These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1461 - 2013-08-03 16:31:44 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
This thread has com donw to people who have flown the vagabond saying it is bad, arguing with people who have never flown a vagabond saying it is good.

or kiddoes want an overpowered ship which is the best in every situation

vaga seems more than fine for its role



Or he is rigth and you font understand what a vagabond is all about , what people are asking is just to give the vaga a defined role not this i,am a close range brawler but a sfi/hurricane can do the job better.

Else gives us a bonus to make it a sjhip that can work betwen 20 to 25k effectively or give her a med and take out a low .
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1462 - 2013-08-03 17:57:20 UTC
Pelea Ming wrote:
side note, but the proposed Amarr Command Ship with the resist bonuses will also have missile bonuses.


Yeah, two. The nighthawk and claymore get three, and when you factor the damage ones in it leaves the damnation with 7.5 effective launchers, 10 for the nighthawk if you use kinetic missiles (6.6~ elsewise), and 10 for the claymore. Only real problem I see there from a damage perspective is that while the damnation's getting its bandwidth buffed to 50mb so's the claymore. The claymore should really have 25mb at best to compensate for (apparently) having a pair of 5% RoF buffs effectively doubling its launchers.

On my own side note CCP is finally doing what I wanted done with the eos. Actually the eos is getting buffed more than I wanted. I would have settled for 5 guns without a damage bonus and 125mb on it, but it's getting 125mb and a 10% damage/hp bonus for drones, and, for all intents and purposes, the damage bonus is getting turned into a tracking bonus, and it's all for the cost of one turret hardpoint.

Roime wrote:
Was it really a must to drop the utility highs from the Ishtar?


Um, the ishtar gained 2 utility high slots. High slot + no applicable weapon bonus for any hardpoints = utility slot, and the ishtar has no turret bonuses in this latest suggestion. Even if you didn't look at it that way the ishtar is only losing one high slot which means only one utility slot lost; you're not being forced to fit a fourth gun into the new fourth turret hardpoint.

Tuxedo Catfish wrote:
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;


Completely eliminating any capacitor penalty for an MWD is "literally useless?"
Getting a boost to your capacitor value from fitting a meta-1+ MWD is "literally useless?"
Having more capacitor and more capacitor recharge to play with is "literally useless?"

Sir, I think you are either quite literally exaggerating or quite literally unimaginative. Lol

Kane Fenris wrote:
i proposed this at the start of the first thread but oly got laughed at..... and eve got called dumb/stupid
(tracking has to be huge enough you can hit from 15-18km +)

it would be not quite like the old vaga but distinct from the cyna and would get rid of the overlap of those ships.


I'd like to play devil's advocate and ask the question, "So if the vagabond gets a tracking bonus and a heavy boost in power grid in order to function as an 'arty kiter' just how would that affect its performance in close-range combat roles? I mean from my perspective more grid means more plates/extenders and more buffer, and more tracking means better damage application against faster targets in close making it a potential frigate murder machine rather than an 'arty kiter.'
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1463 - 2013-08-03 18:04:07 UTC
You overstimate tracking bonused medium guns, they still track like **** vs frigates, a stabber fleet only is good at killing frigs as ab + scram = low transversal speed = good hits, try orbiting a tracking bonused ship at 500, especially a webless one, you will see that it still hits nothing (this is due to sig beeing a direct factor).

Yes it would make it a better kiter, and yes it maybe could encroach on the stabbers terretory (not that that matters much), but to get a good tank out of it you have to either armour tank it, making it a lowdps cruiser because if you go with a shield brawling setup you have only 1 slot for tanking if you want to be able to fight frigates.

But because it would make it a better brawler i prefer option 1 (more speed, twice the falloff bonus) as that changes nothing in its brawling abilitys.
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#1464 - 2013-08-03 19:09:00 UTC
What about an overall ship design change like the Nemesis has had done to it which will set the HAC apart from its cruiser base hull design?
Kane Fenris
NWP
#1465 - 2013-08-03 19:43:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Kane Fenris
Shereza wrote:

Kane Fenris wrote:
i proposed this at the start of the first thread but oly got laughed at..... and eve got called dumb/stupid
(tracking has to be huge enough you can hit from 15-18km +)

it would be not quite like the old vaga but distinct from the cyna and would get rid of the overlap of those ships.


