These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

When will assault ship balancing get a sticky here?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#21 - 2011-12-24 08:10:10 UTC
m0cking bird wrote:
Hungry Eyes wrote:
Wacktopia wrote:
m0cking bird wrote:
Based on that garbage. Seems like CCP plans on screwing over interceptors completely.


Inties still have the speed advantage


and agility advantage. and warp disruption bonuses. and sig radius advantage. as usual, i have no idea what the hell mockingbird is talking about.


I made a reference to r3tards...

What agility advantage? How much does that factor into frigate engagements? You know, with-in warp scrambler range with a Crusader, Claw, and Taranis. Provided said ships only have a micro-warp drive fitted. How long do you think they would last under assault frigate damage.

Signature bonus. How has that helped Interceptors in the current environment? Having to engage ships increasingly using Tracking enhancers will only lead to loss mail. For any frigate even ones with useless bonuses to signature radius.

Nice! 6,000 meters more compared to a standard warp disruptor. I almost never see tackling frigates any more. Most likely, because it's a waste of time to fly them currently.

Now, I believe interceptors have been a joke ever since the changes to pirate faction and navy faction frigates. However, their signature bonus, while useless in the current environment is pretty much all that these frigates have. Their velocity does not mean much if they have to come under warp scrambler range, with regards to the Crusader, Taranis, and Claw. Most interceptors with bonuses to warp disruption range cannot apply damage from that range and do not survive long enough to matter currently (with one exception, which takes a little longer to explode).

Assault frigates are superior to Interceptors when engaging another frigate or any other ship class. Their is a limit to useful velocity of ships. I don't need a frigate going 3,000m/sec for the most part. How does that help you when you need to commit to apply damage and all frigates are superior in terms of velocity to every other class of ship. With these changes, you will be able to use assault frigates with better tank and damage. Making them much better for tackling ships using tracking enhancers. You know, Jaguars and Ishkur with 15,000 effective hit-points and bonuses to signature radius.

This will be the first and only time I'll ever respond to you, because this was a serious waste of time. Also, do not read my post. You're not allowed and I don't want you to learn something...

HAPPY HOLIDAYS!

Also, if you cannot put together a medium pulse laser retribution with a warp disruptor, micro-warp drive and armour repair. You're terrible @ spaceships. However, I believe you are trying to put together a close range Retribution, which would be easier to set-up. Also if it was someone's intention to so. You would never use medium pulse lasers because of tracking.

Also, I already touched on the Enyo in-game when I was speaking to some peeps about these changes today. I would prefer the rail-Enyo. Otherwise, to many other assault frigates are just better close range...


-proxyyyy
Lexmana
#22 - 2011-12-24 10:39:34 UTC
Zarak1 Kenpach1 wrote:
i take it you didnt see the ab bonus' that were on sisi last time. those were about as modest as could be made and they still turned out overpowered and ridiculous. your not going to get the ab bonus so just stop saying it =P

besides, none of these can do ceptor speeds


I never tried the AB bonused AFs but I can see how they could become OP. How about nerfing their agility some and ad a small AB bonus? That would make them very good in scram range against bigger ships but less powerful against MWD frigs.
RougeOperator
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2011-12-24 10:59:39 UTC
I say lets test them before we all scream "the sky is falling".

OK.

**Space wizards are real, they can make 10058 votes vanish. "and for a moment i hurd 10k goons cry out, then silence" **
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#24 - 2011-12-24 11:47:15 UTC
Throwing in the additional comments, given that it is internal, I'm just putting out thoughts, rather than criticising CCP.

I think the problem is that you can't buff AF speed without pushing the redundancy problem to the interceptors. Give the AFs too much speed and their DPS and tank outweighs the benefits of using an interceptor. Likewise, Inty's are used now largely only for their speed. The role bonus to AFs would negate what INTY's essentially have to train level IV interceptors to get.

Given this, a reason to fly Interceptors would need to be created, perhaps give them a role bonus to interdiction maneuvers? Just a thought.

Alternatively, if we are thinking that destroyers are Battle Cruisers, and T2 frigs are T2 Cruisers, how do we define the differences between battlecruisers and HACs? Generally, hacs are more agile, and do potentially more dps, or have other nich aspects.

Likewise, should we see AF's tank/gank buffed a bit to match the same idea?
Avila Cracko
#25 - 2011-12-24 13:55:36 UTC
If you do this... please CCP buff Interceptors too then.
Don't kill one more class of ships.

And... you know it, we know it, that Interceptors need buff even if AF don't get this bonus.

truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#26 - 2011-12-24 15:18:16 UTC
PinkKnife wrote:
Throwing in the additional comments, given that it is internal, I'm just putting out thoughts, rather than criticising CCP.

I think the problem is that you can't buff AF speed without pushing the redundancy problem to the interceptors. Give the AFs too much speed and their DPS and tank outweighs the benefits of using an interceptor. Likewise, Inty's are used now largely only for their speed. The role bonus to AFs would negate what INTY's essentially have to train level IV interceptors to get.

