These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Hyperion] Heavy Assault Cruiser tweaks

First post First post First post
Author
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#701 - 2014-07-31 19:11:20 UTC
I like how this thread started out as 'a few minor tweaks' and has turned into 'go back to the drawing board and start again'. lol.
Thanatos Marathon
Moira.
#702 - 2014-07-31 19:12:39 UTC
The Sac is fine (and some would argue the best HAC depending on utilization) for PVP in Low sec.
Odithia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#703 - 2014-07-31 19:13:05 UTC
Meandering Milieu wrote:

That is the entire flavor of Amarr vs Gal in drones. Amarr get less bandwidth and more drone bay space, where gal get more bandwidth and less drone bay space.

You may as well say that Prophecy needs to drop the resist bonus and get armor rep, or myrm drop armor rep and get resists.

Cookie-cutterism is bad m'kay.

Amarr get less drones brandwich but get EWAR bonus, except the Prophecy.
The Ishtar is Gallente, can launch has many drone as a Dominix and more than an Armageddon and and has the same drone bay than the Armageddon

Resist bonus is comparable to active tank bonus, one being for fleet, the other for solo and small gang.

The Prophecy was used in fleet due to it's resist bonus but now people have figured that's it's better to go full gank with Ishtar, with the smaller sig radius and better speed, you don't even lose that much tanking ability.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#704 - 2014-07-31 19:14:09 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
I like how this thread started out as 'a few minor tweaks' and has turned into 'go back to the drawing board and start again'. lol.


don't they always RollShocked

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

Ivory Kantenu
Apotheosis.
#705 - 2014-07-31 19:20:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Ivory Kantenu
Limit Cruisers to heavies, only Battleship and up should be able to use sentries. Enough of this reign. Every nulsec entity is tired of flying Ishtars / being forced into them to compete in the larger meta.

[i]Learn the basics of Wormhole Selling: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=101693&find=unread[/i]

M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#706 - 2014-07-31 19:26:43 UTC
Sara Tosa wrote:
Aquila Sagitta wrote:

Only problem I have with this is implications for carriers

carriers should be able to field only fighters and bomber fighters


Hear that? It's the song of your people...

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#707 - 2014-07-31 19:27:09 UTC
Sentries are fine as a battleship weapon system. They cap at out a max of less than 800 dps up to only ~50km, with no higher damage option for shorter range. At longer ranges they're down below that. They're also locked into particular damage types at a given range--there's no long-range thermal option, and there's no high-damage explosive option, for example.

The problem is when you put sentries on a cruiser. Sure, drones are meant to be versatile, but it's still fundamentally giving that cruiser battleship-level DPS.

The problem with not allowing cruisers to use sentries is that non-sentry drones are in a fairly bad place right now. They look fine on paper, but in game they're slow to switch targets and very vulnerable to dying (especially to NPCs). Look at the Gila--in order to make medium drones viable they had to buff them up so that the flight of mediums does the damage of a flight of heavies.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#708 - 2014-07-31 19:39:07 UTC
Ivory Kantenu wrote:
Limit Cruisers to heavies, only Battleship and up should be able to use sentries. Enough of this reign. Every nulsec entity is tired of flying Ishtars / being forced into them to compete in the larger meta.



you mean basically limit that complex weapon system to 2 T1 ships plus a few faction ones?

This is dumb balancing.

Sentry concept is OK. The problem is that they should track as badly as long range turrets that share same range.

So around 1400mm tracking.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Sara Tosa
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#709 - 2014-07-31 20:14:48 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Ivory Kantenu wrote:
Limit Cruisers to heavies, only Battleship and up should be able to use sentries. Enough of this reign. Every nulsec entity is tired of flying Ishtars / being forced into them to compete in the larger meta.



you mean basically limit that complex weapon system to 2 T1 ships plus a few faction ones?

This is dumb balancing.

Sentry concept is OK. The problem is that they should track as badly as long range turrets that share same range.