I'd like to play devil's advocate and ask the question, "So if the vagabond gets a tracking bonus and a heavy boost in power grid in order to function as an 'arty kiter' just how would that affect its performance in close-range combat roles? I mean from my perspective more grid means more plates/extenders and more buffer, and more tracking means better damage application against faster targets in close making it a potential frigate murder machine rather than an 'arty kiter.'


ahead of you!

i stated the tracking bonus should be to arti only to prevent abuse if you dont belive me check my posts dunno if in this part or in the first .
(cause its rather obvious)
the pg ? if people get creative with the higher pg and dont want to use the tracking cause they dont want to mount the artys they are free to do so cause i think to have 1 bonus less would be just a fair trade of.
Sven Viko VIkolander
In space we are briefly free
#1466 - 2013-08-03 20:00:04 UTC
Glippo wrote:
CCP Rise... The EAGLE!!!.
It is the worst HAC (by far) for a reason. And you have changed approximately nothing. It will remain the worst HAC. There are no viable roles for it. The only thing it was ever used for was as a Beagle, why not emphasize that? You want it to be a sniper? Have you heard of the Naga?

Rise, i implore you, fix the Eagle. You cannot take the worst HAC in game change nothing and expect it to be better ( yes i know about the medium rail changes). To start you off i suggest removing that Ridiculous double optimal range bonus.


This is how CCP rise seems to approach balancing ships:
-Can I fly it like a shield tanked talos with a bunch of tracking enhancers? If no, make it so, if yes, it is fine. When he says " The Eagle is definitely more of a fleet ship than a small scale skirmisher," I don't know what fleets he is talking about. lul fleets?
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1467 - 2013-08-03 20:03:30 UTC  |  Edited by: W0lf Crendraven
Kane Fenris wrote:
Shereza wrote:

Kane Fenris wrote:
i proposed this at the start of the first thread but oly got laughed at..... and eve got called dumb/stupid
(tracking has to be huge enough you can hit from 15-18km +)

it would be not quite like the old vaga but distinct from the cyna and would get rid of the overlap of those ships.


I'd like to play devil's advocate and ask the question, "So if the vagabond gets a tracking bonus and a heavy boost in power grid in order to function as an 'arty kiter' just how would that affect its performance in close-range combat roles? I mean from my perspective more grid means more plates/extenders and more buffer, and more tracking means better damage application against faster targets in close making it a potential frigate murder machine rather than an 'arty kiter.'


ahead of you!

i stated the tracking bonus should be to arti only to prevent abuse if you dont belive me check my posts dunno if in this part or in the first .
(cause its rather obvious)
the pg ? if people get creative with the higher pg and dont want to use the tracking cause they dont want to mount the artys they are free to do so cause i think to have 1 bonus less would be just a fair trade of.


Thats not a good idea tho, a weapon only bonus forces it into one specific role, something you dont ever want to happen. This btw is why all active tank boni are bad.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#1468 - 2013-08-03 20:25:22 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:
Shereza wrote:

Kane Fenris wrote:
i proposed this at the start of the first thread but oly got laughed at..... and eve got called dumb/stupid
(tracking has to be huge enough you can hit from 15-18km +)

it would be not quite like the old vaga but distinct from the cyna and would get rid of the overlap of those ships.


I'd like to play devil's advocate and ask the question, "So if the vagabond gets a tracking bonus and a heavy boost in power grid in order to function as an 'arty kiter' just how would that affect its performance in close-range combat roles? I mean from my perspective more grid means more plates/extenders and more buffer, and more tracking means better damage application against faster targets in close making it a potential frigate murder machine rather than an 'arty kiter.'


ahead of you!

i stated the tracking bonus should be to arti only to prevent abuse if you dont belive me check my posts dunno if in this part or in the first .
(cause its rather obvious)
the pg ? if people get creative with the higher pg and dont want to use the tracking cause they dont want to mount the artys they are free to do so cause i think to have 1 bonus less would be just a fair trade of.