Given this, a reason to fly Interceptors would need to be created, perhaps give them a role bonus to interdiction maneuvers? Just a thought.

Alternatively, if we are thinking that destroyers are Battle Cruisers, and T2 frigs are T2 Cruisers, how do we define the differences between battlecruisers and HACs? Generally, hacs are more agile, and do potentially more dps, or have other nich aspects.

Likewise, should we see AF's tank/gank buffed a bit to match the same idea?


+1


Giving the vengeance more damage would be a mistake. The Retribution and Coercer are fine as they are now. Fleet Interceptors are terrible currently. That has everything to do with the prevalence of cruisers and battle-cruisers using tracking enhancers. Has been this way for awhile. Given the choice between a myriad of frigates for the purpose of tackling. Dramiel's are used because of survivability.

Jaguars will be increasingly added to that. I was in a "out of character channel" when I first heard of these changes. Most indicated they'll be using assault frigates more often for fleet engagements if this were to happen. They're cheaper than using a Dramiel and more survivable than Interceptors (h0m0's). Beening in this game for so long. Anyone can see where these retards will flock to (easy mode, I win, easy to use, easy to lose etc).

I'm completely against increasing assault frigates defensive capabilities. I am for increasing their damage output with the exception of the Vengeance and Hawk. Mirroring the heavy assault cruiser, battle-cruiser dichotomy (Frigate tank with destroyer damage).

One extreme measure I brought up yesterday was to get rid of the whole assault ship class and merge it into Interceptors. Making assault frigates just another tier within the interceptor class, with differing role bonuses. Pretty much getting rid of the Wolf, Enyo, Harpy, Crusader, Taranis, Claw, Crow and Retribution (would be crazy to see some of these go). Leaving the rest as the new Interceptor class. Also at-least 3 Electronic assault frigates are fine. I tend to use the Keres more than any other frigate for tackling in fleet engagements (one sensor dampner, warp scrambler, medium shield extender, warp disruptor (36km) and micro-warp drive). Only the Heyna seems bad. However, all frigates seem terrible for fleet engagements these days, even a Dramiel.
Zarak1 Kenpach1
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#27 - 2011-12-24 17:17:48 UTC
RougeOperator wrote:
I say lets test them before we all scream "the sky is falling".

OK.


+1

i fully regret ever having made this thread now. i do look forward to trying these things out on sisi as well.

mod please lock this since you said chaos server stufff is not to be discussed or given feedback on this board.
tankus2
HeartVenom Inc.
#28 - 2011-12-24 18:07:58 UTC
given that this ideas thread covers every aspect of the gimped AFs while keeping the ungimped ones from being broken AND not stepping on other class' toes (including interceptors and faction frigates), it should be looked into as well.

Where the science gets done
leich
Nocturnal Romance
Cynosural Field Theory.
#29 - 2011-12-24 18:32:18 UTC
if all these ships that dont need any changes are getting a buff are we going have get the dram fixed?

These Buffs to asult ships are a complete waste of time and effort i really dont see the point.

the dram was been made useless by recent changes and now you going to make assult ships better than it this doesnt make sense.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#30 - 2011-12-24 18:40:43 UTC
This will be able to run a neutraliser permanently. 220 damage per second (160 scorch), 11.5k effective hit-points, 2150m/sec

Retribution

Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S
Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

Adaptive Nano Plating II
200mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Pseudoelectron Containment Field I
Heat Sink II
Heat Sink II

Small Energy Burst Aerator I
Small Energy Collision Accelerator I


Same idea as the one above, but more range. Obviously the point is to prolong being caught by another Assault frigate as long as possible. Mainly the Minmatar assault frigates and the Vengeance. If their running a single armour repair and no capacitor booster or just rolling with a damage control. Things will perish.


[Retribution

Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Scorch S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Scorch S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Scorch S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Scorch S
Small Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters
Warp Disruptor II

Tracking Enhancer II
200mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Internal Force Field Array I
Adaptive Nano Plating II
Heat Sink II

Small Energy Locus Coordinator I
Small Energy Collision Accelerator II


I'll be posting Ishkur and Enyo comparison set-up later on today. You'll see that both ships do basically the same damage with these changes. I'll go into the Vengeance and Hawk alot more and link some overpowered set-ups. I'll also compared the Enyo with wolf and why a rail-gun Enyo would be the most viable set-up. I'll also put together a Jaguar with the new changes for those who lack insight.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#31 - 2011-12-24 18:43:13 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
Hahahaha. Those preliminary changes would make them so OP it isnt even funny. T1 fit AFs would dwarf officer fit pirate frigs for Goddess sake .. extra slots AND more bonuses ....

No wonder CCP has had issues sorting them if they start at the utmost extreme and then whittle away on them .. waste of time.

PS: Drool at prospect of Retribution with not only the original god-range but with god-tracking and 2nd mid .. trolololol.


