These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Technology and Research Center » Player Features and Ideas Discussion » [Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers - r...

Topic is locked indefinitely.

First pagePrevious page102103104105106Next pageLast page

[Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers - round two First post First post First post
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

MJ Incognito

Macabre Votum

Northern Coalition.

Likes received: 28

#2061 - 2013-08-15 08:29:29 UTC | Edited by: MJ Incognito

Devon Weeks wrote:

Quote:

WTF is your point... we're talking about a role. People keep praising the Diemos speed, tank, and dps... all of which get obsoleted and vastly trumped by the overall effects of a Claymore.

HAC Pilot: Man! I'm so happy that Scissors is now viable! Loving it.

CS Pilot: WTF is your problem!?!?! Look at effin' rock! ROCKZ!!!!

Unfortunately, that just happened.

You just proved why the devs have no reason to listen to any of the praise they're getting on this thread or the Command ship thread with so many warnings coming from other players. You're a fanboy of something for the pure sake of just because rather than understanding what 95% of EVE is driven by.

I'm glad you can find fun in a ship just because. But that is in no way what EVE is driven on. People don't want their sandcastles so easily taken by the tide... and you're not understanding or perceiving the changes in the way the water is moving.

This is the issue with overlapping roles and not defining a reason to have a ship. If there's something better.... most people are going to flood to the best choice in a given role.... not fly a ship just because.

Truth is, they could change all the hacs and give them a defined and relevant role.... and you'd still probably appreciate it even more, while the rest of us wouldn't have this massive concern on are minds.

Devon Weeks

Asteroid Mining Industries

Salt Mining Industrialists

Likes received: 60

#2062 - 2013-08-15 08:44:25 UTC

Quote:

Ignorance. This is a thread about HACs. If you want to hear me praise another ship, check another thread. I love the Damnation, Curse, Megathron, etc. But, this thread isn't about them, now is it? It's about HACs, and the new Deimos is obviously in a much better place than it's been in a long time. That's good by any measure. Jumping in the HAC thread just to say "OMFG CLAYMORE" is more indicative of your own status as a fanboy. Time will tell if the field gets flooded with Claymores. If it does, CCP's ever-reliable nerf bat will soon be in the works, I asure you.

MJ Incognito

Macabre Votum

Northern Coalition.

Likes received: 28

#2063 - 2013-08-15 08:45:50 UTC | Edited by: MJ Incognito

The Dominix is such a good example of exactly my point..... people last patch were fear mongering over the Geddon and how great it was going to be, while a small few were screaming, OMG no the Dominix is going to destroy this game once meta hits.

Almost nobody even understood just how vastly superior the Dominix concept was over almost everything else in game considering it's EWAR resistant, one of the purest form of alpha fleets, cruiser like tracking on a BS platform, the infinite drone spam problem of carrier bays in 0.0, the reign of sentries in lowsec, and the underwelming bonus of 12km on a neut as a full on bonus coming from an Armageddon.

Then everyone's eyes get opened up during the Alliance tournament as to what the meta game really means for this **** and how bad that patch really was for EVE.

It's not that the other BS weren't nice in some way... it's just that the Dominix trumps them all in so may ways.

Now you have the same thing being said about this entire patch... and history is repeating itself. Only this time, far more people are being outspoken because the flaws of the Devs are so apparent.

Devon Weeks wrote:

Quote:

And you're totally missing the point so many of us are making in this thread. Yes the Deimos is better than it was... BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO FIT INTO EVE FFS. IT HAS 0 PURPOSE! It's purpose is just usurped by so many other ships.

Devon Weeks

Asteroid Mining Industries

Salt Mining Industrialists

Likes received: 60

#2064 - 2013-08-15 09:07:05 UTC

Quote:

You think saying that in all caps made it less bogus than it was?

It may not fit into your narrow definition of Eve, but not everyone plays the game the way you do. The Deimos in small gangs is going to do quite well.

