These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1101 - 2014-08-06 01:27:42 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Ultimately, the problem with the Ishtar is this: it can do battleship-class DPS at battleship-class ranges, and still maintain a great tank and great mobility. Any of the other HACs have to choose one of those at a time, maybe two, but not all four. I'd be fine with the Ishtar being able to keep it's range, DPS, it's tank, or it's mobility, but being able to sport all of them at once is absolutely insane.

As a (former) sniper Eagle pilot, I was utterly amazed when I started back up a few months back only to find that an Ishtar is a better fleet sniper than my rail Eagle.

I think this change is a step in the right direction. I can appreciate CCP's desire for incremental change, just as long as they realize that they will need to continue looking at the Ishtar until it's fixed.

CCP Rise wrote:
I'm heading out of the office for the day, back tomorrow with more on this.

Fun to be back on F&I.

Your definition of fun, while appreciated, is somewhat troubling sir.

So a HAC should be worse than a ABC?

A HAC shouldn't be "better" or "worse" than an ABC, they are different types of ships that fill different roles. You have to compare the ships in specific roles, not just the ships. Is a Malediction "worse" than an Oracle? That question is invalid without an intended role.

To your point, yes, I feel a HAC should be less effective than an ABC when it comes to being a mobile sniper using battleship-class weaponry. Absolutely, 100%. Why? It's simple. HACs were never intended to fill that role. The only reason CCP gave the sentry drone bonuses to the Ishtar was to avoid making it "just another drone boat". I commend that effort, but it's time for them to put it aside and fix the Ishtar.

To help put this into context, name me one other HAC where this is even a relevant discussion. No other HACs come close to matching ABCs in performance in their role, only the Ishtar.

HACs should be either good anti-support snipers, or good brawling cruisers, or good kiters, or any of several other roles. But none of them should get to be all of them at once, and I don't feel that overlapping them with ABCs is wise or intended by CCP.

In general sense, why should a ship that is easier to train for and build be more powerful? That doesn't seem like balance.
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1102 - 2014-08-06 01:31:22 UTC
Meandering Milieu wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:


HACs should be either good anti-support snipers, or good brawling cruisers, or good kiters, or any of several other roles. But none of them should get to be all of them at once, and I don't feel that overlapping them with ABCs is wise or intended by CCP.


It isn't "all of them at once" . A shield Ishtar isn't brawling anything. Shield ishtars cannot stand to be pinned down by anything with decent firepower. If you have decent tackle, or just bubbles, a shield ishtar fleet couldn't even engage another hac fleet. Their entire strategy would be "burn away and warp out/in for repositioning. " . A single scram means no more kiting for a shield fit, and that means death. They are excellent kiting ships, but snipers often need to be.

Armor ishtars, however, are wonderful brawling ships. Amazing tank, ewar, prop and tackle. Can they get their drone control range high enough to snipe? Yeah. But it doesn't matter much because those 3 DDA fit 600+ damage wardens don't exist on an armor fit. Their damage is pitiful compared to shield fits, and plenty of armor fits prefer ewar to omnis and so their most all hitting falloff.

I get that the ishtar is versatile and strong, but it can't literally do everything at once, fits don't allow for it.

This has been the theme of the anti-Ishtar crowd.
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1103 - 2014-08-06 01:36:12 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
That garde damage is maxxed out. I know for a fact that the numbers on hybrids are low, I have little experience with the others as I have only recently trained the other two turret systems.

It is my bad on the omni enhancers, I have not put a drone ship in space for nearly a year. That just leaves out implants and boosters, which are available to all other primary weapon systems.

I keep seeing this point about the sentries being stationary which helps their tracking being brought up as if it was a clear advantage. It also makes them simple to destroy, especially if the ship putting them out is trying to kite you. Stop fighting how the enemy wants. That simple.

I guess I don't see the problem because I have never cared about killboards. I don't have any PvP kills because my goals were defense of assets, not killmails... So I don't fit tackle and I don't care if the enemy gets away so long as he goes away. Seems perfectly acceptable to me to go for the drones and deny him his weapons. It's what used to happen all the time when you tried to use drones in PvP. They are not a joke anymore, but they still have low average damage with exceptional application and high resistance to ewar. That's just what they are, and if no one can be bothered to kill them that's a failure to adapt, not a failure to balance.

