These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Danny John-Peter
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#561 - 2013-07-30 10:07:42 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Danny John-Peter wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:

Please tell me more about how other players have an advantage over you because they might bring friends to a fight that you did not.


Im not saying that, Im saying your fit is impractical for fighting more than one person, and is therefore not really practical for use at all.

Well, then use another fit?

People complain in the first turn that a Talos can kill it too easily, then when countered by a fit that would kill a Talos they say that the fit is not viable because the Talos is not alone. What?


I didn't mention the Talos at any point.

What are you talking about?
Lucien Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#562 - 2013-07-30 10:08:25 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
These new changes seem a bit more reasonable but i think the Ishtar needs a bit more work.

Maybe CCP want to force the ishtar into a shield role but i'd prefer it to be an armour tanker just like all the other Gallente ships. For that to happen, it need drone damage and hitpoint bonuses not tracking. The pilot can then use its low slots for tank and its med slots for drone tracking/range/speed.

Also has anyone calculated how OP the sacrilege will be now?



Would you be so kind as to elaborate how exactly the SAC is OP? It's tank is still the same(=meh...) the damage still subpar compared to the much cheaper BCs or even T1s with dedicated, but still much cheaper fittings. The drone increase doesn't do much tbh. Medium drones are going to die like flies in a serious fight, a Set of Light drones + EWARs won't turn it into the "Monster" it's supposed to be.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#563 - 2013-07-30 10:15:00 UTC
One thing I think Really need to b done for sake of balance and coherence is. Give the HAcs the SAME HP pools of the t1 ships!

There is absolutely no excuse for not doing so. Otherwise the role of being a tough nut cruiser as you describe is impossible.


Just that. Same shields, Armor and hull.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#564 - 2013-07-30 10:18:12 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:

But does it project better EVI. I don't that this does, which still stands that some of the Navy Ships are better HACs than the HACs.

But you do put up a good point, when are these ships going to be on SiSi.

I'm assuming you are talking about the NEX(Navy EXequror)? Or is EVI something else?

The NEX is better in some areas, the Deimos is better in a whole lot of other areas which I just pointed out.


You showed that it a little better, but not 50mil more better, and still does not have a defining role.

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#565 - 2013-07-30 10:19:37 UTC
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Voith wrote:
NinjaTurtle wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


can be reloaded over the course of a long fight.


sixty second reload time. I don't think you have a very realistic idea of what occurs to an asb vagabond in that time period.

It has a skilled pilot and realizes it will need to reload so it gets into a favorable position to do so instead of being a noob and acting surprised when the reload happens?

there's no favorable position in which the Vagabond can reload its tank for 60s and still maintain tackle or damage. That's not skill related, that's basic PVP mechanic limits.



The only way it could work would be if vaga lost a low slot for a mid so that it can fit 2 Large ASB.

In fact that makes easier to adjkust its PG and CPU so that It can fit this tank with 220mm guns while still not being able to fit stupid XL ASB (the loss of a low slot makes fittings pg AND cpu less variable)

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Phox Jorkarzul
Deep Void Merc Syndicate
#566 - 2013-07-30 10:25:12 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Voith wrote:
NinjaTurtle wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


can be reloaded over the course of a long fight.


sixty second reload time. I don't think you have a very realistic idea of what occurs to an asb vagabond in that time period.

It has a skilled pilot and realizes it will need to reload so it gets into a favorable position to do so instead of being a noob and acting surprised when the reload happens?

there's no favorable position in which the Vagabond can reload its tank for 60s and still maintain tackle or damage. That's not skill related, that's basic PVP mechanic limits.



The only way it could work would be if vaga lost a low slot for a mid so that it can fit 2 Large ASB.

In fact that makes easier to adjkust its PG and CPU so that It can fit this tank with 220mm guns while still not being able to fit stupid XL ASB (the loss of a low slot makes fittings pg AND cpu less variable)


How does the Vaga compare to the S.F.I.

Blasters for life

https://neverpheedthetroll.blogspot.com
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#567 - 2013-07-30 10:25:29 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
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.



They reduce the damage of everything.

Missiles do need to loose more DPS than turrets. that is MANDATORY to avoid stupid things like the nanophoons of old age that would orbit at high speed delivering very high damage on targets. Turrets annot be abused liek that because the orbiting ship also looses DPS due to tracking. TO not make missiles plain superior, they need a huge drawback... and that drawbback is being inferior against smaller targets.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#568 - 2013-07-30 10:26:31 UTC
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:


How does the Vaga compare to the S.F.I.