Just to clarify a point here... what the hell are you actually saying? You want to buff the Deimos some more? You want to make it comparable to a Claymore? Why don't you post your proposal for the Deimos. I'm not being antagonistic here, seriously. Your posts just seem like nothing but "it doesn't work the way I think it should" but offer no alternative. I'm curious to see what you think a "Deimos that works" looks like.

MJ Incognito

Macabre Votum

Northern Coalition.

Likes received: 28

#2065 - 2013-08-15 09:19:03 UTC | Edited by: CCP Eterne

Devon Weeks wrote:

Quote:

There are 35+ proposals between the 2 HAC threads for how to give HAC's roles that all have merit and because you seem to ignore the 99% of this thread, you want me to list it all out here for you?

I have not said buff the Deimos more *snipped personal attack* - CCP Eterne, I've said give it a unique role. A role means a unique quality that is not currently being seen or utilized in game. Things like localized defensive modules for hacs that have unique limitations to define more offensive or defensive capabilities with limitations to how and when one can change out to either.... IE Cooldowns similar to switching on/off HIC bubbles. This means you can define more offensive and defensive roles on the ship helping necessitate which is more necessary rather than give a very mundane balance to each that is already seen in game 50 times over on other better ships.

This can create unique balances such as higher AB speeds, better resist, etc while trading off receiving remote repairs, projecting offense, etc. Essentially, it's a stopgap module that makes you choose what is needed most, while almost totally removing the other aspects at that time and limiting when you can swap to the other set of bonuses....

In other words, roles and balance without mundane mediocrity in the middle, but forcible choices by players in how to utilize a ship actively during a fight (something this game has lost a lot of.)

Danny John-Peter

The Congregation

RAPID HEAVY ROPERS

Likes received: 579

#2066 - 2013-08-15 09:24:07 UTC

MJ Incognito wrote:

Devon Weeks wrote:

Quote:

There are 35+ proposals between the 2 HAC threads for how to give HAC's roles that all have merit and because you seem to ignore the 99% of this thread, you want me to list it all out here for you?

I have not said buff the Deimos more you dense ****, I've said give it a unique role. A role means a unique quality that is not currently being seen or utilized in game. Things like localized defensive modules for hacs that have unique limitations to define more offensive or defensive capabilities with limitations to how and when one can change out to either.... IE Cooldowns similar to switching on/off HIC bubbles. This means you can define more offensive and defensive roles on the ship helping necessitate which is more necessary rather than give a very mundane balance to each that is already seen in game 50 times over on other better ships.

This can create unique balances such as higher AB speeds, better resist, etc while trading off receiving remote repairs, projecting offense, etc. Essentially, it's a stopgap module that makes you choose what is needed most, while almost totally removing the other aspects at that time and limiting when you can swap to the other set of bonuses....

In other words, roles and balance without mundane mediocrity in the middle, but forcible choices by players in how to utilize a ship actively during a fight (something this game has lost a lot of.)

Modules dedicated to 1 class of ship are generally pretty crap as they limit fitting choices.

To be honest, the HACs generally look in a good place at this point, the Eagle maybe needs a little more speed but I really think we need to see that one on TQ before we can say for sure, the Vaga needs a second falloff bonus to be a viable kiter, apart from that things are looking Ok.

MJ Incognito

Macabre Votum

Northern Coalition.

Likes received: 28

#2067 - 2013-08-15 09:35:45 UTC

Danny John-Peter wrote:

OK compared to what?

I'm sorry, but define what these ships do in game that's not already being done 50 times over by other ships, and almost always better and cheaper?

A module dedicated to 1 ship in 1 slot to affect a role has no real impact on fitting choices... especially when you can give a bonus slot to every ship for that specific module.

