These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1421 - 2014-08-12 19:21:40 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
what that shows is that the eagle is still far too slow .. and the vaga is too fast ...

ishtar needs a much stronger nerf too its sentry use/dronebay not just a minor speed nerf that doesnt really address the issue



Vaga is too fast...? What? Its a supposed to be fast. Its fragile as hell when caught. NEEDS 2 TE to project any decent dps at point range, and even then, out of 500dps, only 300-350 is actually hitting target. If anything, vaga's speed should be bumped up and agility increased to actually make it more unique, especially after faction cruiser buffs.
Acel Tokalov
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1422 - 2014-08-12 21:12:11 UTC
One thing that could be done to fix the issue with HAC balance is to rearrange some of the slot layouts on specifically the Ishtar, Vagabond, and Muninn.

The Ishtar having a 4/5/5 slot layout means that it can easily shield tank and apply more of the low slots to damage modules. Moving one mid to the low for a 4/4/6 will make it so that if you are going to shield tank it you have to sacrifice having Drone Tracking Units.

The problem with both the Muninn and Vagabond is that they have a 6th high that is nearly useless because they don't have the hard points to mount any bonused turrets and are forced to leave it empty to save resources or put useless or highly situational items in the slot like a non-bonused turret, smart bomb, or cloak. The Muninn should have enough mid slots to be able to shield tank and not be forced to armor tank, and the Vagabond should be a 5/5/5 because then you can at least get a reasonable shield tank on it while fitting a MWD and Web/Scram/Point.

There is a reason that of all the HACs in game the ones you see the least are the Minmatar ones.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1423 - 2014-08-12 21:27:26 UTC
Acel Tokalov wrote:
One thing that could be done to fix the issue with HAC balance is to rearrange some of the slot layouts on specifically the Ishtar, Vagabond, and Muninn.

The Ishtar having a 4/5/5 slot layout means that it can easily shield tank and apply more of the low slots to damage modules. Moving one mid to the low for a 4/4/6 will make it so that if you are going to shield tank it you have to sacrifice having Drone Tracking Units.

The problem with both the Muninn and Vagabond is that they have a 6th high that is nearly useless because they don't have the hard points to mount any bonused turrets and are forced to leave it empty to save resources or put useless or highly situational items in the slot like a non-bonused turret, smart bomb, or cloak. The Muninn should have enough mid slots to be able to shield tank and not be forced to armor tank, and the Vagabond should be a 5/5/5 because then you can at least get a reasonable shield tank on it while fitting a MWD and Web/Scram/Point.

There is a reason that of all the HACs in game the ones you see the least are the Minmatar ones.


the spare high on a vaga is usually for a neut .. anti frig gear .. a cloak for 0.0 is an option .. it funny you say that about minnie HAC's cos before the buffs to the others . it was usually the Vaga that was the most used HAC .. with zealots and munnins in 0.0 gangs ...

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

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1424 - 2014-08-12 21:30:39 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
what that shows is that the eagle is still far too slow .. and the vaga is too fast ...

ishtar needs a much stronger nerf too its sentry use/dronebay not just a minor speed nerf that doesnt really address the issue



Vaga is too fast...? What? Its a supposed to be fast. Its fragile as hell when caught. NEEDS 2 TE to project any decent dps at point range, and even then, out of 500dps, only 300-350 is actually hitting target. If anything, vaga's speed should be bumped up and agility increased to actually make it more unique, especially after faction cruiser buffs.


well the point of a HAC as defined by Rise .. is as a resilient cruiser .. yet its quicker than a stabber the fastest attack cruiser .. attack being about speed and all .. and just look at the other HAC's too see how slow they are compared too there attack cruiser T1 variants they are based on...

The vaga should trade some 20m/s -30 m/s for more shield HP

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

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1425 - 2014-08-12 21:34:31 UTC
or you could model them after AFs and make them move like BCs.
Acel Tokalov
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1426 - 2014-08-12 21:34:39 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Acel Tokalov wrote:
One thing that could be done to fix the issue with HAC balance is to rearrange some of the slot layouts on specifically the Ishtar, Vagabond, and Muninn.

