These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
#1421 - 2013-08-02 23:30:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Danny John-Peter
I'm glad so many people are posting there thoughts on the Vaga, it gives me hope that an application bonus or something to similarly help damage at point range is on the cards to help deal with the massive DPS issue the hull has.

On the subject of the Eagle, I posted a fit a while back which I will grab;

[Eagle, Rail]
Damage Control II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Large Shield Extender II
EM Ward Field II
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script
Tracking Computer II, Optimal Range Script
Large Shield Extender II

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

Medium Ancillary Current Router I
Medium Core Defense Field Extender I

It looks like a not unpromising ship, the resist bonus means that under Vulture links you only need 1 Hardener and a DCU to get good overall resists, this lets you use the mids for buffer and range, it has some 85k EHP omni and a fairly amazing 130K EHP Vs Nagas and it does 414DPS out to 79+25 with Uranium.

The key with the Eagle is clearing hostile support quickly, in an even fight with ABCS things would be roughly equal, the ABCs having more DPS and the Eagles having way lower sigs and massive EHP/Resists, over time the ABCs would probably win out due to sheer alpha potential. The key is when support (webbing/painting specifically) begins to be killed off or forced from the field, as Huginn webs/painters begin to tail off the Eagles gain a massive advantage due to their low sigs.

I honestly think its not a bad hull as it currently is.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#1422 - 2013-08-02 23:34:54 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I think our biggest concern is the Deimos. While the combination of the new layout and speed, added to the rail buff probably makes for a skirmisher that will be extremely powerful, we do appreciate the fact that a lot of people feel disappointed with it as an in-your-face brawler. I think the expected performance as a brawler varies quite a bit based on what kind of PVP you like (what size etc), but I would like to push it back towards that role in some way. We want to at least give back some of the base hp in armor, maybe at the cost of some of the added shield hp. I don't have numbers for this yet but I'll get them to you guys early next week. The other thing I would really like to do is give the Deimos an armor rep bonus. I think it could fit in nicely as a replacement for the MWD cap use bonus as long as the cap recharge is high enough that the kiting fits are handicapped. This wouldn't have much affect on large fleet AHAC type application, but would open up more possibilities at small scale. It also fits really well racially compared to the cap use bonus which is sort of unusual. I'm sure a lot of you won't love an active bonus because it doesn't apply to your style of play, but it would come in at little-to-no cost and offer smaller scale fighters more diversity and a more efficient brawler.


An Armor Rep bonused Deimos with some of it's Armor HP returned sounds like an excellent change, especially with the new slot layout.
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1423 - 2013-08-03 00:34:19 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

Vega starts with 855MW of power grid with skills it is 1068.75
425mm autocannon II uses 154MW of power grid with skills 138.6
Vega has 5 turret hard points meaning power grid usage for T2 425mm autocannons is 693.
I see plenty of grid left.


Yes you're missing the other main pg users being a medium neut , 2 LSE 2's and MWD

Wow so you can't fit full tank and full gank on you ships, such a tragedy. Looks like you will need to use fitting mods or just use resist mods rather than extenders.


The Deimos can fit MWD, 2x LSE, Disrupt, and a full rack of Heavy Neutrons T2.

That's full tank and full gank.

The same Deimos can fit MWD, 2x LSE, Disrupt and a full rack of long-range 250mm Railguns.

That's full tank and full gank. Not a single fitting mod used on both of those setups.

The Zealot can fit his top-guns + 2 LSEs + MWD without a care in the world aswell.

The Fleet Stabber can fit 425mms and 2 LSEs and a MWD too.

So yeah. You're wrong on this one.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1424 - 2013-08-03 00:56:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Pelea Ming
more talk about the Zealot and that idiotic cap need modifier!

Also, fit armor to the zealot, like, really, shoot yourself in the foot for putting that shield tank on it :P
Michael J Caboose
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1425 - 2013-08-03 00:59:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Michael J Caboose
SMT008 wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

Vega starts with 855MW of power grid with skills it is 1068.75
425mm autocannon II uses 154MW of power grid with skills 138.6
Vega has 5 turret hard points meaning power grid usage for T2 425mm autocannons is 693.
I see plenty of grid left.


Yes you're missing the other main pg users being a medium neut , 2 LSE 2's and MWD

Wow so you can't fit full tank and full gank on you ships, such a tragedy. Looks like you will need to use fitting mods or just use resist mods rather than extenders.


The Deimos can fit MWD, 2x LSE, Disrupt, and a full rack of Heavy Neutrons T2.

That's full tank and full gank.

The same Deimos can fit MWD, 2x LSE, Disrupt and a full rack of long-range 250mm Railguns.

That's full tank and full gank. Not a single fitting mod used on both of those setups.

