and kite at 30km...

Blaster Deimos will be just about as bad after the patch as it is now.


I addressed this before. If ccp's intention is to remove the Deimos as a blaster platform (I know its possible but not everybody is that crazy to dive a Deimos headfirst into a fleet), then CCP did good.

As I listed before:
Thorax, rail and blaster platform
Deimos,Rail platform
Proteus, Blaster platform

If that was ccp's intention, they got it right. If not lord that ship will never see the light of day.

Yaay!!!!
nikar galvren
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#444 - 2013-07-29 22:48:48 UTC  |  Edited by: nikar galvren
Sigras wrote:
Rise, perhaps it would help if we had some idea of the goal or outcome of each ship; what it is supposed to be specialized for

Specialization means it does one thing very well and it sucks at everything else. The best example of a specialized T2 ship is the Logistics ship line. It throws reps out there and tanks. It doesnt tackle, it doesnt DPS, it throws out RR and it survives.

So what does the sacrilege do? Its armor resist and MWD bonuses lead me to believe it is a close range brawler, meant to get in there, latch onto something and never let go, but then it gets this strange missile range bonus and gets HMLs. Sure these bonuses make it more versatile but it isnt supposed to be versatile it's supposed to be good at one (1) thing, so what is it that this ship is supposed to be specialized in?

TBH we shouldnt even have to ask this question for T2 ships. If theyre super specialized, then it should be so blatantly obvious what theyre good at that even a fool could figure it out (see logistics ships)

TL;DR
we need to know what you want these ships to be specialized to do in order to give good feedback.

This. What are the HACs supposed to DO?

EDIT: 89 pages in the original thread and 23 pages and counting here clearly state that the balancing passes thus far are uninspired and insufficient. Please listen to the excellent feedback that can be found in both threads and give these ships a solid role to perform.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#445 - 2013-07-29 22:48:59 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
Phoenix Jones wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
A tracking bonus only helps a rail Deimos and not the blaster variation. The bonus itself does t save it (or even assist it) in surviving under fire.

Tracking, no it doesn't need it. It needs a tank, or a way of surviving. It doesn't have it yet


Wtf? You have played eve before yes?


Yes and even with a tracking bonus the ship still derps and is melted into Ashe at point blank range.

The ship doesn't need to be navyfied (tracking bonus). It needs to survive (a tank of some way, shape or form).


i did not mean tank vrs tracking... you said that tracking does not affect blasters and only rails... that was the wtf moment.

personally i would switch falloff for tracking and give it some sort of armor per level bonus for the mwd bonus.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#446 - 2013-07-29 22:51:50 UTC
Tuxedo Catfish wrote:
Veshta Yoshida wrote:

I hear the armour rep bonus is immensely popular on the small scale at least after the AAR introduction (tongue in cheek .. or is it! Smile) Would certainly make it into the quintessential brawler.


I realize you're probably joking but good god, no. CCP should retire the armor repair bonus and never put it on another ship ever again until such time as it's possible to fit upsized armor reps on a ship the way it is with shields. Or never at all, I'm honestly fine with either.

Tongue was firmly in cheek, I don't hate Gallente that much Smile If only they had managed to sort the off-grid issue before getting to the meat-n-potatoes HACs I'd have advocated a point range bonus, but with Loki's still in every system of note the interregnum would be devastating.

But if you don't want it, can I have it for my dual-rep Sacrilege instead of the redundant (stuff that stays far enough away to warrant it is also fast/small enough to ignore HAMs and never be caught) range bonus Twisted

The thought of the sheer power of a bonused MAAR/MAR tank on the Sacrilege, knowing what it can could tank with some selective heating makes me salivate .. will still hit like a girl, but one doing lots of cardio so keeps going all day long!
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#447 - 2013-07-29 22:51:58 UTC
I think the changes are good on the whole, and will help HACs (especially long range HACs) become more competitive relative to their cost again.

The really glaring exception is the Deimos. My list of issues are:

1. Losing the utility high - with upcoming NOS changes its frustrating that the closest range brawler now can't fit that NOS to at least keep its guns going while getting neuted to hell. No other HAC has such a glaring vulnerability as having to fight the majority of fights within even small neut range.

2. The MWD cap bonus is still a crap bonus - It is something that should get rolled into the base stats and replaced with something useful.

3. Despite it having a crap tank you made it even weaker by removing 10% of its base armour (WTF?!) and 20% of its hull (Coz gallente hull tanking was always overpowered right?). It is awesome it now has a lower sig and is much more mobile and survivable in its long trek across a battlefield to get into brawl range - except then it dies even quicker in a brawl (which is its primary role).

These changes reduce this ship to some horribly role changing rail-kite obsenity, much worse than a vigilant, only arguably better than a Thorax. You nerfed it and it is probably one of the worst (but most loved) HACs in game already.

Please look again or further explain these horrible Deimos changes - Thanks.
Michael J Caboose
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#448 - 2013-07-29 22:56:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael J Caboose
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:
CCP Rise: The Sacri slot layout is still a major problem in my eyes.