Quoting someone who is often correct.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#32 - 2011-12-25 22:43:30 UTC
the changes are fine
maybe the retribution need a bigger damage bonus to stand on par with the others

about the mwd bonus i have my doubts i like it because it bring more ppl to fit a mwd to these ship and this is good, i dont like beacuse after the other changes the AFs dont need a role bonus they are already good enough.
a AB bonus would be totally over the top
Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#33 - 2011-12-26 00:59:49 UTC
I remember making a similar thread 2 weeks before changed went live... :O

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction
Skex Relbore
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2011-12-26 20:17:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Skex Relbore
m0cking bird wrote:


Anyway, from what I've read. The Bonuses and changes to the Enyo, Hawk and Retribution are not substantial. Atleast compared to the other assault frigates.



Bleh forums ate my original response.

Are you insane? Then Enyo and Retribution are the two biggest winners in this list. The wolf got screwed with yet another low (guess a Nano can go there) and lets see another spot to put a web on a shield rocket ship? that doesn't sound "not substantial" to me.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#35 - 2011-12-27 04:00:39 UTC
Skex Relbore wrote:
m0cking bird wrote:


Anyway, from what I've read. The Bonuses and changes to the Enyo, Hawk and Retribution are not substantial. Atleast compared to the other assault frigates.



Bleh forums ate my original response.

Are you insane? Then Enyo and Retribution are the two biggest winners in this list. The wolf got screwed with yet another low (guess a Nano can go there) and lets see another spot to put a web on a shield rocket ship? that doesn't sound "not substantial" to me.



Calm down space cowboy. I should have also put the Ishkur, Wolf and Jaguar in there. However, I was to lazy. I know what you think I mean by my statements based on your response, but you don't understand. More words here and there (I'm just not into it). Also that was a quick response after a quick glance @ the purpose changes.

Read some of the things I've posted else where in the forums if you're bored and think It's even worth your time.
Allota VaISK
Self Aggrandisement
#36 - 2011-12-27 14:41:26 UTC
m0cking bird wrote:


Read some of the things I've posted else where in the forums if you're bored and think It's even worth your time.


Its not
Lord FunkyMunky
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#37 - 2011-12-28 12:29:25 UTC
i actually like the setups mentioned above, as long as interceptors are 2x the speed of the new assault frigates, and even smaller sig radius, then i'm sold :)
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#38 - 2011-12-28 20:10:13 UTC
Still not seeing how making AF's de facto cruisers will not completely demolish balance on the small scale.

Sure, it would be nifty if they were viable in fleets and large romps but the only frig (Interceptors) that can currently claim that has bonuses unavailable elsewhere, specifically tailored to make that happen (point range & Sig redux).
Increasing AF tank/spank to a level where it can function on the large scale makes it unbeatable on the small which is the wrong way of doing it.

Kind of warming up to the idea of sig redux though, not for any particular ship mind you but in general;
1Mn MWD = 250-300% bloom (ie. all users benefit and frigates/destroyers become needed to swat frigates/destroyers (especially ceptors!)).
10Mn MWD = 500% bloom (as is, pretty well balanced I think)
100MN MWD = 500% (Doesn't really matter. Even if its just 2x they'll still compete with moons in the fatness category Smile)

Carry on.
CobaltSixty
Fawkes' Loyal Professionals
#39 - 2011-12-28 23:12:46 UTC  |  Edited by: CobaltSixty
The solution for the role bonus is simple: -80% to powergrid requirements of 10MN Afterburners.
- Scramble-immune speed (1680-2220 m/s) but slower than MWD-equipped frigates.
- Terrible agility while speed boosting.
- Identical CPU requirements as fitting 1MN MWD.
- No break in capacitor consumption for the 10MN mod.
- Vulnerable to kiting by MWD-equipped frigates.
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#40 - 2011-12-29 10:32:37 UTC
Added mass affects agility even when not boosting, what you are probably looking at is align time which means time to reach 70% thrust .. so they will be fat-asses with abysmal acceleration (2-3 full cycles to top out (20s+)).
Not sure what role you see them performing with that to be honest, only "good" thing I can see is that it can make the Hawk a proper bad-ass, like a mini-Tengu. Other than that it cripples them in small engagements as well as large engagements .. just sayin' Smile

It does the same to the class as the AB boost would have done, huge benefits to ships with good native agility/speed and tracking/range .. double bonus if cap independent = Winmatar boost. All other ships are either very sensitive to mobility hits (tracking/range. See: blasters/rails/beams/rocks), need cap elsewhere or both.

PS: You are not particular vulnerable to MWD kiters if the speed difference is less than 30-40% or so, very easy to collapse an orbit when speeds are that close .. one heated cycle is all it takes (can do it with 1Mn AB's too, just takes better timing).
PPS: Have I mentioned how much I ******* hate these forums and their unnatural urge to eat ones posts?
Previous page123Next page