I will take that by SFI you mean stabber not Scythe :P They have completely different roles. SFI has tracking.. not falloff bonus.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Lucien Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#569 - 2013-07-30 10:29:02 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
One thing I think Really need to b done for sake of balance and coherence is. Give the HAcs the SAME HP pools of the t1 ships!

There is absolutely no excuse for not doing so. Otherwise the role of being a tough nut cruiser as you describe is impossible.


Just that. Same shields, Armor and hull.


Sounds fair and reasonable. But that should give people an indication on how much better the HACs need to be improved. If you have to struggle to make them atleast as good as their T1 Counterparts, then something is really f...ing wrong here. I would go as far as to say give them 50% MORE Sh/Ar/Hu and atleast 25% more damage or vice versa. That would clearly justify their price.
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#570 - 2013-07-30 10:29:11 UTC
Danny John-Peter wrote:
Hannott Thanos wrote:

Well, then use another fit?

People complain in the first turn that a Talos can kill it too easily, then when countered by a fit that would kill a Talos they say that the fit is not viable because the Talos is not alone. What?


I didn't mention the Talos at any point.

What are you talking about?

You didn't, but it's a common trend in this thread. And guess what eve is all about? You can have the cake, but not eat it. Sooo many people cry "I want my cake and eat it as well! Give X a Y bonus". NO! You can't have it all. There is always a counter to the counter of your counter to another counter.

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

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#571 - 2013-07-30 10:38:04 UTC
Phox Jorkarzul wrote:

You showed that it a little better, but not 50mil more better, and still does not have a defining role.

According to you that is. I'm fairly confident I could take your NEX with my Deimos(post patch), even if you are a tad bit faster than me. My racial resists give me enough time to manouver a slingshot to close distance, and you cant overload the whole fight.

Unless you dual nano and go rail fit. But I could do that as well and win that way. There will always be a way to win a fight if you have the right tools for the situation.

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

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}
Alan Bell
Bob's Bait and Tackle
#572 - 2013-07-30 10:41:51 UTC
Ishtar

Why seperate the bonuses? just have tracking apply to all drones and make additional stat affect drone speeds.
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#573 - 2013-07-30 10:44:11 UTC
Hi all

Wanted to post and let you know I haven't disappeared or something, just had to go home and sleep and stuff.

I've been reading all of this and will continue to do so. I would not expect any changes at the scale of this last iteration, maybe some small tweaks after a few more days of feedback at the most.

We are a little concerned that some overpowered configurations might be popular following these changes, but I know many of you are still worried they aren't powerful enough. I'll keep reading for now and if we decide to make any changes you will be the first to know.

Thanks!

@ccp_rise
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#574 - 2013-07-30 10:44:22 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Alekseyev Karrde wrote:
Voith wrote:
NinjaTurtle wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


can be reloaded over the course of a long fight.


sixty second reload time. I don't think you have a very realistic idea of what occurs to an asb vagabond in that time period.

It has a skilled pilot and realizes it will need to reload so it gets into a favorable position to do so instead of being a noob and acting surprised when the reload happens?

there's no favorable position in which the Vagabond can reload its tank for 60s and still maintain tackle or damage. That's not skill related, that's basic PVP mechanic limits.



The only way it could work would be if vaga lost a low slot for a mid so that it can fit 2 Large ASB.

In fact that makes easier to adjkust its PG and CPU so that It can fit this tank with 220mm guns while still not being able to fit stupid XL ASB (the loss of a low slot makes fittings pg AND cpu less variable)


God no, the vaga needs more lowslots, not more mids, a extra mid is a nice to have, a extra lowslot is way better. It problems are damage projection,dps and speed (yes it the fastest hacs but it still is to slow) not tank or ewar or (if those cap changes stay) cap.
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#575 - 2013-07-30 10:45:39 UTC
CCP Rise, how long before those changes hit Singularity ? Feedback would be 10x better if we could actually test it out ingame rather than do EFT wars.
Danny John-Peter
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#576 - 2013-07-30 10:47:12 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi all

Wanted to post and let you know I haven't disappeared or something, just had to go home and sleep and stuff.

I've been reading all of this and will continue to do so. I would not expect any changes at the scale of this last iteration, maybe some small tweaks after a few more days of feedback at the most.