I am still of the opinion that removing a launcher, increasing the ROF or Damage bonus to compensate, and shifting a high to a low is the best solution. This will allow reasonable DPS, projected thanks to your changes, while retaining the utility high that makes the Sac such an awesome brawler.

I really think this would work perfectly. Remove a launcher, change damage bonus to 10%, ROF bonus to 7.5%, and we end up with the same base damage; switch a high to the low, resulting in a 5/4/6 slot layout, and BOOM, every single problem with this ship is solved.

This really, really needs to happen.


Another +1 for this. or add a 16th slot to all HACS, that would be great too. I do appreciate the CPU and PG buff on the sac, and the extra range for HAMs is also nice. Maybe extend it's bonus to RLMLs?

As for the other HACS;

Zealot: As things stand, the 2 I own will remain hangar queens. I don't fly with blobs, and the Zealot is lacking outside logi heavy gangs. It needs a bit more speed. The fact it's now slower than the Cerb is just wrong. A small drone bay wouldn't make it OP either.

Cerberus: get rid of the weird little drone bay or make it 25m3. I'd prefer to remove it. RLMLs already make this a ship frigates should fear. Other than that. It looks good. I'm looking forward to trying it out, especially with RLMLs.

Eagle: Still lacking. With the tanking bonus, it needs to be more of a brawler, which currently it isn't.

Deimos: Please stop trying to nerf it's sad little tank. Also, replace the mwd cap use bonus. It's an anachronism.

Ishtar: Drone bonuses seem a bit odd, but I'm willing to give it a try.

Vagabond: Don't know enough to comment

Muninn: Needs work. I predict almost no one will bother to fly it. While I think all the HACs need a 16th slot, the muninn would probably benefit the most.


I'm also very unimpressed with the blanket 50% MWD penalty reduction as a role bonus. For half these ships, fitting a mwd makes little sense, so why would they have a role bonus for it? And it is a weak and highly situational bonus indeed, as the graphs clearly show.

Each ship should have a unique role bonus. Otherwise if we're stuck with the MWD bonus should be more on the order of 75%.
Tuxedo Catfish
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#449 - 2013-07-29 22:56:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Tuxedo Catfish
Tracking is incredibly valuable for soloing in a blaster ship, because it determines whether or not your ship is ****** if you're caught by a lone frigate. (Or if you have to shed tackle quickly before his friends catch up.) This is more important than ever if the Deimos is losing the utility high slot.

I realize this may not have occurred to some of you as soloing in Gallente cruisers, t1 or t2, is essentially suicide. But it shouldn't be!
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#450 - 2013-07-29 22:59:00 UTC
Tuxedo Catfish wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
there is a camp that wants the Deimos to be this awesome zippy Blaster Platform ship....
I don't know why we'd want a Gallente ship to reflect the Gallente play style of in-your-face with blasters.... What?


totally right? silly gal for actually wanting a in your face blaster setup.Roll


The problem is the Gallente design model is fundamentally broken; big slow armor tanks and blasters with no range. It's a combination of bad and bad with no counterbalance, especially for cruiser-sized ships; battleships are always slow regardless of how they're fit (and have MJDs, which are a wonderful way around this problem), while frigates can get away with just fitting a damage control and perhaps some other resist mods.

Making armor faster isn't a good choice since it's the defining weakness of an armor tank, and when you start adding range to blasters you start looking suspiciously like Minmatar. The Talos is as good as it is, perhaps even overpowered, because it's un-Gallente: it has both range and speed.

The way I see it, there are two options: either redesign the Gallente HACs to have shield tanks with a decisive speed advantage and enough EHP to brawl at point blank range -- and I mean actually enough, not like the Thorax where shields + blasters means you'll explode instantly -- or leave them armor-tanked, but let them track well enough for railguns + antimatter to be at least somewhat competetive with Scorch and Barrage.

(To CCP's credit, I think the proposed Ishtar changes have already achieved this balance with drones, which just leaves the Deimos.)

I prefer the latter solution since I think ultra-fast shield-tanked blaster ships would be a great direction to take the Serpentis ship line, but that's just me.


You know for a Goon you make good points that i agree with. I have always said that the Gallente boats needed to be shield and fast, or they needed to have range, falloff or tracking bonus on hulls to apply DPS. Right now outside frigates used inside Faction Warfare plexes, and the Talos it is too hard to apply damage to any other ship. I think that with the rail buff that is coming it, you'll see more people using medium rails on Gallente boats, and medium blasters will fall behind in pvp.

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Sigras
Conglomo
#451 - 2013-07-29 22:59:21 UTC
Along the lines of my last post, my proposed change for the deimos would be to change the MWD cap use bonus to either:

5% increase in MWD overload speed per level
5% reduction in armor plate mass penalty per level

This and maybe swapping a mid for a low; if you want to get really crazy put in both bonuses one instead of MWD cap bonus and one in place of the falloff bonus.

