These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1481 - 2014-08-13 16:31:08 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Power creep is not a great end goal in itself, but neither is power slide or a race to the bottom.

If a ship is out of balance, ask CCP to create an effective counter to it, then you get more choice and a wider range of possibilities and a richer more enjoyable game..

Of course alternatively, nerf Drake, Nerf Heavy missiles, nerf ishtar, always works out so well doesn't it.......Roll

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1482 - 2014-08-13 16:45:37 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Astral Jesus wrote:


And nerfing one thing is basically the same as buffing everything else against that one thing...


No its not. Power creep happens when you buff a few ships to balance them with an overpowered ship which then makes all of those ships overpowered so you have to buff even more ships leading to a neverending spiral of buffs.

Nerfing the overpowered ship fixes the problem.



Not when the result is that neither that ship neither the other ones are used.


We use near every ship now. So, that theory of yours doesn't hold up.
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1483 - 2014-08-13 16:57:41 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Power creep is not a great end goal in itself, but neither is power slide or a race to the bottom.

If a ship is out of balance, ask CCP to create an effective counter to it, then you get more choice and a wider range of possibilities and a richer more enjoyable game..

Of course alternatively, nerf Drake, Nerf Heavy missiles, nerf ishtar, always works out so well doesn't it.......Roll


Creating an effective counter to Ishtar also creates an effective counter to anything which kites at 2k+ speeds, has capless BS weapons, can swap out guns on-demand and uses no fitting for said guns for beefier tank.

That ship will outclass most of all the other ships also and we are left with 1 OP, 1 good and a legion of sub-par ships.

Only way to create an Ishtar-counter is to have a ship with 1m sig radius, 5k+ speed, 40k scram range, 1 turret and 15 000% damage bonus to the single turret against Ishtars only.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1484 - 2014-08-13 17:11:40 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Astral Jesus wrote:


And nerfing one thing is basically the same as buffing everything else against that one thing...


No its not. Power creep happens when you buff a few ships to balance them with an overpowered ship which then makes all of those ships overpowered so you have to buff even more ships leading to a neverending spiral of buffs.

Nerfing the overpowered ship fixes the problem.



Not when the result is that neither that ship neither the other ones are used.


We use near every ship now. So, that theory of yours doesn't hold up.



Not true at all on the battleship level.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1485 - 2014-08-13 17:29:17 UTC
Adrie Atticus wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Power creep is not a great end goal in itself, but neither is power slide or a race to the bottom.

If a ship is out of balance, ask CCP to create an effective counter to it, then you get more choice and a wider range of possibilities and a richer more enjoyable game..

Of course alternatively, nerf Drake, Nerf Heavy missiles, nerf ishtar, always works out so well doesn't it.......Roll


Creating an effective counter to Ishtar also creates an effective counter to anything which kites at 2k+ speeds, has capless BS weapons, can swap out guns on-demand and uses no fitting for said guns for beefier tank.

That ship will outclass most of all the other ships also and we are left with 1 OP, 1 good and a legion of sub-par ships.

Only way to create an Ishtar-counter is to have a ship with 1m sig radius, 5k+ speed, 40k scram range, 1 turret and 15 000% damage bonus to the single turret against Ishtars only.



A little bit of exageration there.. would be easier to give a battleships 9000% per level range for smartbombs :P

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#1486 - 2014-08-13 18:03:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Antillie Sa'Kan
CCP Rise wrote:
Sentry drones have enormous downsides. They can be killed like other drones AND they don't return to your ship. There's a reason they were never used at all until assist + these tracking/optimal bonuses came along.

Neither of these downsides mean anything on a ship that can carry literally hundreds of replacement drones and is already so slow that it is essentially immobile. You know, like a carrier.

The lack of tracking/optimal bonuses is now easily fixed with drone upgrade modules and the carrier fleet's ability to refit in space capitalizes on this strength even further. Add some super carriers into the fleet and you are now the perfect counter to literally anything but an even larger carrier force with no subcap support required.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#1487 - 2014-08-13 18:20:57 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Not true at all on the battleship level.