The Zealot can fit his top-guns + 2 LSEs + MWD without a care in the world aswell.

The Fleet Stabber can fit 425mms and 2 LSEs and a MWD too.

So yeah. You're wrong on this one.



Except the Zealot is not a shield tanker, it's an armor tanker. And it CANNOT fit a full rack of HPLIIs, an MWD and a 1600mm plate without a fitting mod.

The new Deimos with all V skills actually CANNOT fit a MWD, 2xLSE and 250mm rails unless you downgrade to meta 4 LSEs. And with only 3 mids the Deimos is more of an armor tanker, and it likewise cannot fit top tier blasters or rails, a MWD and a 1600mm plate without fitting mods.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1426 - 2013-08-03 01:08:10 UTC
Then again, I'm the smart ass that would go and only fit a DC II to it for tank, then set it up to take full advantage of it's kite-ability :P
Devon Weeks
Asteroid Mining Industries
Salt Mining Industrialists
#1427 - 2013-08-03 01:42:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Devon Weeks
While I'm not normally an active armor tanker, I think Rise's idea for the Deimos is good one. If the Deimos gets back its base armor with an active rep bonus, I'd look forward to experimenting with that. And, it wouldn't hamper the buffer I normally fit anyway when I have logi, so I think it sounds like a good idea. Electrons, cap booster, AAR, 800mm? I'm not where I can do the math. But, if that fits, it could make for a solid brawling option.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1428 - 2013-08-03 01:45:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Diesel47
Rofl, the Cerb is not OP. The other HACs just blow in comparison (see vaga). Ok so the cerb becomes a frig murdering monster... So what Roll One could say that it is the ships "role" Blink

And I like how Rise just ignores the fact that minmatar is now supposed to have a clear missile ship progression, and this applies to every ship class but not HACs?
Daide Vondrichnov
French Drop-O-Panache
Snuffed Out
#1429 - 2013-08-03 02:11:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Daide Vondrichnov
Devon Weeks wrote:
While I'm not normally an active armor tanker, I think Rise's idea for the Deimos is good one. If the Deimos gets back its base armor with an active rep bonus, I'd look forward to experimenting with that. And, it wouldn't hamper the buffer I normally fit anyway when I have logi, so I think it sounds like a good idea. Electrons, cap booster, AAR, 800mm? I'm not where I can do the math. But, if that fits, it could make for a solid brawling option.


No.

This mwd cap bonus is good dont touch it, the fact is you have more capa with a mwd fitted on this ship and it can be perma runned something that a vagabond can't do.

I think if ccp remove it, it will decrease a lot his power as a shield kiter, i've do some test and it can be better than the actual vagabond with less speed but more dps and tank and a nice cap.
DJ FunkyBacon
Rabid Ninja Space Monkey Inc.
Monkeys with Guns.
#1430 - 2013-08-03 02:24:03 UTC
Thanks for joining us tonight. I'm serious, 5-3-7 Deimos. It'd be a winner :P Loving the active rep bonus, Gallente really need a speedy skirmisher, and the Deimos is setting up to be the one with so many other ships focused on medium blaster brawling.

For those interested, you can catch the whole show at: http://www.eve-radio.com/radio/rewind

FunkyBacon
Saturday 00:00
3rd of August 2013

We get to HACs at about the 1 hour mark.

Radio Host, Blogger, Lowsec Resident, PvP Afficionado.

funkybacon.com - Blog

FunkyBacon on Twitter
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#1431 - 2013-08-03 02:43:28 UTC
So from what i heard the Deimos will loose some shield and gain a bunch of armor.

more then likely the slot laywout will stay the same and the mwd bonus will be built in the this and we will gain a 7.5% to armor rep amount

rise said he wanted the diemos to fullfill some new role as a kiting active armor repairing mwd cap boosting 250 II javelin beast..

to do this the armor repair bonus needs to include a reduction in cap activation cost as well or else the ship will drain way to much cap to actually be "operational".


i still think the best thing for the diemos would be 4 4 7
but it seems nostalgia will cause the ship to keep 5 4 6

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Devon Weeks
Asteroid Mining Industries
Salt Mining Industrialists
#1432 - 2013-08-03 02:43:58 UTC
Quote:
No.This mwd cap bonus is good dont touch it, the fact is you have more capa with a mwd fitted on this ship and it can be perma runned something that a vagabond can't do.I think if ccp remove it, it will decrease a lot his power as a shield kiter, i've do some test and it can be better than the actual vagabond with less speed but more dps and tank and a nice cap.