This is exactly my point... you guys think they're ok b/c they look better on a forum post and on a horrific simulation test server... you don't have a clue what's going to happen live when the meta game hits. Meta game creates winners and losers. Hacs have been loser for so long b/c they have no real purpose.... and how do you think any of these changes affect a purpose? They don't... they just make **** ships slightly less ****** than before.

You can put a flower on a turd and make it smell better, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a turd.

The Scope Gallente Federation 277
Akturous The Scope Gallente Federation Likes received: 277	#2068 - 2013-08-15 09:37:19 UTC 2 Seriously Fozzie, cargo hold on the deimos, 315 on an active tanker? That's 11 cap boosters if you want minimal ammo, seriously mate, cargo holds on all these ships are way over the shop, cmd ships as well. Some space please. Vote Item Heck One for CSM8

Devon Weeks

Asteroid Mining Industries

Salt Mining Industrialists

Likes received: 60

#2069 - 2013-08-15 09:43:32 UTC

Quote:

There are 35+ proposals between the 2 HAC threads for how to give HAC's roles that all have merit and because you seem to ignore the 99% of this thread, you want me to list it all out here for you?

I have not said buff the Deimos more you dense ****, I've said give it a unique role. A role means a unique quality that is not currently being seen or utilized in game. Things like localized defensive modules for hacs that have unique limitations to define more offensive or defensive capabilities with limitations to how and when one can change out to either.... IE Cooldowns similar to switching on/off HIC bubbles. This means you can define more offensive and defensive roles on the ship helping necessitate which is more necessary rather than give a very mundane balance to each that is already seen in game 50 times over on other better ships.

This can create unique balances such as higher AB speeds, better resist, etc while trading off receiving remote repairs, projecting offense, etc. Essentially, it's a stopgap module that makes you choose what is needed most, while almost totally removing the other aspects at that time and limiting when you can swap to the other set of bonuses....

In other words, roles and balance without mundane mediocrity in the middle, but forcible choices by players in how to utilize a ship actively during a fight (something this game has lost a lot of.)

Personal insults aside, your post seems a bit unrealistic. Also, your assertion that I haven't noticed all the Deimos proposals in this thread is wrong. But, no one has suggested what you have. It's all been more speed, lower sig, etc. It's just stat changes, nothing more.

Your idea of, essentially, a "command" style module that will provide a buff like a boosting module would certainly be unique and isn't a bad one in my view, but what will those effects be? Command ships and tech 3s already boost armor, speed/agility, e-war, and shields. How do you boost defensive capability without overlapping your role with the Damnation? The idea needs some fleshing out, but it isn't a bad line of thought.

Mournful Conciousness

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 901

#2070 - 2013-08-15 09:43:49 UTC

Akturous wrote:

Seriously Fozzie, cargo hold on the deimos, 315 on an active tanker? That's 11 cap boosters if you want minimal ammo, seriously mate, cargo holds on all these ships are way over the shop, cmd ships as well. Some space please.

I thought this too - until I flew the ship.

It has a very strong capacitor and can almost perma-run 1 repper on cap recharge alone. I assure you I have been running out of ammo before cap boosters.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Devon Weeks

Asteroid Mining Industries

Salt Mining Industrialists

Likes received: 60

#2071 - 2013-08-15 09:44:47 UTC

Akturous wrote:

Whah? Are you using navy 400s? That's really all you need, and I am able to fit 21 of them easily with plenty of room left for nanite paste and ammo.

Fumble et Black Cat 0
galessin Fumble et Black Cat Likes received: 0	#2072 - 2013-08-15 10:22:11 UTC ishtar has 3 useables bonus at the same time, all others HAC have 4.... something seems to be wrong...

MJ Incognito

Macabre Votum

Northern Coalition.

Likes received: 28

#2073 - 2013-08-15 10:22:48 UTC | Edited by: MJ Incognito

Devon Weeks wrote:

Your idea of, essentially, a "command" style module that will provide a buff like a boosting module would certainly be unique and isn't a bad one in my view, but what will those effects be? Command ships and tech 3s already boost armor, speed/agility, e-war, and shields. How do you boost defensive capability without overlapping your role with the Damnation? The idea needs some fleshing out, but it isn't a bad line of thought.