Name a battleship (other than the scorpion or nestor) that is unused and I can probably name a type of gameplay where they are commonly used and resonably decent.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#1488 - 2014-08-13 18:27:58 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:




Not true at all on the battleship level.


Every battleship is now good (aside from the pest but this fix might change that)
Starrakatt
Empire Assault Corp
Dead Terrorists
#1489 - 2014-08-13 20:07:07 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:




Not true at all on the battleship level.


Every battleship is now good (aside from the pest but this fix might change that)

Yes, exept for the Tempest, now all BS have a role and are equals. Except for the Domi, who seems to be a bit more equal than the others. Basically suffers the same projection problem than the Ishtar. It's saving grace being that as a BS, it IS effin slow, thus easily catchable.

Join Celtic Anarchy!

Sneaky bastard.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1490 - 2014-08-13 21:22:12 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Not true at all on the battleship level.

Name a battleship (other than the scorpion or nestor) that is unused and I can probably name a type of gameplay where they are commonly used and resonably decent.


Hyperion, Abaddon, Tempest, Rohk.

They are each outclassed in any PvE endeavor by another battleship of their same race, and they are very much less useful in PvP in general than a host of other ships.

Yes, they each might have their own miniature niche, but realistically they do not see much play and that is not for no reason.

"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.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1491 - 2014-08-13 22:25:50 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Not true at all on the battleship level.

Name a battleship (other than the scorpion or nestor) that is unused and I can probably name a type of gameplay where they are commonly used and resonably decent.



There was one at the title of this thread and half the thread is about it. ANd a gameplay shoudl not be a niche that happens 5 times per year.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1492 - 2014-08-13 23:26:51 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Not true at all on the battleship level.

Name a battleship (other than the scorpion or nestor) that is unused and I can probably name a type of gameplay where they are commonly used and resonably decent.


Hyperion, Abaddon, Tempest, Rohk.

They are each outclassed in any PvE endeavor by another battleship of their same race, and they are very much less useful in PvP in general than a host of other ships.

Yes, they each might have their own miniature niche, but realistically they do not see much play and that is not for no reason.


hyperions are beasts at breaking gate small-medium camps and otherwise, generally brawly things. 1.5k-2k dps triple rep tank (boosters/links) with 1k dps from blasters, scram/web/mwd. If it catches you, things will end badly. Get a small gang of 2-3 of them, and theres a lot of damage potential there.

Abaddon, yea, i don't see much out of it anymore. Normally on gate camps shooting rainbow lasers or some ****. I've never flown, but heard its cap is utter crap.

tempest, other than the FI version, i don't fly it much, as mentioned already in this thread, it just feels so luckluster, can't get decent dps even with double damage orientated bonus. I'd consider a 10% dmg or RoF + tracking, would make an interesting artillery platform and make effective kiting possible. With the 10% dmg bonus, things could get ugly with 1400's, though you only have 6 turrets.. so maybe equivalent to tornado/mael in terms of alpha. I'd like to see more minmatar ships with legitmate artillery use in mind, we only have 2-3, which is muninn/jag and i guess nado, though its really squishy. So 2 realistically. Besides, 10% tracking/damage would be really useful for shield tanked, kiting autocannon fits as well.

Rohk i see used from time to time in pvp and pve (low level incursions). It seems to be the poor man's entry into incursions. In pvp normally fit with dual XLASB + blasters, another ship that can break gate camps, and used to be part of some fleet doctrines with rails.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Andromecin
Verum et Libra
#1493 - 2014-08-14 00:35:08 UTC
I admit PVP isn't my thing, so i don't really understand the problem with the Ishtar, it is a heavy assault cruiser after all, the very definition of the class name suggests the vessel should be able to attack vessels above and below its class, with superior speed and firepower, it's designed to engage in a HEAVY ASSAULT. sounds to me like the only real complaint is that you can't solo or small gang it, which you shouldn't be able to do against such a class anyways. if it's that far out of line with other hacs, then maybe they should look at all the ships in the class as a whole, and redefine what the intended role of a heavy assault cruiser should actually be in the game.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1494 - 2014-08-14 00:58:19 UTC
Andromecin wrote:
I admit PVP isn't my thing, so i don't really understand the problem with the Ishtar, it is a heavy assault cruiser after all, the very definition of the class name suggests the vessel should be able to attack vessels above and below its class, with superior speed and firepower, it's designed to engage in a HEAVY ASSAULT. sounds to me like the only real complaint is that you can't solo or small gang it, which you shouldn't be able to do against such a class anyways. if it's that far out of line with other hacs, then maybe they should look at all the ships in the class as a whole, and redefine what the intended role of a heavy assault cruiser should actually be in the game.

