These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1881 - 2013-08-09 19:58:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Heribeck Weathers
W0lf Crendraven wrote:


You can counter everything tho, not really a argument tbh. In hac defences the deimos tank seems op, its offensive power is euqal or greater then the damage of its peers.



Isent that bassed more on mmm i dont know weapon system balancing than ship bonuses, sure it could probialy lose 25m3 drone bay but thats about as far as i would go.

Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
And yes under extremly heavy neuting the deimos is clearly superior


Stop posting


Im startign to agree
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1882 - 2013-08-09 20:06:12 UTC
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
And yes under extremly heavy neuting the deimos is clearly superior


Stop posting


Start thinking? A ship that does 0 dps is more useless then a ship that tanks a bit less then half of what it can on paper.
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1883 - 2013-08-09 20:20:54 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Jerick Ludhowe wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
And yes under extremly heavy neuting the deimos is clearly superior


Stop posting


Start thinking? A ship that does 0 dps is more useless then a ship that tanks a bit less then half of what it can on paper.


The Eagles going to use far less cap to run its point/guns than a Deimos will to run rep+ web+point, You will have to newt trough all of the eagles cap and Keep it newted out to stop its dps and tank, and still has the option to deagro and escape if near a gate or station. A Deimos will destroy its own capaciter in no time flat, and will have to depend heavily on its cap booster to run anything, which is still going to bearly cut it, add on even a speratic newt and this will cause serious cap problems resulting in losign point, dps, or tank or in rare ocasions all three. So unless your basing your idea of some magic senario where both ships are newted to 0 instantly and have 0 cap recharge, then yes the eagle is worse off, but if you base it in a real game senario the eagles much better off.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1884 - 2013-08-09 20:24:14 UTC  |  Edited by: W0lf Crendraven
Thats heavy neuting m8, a deimos is perfectly cap stable, even with 1 med neut on it, the eagle however is dry after 1min 50, with w2 neits the deimos still has cap most of the time, the eagle however is dry after 50 secs.

A dual xlasb tank is simply worse.


Edit:

Under heavy neuts (i.e. every 2 secs the entire possible cap gets nuked) the deimos still tanks more then the dual xlasb eagle.
Tor Saani
Arcana Imperii Ltd.
#1885 - 2013-08-09 20:35:55 UTC
Reading the first version of this post I was like "Ishtar! Ishtar!". This version is almost perfect, HACs will have a clear place in the game again.

There is just one last tweak you need to make:

Vagabond +1 Mid (-1 High or -1 Low).

This final tweak would give it a role seperate from the Cynabal.

Having a shield boost bonus and only 4 mids is silly and will need to be changed at some point. Why not just do it with this patch and save yourselves having to spend time fixing it later? (I am really helping you out here!)
Devon Weeks
Asteroid Mining Industries
Salt Mining Industrialists
#1886 - 2013-08-09 21:23:30 UTC
Looking forward to the new Deimos, and the Sacrilege for that matter. When will these changes hit the test server?
Kasife Vynneve
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1887 - 2013-08-09 21:42:43 UTC
Not going to read all 95 odd pages to see if its mentioned but

Why have a Turret slot on the Sacrilege?
Its a Missile Ship and could do with having a extra Low slot given its heritage of the Maller in place of a High

I know several of the Khanid ships have mixed high slots but why take away 3 turrets and leave one. a Utility high can be of use but time is needed for a full on Armour Missile (and only Missile) boat and this should be it.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#1888 - 2013-08-10 05:49:37 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Roime wrote:
Why do you think the Deimos tank is "op"? What is the threshold for "op tank"?



I have no real threshod, but if a cruiser ship can reach 1 k tank before links or implants something is wrong.


Ok, that's why you think the Vaga and Moa are OP as well.

.
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1889 - 2013-08-10 05:56:45 UTC
Tor Saani wrote:
Reading the first version of this post I was like "Ishtar! Ishtar!". This version is almost perfect, HACs will have a clear place in the game again.

There is just one last tweak you need to make:

Vagabond +1 Mid (-1 High or -1 Low).

This final tweak would give it a role seperate from the Cynabal.

Having a shield boost bonus and only 4 mids is silly and will need to be changed at some point. Why not just do it with this patch and save yourselves having to spend time fixing it later? (I am really helping you out here!)

its role will be separated when cynabal gets its deserved nerf
Ariel Dawn
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1890 - 2013-08-10 07:43:12 UTC
Probably will get drowned by the angry people, but could it be possible to make the Vagabond a little more "vagabond'-y?

Increasing the cargo hold (so it can store a few more cap booster charges to use it's new bonus)
Change the drone bay from 25/25 to 25/50 or maybe even 25/75!

Running out of cap charges/drones fairly quickly can cut short roams with the ship!
Romar Thel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1891 - 2013-08-10 11:38:12 UTC
Or dont change any slots for vaga, take out the silly new bonus and replace it with a falloff or dmg bonus.
Darth Khasei
Wavestar Business Ventures Inc.
#1892 - 2013-08-10 13:23:40 UTC
Respect. Cool

1-Tech 1 Cruisers.
2-Tech 2 Cruisers=HAC's
3-Tech 3 Cruisers=Strategic Cruisers
4-Pirate faction
5-Navy Faction
6-Heavy Interdictors
7-Recons
8-Logistics

Six attack based models all trying not to step on each others toes is the problem with the balancing of this hull class. Nerfing Pirate ships again as suggested is not the answer to HAC balance as it was not for the recent Navy Cruiser balance, especially since pirate ships were already "balanced/nerfed" before.