The Ishtar having a 4/5/5 slot layout means that it can easily shield tank and apply more of the low slots to damage modules. Moving one mid to the low for a 4/4/6 will make it so that if you are going to shield tank it you have to sacrifice having Drone Tracking Units.

The problem with both the Muninn and Vagabond is that they have a 6th high that is nearly useless because they don't have the hard points to mount any bonused turrets and are forced to leave it empty to save resources or put useless or highly situational items in the slot like a non-bonused turret, smart bomb, or cloak. The Muninn should have enough mid slots to be able to shield tank and not be forced to armor tank, and the Vagabond should be a 5/5/5 because then you can at least get a reasonable shield tank on it while fitting a MWD and Web/Scram/Point.

There is a reason that of all the HACs in game the ones you see the least are the Minmatar ones.


the spare high on a vaga is usually for a neut .. anti frig gear .. a cloak for 0.0 is an option .. it funny you say that about minnie HAC's cos before the buffs to the others . it was usually the Vaga that was the most used HAC .. with zealots and munnins in 0.0 gangs ...


Well the old Vaga was also much faster than its current form. The big part of my issue with the Muninn though is that CCP is supposedly making Minmatar more shield focused, especially considering that their logi is all shield focused, but then they have ships like the Muninn and the Wolf that have to be armor tanked, because they lose mid slots in favor of a utility/missile high.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1427 - 2014-08-12 22:13:45 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
or you could model them after AFs and make them move like BCs.


or you could contribute something useful ..

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

Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1428 - 2014-08-12 22:25:51 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
what that shows is that the eagle is still far too slow .. and the vaga is too fast ...

ishtar needs a much stronger nerf too its sentry use/dronebay not just a minor speed nerf that doesnt really address the issue



Vaga is too fast...? What? Its a supposed to be fast. Its fragile as hell when caught. NEEDS 2 TE to project any decent dps at point range, and even then, out of 500dps, only 300-350 is actually hitting target. If anything, vaga's speed should be bumped up and agility increased to actually make it more unique, especially after faction cruiser buffs.


The problem with the Vaga is that ACs suck. The hull and bonuses itself are fine. Name one ship that primarily fits ACs that isn't terrible. That pretty much leaves you with just the Sabre.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1429 - 2014-08-12 22:27:59 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
what that shows is that the eagle is still far too slow .. and the vaga is too fast ...

ishtar needs a much stronger nerf too its sentry use/dronebay not just a minor speed nerf that doesnt really address the issue



Vaga is too fast...? What? Its a supposed to be fast. Its fragile as hell when caught. NEEDS 2 TE to project any decent dps at point range, and even then, out of 500dps, only 300-350 is actually hitting target. If anything, vaga's speed should be bumped up and agility increased to actually make it more unique, especially after faction cruiser buffs.


The problem with the Vaga is that ACs suck. The hull and bonuses itself are fine. Name one ship that primarily fits ACs that isn't terrible. That pretty much leaves you with just the Sabre.


AC's have drawbacks like any weapon system does .. but also has some nice benefits ...

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

Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1430 - 2014-08-12 22:44:35 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
AC's have drawbacks like any weapon system does .. but also has some nice benefits ...


Blasters with Null, let alone lasers with Scorch, project damage and track better than ACs. At the range where blaster DPS goes under AC DPS, the DPS of ACs is so low it doesn't matter anymore. It's the same problem lasers and ACs have before you get T2 ammo, blasters outdamage them until the DPS is so low it's irrelevant. It's the main reason Gallente is more popular than Amarr and Minmatar combined, their weapon systems (hybrids and drones) are actually functional at T1, so newer players have to pick them if they actually want to kill anything.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1431 - 2014-08-12 22:46:56 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
AC's have drawbacks like any weapon system does .. but also has some nice benefits ...


Blasters with Null, let alone lasers with Scorch, project damage and track better than ACs. At the range where blaster DPS goes under AC DPS, the DPS of ACs is so low it doesn't matter anymore. It's the same problem lasers and ACs have before you get T2 ammo, blasters outdamage them until the DPS is so low it's irrelevant. It's the main reason Gallente is more popular than Amarr and Minmatar combined, their weapon systems (hybrids and drones) are actually functional at T1, so newer players have to pick them if they actually want to kill anything.


a deimos could barely hit a vaga at 20km's but a vaga can hit the deimos just fine..