The problem with buffing everything except the issue ship is it becomes a whole new reason to rebalance everything above and below so that things are where they should be. It basically causes more problems than it originally started with.
Andromecin
Verum et Libra
#1495 - 2014-08-14 01:23:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Andromecin
Rowells wrote:
Andromecin wrote:
I admit PVP isn't my thing, so i don't really understand the problem with the Ishtar, it is a heavy assault cruiser after all, the very definition of the class name suggests the vessel should be able to attack vessels above and below its class, with superior speed and firepower, it's designed to engage in a HEAVY ASSAULT. sounds to me like the only real complaint is that you can't solo or small gang it, which you shouldn't be able to do against such a class anyways. if it's that far out of line with other hacs, then maybe they should look at all the ships in the class as a whole, and redefine what the intended role of a heavy assault cruiser should actually be in the game.

The problem with buffing everything except the issue ship is it becomes a whole new reason to rebalance everything above and below so that things are where they should be. It basically causes more problems than it originally started with.




I do understand that problem, but here is where the arguement seems to get diverted as to what they should be, a heavy assault cruiser by it's name is designed to maintain the perks of a cruiser class hull but still be able to compete in a larger battle against something higher than it's hull class. for this reason alone, given that the next size of hulls directly above cruiser are BC and BS, this vessel should have the damage potential and the tank to engage these classes, and it SHOULD be vastly superior in firepower and tank against smaller or less advanced hulls. nerfing the ship to balance it with other classes above and below the hulls size is simply negating it's purpose as it's class would suggest.
Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1496 - 2014-08-14 03:01:04 UTC
Andromecin wrote:
I admit PVP isn't my thing, so i don't really understand the problem with the Ishtar, it is a heavy assault cruiser after all, the very definition of the class name suggests the vessel should be able to attack vessels above and below its class, with superior speed and firepower, it's designed to engage in a HEAVY ASSAULT. sounds to me like the only real complaint is that you can't solo or small gang it, which you shouldn't be able to do against such a class anyways. if it's that far out of line with other hacs, then maybe they should look at all the ships in the class as a whole, and redefine what the intended role of a heavy assault cruiser should actually be in the game.


The issue is the way drones are.

They require no CPU or PG: all of which could become bigger tanks,

No slots: people complained about the hurricane being able to neut out a frig in one cycle, well the Ishtar can just fit a flight of, light drones plus neuts, plus a rack of small guns for frigate control

cap independent: nueting drones boats is generally irreverent, the weapons system and often the tank is free of cap and they'll just neut you much harder especially XLASB fits

Interchangeable flights: seriously imagine a gunboat with a full rack of small, med, and large guns plus a full rack of arty (sentries)

E-war resistant or impervious in small gangs. a damp or jam cycle will only save you if the drones have not be aggro'd, TDs obviously are not viable, and the aforementioned neuts are worthless

and they really don't care about range, whether you're 70 clicks away or a 70 meters they'll have no issues applying their damage.

and on top of all this the Ishtar can out damage every HAC with none of the drawbacks guns come with.

their only real drawback is drones can be shot.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Mordus Angels
#1497 - 2014-08-14 06:56:53 UTC
Andromecin wrote:
I admit PVP isn't my thing, so i don't really understand the problem with the Ishtar, ...


In a nutshell - it can fly without a "support" wing. Other than some logi ofc.

I was in a isthar fleet few days back and had no problem killing interceptors with sentries trying to slow down our logis or anchor. Not to mention melting bombers that were few seconds too slow in warping out/cloaking and interdictors trying to bubble us.

To be honest it is getting a bit boring as whenever its a reasonably large engagement I'm told to bring an isthar or scimi.