Why not just recognize there will be a some role blending in the attack area with this hull class instead of searching for differences that are already there in the significantly different resistance levels.


Seems like a dog chasing his tail here if that is the best "solution" this iteration of the dev balance team can come up with today.

Oh well that is MMO's and "rebalancing" a big dog chasing his tail.

Carry on CCP. Ugh
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1893 - 2013-08-10 15:09:14 UTC
^Not a serious remark, would love if the entire hac line had kiting as its specialitation.
Lucien Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1894 - 2013-08-10 15:25:19 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
^Not a serious remark, would love if the entire hac line had kiting as its specialitation.


What I'm going to write down now may shock you, so fasten your seat belts!

Some people want their HACs to be HEAVY and/or ASSAULTing...my god the revelation!!
But who's to blame you for not knowing that? Even the Folks at CCP don't have a knack what to do with them! Surprisingly so many people here do have some decent ideas about their favourite HACs...but I'm not even sure if CCP reads them at all.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1895 - 2013-08-10 15:41:21 UTC
Yes i know, but there are tons of brawling boats and very very few dedicated kiting ships, especially in the cruiser class.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1896 - 2013-08-10 15:47:54 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Yes i know, but there are tons of brawling boats and very very few dedicated kiting ships, especially in the cruiser class.


Yes i agree that HAC's should be the premier kiting ship in the game think much more mobile ABC's but with the resilience/ ability to mitigate damage much better but with less dps.

Brawling HAC's is just pointless who want's to risk 200 plus mil in a brawl when you can use much cheaper and more effective brawlers ... i.e. bc's why do you think people use the Vaga but not the eagle or sacrilege as much?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1897 - 2013-08-10 15:54:19 UTC
Ariel Dawn wrote:
Probably will get drowned by the angry people, but could it be possible to make the Vagabond a little more "vagabond'-y?

Increasing the cargo hold (so it can store a few more cap booster charges to use it's new bonus)
Change the drone bay from 25/25 to 25/50 or maybe even 25/75!

Running out of cap charges/drones fairly quickly can cut short roams with the ship!


agree that the cargo holds should be revisioned - at the moment, those that favor active tanking mosty got the smallest holds aswell.
Lucien Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1898 - 2013-08-10 16:00:37 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Yes i know, but there are tons of brawling boats and very very few dedicated kiting ships, especially in the cruiser class.


I've got no problem with a little diversity in the HAC line of ships. I also think the whole issue was made more difficult without proper reason. 4 Brawlers (Slow/medium speed, Heavy/very heavy tanks with average/weak DMG) and 4 Kiters(Fast/very Fast with good/very good damage and average/weak tank).

Let's make this simple. You would have sufficient diversity and clear defined roles by balancing those ships through these 3 categories.

Example: Sacrilege= Heavy tank + medium damage + slow speed.
Vagabond= Weak tank+ medium damage + amazing speed
Deimos= Medium tank + medium damage + medium speed
Zealot= Medium tank+ high damage + slow speed

There's no need for overcomplicating the whole issue even further, we need good and simple solutions now.


Lucien Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1899 - 2013-08-10 16:04:35 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Yes i know, but there are tons of brawling boats and very very few dedicated kiting ships, especially in the cruiser class.


Yes i agree that HAC's should be the premier kiting ship in the game think much more mobile ABC's but with the resilience/ ability to mitigate damage much better but with less dps.

Brawling HAC's is just pointless who want's to risk 200 plus mil in a brawl when you can use much cheaper and more effective brawlers ... i.e. bc's why do you think people use the Vaga but not the eagle or sacrilege as much?


This would turn the whole meaning of HEAVY ASSAULT ships upside down. If you fear to lose a brawling ship then it's either because your tanking skills suck or the tanking abilities of your ship stinks. Easy solution, buff your skills or (god forbid) let's turn some of the HACs into decent and/or affordable Brawlers.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1900 - 2013-08-10 16:10:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
Lucien Cain wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Yes i know, but there are tons of brawling boats and very very few dedicated kiting ships, especially in the cruiser class.


I've got no problem with a little diversity in the HAC line of ships. I also think the whole issue was made more difficult without proper reason. 4 Brawlers (Slow/medium speed, Heavy/very heavy tanks with average/weak DMG) and 4 Kiters(Fast/very Fast with good/very good damage and average/weak tank).

Let's make this simple. You would have sufficient diversity and clear defined roles by balancing those ships through these 3 categories.

Example: Sacrilege= Heavy tank + medium damage + slow speed.
Vagabond= Weak tank+ medium damage + amazing speed
Deimos= Medium tank + medium damage + medium speed
Zealot= Medium tank+ high damage + slow speed

There's no need for overcomplicating the whole issue even further, we need good and simple solutions now.





No the problem with that is you might aswell make a new class of ship because they will be so different but then again they are already like that which is why people are confused about the role of a HAC.. there is no consistency in the class.

What would be interesting would be if they made that separate class say Fast assault cruisers or fast attack cruisers.
This class could have all the fast skirmishers essentially T2 attack cruisers
- Vagabond = Weak tank + medium damage + amazing speed
- Deimos = Weak tank + strong damage + excellent speed
- Cerberus = decent tank + strong damage + strong speed
- Zealot = decent tank + medium damage + strong speed

HAC's
-eagle = Heavy tank + medium damage + slow speed.
-sacrilege = Heavy tank + medium damage + slow speed.
-Ishtar = Heavy tank + medium damage + slow speed.
-Muninn = Heavy tank + medium damage + slow speed.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using