This would assist with the deimos goal of "get in close to tank and gank" Losing a mid and the falloff bonus would keep it a brawler contributing to the idea of "good at one and only one thing"

This would make for the super specialized ships that HACs are supposed to be.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#452 - 2013-07-29 23:01:01 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
A tracking bonus only helps a rail Deimos and not the blaster variation. The bonus itself does t save it (or even assist it) in surviving under fire.

Tracking, no it doesn't need it. It needs a tank, or a way of surviving. It doesn't have it yet


Wtf? You have played eve before yes?


Yes and even with a tracking bonus the ship still derps and is melted into Ashe at point blank range.

The ship doesn't need to be navyfied (tracking bonus). It needs to survive (a tank of some way, shape or form).


i did not mean tank vrs tracking... you said that tracking does not affect blasters and only rails... that was the wtf moment.

personally i would switch falloff for tracking and give it some sort of armor per level bonus for the mwd bonus.

The falloff bonus doesn't belong on a gallente ship, of we want range we will use Railguns or drones.
A tracking bonus would be better for the Gallente doctrine than a falloff bonus.

This is what I would like to see, from the last thread.

Gallente Cruiser
+5% Armor HP per Level
+5% Medium Hybrid Damage per level.
Heavy Assault Ships
+7.5% medium hybrid tracking per level
+5% medium hybrid damage per level.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#453 - 2013-07-29 23:07:40 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:


This is what I would like to see, from the last thread.

Gallente Cruiser
+5% Armor HP per Level
+5% Medium Hybrid Damage per level.
Heavy Assault Ships
+7.5% medium hybrid tracking per level
+7.5% medium hybrid rate of fire per level.


i would then reduce to 4 turrets but keep 5 high slots so its gets a high slot back... think of it as a mini mega.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#454 - 2013-07-29 23:08:39 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Seriously, you view 25% more range (with the same flight time) for your high damage short range weapons system as a useless bonus?

Now, I'll agree I'd prefer perhaps a bonus that allowed them to apply that damage better... especially since a range bonus would be of more benefit to a faster hull.... but I don't find that bonus to be useless. Sometimes getting in range with a Sac can be problematic.


Well, it depends. Do your opponents have OGB with skirmish links? If yes, then yes the range bonus is useless, because anything BC size and down not webbed and/or scrammed will take next to no damage from your HAMs anyway.

HAMs are crippled by OGB more than any other weapon system due to the 4.8 damage reduction factor that results in an almost 1:1 ratio between decrease in sig and a decrease in damage, as well as an almost 1:1 ratio between an increase in speed and a decrease in damage.

Basically, against anything BC size and down, if its MWD is running and it's not webbed, skirmish links reduce HAM DPS by 50%. Yes, it's that bad.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#455 - 2013-07-29 23:12:54 UTC
Wow ! I'm realizing people are complaining about the Deimos losing a utility high slot for a mid slot...

Then, I understand why CCP is rather conservative in these changes. The ships are mostly only better than before in a lot of ways, and yet people cry, and often for no real reason, like the Sacrilege capacitor or the Vagabond shield boost bonus.

I'm losing hope for humanity.
Kais Fiddler
Perkone
Caldari State
#456 - 2013-07-29 23:20:03 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Wow ! I'm realizing people are complaining about the Deimos losing a utility high slot for a mid slot...

Then, I understand why CCP is rather conservative in these changes. The ships are mostly only better than before in a lot of ways, and yet people cry, and often for no real reason, like the Sacrilege capacitor or the Vagabond shield boost bonus.

I'm losing hope for humanity.

We're not complaining about the ishtar, which is being buffed in reasonable and powerful ways. The deimos isn't getting that kind of love however.
I'm Down
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#457 - 2013-07-29 23:24:04 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Wow ! I'm realizing people are complaining about the Deimos losing a utility high slot for a mid slot...

Then, I understand why CCP is rather conservative in these changes. The ships are mostly only better than before in a lot of ways, and yet people cry, and often for no real reason, like the Sacrilege capacitor or the Vagabond shield boost bonus.

I'm losing hope for humanity.



Nobody is saying they aren't more powerful than before... What we're saying is that they are dull as **** and outclassed by other options in terms of price and/or ability and therefore have no reason to be used other than "just because." That is horrible design implementation.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#458 - 2013-07-29 23:24:26 UTC
honestly i think a heat reduction as a role bonus would be perfect for hacs.

Role bonus:
37.5% reduction in overheating damage to modules

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Madbuster73
State War Academy
Caldari State
#459 - 2013-07-29 23:24:37 UTC
I love the new changes, giving the HACS the treatment they deserve Big smile
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#460 - 2013-07-29 23:26:49 UTC
My concerns with the Ishtar remain.

It goes from having a bonused weapons system that can be overheated (in a 1v1 PVP environment where your goal is to destroy the opponent before their reinforcements arrive) to not having an overheatable bonused weapons system.

In short its burst DPS drops a lot.

Given that this ship was (IMO) one of the finest solo roaming ships in the game, I will be sad to see it lose that aspect.

That said, a 37.5% bonus to heavy drone speed is unique and powerful for anyone that prefers to engage at medium range (rather than my preferred short range) with their Ishtar.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com