QFT
PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1104 - 2014-08-06 02:04:31 UTC  |  Edited by: PotatoOverdose
Taleden wrote:


  • (L) Tachyon Beam Laser II: 455dps @ 33+25km, 0.0174rad/s, 400m res
  • (L) 425mm Railgun II: 400dps @ 36+30km, 0.01263rad/s, 400m res
  • (L) 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II: 336dps @ 30+44km, 0.01125rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Garde II: 421dps @ 30+18km, 0.036rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Curator II: 396dps @ 52+12km, 0.0276rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Bouncer II: 371dps @ 52+48km, 0.0192rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Warden II: 346dps @ 75+42km, 0.012rad/s, 400m res
  • (M) Heavy Beam Laser II: 395dps @ 15+10km, 0.03712rad/s, 125m res
  • (M) 250mm Railgun II: 406dps @ 18+15km, 0.02566rad/s, 125m res
  • (M) 720mm Howitzer Artillery II: 280dps @ 15+22km, 0.02612rad/s, 125m res


So aside form the one person posting 6 times in a row there's consensus? The ishtar (and/or sentry drones) needs to be brought in line with other cruisers. No other cruiser uses Battleship grade weapons (with regards to damage projection in particular) while retaining the speed and sig of a cruiser.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1105 - 2014-08-06 02:32:27 UTC
Janice en Marland wrote:
My "agenda" is to prevent the Ishtar from being nerfed to oblivion by large alliance unable to keep up with rapid changes.


Translation.

Your agenda is to oppose change by claiming that the people who want the Ishtar nerfed are the ones who really oppose change in the first place.

Which is honestly mind boggling.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Meandering Milieu
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1106 - 2014-08-06 02:34:38 UTC
Falin Whalen wrote:

  • (S) Garde II: 421dps @ 30+18km, 0.036rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Curator II: 396dps @ 52+12km, 0.0276rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Bouncer II: 371dps @ 52+48km, 0.0192rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Warden II: 346dps @ 75+42km, 0.012rad/s, 400m res

Instead have Sentries like this:

  • (S) Garde II: 421dps @ 25+18km, 0.0197rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Curator II: 346dps @ 42+12km, 0.0146rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Bouncer II: 391dps @ 32+18km, 0.0172rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Warden II: 376dps @ 37+12km, 0.0153rad/s, 400m res

There, the extreme range and excelent tracking problems of sentries are solved, and are in line with Battleship dps and tracking. This also solves the problem with sentry carriers as they don't turn into long range snipe boats, and will remove the 160km "deathzone" for subcaps to actually get on grid and do more than just leer menacingly at enemy carriers from 170km away.


Ranges nerfed too much. These are supposed to be sniping platforms, with perhaps the exception of the garde. However after that tracking nerf I'm not sure the garde would be able to hit anything within its killbox, even a BS, unless it was webbed into oblivion.

But the range nerfs are too harsh there. If you wanted to adjust them a bit so that you had to worry about range, instead of the choice of "garde or anything else" that would be fine. However wardens with 37km optimal is just absurd for a caldari drone.
Meandering Milieu
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1107 - 2014-08-06 02:39:12 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Taleden wrote:


  • (L) Tachyon Beam Laser II: 455dps @ 33+25km, 0.0174rad/s, 400m res
  • (L) 425mm Railgun II: 400dps @ 36+30km, 0.01263rad/s, 400m res
  • (L) 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II: 336dps @ 30+44km, 0.01125rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Garde II: 421dps @ 30+18km, 0.036rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Curator II: 396dps @ 52+12km, 0.0276rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Bouncer II: 371dps @ 52+48km, 0.0192rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Warden II: 346dps @ 75+42km, 0.012rad/s, 400m res
  • (M) Heavy Beam Laser II: 395dps @ 15+10km, 0.03712rad/s, 125m res
  • (M) 250mm Railgun II: 406dps @ 18+15km, 0.02566rad/s, 125m res
  • (M) 720mm Howitzer Artillery II: 280dps @ 15+22km, 0.02612rad/s, 125m res


So aside form the one person posting 6 times in a row there's consensus? The ishtar (and/or sentry drones) needs to be brought in line with other cruisers. No other cruiser uses Battleship grade weapons (with regards to damage projection in particular) while retaining the speed and sig of a cruiser.


Blaster proteus.
Tengu
Vexor Navy
Cerberus
Deimos

Only thing you're right about there is damage projection. Plenty of other cruisers can pull 500+ dps while maintaining sig and maneuverability. I didn't mention amarr/Minmatar because I don't fly them.