So around 1400mm tracking.

then why use them instead of 1400mm?
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#710 - 2014-07-31 20:21:45 UTC
Sara Tosa wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Ivory Kantenu wrote:
Limit Cruisers to heavies, only Battleship and up should be able to use sentries. Enough of this reign. Every nulsec entity is tired of flying Ishtars / being forced into them to compete in the larger meta.



you mean basically limit that complex weapon system to 2 T1 ships plus a few faction ones?

This is dumb balancing.

Sentry concept is OK. The problem is that they should track as badly as long range turrets that share same range.

So around 1400mm tracking.

then why use them instead of 1400mm?



EWAR immune, still able to fit a rack of guns/missiles to name a couple.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#711 - 2014-07-31 20:23:10 UTC
Sara Tosa wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Ivory Kantenu wrote:
Limit Cruisers to heavies, only Battleship and up should be able to use sentries. Enough of this reign. Every nulsec entity is tired of flying Ishtars / being forced into them to compete in the larger meta.



you mean basically limit that complex weapon system to 2 T1 ships plus a few faction ones?

This is dumb balancing.

Sentry concept is OK. The problem is that they should track as badly as long range turrets that share same range.

So around 1400mm tracking.

then why use them instead of 1400mm?



No ammo, no fittings required, do not reload, ecm immune Track disruption immune..
a LOT of advantages....

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#712 - 2014-07-31 20:25:13 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello

I was out of the office yesterday but I did get caught up here finally. I don't have a lot to add for the moment. We are still leaning towards more gradual changes for this particular pass but I'm going to get folks together once vacations are over and have a larger conversation about sentries and drone balance overall. I definitely agree that being destructible doesn't end up being an actual drawback for sentry drones in almost all situations. We could expose that weakness more by changing things like drone bay or drone HP but the August release is too close for that kind of change so I'll just get the conversation started and we'll see how things look for the following release.

I don't doubt that the Ishtar will still be strong, and we could definitely remove it from the meta by attacking the sentry use more directly, but we want to try and reach some middle ground before going that route.

One small addition - I'm going to even out the cargo capacity on HACs some in this release, the Zealot's very sad 260 cargo was very annoying.



What about our sad friend munin?

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Meandering Milieu
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#713 - 2014-07-31 20:32:47 UTC
Odithia wrote:
Meandering Milieu wrote:

That is the entire flavor of Amarr vs Gal in drones. Amarr get less bandwidth and more drone bay space, where gal get more bandwidth and less drone bay space.

You may as well say that Prophecy needs to drop the resist bonus and get armor rep, or myrm drop armor rep and get resists.

Cookie-cutterism is bad m'kay.

Amarr get less drones brandwich but get EWAR bonus, except the Prophecy.
The Ishtar is Gallente, can launch has many drone as a Dominix and more than an Armageddon and and has the same drone bay than the Armageddon

Resist bonus is comparable to active tank bonus, one being for fleet, the other for solo and small gang.

The Prophecy was used in fleet due to it's resist bonus but now people have figured that's it's better to go full gank with Ishtar, with the smaller sig radius and better speed, you don't even lose that much tanking ability.


Yeah, and assuming we both stick around to brawl, my solo pvp deimos will chew through a Talos. Assuming the Talos kites, he can't apply dps properly and simply cannot kill me. Comparing HACs to BCs is useless. The cerb surpasses the drake. The myrm might have sheer dps tank on an ishtar, but loses in terms of raw firepower. Something something minmatar hac vs min BC. ( I don't fly them).

The ishtar sports the 5 drone configuration because that is the appeal. An Ishkur does really well compared to most frigates too. The only reason it isn't used as a fleet doctrine is probably a lack of small sentry drones. Hilariously a Harpy fleet is basically a fleet of small sentry drones on an anchor.

I'm not suggesting the prophecy doesn't possibly need some love to be useful. I'm saying that removing flavor and differences to do so is bad.

And what are you talking about when you say the Armageddon cannot field as many drones as an ishtar? It has 125 bandwidth. It has to, because for a battleship that would be crippling. In exchange, it has the same bay as the domi. The difference between them is domi gets tracking/optimal bonuses and Geddon gets neuts.

If anything, I'd suggest removing the resist bonus and giving them the neut bonus that other Amarr drone ships get.
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#714 - 2014-07-31 20:35:49 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
We are still leaning towards more gradual changes for this particular pass.