You just create a module that has an active and passive effect that determines where your ship shines and falls.... you could actually do multiple varieties.
=========================================
One for instance:

Active: Boost AB speed 75%, Boost resistances 50%, boost local armor/shield repair speed 25% --- But, Reduces Optimal 75%, Reduces tracking 75%, removes remote repair assistance until deactivated, Increases Cap Injector duration by 300% (IE slowing down cap injector rates) in total for minute duration

Passive: NO pros, no cons....

So you question yourself... do I need that approach speed if it's going to totally force me to rely on my own repairers and capacitor... or are my logistics ships all jammed and I need to boost my local defenses thinking we can't get them unjammed...and **** I'm stuck if they get unjammed, and I get webbed down to **** and neuted.
==========================================

This has nothing at all to do with command style bonuses as there are obvious benefits and pitfalls to turning that thing on and it's localized to that ship within the fleet.

In other words, you get your mundane Deimos exactly how it is proposed with the added effect of this module exclusivity on top of it all. Think of how cool that would pair with the current Deimos proposal giving you really wicked choices to make about when to activate and when not to. It doesn't even have to take any capacitor to activate... or like 1 for ***** and giggles... because the negatives require so much thought in the first place.

S1dy

Uplifting Infernal Paradise

Likes received: 46

#2074 - 2013-08-15 10:25:54 UTC

Devon Weeks wrote:

It's just an example. His goal is to determine a specific role, a specialization and that's what I want for HAC's as well. It's a Tech 2 ship that should have a specialization for anything (even CCP stated that a few times in the past). In both threads to the HAC changes are so many examples for what it could be that would make the HAC's special and worth it to use (or buy). Some stated Large Micro Jump Drives, bonus to Target Spectrum Breaker, etc etc. There are enough examples. some are bad, some are good. But the Role Bonus right now is crap and even the bad examples are far better than the MWD Bonus.

Devon Weeks

Asteroid Mining Industries

Salt Mining Industrialists

Likes received: 60

#2075 - 2013-08-15 10:30:02 UTC

Quote:

You just create a module that has an active and passive effect that determines where your ship shines and falls.... you could actually do multiple varieties.

For instance:

Active: Boost AB speed 75%, Boost resistances 50%, boost local armor/shield repair speed 25% --- But, Reduces Optimal 75%, Reduces tracking 75%, reduces remote repair assistance, Increases Cap Injector duration by 300% (IE slowing down cap injector rates) in total for minute duration

Passive: NO pros, no cons....

So you question yourself... do I need that approach speed if it's going to totally force me to rely on my own repairers and capacitor... or are my logistics ships all jammed and I need to boost my local defenses thinking we can't get them unjammed...and **** I'm stuck if they get unjammed, and I get webbed down to **** and neuted.

Not bad. A coding nightmare, but that's not our problem. Lol. I basically understand your idea as beign portable "wormhole system style effects" packed in a module. I could see something like that being a fun addition, even if it does provide a rather tedious level of micromanagement for fleet commanders.

MJ Incognito

Macabre Votum

Northern Coalition.

Likes received: 28

#2076 - 2013-08-15 10:32:20 UTC | Edited by: MJ Incognito

Devon Weeks wrote:

Quote:

It's more like drugs with no random luck and no level of hours of commitment... it's severe bonuses and penalties for manageable short durations that create an element of choice, tradeoff and excitement. It's also an all or none thing where as drugs are luck and pretty mild penalties in selectable quantities for very long durations.

That's more of a local pilot decision than an FC decision... that's the point..... the FC would never micromanage on that level just as any HIC pilot already knows. It's not a coding nightmare either... We already have modules that do all those sorts of things... It's just combining effects into one module....

