These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1181 - 2013-08-01 12:35:32 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Diesel47 wrote:

Nope, the navy omen with one nanofiber is faster than a vaga with none.

Only a moron would fit a nanofiber to a vagabond.

Well if you say so it MUST be true.


Which part? The NOmen or the nanofiber on vaga?
Oh My Boobs
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1182 - 2013-08-01 12:35:40 UTC
-1 low +1 med for the vagabond
-1 low +1 med for the muninn

DONE
Danny John-Peter
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#1183 - 2013-08-01 12:37:21 UTC
Oh My Boobs wrote:
-1 low +1 med for the vagabond
-1 low +1 med for the muninn

DONE


That will again, make the Vaga worse, as it relies on those lows for DPS and projection.
Outcch
Autistic Delights
#1184 - 2013-08-01 12:39:59 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
[quote=Tsubutai]
I still think the Vaga is very much fine with these changes.

[NEW Vagabond, test]
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Damage Control II

Balmer Series Tracking Disruptor I, Tracking Speed Disruption Script
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Large Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 150
Warp Disruptor II

425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
425mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
Salvager II

Medium Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer I
Medium Anti-Explosive Screen Reinforcer I

Hobgoblin II x5


This is what I'll be running most likely.

Horrible EHP (14k), but can mitigate a ton of dps by ways of speed and TD.
Can tank most missile cruisers for long enough to win or get out of the fight


>Vaga
>Balmer Series Tracking Disruptor I
HEAVY ASSAULT SHIP SPECIAL ROLE
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1185 - 2013-08-01 12:41:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Diesel47
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Tsubutai wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
I can't understand those Vagabond pilots despising on speed...

If you don't care about speed, why don't use another ship than the Vagabond ? You know, the Muninn can fit artilleries fine.

No one's "despising on speed" or discounting its value, but speed alone isn't enough to make a ship good any more than tank alone was enough to make the old prophecy or maller worth flying. In particular, speed can't make up for glaring deficiencies in other respects, as demonstrated by the initial Odyssey stabber - it was certainly fast, but going fast was the only thing it could do at all well and so it saw very little use.

Now that become interesting. The core problem here is that speed supremacy give so much of an advantage to a ship that it can become absurdly OP very fast if you add only a little too much of something. See angel ship for an exemple.


Speed isn't OP, bad players just don't know how to counter it.

A Rapier or Arazu will ruin any fast kite ships day.

A single Keres will make a cynabal essentially worthless.

So would a tracking disrupter, optimal range scripts.
Spc One
The Chodak
Void Alliance
#1186 - 2013-08-01 12:43:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Spc One
Diesel47 wrote:
Spc One wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

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.

I use sacrilege with 2 medium armor repairers because of 25% cap recharge bonus.
This makes sacrilege active tank very good, if you're removing this bonus i'll not be able to run 2 medium armor reps anymore and it will be useless.


You are wrong.

This is for pve, pve fit, for pvp i would fit it completely different and as CCP Rise said they want HAC's for both pve and pvp.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1187 - 2013-08-01 12:44:12 UTC
Spc One wrote:
Diesel47 wrote:
Spc One wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

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.

I use sacrilege with 2 medium armor repairers because of 25% cap recharge bonus.
This makes sacrilege active tank very good, if you're removing this bonus i'll not be able to run 2 medium armor reps anymore and it will be useless.


You are wrong.

This is for pve, pve fit, for pvp i would fit it completely different.


So? What difference does it make? The cap is the same.
Corporal Cina
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1188 - 2013-08-01 12:45:01 UTC
So that's it then?

A handful of dev responses and then nothing?
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1189 - 2013-08-01 12:47:06 UTC
Corporal Cina wrote:
So that's it then?

A handful of dev responses and then nothing?


Yep, a bunch of bad changes and 60 pages of arguments that these changes are good by uninformed players.
Danny John-Peter
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#1190 - 2013-08-01 12:47:31 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
Spc One wrote:
Diesel47 wrote:
Spc One wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

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.