Thats not a good idea tho, a weapon only bonus forces it into one specific role, something you dont ever want to happen. This btw is why all active tank boni are bad.



uhm yeah ..... cause the vagabond is a allround ship Roll
(and on top of that t2 are supposed to be specialized)
i on my part have rather a ship thats specialized and worth flying than a ship i dont care about cause its not worth flying
Danny John-Peter
The Congregation
RAPID HEAVY ROPERS
#1469 - 2013-08-03 20:48:17 UTC
Sven Viko VIkolander wrote:
Glippo wrote:
CCP Rise... The EAGLE!!!.
It is the worst HAC (by far) for a reason. And you have changed approximately nothing. It will remain the worst HAC. There are no viable roles for it. The only thing it was ever used for was as a Beagle, why not emphasize that? You want it to be a sniper? Have you heard of the Naga?

Rise, i implore you, fix the Eagle. You cannot take the worst HAC in game change nothing and expect it to be better ( yes i know about the medium rail changes). To start you off i suggest removing that Ridiculous double optimal range bonus.


This is how CCP rise seems to approach balancing ships:
-Can I fly it like a shield tanked talos with a bunch of tracking enhancers? If no, make it so, if yes, it is fine. When he says " The Eagle is definitely more of a fleet ship than a small scale skirmisher," I don't know what fleets he is talking about. lul fleets?


Its going to have the EHP as a Zealot the same DPS as the Zealot but it deals it at 80K, seems pretty good to me.
CaldariCitizen 3924833
Throw More Dots
#1470 - 2013-08-03 20:54:31 UTC
remove the highslot on the sacrilege

add one slot to the lows on the sacrilege

you have to choose between not poop tank or not poop dps.

this has been said over and over by many people
Mariner6
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1471 - 2013-08-03 21:21:14 UTC
T2 are specialized right? By the time you should be flying HAC's you should be able to choose from the 4 races. I don't need the same thing from each race like in T1. That said, the Diemost should be a specialized brawler and very scary at zero. Sadly its not. It is squishy and while orbiting close in it struggles to hit. This whole rail thing is fine I guess but really? If I want to do that I'll choose another platform for it, and rightly so because that fall off bonus to my rail guns is just awesome right? This is such a confused ship. Its a specialist, make it so. Leave the kity stuff to other ships.

The Diemost is expensive and the only way people will risk a "win or die" ship is if it can perform. Kiting ships have so many advantages in this game its overwhelming. It needs all its EHP back and for pete's sake not another niche active armor rep boat. There goes yet another fleet ship out of the Gal inventory. Do something different with it and give it a bonus to AB velocity. Make it the one and only truly dual prop specialized boat. I'd gladly trade some raw DPS bonus for a tracking bonus to add to the mix. Then it will be vicious in the right hands.

But for all that is good and right please don't kill me with yet another active armor rep Gal boat.

ReZoon
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#1472 - 2013-08-03 21:24:11 UTC
meh.....

For the prices, I'd still rather fly a T3, BS, or faction.

Sol Mortis
An Heroes
#1473 - 2013-08-03 21:31:06 UTC
Just about anything is better than the MWD capacitor penalty bonus.

One thing people keep saying over and over is that we want a tracking bonus on the Deimos. The MWD bonus was the obvious candidate to replace that, but I understand not wanting too many weapon bonuses on the ship.

A great Idea I've seen many times is replacing the falloff bonus with a tracking bonus. falloff doesn't really help hybrids very much on either rails or blasters. Blaster falloff is mostly inside web range anyway, and rail optimal is easy to push out to 24km; added range is hardly ever an issue for either weapon system on these ships. Anybody needing to shoot farther than that will use large weapons on a BS or ABC.

Tracking instead of falloff is a huge boon in blaster/web range. It really fits the identity of gallente as being the best at close range. It also helps more with medium rails at the ranges I expect to use them in. The falloff bonus is pushing deimos damage projection out beyond where I would even be if I was kiting with rails in point range, and is a fairly unattractive bonus on rails which don't have too much falloff to begin with. I'd much rather be more mobile in point range, able to keep my speed up fairly high and still be hitting.

My ideal set of bonuses would be:
Deimos
Gallente Cruiser:
5% hybrid damage per level / 7.5% hybrid tracking per level

Heavy Assault Cruiser:
5% hybrid damage per level / 7.5% armor repair amount per level

I think tracking makes most sense as cruiser bonus since the thorax has it. If you really want more variety between blasters and rails, tracking benefits both equally.
Large Collidable Object
morons.
#1474 - 2013-08-03 22:07:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Large Collidable Object
CCP Rise wrote:
Role[...] [HACs are tough but mobile cruisers that can take a lot of punishment. What we want to do is extend that tenacity to some of their other systems, namely electronics and capacitor.