As Rise stated, it's being moved back towards brawling, something I, for one, am very happy about. Gallente already have solid skirmishers in the Talos and very diverse hulls like the Ishtar. As a brawler, the MWD is somewhat of a waste. If you don't manage your field position to only need one or two cycles before landing in scram range, you are probably in a fight you can't win anyway. And, once you do start to brawl, the MWD bonus is unused anyway. If it's a brawling ship, all bonuses being applicable while brawling is a good thing. That's my opinion, though. Yours may differ.
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1433 - 2013-08-03 02:50:58 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
And I like how Rise just ignores the fact that minmatar is now supposed to have a clear missile ship progression, and this applies to every ship class but not HACs?


It also doesn't apply to marauders, black ops, heavy interdictors, logistics (for obvious reasons though), interdictors (even though all other interdictors have at least one missile bonus), covert ops (not stealth bomber), assault ship, electronic attack ships, or interceptors. In point of fact the only T2 classes that have a ship with missile bonuses are recon ships with the huginn and command ships with the claymore, and that's a proposed change for 1.1, not something actually in the game just yet.

I'm not against the idea of the Minmatar ships having one T2 missile ship in each size class, but right now they've already got one missile-bonused T2 cruiser and there's one on the plates for command ships. You might be better off trying to push for the huginn getting turned into a completely missile-bonused ship, and even that has the problem of being a Boundless Creation ship, not like the soon-to-be-a-missile-platform Claymore which is a Core Complexion ship. The scimitar, broadsword, and rapier are the CC cruiser hulls, and the scimitar's out of the running for being a missile platform for obvious reasons while turning the rapier into one would be problematic as well.

I'd also be interesting in learning where someone from CCP said, or even indicated, that they intended that there be "a clear missile ship progression" in T2 hulls as well as T1. I'm not saying you're wrong about that, mind you, I'd just like to read it myself to see what sort of context it might have been in.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1434 - 2013-08-03 03:21:19 UTC
side note, but the proposed Amarr Command Ship with the resist bonuses will also have missile bonuses.
Aglais
Ice-Storm
#1435 - 2013-08-03 04:03:10 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
Rofl, the Cerb is not OP. The other HACs just blow in comparison (see vaga). Ok so the cerb becomes a frig murdering monster... So what Roll One could say that it is the ships "role" Blink



Yeah, I find the 'Oh no we're not tweaking it more because it'll murder with RLMLs' to be absolutely hilarious.

Take that bonus to RLMLs off. This is a HAC, not a Destroyer. Make it best against it's own size class or larger. If I want a dedicated frig killer, I'll buy a destroyer, or even other frigates.

To be honest? I think the Cerberus still needs a few tweaks. It's not as completely worthless as it is currently (what with being outperformed or on par with the Caracal in almost every field but range).

The Eagle on the other hand is still an unmitigated catastrophe.
Oreb Wing
Last Rites.
#1436 - 2013-08-03 04:44:51 UTC
Chi'Nane T'Kal wrote:
Some positive changes there.

I still don't understand why you maintain the 4/5/5 setup on the Ishtar, though and not go 4/4/6 to get away from the predominant shieldtank - which is what the Gila is there for.

The heavy drone bonus might be useful one day - if you ever get to fix heavy/med drones in general, so they don't die while warping to their targets (or back into the drone bay in PvE).


For Omni mods. Keep the 5 mids, as an Ishtar would carry them better than a shield Gila. Awesome changes. The Domi made me a believer! Baby Domi ftw! I wonder what Javelin falloff on 250mm Deimos would be with a TC (tracking script) and TE...
Natalia Sidorovich
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1437 - 2013-08-03 05:17:55 UTC
CCP Rise, I am in love with the current Deimos changes. Gallente has enough brawlers in my opinion, so if you do go ahead and add the rep bonus/armor hp, please make sure the shield rail fit stays as awesome as it looks now. By this I mean roll the mwd cap bonus into the hull somehow, and don't lower the shield hp too much (or at all, don't see how making both options good hurts)

That said, I'm in the camp that favors a tracking bonus over a rep bonus. Improves brawling and kiting.

Either way, the gallente hacs seem very flexible and have me excited!
Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#1438 - 2013-08-03 06:34:05 UTC
Rynnik wrote:
1: 400 m/s is a MASSIVE margin...

2: You are vastly understating the utility of a med neut.... you really don't have much cause to write off the impact of that med neut as some kind of default setting - and we haven't talked about the Vaga's drone bay at all...

3: ...the crossover point with Vaga ACs is fine. And that is without thinking about projectile damage selection vs cerb kinetic....

4: RLML would be the smallest med missile weapon system. You can't draw a straight equivalence - but how does the fit comparison go with 180s?