I use sacrilege with 2 medium armor repairers because of 25% cap recharge bonus.
This makes sacrilege active tank very good, if you're removing this bonus i'll not be able to run 2 medium armor reps anymore and it will be useless.


You are wrong.

This is for pve, pve fit, for pvp i would fit it completely different.


So? What difference does it make? The cap is the same.


As the man says they rolled the Cap bonus into the hull, please read patch notes before commenting on them.
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1191 - 2013-08-01 12:48:31 UTC
I was looking back over the Vaga and I've decided it will be actually pretty cool with an Invul and an ancil booster, the capacitor changes have really tipped it over from being rubbish to being pretty good on paper.

I have however discovered a bit of a problem...

Let's say you went with 10mn ab web scram XL ASB dual 180 config and you have low grade crystals, take your blue pill and overload your booster (it's an ASB, you should always heat it, even when pulsing), currently you will boost around 2300 shield hp/cycle. The problem is that your total shield hp pool on the Vagabond is currently 1847 and after the changes will only be 1978, this is assuming you get the -25% shield penalty, it's a bit better if you have the nanite control (I think that's the one) at V, but even still, you're wasting huge amounts of shield.

It won't make it broken op'd if you take 500 armour from the Vaga and put it in shield. I know minmatar have usually got fairly even shield/armour values, but this is 100% a shield tanking ship, It'd be nice to at least have enough shield to cover 25% penalty from booster+HG crystals and heat and not have to waste shield boost even if you let your shield go to 0%. So you need about 2500 base unskilled shield hp to be safe. I know that's the same as the Eagle which isn't strictly role play, but it's necessary for the ship to function in it's new role.

Pretty please with a kitteh on top.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8
Danny John-Peter
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#1192 - 2013-08-01 12:50:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Danny John-Peter
Diesel47 wrote:
Corporal Cina wrote:
So that's it then?

A handful of dev responses and then nothing?


Yep, a bunch of bad changes and 60 pages of arguments that these changes are good by uninformed players.


To be honest, most of the Changes only need tweaking, the Deimos EHP drop is a bit crap but thats easily fixed.

They are just doing the same thing to the Vaga they did to the Rifter, because they obviously didn't learn the first time that the best of a runt bunch still isn't good, its just the best of a runt bunch.

A Dev comment on the Vaga other than "We think its fine because its the second most popular turd in a contest of turds" would be good though, particularly on why they think a HAC which entire roll supports low EHP skirmishing can't actually skirmish because it applies 150-200 DPS to point range.
Allandri
Liandri Industrial
#1193 - 2013-08-01 13:03:54 UTC
Any bets for a round three?
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1194 - 2013-08-01 13:24:07 UTC
Danny John-Peter wrote:
"We think its fine because its the second most popular turd in a contest of turds"


This is and has been the largest issue with ccp's "balancing" of ships. They seem to think that usage is the primary indicator of something being good or bad... While obviously people will flock to a more powerful ship (as has been done), it's still not a good excuse for balancing decisions... There are plenty of ships that have seen usage now and in the past that are woefully ****, and they see use simply because they are in fact ****... CCP metrics do not take this or any other variable into account.

Let me reiterate, balancing via usage metrics is the sign of a mongoloid dev team.
Danny John-Peter
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#1195 - 2013-08-01 13:29:08 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
Danny John-Peter wrote:
"We think its fine because its the second most popular turd in a contest of turds"


This is and has been the largest issue with ccp's "balancing" of ships. They seem to think that usage is the primary indicator of something being good or bad... While obviously people will flock to a more powerful ship (as has been done), it's still not a good excuse for balancing decisions... There are plenty of ships that have seen usage now and in the past that are woefully ****, and they see use simply because they are in fact ****... CCP metrics do not take this or any other variable into account.

Let me reiterate, balancing via usage metrics is the sign of a mongoloid dev team.


Its certainly true, I don't fly it because its particularly good I fly it because it looks pretty and because most of the other HACs are ****, once all the other HACs are good there's no real reason to fly it other than its pretty, and that isn't really balancing.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#1196 - 2013-08-01 13:31:38 UTC
I'm Down wrote:
I love how people's understanding of the Vaga is:

If it can't fit an XL ASB, then **** it.