So why did you give them a role bonus that doesn't help them in that role and still leaves them ouclassed by T1 BCs and even some T1 cruisers, given you didn't bother upgrading their base speeds etc.. to competetive levels?

Jesus - I better start selling off my stack of Curses before you start balancing those...

Just to clarify: What your DPS graphs show is that even after the useless MWD sig bonus, a cheap Tier 3 BC will kill a HAC sooner than the worst tracking HAC does. Considering all med and small turrets, it wont help them at all.

So what is this supposed to be? Another nerf for extinct tracking titans? A tweak to reduce the number of overabundant solo-BS?
You know... [morons.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gjOx65yD5A)
Tibus Bravour
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1475 - 2013-08-03 22:45:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Tibus Bravour
CCP Rise wrote:

The Eagle is a little harder to judge, but I think it's probably more towards the side of being too strong than being too weak. The Eagle is definitely more of a fleet ship than a small scale skirmisher, but it got much much better for that role in this pass. Added sensor stats, lower sig, added fitting, and most importantly the trade of a utility high for an extra mid means that we are expecting ahac style eagle fleets to be very strong, especially when you consider the rail buff. We'll have to see how it goes but we are not worried about the Eagle.


This makes me think CCP Rise hasn't read a single post in this thread. 90% of them include feedback about how the Eagle is garbage and not a single one agrees with him. Nearly all include some criticism of the laughable speed it has and he responds with "added sensor stats"....yikes.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1476 - 2013-08-03 23:07:08 UTC
^ yep.

I think either he didn't read anything, or he did and just ignored it all.
Fewell
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1477 - 2013-08-04 01:32:15 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
if you upped the falloff on the vega to 12.5% per level that would fix the "range" issues people are having with the ship.

so that would end up being an extra 62.5% increase to falloff crs 50% that we see now. its not much but it should make the difference.


The main issue with the vaga is that you can't even fit 425's which costs it 9km range and some dps


ok so how much pg is it short on?

It's got no PG. It'd be fairly dangerous to give it the pg to fit 425's with the shield boost bonus. If you want the ship to kill things that aren't frigates, but not kill all the things, replace the shield boosting bonus with another falloff bonus.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#1478 - 2013-08-04 02:59:37 UTC
vaga its lacking PG but more than that it lack CPU especially if they want us to fit it for active tank, as i said before a LASB really offer little to no improvement over a dual LSE setup and X-LASB its impossible to fit w/o fitting mods.
give it more fitting to make a decent fit or change the bonus to something that fit the idea of the vagabond better than a tank bonus
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#1479 - 2013-08-04 03:37:11 UTC
Mariner6 wrote:
T2 are specialized right? By the time you should be flying HAC's you should be able to choose from the 4 races. I don't need the same thing from each race like in T1. That said, the Diemost should be a specialized brawler and very scary at zero. Sadly its not. It is squishy and while orbiting close in it struggles to hit. This whole rail thing is fine I guess but really? If I want to do that I'll choose another platform for it, and rightly so because that fall off bonus to my rail guns is just awesome right? This is such a confused ship. Its a specialist, make it so. Leave the kity stuff to other ships.

The Diemost is expensive and the only way people will risk a "win or die" ship is if it can perform. Kiting ships have so many advantages in this game its overwhelming. It needs all its EHP back and for pete's sake not another niche active armor rep boat. There goes yet another fleet ship out of the Gal inventory. Do something different with it and give it a bonus to AB velocity. Make it the one and only truly dual prop specialized boat. I'd gladly trade some raw DPS bonus for a tracking bonus to add to the mix. Then it will be vicious in the right hands.

But for all that is good and right please don't kill me with yet another active armor rep Gal boat.



that would be pretty awesome like a 5% to afterburner max velocity

i would like that more then the repair bonus.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
DaeHan Minhyok
Logical Outcomes
#1480 - 2013-08-04 04:03:09 UTC
Changes look interesting.

so why do the Amarr get a better missile bonus than the caldari? If I'm not mistaken missiles are kind of a cladari thing, but the cerb only gets a 5%bonus to kinetic while the sac gets 5% to ALL missile damage types, something seems wrong with this picture....

but then caldari always gets dumped on.