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

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1432 - 2014-08-13 00:12:05 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Xequecal wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
AC's have drawbacks like any weapon system does .. but also has some nice benefits ...


Blasters with Null, let alone lasers with Scorch, project damage and track better than ACs. At the range where blaster DPS goes under AC DPS, the DPS of ACs is so low it doesn't matter anymore. It's the same problem lasers and ACs have before you get T2 ammo, blasters outdamage them until the DPS is so low it's irrelevant. It's the main reason Gallente is more popular than Amarr and Minmatar combined, their weapon systems (hybrids and drones) are actually functional at T1, so newer players have to pick them if they actually want to kill anything.


a deimos could barely hit a vaga at 20km's but a vaga can hit the deimos just fine..


Except at 20km, a vaga cannot break the deimos' tank with `300dps (with 2 TE/2 Gyro) unless its buffer or single MAAR fit. This also doesn't include rail deimos' that are getting more and more common, which would generally shoot into the vaga's kinetic hole, and easily force it off or kill it.

Quote:
well the point of a HAC as defined by Rise .. is as a resilient cruiser .. yet its quicker than a stabber the fastest attack cruiser .. attack being about speed and all .. and just look at the other HAC's too see how slow they are compared too there attack cruiser T1 variants they are based on...

The vaga should trade some 20m/s -30 m/s for more shield HP


Hmm.. so the t2 version of the t1 is faster, you don't say? And what role do all those t1 ships of other races have? The stabber is the fast one, the caracal is tanky anti-support, the vexor/thorax is brawler, and omen/maller is a split, super tank and anti-support. If you look at their counterparts, the vagabond is fast, cerb is tanky and excel as nuking frigs, the deimos brawls **** down, the ishtar.. well you know, the sac has an amazing resist profile with potential for good tank. If anything, the moa/eagle should be reconsidered, as the moa is a brawler, and eagle is a long range sniper.

The point of a HAC is to be more than just a "resilient cruiser", otherwise we'd have cookie cutter sac's for every race. They're to fill a specific role, the vaga's is being one of the fastest HAC's and fighting in fall-off.

Yea, and the other HAC's are performing their specified roles, where speed isn't necessarily part of that role. They outperform the vagabond in those roles. As an example, the deimos and lesser extent sac, are some of the best brawlers, and vagabond couldn't brawl to save its life, unless you sink 400-500m in fits and implants, and even then, its subpar. Mainly because you're trying to do something with the ship that isn't intended for its role.

And as of right now, the "fastest" part is questionable, scyfi, nomen, Nosprey, cynabal, orthus are all knocking on the vaga's door or blowing right past it. For a T2 that specializes in being fast, it doesn't seem to be that unique or special when other ships can do it just as well.

Don't even know what to say to your last sentence there.. make the fast hac slower, but give it more EHP.. that goes against everything for its intended role. If the vaga gets any slower, many other ships in the game will overtake it easily, and that extra shield HP isn't going to save you. The tank of the vaga is mainly its speed, you neuter that, and you might as well redo the entire ship. As it would need more mids to brawl effectively. At which point, they should just make the muninn a minmatar brawler, since no one uses it for its intended role anyway.
Caoni Mar
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1433 - 2014-08-13 00:48:01 UTC
As an Ishtar pilot myself, the change doesn't really affect me much. But I always had a problem with them doing BS level damage across the board since the very beginning. I always felt it wast unfair.

To me the solution has always been simple and we now have something of a precedent with the Gurista ships and their role bonus applying only to specific size drones. Simply make the bonus on the Ishtar apply only to light and medium drones and give it a drone bandwidth to match that.
Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1434 - 2014-08-13 01:27:16 UTC
Why do you want to make all the naturally fast minmatar ships armor tankers? If anything it should lose a low and gain a mid.

the HAC tweaks are fine.

seriously though, if you're going to slow the tempest down speed the maelstrom the **** up.