The vaga and cerberus fits I'm comparing are these:

[NEW Cerberus, RLML - LSE LASB]
Ballistic Control System II
Ballistic Control System II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Large Shield Extender II
Large Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 150
Large Shield Extender II
Warp Disruptor II

Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile
Rapid Light Missile Launcher II, Scourge Fury Light Missile

Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II
Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II


Warrior II x3


[NEW Vagabond, LSE LASB PG hardwiring]
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Damage Control II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
Large Shield Extender II
Large Ancillary Shield Booster, Navy Cap Booster 150
Warp Disruptor II

220mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
220mm AutoCannon II, Barrage M
Medium Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Medium Anti-Explosive Screen Reinforcer II
Medium Anti-Kinetic Screen Reinforcer II


Warrior II x5

without heat on anything but the LASBs, they have the following stats:
Vaga - 2.45 km/s, 7.8s align (MWD on), 25k EHP + 605 dps burst tank (43k EHP before ASB reload), 428 dps at 3.2+35 km, 7m49s cap running mwd and point
Cerb - 2.05 km/s, 5.6s align (MWD on), 29k EHP + 414 dps burst tank (42k EHP before ASB reload), 403 dps at <71.2 km, 59m cap running mwd and point

As you can see, fitting the nanos costs the cerb essentially nothing relative to the vaga in terms of tank and damage, whereas replacing any of the vaga's low slot mods with a nano would dramatically reduce its tank or its damage output/projection. As for saying that 400 m/s is a "massive margin", it's not nothing, but you're overstating its value. The important thing for a kiting ship isn't that you have to outrun everything, it's that you have to outrun everything you can't quickly kill or force off. The cerb is more than fast enough and has more than enough applied damage at range to drive off or kill the things that can catch it - RLMs are of course very good at killing off frigates, and any cruiser fast enough to outrun the cerb will (a) only be a few hundred m/s faster at best, so it'll take a long time to run down a cerb that's burning away, and (b) won't have much tank, so it'll be in deep trouble by the time it has caught up since the cerberus will have been putting its full damage on the incoming tackler for the entire duration of its approach.

I'm not sure why you think I'm understating the utility of the med neut - I specifically said it's vital for the vagabond because it needs a way to defend itself against frigates that get close. What I said was that it doesn't constitute an advantage over the cerberus because the cerberus has a better built-in frigate defence: it can kill frigates at any range with its primary weapon system. If a vaga (or a kitey zealot, for that matter) could reliably use its guns to kill scramming frigates in a tight orbit, it wouldn't need the neut either. As for the vaga's drone bay, it has a grand total of 10m3/mbit more than the cerb, and if you really think that two extra warrior IIs/EC-300s are as useful or better than six heavily bonused light missile launchers for killing frigates, then I really don't know what to say to you.

Also, I'm not asking for the vaga to match the cerb's projection - letting it fit 425s would push the point at which the RLM cerb overtakes the vaga's damage from around 15 km to around 18 km, not bring it up to par. On top of that, it's hugely misleading to hold up the vagabond's ability to swap damage types as an advantage over the cerb. The vaga absolutely needs to use barrage to get acceptable dps at kiting ranges: at 25 km, barrage + warriors on the 220mm fit gets you 319 dps; RF EMP gives only 249. For comparative purposes, the cerb's dps when using non-kinetic missiles at the same range goes from 403 to 332 - it outdamages the barrage vaga at kiting ranges even when not using its kinetic bonus.

Finally, yes RLMs are the smallest cruiser-class launchers and the easiest to fit. However, whereas the different medium turrets are basically down- or up-scaled versions of one-another and have basically similar properties, the three cruiser-class launcher systems differ wildly in terms of range as well as raw and applied damage; RLMs are not scaled down HAMs or HMLs, they're a completely different weapon system. I don't fit them on missile cruisers as a way of addressing fitting issues, I fit them because I consider them to be the optimal cruiser launchers for kiting, in the same way that HAMs are optimal for brawling. Conversely, the only reason for fitting anything less than 425s on a kiting AC ship is to deal with fitting problems.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#1439 - 2013-08-03 08:40:16 UTC
Was it really a must to drop the utility highs from the Ishtar?


.
Tuxedo Catfish
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1440 - 2013-08-03 09:40:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tuxedo Catfish
Please, tracking bonus on the Deimos. I really don't know what more to say that isn't repeating myself. Active armor tanking is better than the MWD bonus (and I'm glad you've backed down from that) but only because the MWD bonus is literally useless; active tanking bonuses are useful only in one extremely limited situation and force you to either pigeonhole a ship or leave it at a disadvantage against ships that aren't saddled with dead weight bonuses. (I don't care for the one on the Vaga either, but it at least has the absurdity that is ASBs in its favor.)

Again, the Muninn combined tracking and range bonuses when artillery was by far the best long-range medium weapon system, and it wasn't exactly OP.

Besides, anyone who doesn't want "just a better Thorax" with t2 resists, 20km Null and a sweet color scheme is a crazy person.