We are a little concerned that some overpowered configurations might be popular following these changes, but I know many of you are still worried they aren't powerful enough. I'll keep reading for now and if we decide to make any changes you will be the first to know.

Thanks!


I'd like to know what your opinion on the Vagabond at the present moment, in terms of DPS and projection, do you think its where it should be?
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#577 - 2013-07-30 10:54:58 UTC
Roime wrote:


[Deimos, Pocket Talos]
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Large Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
10MN Microwarpdrive II
Warp Disruptor II

250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M
250mm Railgun II, Caldari Navy Antimatter Charge M

Medium Auxiliary Thrusters I
Medium Hybrid Metastasis Adjuster II


Warrior II x5
Warrior SW-300 x5

603 turret dps @ 22+32, 0.03514 tracking
2239/3191 m/s
20.3K EHP (37.4K heated against Null)


Best about it: runs stable all day long even with two hawks neuting you!
James1122
Perimeter Trade and Distribution Inc
#578 - 2013-07-30 10:56:36 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:


God no, the vaga needs more lowslots, not more mids, a extra mid is a nice to have, a extra lowslot is way better. It problems are damage projection,dpsand speed (yes it the fastest hacs but it still is to slow) not tank or ewar or (if those cap changes stay) cap.



What is wrong with you ?

Please explain to me what stats the vaga should have in your world?

600dps at 40km ?
+ 4kms ?
+ 60k ehp tank ?

People just seem to fixate on maximizing what the ships should be able to do for them in there own worlds without any thought on overall game balance. 3/4s of the posts i read on here just come across as clueless.


I think tier 3s still need a bit more of a nerf, but i am not going to use that as an excuse to further buff HACS, all you will get from that is horrific power creep. I still need to test these things on SISI before being able to give any feedback of worth but most these changes seem pretty decent.

The LACB on the vaga is a great addition with the bonus and will make it a very strong ship. Anyway if the ships aren't any good then the market will sort them out.

....
Vyktor Abyss
Abyss Research
#579 - 2013-07-30 11:03:55 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi all

Wanted to post and let you know I haven't disappeared or something, just had to go home and sleep and stuff.

I've been reading all of this and will continue to do so. I would not expect any changes at the scale of this last iteration, maybe some small tweaks after a few more days of feedback at the most.

We are a little concerned that some overpowered configurations might be popular following these changes, but I know many of you are still worried they aren't powerful enough. I'll keep reading for now and if we decide to make any changes you will be the first to know.

Thanks!


Hi, as requested earlier, please can you elaborate and shed some more light on the Deimos changes please?

Specifically, what else did you condiser for the MWD bonus, and why no other bonus seemed more appropriate?

Any chance we can drop it to 4 guns, up the DPS to compensate and retain a utility high?

Why has it had its base stats tank nerfed - was it considered an overpowered tank? (yes I'm aware it has a lower sig etc)

Cheers.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#580 - 2013-07-30 11:04:41 UTC
James1122 wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:


God no, the vaga needs more lowslots, not more mids, a extra mid is a nice to have, a extra lowslot is way better. It problems are damage projection,dpsand speed (yes it the fastest hacs but it still is to slow) not tank or ewar or (if those cap changes stay) cap.



What is wrong with you ?

Please explain to me what stats the vaga should have in your world?

600dps at 40km ?
+ 4kms ?
+ 60k ehp tank ?

People just seem to fixate on maximizing what the ships should be able to do for them in there own worlds without any thought on overall game balance. 3/4s of the posts i read on here just come across as clueless.


I think tier 3s still need a bit more of a nerf, but i am not going to use that as an excuse to further buff HACS, all you will get from that is horrific power creep. I still need to test these things on SISI before being able to give any feedback of worth but most these changes seem pretty decent.

The LACB on the vaga is a great addition with the bonus and will make it a very strong ship. Anyway if the ships aren't any good then the market will sort them out.


300gun dps (still well under what a zealot/cerb put out at that range) at 40km, maybe 480 or so at 20km, 2.8km/s preheat with just a mwd, same ehp as now.


Also lol at "market will sort it out", the market is utterly without power in sorting any hac related things out (or any t2 realted things), in fact the market for base stuff if utterly mineral/component dependent, if you could build another t2 ship from the same minerals (you can) you will never see a serious price drop.