Curant Thanger
Destructive Influence
Northern Coalition.
#1435 - 2014-08-13 01:59:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Curant Thanger
Querns wrote:
Another potential compromise, if you're intent on leaving sentry bonuses on the Ishtar: split out the drone damage bonus. The bonuses would look something like this:

Ship bonus:
50.00% reduction in Microwarpdrive signature radius penalty
25km bonus to Drone operation range

Gallente Cruiser skill level:
7.50% bonus to Heavy Drone max velocity and tracking speed
10.00% bonus to Small, Medium, and Heavy Drone hitpoints and damage

Heavy Assault Cruisers skill level:
5.00% bonus to Sentry Drone hitpoints and damage
5.00% bonus to Sentry Drone optimal range and tracking speed

This would let you separately tune sentry damage against other drones, and move the sentry bonus to the Heavy Assault Cruisers skill, which is much more difficult to maximize.


Bump

A reduction to PG probably wouldn't go awry either, especially not if the damage nerf isn't as hard as this.
VonGurgoth
Dzicy Alkoholicy
#1436 - 2014-08-13 07:18:12 UTC
CCP why don't you spend more time to create balance by releasing new ships more than nerfing existing one?
Fitz Muller
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1437 - 2014-08-13 07:32:45 UTC
I don't like the idea of an 8/4/7 Tempest because the Typhoon has to be armor tanked and the Maelstrom has to be shield tanked. You would force the Tempest into armor which takes away the versatility that the Minmatar are known for. At least for battleship class ships
Josef Djugashvilis
#1438 - 2014-08-13 07:35:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Josef Djugashvilis
The constant tweaking of ships etc to make them all pretty much equal should be carried to its logical conclusion by CCP.

One ship type of each class, no ship allowed to have even a slight inbuilt advantage over another, just different skins so folk can feel that their ship is 'different' to the others.

Further to this, each ship class should only be allowed to fight ships of the same class in equal number fights.

Finally, Eve Online should be renamed as - Vanilla Online.

This is not a signature.

Montey Haul
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1439 - 2014-08-13 08:12:29 UTC
Caoni Mar wrote:
As an Ishtar pilot myself, the change doesn't really affect me much. But I always had a problem with them doing BS level damage across the board since the very beginning. I always felt it wast unfair.

To me the solution has always been simple and we now have something of a precedent with the Gurista ships and their role bonus applying only to specific size drones. Simply make the bonus on the Ishtar apply only to light and medium drones and give it a drone bandwidth to match that.




Well, lets just say as a mission runner the changes to the Gurista ships were just a really worthless thing to do! I sold all the Lvl 4 mission rattlers and the Gila is almost completely worthless after having its drone utility removed. I guess whatever they are gonna do is what they are going to do. All this cookie cutter ship mixing is killing the game. If everyone is going to move to the same cookie cutter crap fits... Why have all the daunting SP trains on drones. The stratios has a good sized bay with decent bonuses. Brand new ship... Is that OP too... I don't get why such a bunch of whining one way or the other. Nerf every drone boat. I'll sell the rest of the drones and they can find another sub to replace me. If you have an issue with balance change SP. Make it even more challenging. This game is going downhill in a hurry trying to make it easy for new pilots that don't want a challenge with real time training. Make all the drone ships worthless for anyone that doesn't want to fly a carrier. Good call.... Next nerf the bejesus out of the t3's. Oh yeah, and while we're at it lets give a Laser impervious group like the guristas a super far reaching (over 200km) hit you all day. That will make more folks want to go Paladin for level 4's... Go amarr balance. EM/Therm only works worth a lick on 2 outta 4 existing factions.
Astral Jesus
Doomheim
#1440 - 2014-08-13 08:45:33 UTC
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:
The constant tweaking of ships etc to make them all pretty much equal should be carried to its logical conclusion by CCP.

One ship type of each class, no ship allowed to have even a slight inbuilt advantage over another, just different skins so folk can feel that their ship is 'different' to the others.

Further to this, each ship class should only be allowed to fight ships of the same class in equal number fights.

Finally, Eve Online should be renamed as - Vanilla Online.


Seriously. This seems to be where things are headed. It's sad.