Here, sanity... niiiice sanity, come to daddy... okay, that's a good sanity... THWONK! GOT the bastard.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#1498 - 2014-08-14 07:37:37 UTC
Andromecin wrote:
Rowells wrote:
Andromecin wrote:
I admit PVP isn't my thing, so i don't really understand the problem with the Ishtar, it is a heavy assault cruiser after all, the very definition of the class name suggests the vessel should be able to attack vessels above and below its class, with superior speed and firepower, it's designed to engage in a HEAVY ASSAULT. sounds to me like the only real complaint is that you can't solo or small gang it, which you shouldn't be able to do against such a class anyways. if it's that far out of line with other hacs, then maybe they should look at all the ships in the class as a whole, and redefine what the intended role of a heavy assault cruiser should actually be in the game.

The problem with buffing everything except the issue ship is it becomes a whole new reason to rebalance everything above and below so that things are where they should be. It basically causes more problems than it originally started with.




I do understand that problem, but here is where the arguement seems to get diverted as to what they should be, a heavy assault cruiser by it's name is designed to maintain the perks of a cruiser class hull but still be able to compete in a larger battle against something higher than it's hull class. for this reason alone, given that the next size of hulls directly above cruiser are BC and BS, this vessel should have the damage potential and the tank to engage these classes, and it SHOULD be vastly superior in firepower and tank against smaller or less advanced hulls. nerfing the ship to balance it with other classes above and below the hulls size is simply negating it's purpose as it's class would suggest.


A HAC as a T2 is a specialised Hull. This means sometimes it will be able to compete with a higher class of ship in 1 or 2 particular areas, but not everything. The Ishtar is supposed to be a drone boat specialised on damage projection. But is it really specialised or does it just outright outperform? It has identical bonuses to a battleship in the same role AND uses the same weapon system. No other HAC does that. A Zealot for example has bonuses that allow it to project to the same range as Large Lasers but it will never do the same (raw) damage on account of still using Medium Lasers.

The Ishtar in this sense is unique from a balancing perspective. It is essentially a dominix that's nearly impossible to catch if the pilot is careful. I think CCP Rise's tweak, although conservative does address this issue to an extent. Namely if this tweak is insufficient (which I think it isn't) the other thing I can think of is to nerf its drone bay capacity. This way targetting an Ishtar's drones actually has an impact as currently if you chase it away or destroy its drones (no doubt taking a lot of damage doing so), it'll just deploy another set of sentries. I think a 25-50m3 nerf would be appropriate. That way Heavy Drone Ishtars (which I don't think are OP) will still be able to replace their drones, as will Sentry Ishtars that stand their ground. But Kiting Ishtars will not simply be able to replace a full set of sentries and therefore they will actually suffer from the intended weakness of Sentries (i.e. their immobility).
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1499 - 2014-08-14 08:46:23 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:


Not true at all on the battleship level.

Name a battleship (other than the scorpion or nestor) that is unused and I can probably name a type of gameplay where they are commonly used and resonably decent.



There was one at the title of this thread and half the thread is about it. ANd a gameplay shoudl not be a niche that happens 5 times per year.


You do realize that the title refers to the patch name which is "Hyperion" instead of the ship which is not getting any adjustments at all?
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1500 - 2014-08-14 09:50:08 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Andromecin wrote:
I admit PVP isn't my thing, so i don't really understand the problem with the Ishtar, it is a heavy assault cruiser after all, the very definition of the class name suggests the vessel should be able to attack vessels above and below its class, with superior speed and firepower, it's designed to engage in a HEAVY ASSAULT. sounds to me like the only real complaint is that you can't solo or small gang it, which you shouldn't be able to do against such a class anyways. if it's that far out of line with other hacs, then maybe they should look at all the ships in the class as a whole, and redefine what the intended role of a heavy assault cruiser should actually be in the game.

The problem with buffing everything except the issue ship is it becomes a whole new reason to rebalance everything above and below so that things are where they should be. It basically causes more problems than it originally started with.



That is true on most cases. But there are and were exceptions. Clear case was t1 cruiser tiercide pass. Buffing all of them to rupture level was the correct thing to do.

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