Player level competence trying to fit a BS sized mod on every cruiser class ship.... You know what, why not let it fit a 100mn AB too, and for that matter, get an agility boost when using it.


But larges are MEH!
XLASB or nothing Big smile

The main issue I have is that the standard buffer fit, with two LSEs, can hardly fit 425s, compared to the CYNABAL which can fit 425s, full tank, a medium neut, and still have PG left over. So yea.
I understand it would be more arms race between the two but honestly I think its just leveling the playing field rather than making the Vaga better and the Cynabal again useless.

I just want to have a reason to fly the Vaga Sad

Oh My Boobs wrote:
-1 low +1 med for the vagabond
-1 low +1 med for the muninn

DONE


I do agree the Muninn needs another mid, but the Vaga needs another mid while keeping the low. Without that low the Vaga will be further gimped on the DPS that it is already weak on.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#1197 - 2013-08-01 13:32:37 UTC
Allandri wrote:
Any bets for a round three?


I wish, but Rise said it is unlikely.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Fewell
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1198 - 2013-08-01 13:39:19 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
I love how people's understanding of the Vaga is:

If it can't fit an XL ASB, then **** it.


Player level competence trying to fit a BS sized mod on every cruiser class ship.... You know what, why not let it fit a 100mn AB too, and for that matter, get an agility boost when using it.


But larges are MEH!
XLASB or nothing Big smile

The main issue I have is that the standard buffer fit, with two LSEs, can hardly fit 425s, compared to the CYNABAL which can fit 425s, full tank, a medium neut, and still have PG left over. So yea.
I understand it would be more arms race between the two but honestly I think its just leveling the playing field rather than making the Vaga better and the Cynabal again useless.

I just want to have a reason to fly the Vaga Sad

Oh My Boobs wrote:
-1 low +1 med for the vagabond
-1 low +1 med for the muninn

DONE


I do agree the Muninn needs another mid, but the Vaga needs another mid while keeping the low. Without that low the Vaga will be further gimped on the DPS that it is already weak on.

larges are pretty good with tengu links, implants and blue pills. This is what we'll be seeing a lot of.
I'd be so much happier with a less easily abused bonus like another falloff bonus.
NorthCrossroad
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1199 - 2013-08-01 13:42:48 UTC
Hannott Thanos wrote:
Feels good being ignorant right?

Old Sacrilege cap with 2 medium armor repairers:
2m 21s

New Sacrilege cap with 2 medium armor repairers:
2m 37s
The point is - cap wasn't an issue before, so it's not what should be changed.

North
Danny John-Peter
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#1200 - 2013-08-01 13:45:31 UTC
Fewell wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
I love how people's understanding of the Vaga is:

If it can't fit an XL ASB, then **** it.


Player level competence trying to fit a BS sized mod on every cruiser class ship.... You know what, why not let it fit a 100mn AB too, and for that matter, get an agility boost when using it.


But larges are MEH!
XLASB or nothing Big smile

The main issue I have is that the standard buffer fit, with two LSEs, can hardly fit 425s, compared to the CYNABAL which can fit 425s, full tank, a medium neut, and still have PG left over. So yea.
I understand it would be more arms race between the two but honestly I think its just leveling the playing field rather than making the Vaga better and the Cynabal again useless.

I just want to have a reason to fly the Vaga Sad

Oh My Boobs wrote:
-1 low +1 med for the vagabond
-1 low +1 med for the muninn

DONE


I do agree the Muninn needs another mid, but the Vaga needs another mid while keeping the low. Without that low the Vaga will be further gimped on the DPS that it is already weak on.

larges are pretty good with tengu links, implants and blue pills. This is what we'll be seeing a lot of.
I'd be so much happier with a less easily abused bonus like another falloff bonus.


Double falloff bonus is actually what I suggested initially along with a raw DPS buff of around 50 DPS, I would even be happy to lose 1-2K EHP after LSEs applied to keep things well balanced.