Why? Can you please be clearer about this? The overwhelming feedback in this thread was very clear: people are sick of 'Ishtars online' and want a change. Why not reduce the bandwidth?

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#715 - 2014-07-31 20:51:53 UTC
Zappity wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
We are still leaning towards more gradual changes for this particular pass.

Why? Can you please be clearer about this? The overwhelming feedback in this thread was very clear: people are sick of 'Ishtars online' and want a change. Why not reduce the bandwidth?


Gotta leave everyone a change to finish hopping on the bandwagon while it's still a good one to hop on. Think of all the people training Gallente cruiser V right now.
Odithia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#716 - 2014-07-31 20:56:51 UTC
Meandering Milieu wrote:

And what are you talking about when you say the Armageddon cannot field as many drones as an ishtar? It has 125 bandwidth. It has to, because for a battleship that would be crippling. In exchange, it has the same bay as the domi. The difference between them is domi gets tracking/optimal bonuses and Geddon gets neuts.

If anything, I'd suggest removing the resist bonus and giving them the neut bonus that other Amarr drone ships get.

Sorry for the confusion, I meant to write that the Ishtar did as much damage as a Dominix (due to application/projection bonus) and more than an Armageddon then messed up changing the beginin of the sentance to "launch drone".



Deimos should be compared to Brutix not Talos. I think the Brutix has good chances.
Same for Zealot and Harbringer.
Vagabond and Hurricane.
Eagle and Ferox.
Cerberus and Drake.
Ishtar and Myrmidon, nope.


Funny how every ship that uses drones as its main weapons is either useless or completely overpowered patch after patch.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#717 - 2014-07-31 21:10:16 UTC
Zappity wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
We are still leaning towards more gradual changes for this particular pass.

Why? Can you please be clearer about this? The overwhelming feedback in this thread was very clear: people are sick of 'Ishtars online' and want a change. Why not reduce the bandwidth?



because someof the last ships they nerfed explicitly simply disappeared from eve, like rupture (nerfed when compared to the other cruisers larger buffs) sttaber fleet issues (same thing) etc...

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#718 - 2014-07-31 21:27:21 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Zappity wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
We are still leaning towards more gradual changes for this particular pass.

Why? Can you please be clearer about this? The overwhelming feedback in this thread was very clear: people are sick of 'Ishtars online' and want a change. Why not reduce the bandwidth?



because someof the last ships they nerfed explicitly simply disappeared from eve, like rupture (nerfed when compared to the other cruisers larger buffs) sttaber fleet issues (same thing) etc...

So what? All the people who previously flee Drakes (or whatever) are now flying a wide range of other ships. Diversity is good. And Gallente Cruiser V is plenty powerful enough even without Ishtar dominance.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.

Odithia
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#719 - 2014-07-31 22:37:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Odithia
Because I like graphs and because I think the eagle need more love.

Here is a dps comparison of both ships with similar equipment.
http://imgur.com/0domEE7

Note that the Eagle is significantly tankier than the Ishtar, lets say a bit less than 20% more EHP on a typical buffer fit, this can be considered balanced with the Ishtar increased damage.

At further range, when the ishtar swap drones and the eagle swap ammo, the difference is much more in favor of the Ishtar.
http://imgur.com/OLV3XSB
Some will argue that due to destructible weapons, and thinier tank this is perfectly balanced.
To those I say look at the Ishtar used drones on both pictures.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#720 - 2014-07-31 22:42:57 UTC
Odithia wrote:
Because I like graphs and because I think the eagle need more love.

Here is a dps comparison of both ships with similar equipment.
http://imgur.com/0domEE7

Note that the Eagle is significantly tankier than the Ishtar, lets say a bit less than 20% more EHP on a typical buffer fit, this can be considered balanced with the Ishtar increased damage.

At further range, when the ishtar swap drones and the eagle swap ammo, the difference is much more in favor of the Ishtar.
http://imgur.com/OLV3XSB
Some will argue that due to destructible weapons, and thinier tank this is perfectly balanced.
To those I say look at the Ishtar used drones on both pictures.


only 4 gardes aswell..

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