Danny John-Peter

The Congregation

RAPID HEAVY ROPERS

Likes received: 579

#2077 - 2013-08-15 10:45:30 UTC

MJ Incognito wrote:

Danny John-Peter wrote:

You really just proved my point, the balancing is almost at a good point now, Im still not happy about the Vaga but Im pretty much resigned to the fact that CCP don't want their to be a good kiting Minmatar HAC because then idiots who don't know how to counter such things would whine.

We need to see these changes on TQ and take it from their, see how the meta changes and balance pass as it goes along.

MJ Incognito

Macabre Votum

Northern Coalition.

Likes received: 28

#2078 - 2013-08-15 10:50:13 UTC | Edited by: MJ Incognito

Danny John-Peter wrote:

MJ Incognito wrote:

Danny John-Peter wrote:

How the hell does any of that support what you say? I already know what's going to happen on TQ with all of these b/c the changes are so mild and unimaginative. All they did on these is ever so slightly close the gap on tech 3s while making command ships overlap them far more than before... but by doing most things hacs did better. I doesn't even take a rocket scientist to see that.

This is not a spreadsheet issue, this is an experience issue.

None of these were huge game changes... they are small fluff buffs to a ship class that already didn't have a purpose. Experience over the past 11 years of eve, including countless adaptations, FCing, trials, and patches makes it incredibly easy to know where these are going. If you're requiring SiSi to figure out what these changes meant for these ships, you really don't understand the game. So many of us have been through the scenarios 1000s of times before to know how these small stat changes might have affected those many prior fights before.

I don't need Sisi to tell me exactly how the Ishtar, or Eagle, or Deimos, or Sac, or Zealot will fly because nothing has really changed..... The one exception is the Vaga, and that 's just an understanding of active vs passive tank with 4 mids since litearlly nothing else changed on it. And I can tell you right now, passive is still going to trump active 9/10 times still on that ship. That ship was, and still is a skill based flying ship, and if you knew how to use it before.... the changes aren't really going to dictate anything new now.

Hell Bitch

Imperial Academy

Amarr Empire

Likes received: 32

#2079 - 2013-08-15 11:22:54 UTC

MJ Incognito wrote:

Danny John-Peter wrote:

I think i get what your trying to achieve, rather than just a numerical stat increase (spend more isk your ship has more numbers) you want a real role bonus. having mulled this over during a quiet morning at work i can see where your coming from and I'll try and re-iterate this, but in my own words, so that maybe others will see your point too.

Currently the problem that you see with Eves ship prgression is that it is pretty much a numbers game, and this is not unique to eve, a LOT of rpg ish games have this feature, such that end game you are pretty much doing the same as you were start game, just that all the numbers are bigger.

e.g you'll hit harder, have more hp, repair more blah blah bigger numbers but the core gameplay hasn't changed.

There are areas where isn't true, Stealth bombers, Dreads, Carriers......etc all have roles that define them as being different from the standard more numbers = better.

These roles give the pilot choice that extends beyond the fitting window, there are actually tactical choices to be made when flying those ships, do i drop cloak, go into seige, triage etc, they are all double edged and carry a trade off. The only choices to be made when flying these HAC's happens in the market and fitting screen.

The propsed HAC role bonus is pretty crap, unless i really want to fly a smaller MWD'ing cruiser, HAC as they stand are numerical increases, nothing more. And then the problem is that there are better options for going down the numerical increase route than the HAC's.

Seems like a fair point

Red Sky Morning The Amarr Militia. 94
sten mattson Red Sky Morning The Amarr Militia. Likes received: 94	#2080 - 2013-08-15 12:42:09 UTC 2 galessin wrote: ishtar has 3 useables bonus at the same time, all others HAC have 4.... something seems to be wrong... Lazor weapon cap use anyone? Welcome to eve on hard mode IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!