I also admit the tracking of sentries is indeed outrageous.

Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1108 - 2014-08-06 02:50:36 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
My "agenda" is to prevent the Ishtar from being nerfed to oblivion by large alliance unable to keep up with rapid changes.


Translation.

Your agenda is to oppose change by claiming that the people who want the Ishtar nerfed are the ones who really oppose change in the first place.

Which is honestly mind boggling.

You know exactly what I mean.
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1109 - 2014-08-06 02:53:15 UTC
PotatoOverdose wrote:
Taleden wrote:


  • (L) Tachyon Beam Laser II: 455dps @ 33+25km, 0.0174rad/s, 400m res
  • (L) 425mm Railgun II: 400dps @ 36+30km, 0.01263rad/s, 400m res
  • (L) 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II: 336dps @ 30+44km, 0.01125rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Garde II: 421dps @ 30+18km, 0.036rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Curator II: 396dps @ 52+12km, 0.0276rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Bouncer II: 371dps @ 52+48km, 0.0192rad/s, 400m res
  • (S) Warden II: 346dps @ 75+42km, 0.012rad/s, 400m res
  • (M) Heavy Beam Laser II: 395dps @ 15+10km, 0.03712rad/s, 125m res
  • (M) 250mm Railgun II: 406dps @ 18+15km, 0.02566rad/s, 125m res
  • (M) 720mm Howitzer Artillery II: 280dps @ 15+22km, 0.02612rad/s, 125m res


So aside form the one person posting 6 times in a row there's consensus? The ishtar (and/or sentry drones) needs to be brought in line with other cruisers. No other cruiser uses Battleship grade weapons (with regards to damage projection in particular) while retaining the speed and sig of a cruiser.

You can put that "BS grade weapon" in a Tristan so maybe it isn't BS grade after all things considered.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1110 - 2014-08-06 02:56:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Janice en Marland wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
That's just what they are, and if no one can be bothered to kill them that's a failure to adapt, not a failure to balance.

QFT
so you think we should bring back the 100mn tengu fleets? Un-nerf the missiles because obviously if they can't kill it, it's not that the ship is too powerful, it's just failure to adapt.
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1111 - 2014-08-06 02:59:00 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
That's just what they are, and if no one can be bothered to kill them that's a failure to adapt, not a failure to balance.

QFT
so you think we should bring back the 100mn tengu fleets? Un-nerf the missiles because obviously if they can't kill it, it's not that the ship is too powerful, it's just failure to adapt.

I never said anything about 100mn Tengus. Let's try to stay on topic.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1112 - 2014-08-06 03:11:59 UTC
Janice en Marland wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
My "agenda" is to prevent the Ishtar from being nerfed to oblivion by large alliance unable to keep up with rapid changes.


Translation.

Your agenda is to oppose change by claiming that the people who want the Ishtar nerfed are the ones who really oppose change in the first place.

Which is honestly mind boggling.

You know exactly what I mean.


I know you're defending your golden goose, that is fairly clear.

But I have yet to see anyone actually mount a genuine defense of a cruiser being able to fit a battleship sized weapon system that can track frigates.

I have very little issues with the Ishtar itself. But non battleships should not be able to fit sentry drones. Either that, or sentry drones need to be nerfed severely.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1113 - 2014-08-06 03:21:59 UTC
Janice en Marland wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
That's just what they are, and if no one can be bothered to kill them that's a failure to adapt, not a failure to balance.

QFT
so you think we should bring back the 100mn tengu fleets? Un-nerf the missiles because obviously if they can't kill it, it's not that the ship is too powerful, it's just failure to adapt.

I never said anything about 100mn Tengus. Let's try to stay on topic.

So why does that path of thought only apply to ishtars? Are they special in some way? If you think like that then you must be against any need to anything good, or does it just suit you for this argument?
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1114 - 2014-08-06 03:28:00 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
My "agenda" is to prevent the Ishtar from being nerfed to oblivion by large alliance unable to keep up with rapid changes.


Translation.

Your agenda is to oppose change by claiming that the people who want the Ishtar nerfed are the ones who really oppose change in the first place.

Which is honestly mind boggling.

You know exactly what I mean.


I know you're defending your golden goose, that is fairly clear.

But I have yet to see anyone actually mount a genuine defense of a cruiser being able to fit a battleship sized weapon system that can track frigates.

I have very little issues with the Ishtar itself. But non battleships should not be able to fit sentry drones. Either that, or sentry drones need to be nerfed severely.

Sentry drones are not BS weapons. End of story.
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1115 - 2014-08-06 03:34:04 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
Mike Voidstar wrote:
That's just what they are, and if no one can be bothered to kill them that's a failure to adapt, not a failure to balance.

QFT
so you think we should bring back the 100mn tengu fleets? Un-nerf the missiles because obviously if they can't kill it, it's not that the ship is too powerful, it's just failure to adapt.

I never said anything about 100mn Tengus. Let's try to stay on topic.

So why does that path of thought only apply to ishtars? Are they special in some way? If you think like that then you must be against any need to anything good, or does it just suit you for this argument?

The Ishtar compared to AF and Command Ships is in a very acceptable spot. A few tweaks here and there and it would work well compared to other HACs. What I oppose is nerfing the Ishtar to the point where it is not even worth training for. The Gila truly isn't far behind if at all. The VNI offers similar DPS. The Stratios offers a covert ops cloak. Even a T1 Vexor can reach very high quantities of DPS.
Taleden
North Wind Local no. 612
#1116 - 2014-08-06 03:40:28 UTC
Janice en Marland wrote:
You can put that "BS grade weapon" in a Tristan so maybe it isn't BS grade after all things considered.


Janice en Marland wrote:
Sentry drones are not BS weapons. End of story.


Spam posting half a dozen times in a row does not make your point valid. Did you even read what I posted above all the numbers? Just because you *can* currently deploy a (single) sentry drone from a frigate does not mean you *should* be able to, nor does it change the fact that sentry drones are *obviously* comparable to large turrets. If you really think otherwise, explain to me the 400m sig res of sentry drones, which exactly matches large turrets.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and repeating what you *want* to be true does not mean it *is* true. You're still wrong, no matter how obnoxiously repetitive you can be.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1117 - 2014-08-06 03:50:55 UTC
Janice en Marland wrote:
The Ishtar compared to AF and Command Ships is in a very acceptable spot. A few tweaks here and there and it would work well compared to other HACs. What I oppose is nerfing the Ishtar to the point where it is not even worth training for. The Gila truly isn't far behind if at all. The VNI offers similar DPS. The Stratios offers a covert ops cloak. Even a T1 Vexor can reach very high quantities of DPS.
im sure comparing the same weapon system to itself is a great way to balance it. The Ishtar is the focal point of this discussion A: because this is a HAC thread and B: because it is the most powerful ship in the line of sentry using ships you listed. A lot of these argument could and probably would be applied to them if the Ishtar was no longer the front-runner of them.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1118 - 2014-08-06 04:06:51 UTC
Janice en Marland wrote:

Sentry drones are not BS weapons. End of story.


An attempt to handwave away the argument without even attempting a rebuttal.

Thanks for telling me that you basically don't have one.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#1119 - 2014-08-06 04:14:34 UTC
It isn't just the DPS. The Sentry drones require no capacitor...no cpu or grid and the deploying ship needs only to remain within control range...which can be extended easily to 200km. Then it can run around the field not worrying about transversal and keep a superior force (in numbers and or mass) pinned down inside a bubble of fire from all sides.

It's real power comes from not needing to stay with its weapons system. If it had to stay within 30km of its sentries it would be easier to counter. As it is drones are cheap enough that you can *so what* and warp off...warp back drop a new set. Worst case scenario and you run out of drones in your bay...you can carry a mobile depot and 3 more sets in your cargo.

If you run out of 6 sets of sentry drones in an ishtar fleet and you're alive and still in system...then you are in an odd situation.
Janice en Marland
Cross Saber Holdings
#1120 - 2014-08-06 04:25:45 UTC
Taleden wrote:
Janice en Marland wrote:
You can put that "BS grade weapon" in a Tristan so maybe it isn't BS grade after all things considered.


Janice en Marland wrote:
Sentry drones are not BS weapons. End of story.


Spam posting half a dozen times in a row does not make your point valid. Did you even read what I posted above all the numbers? Just because you *can* currently deploy a (single) sentry drone from a frigate does not mean you *should* be able to, nor does it change the fact that sentry drones are *obviously* comparable to large turrets. If you really think otherwise, explain to me the 400m sig res of sentry drones, which exactly matches large turrets.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and repeating what you *want* to be true does not mean it *is* true. You're still wrong, no matter how obnoxiously repetitive you can be.

So your argument for sentry drones being BS sized weapons is their sig res? Please refer to post #183.