These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Balancing Feedback: Assault Ships

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#1021 - 2012-01-22 15:59:55 UTC
Anyone ever stumble upon an arty jag setup that actually worked? Before the jag CPU buff I was liking this:

High:
280mm II x 3

Mid:
Limited 1MN MWD
Small cap booster II
PWNG TP
Warp Disruptors II

Low:
MAPC II
TE II x 3

Rigs:
Projecile burst
Projectile Collision

I might swap out the cap booster and TP for a small shield extender and a cap recharger now. I'll see if it fits when I get home.
Sylvous
Bigger than Jesus
#1022 - 2012-01-22 18:06:01 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Anyone ever stumble upon an arty jag setup that actually worked?

Yes actually, its a fairly popular/effective ship.
Lunkwill Khashour
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1023 - 2012-01-22 18:23:02 UTC
IMO (AF4 here), AF's don't need another slot. They need a 4th bonus and a mass reduction. The Retribution needs some serious love (which is also related to dps/grid and dps/cap of small lasers)

On the issue of MWD's. Interceptors were changed around to MWD sig reduction bonus. AF's are changed around to a MWD sig reduction bonus. An often suggested buff for EAF's is, a MWD sig reduction bonus. IMO, the 500% increase on a MWD is way too much (or the tracking formula fails a tracking smaller targets, see titan tracking cries) This is most obvious on ships that rely on damage avoidance as a tank i.e., frigs.
As it stands, a MWD sig penalty of 250ish % across the board (all sizes) would be more appropiate.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1024 - 2012-01-22 19:28:19 UTC
It always made good sense to me for the non-cloaky T2 frigates to get a sig bonus.
ie: interceptors, afs, eafs

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Stay Feral
#1025 - 2012-01-22 20:10:23 UTC
Ill admit i haven't read through the 52 pages up to this point so this has probably been said before but it true.

Wolf: it doesn't need a 5th low slot, if it MUST have another slot a med would help it with range control which is what it doesnt have. An arty wolf is a joke, I fly one, and the wolf should remain an auto platform. It doesn't need an armor HP buff. A Wolf with more tank will just make it a tanking Catalyst, which would make it FAR too overpowered.

Jaguar: Doesn't need another low slot or even mid slot was was suggested, the tracking bonus will help it with its arties but a fourth turret would help with those arties as well.

MWD BONUS??? Every T1 frigate in the game packs a warp scrambler so as soon as an assault ships gets within 8km of one its going to going to lose the MWD and therefore making the bonus useles. Afterburner bonus would be a better buff, something like 10% bonus to speed or level if it can be fit or a flat 50% role bonus.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Tolstoyevski Tsuyasa
Lazerhawks
L A Z E R H A W K S
#1026 - 2012-01-22 20:16:36 UTC
People complain an extra slot to certain ships won't help if the grid or CPU isn't boosted, others are worried of a bonus to AB that would make it too OP.

But what about making the AF role bonus, Fitting a Small AB cost No Grid/CPU. Basically, making their new role bonus the ability fly exactly how they do now; With the inclusion of a free-fitted AB?
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1027 - 2012-01-22 20:40:34 UTC
That wouldn't solve the problem of them being slow and fat, and severely limits their use to ABs only.
MWD bonus solves the first issue (should you choose to fit one), but doesn't limit the users on their fits.

AB fits benefit from being able to fit larger tanks with better cap and fitment.
MWD fits benefit from mobility outside of empire space, but sacrificing some tank/damage.
Both ways have their advantages/disadvantages, but AFs are no longer limited to the one.

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
Lilly Shiroimozu
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1028 - 2012-01-22 22:46:10 UTC
Wolf/jag/ishkur still look the best.

Hawk still looks the worst and is still unfittable properly compared to the others.
Ormaz
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1029 - 2012-01-22 22:58:08 UTC
Lilly Shiroimozu wrote:
Wolf/jag/ishkur still look the best.

Hawk still looks the worst and is still unfittable properly compared to the others.


Explain how the Hawk is not on equal ground with the other T2 because claiming without an example fit does not bring a possible needed fix to anyone's attention.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#1030 - 2012-01-22 23:04:38 UTC
I'll take the category 'Didn't read the thread' for 200 Alex. The Jaguar went from top of the pile to bottom. And the Enyo moved so far ahead of the Ishkur in the DPS department it isn't even funny. The biggest impression I got on SISSI was how close all the AF were.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1031 - 2012-01-22 23:42:11 UTC
The Jag actually isn't awful now Smile
The extra shields & cpu helped it a fair bit.

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
Ormaz
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1032 - 2012-01-22 23:43:33 UTC
I put together a Hawk with the EFT tool update this requires a 4% CPU implant to fit although it was a quick improvement to a standard fit, so I am sure some mods can be swapped to get more CPU.

Overdrive Injector II
Internal Force Field Array

Medium Shield Booster II
Invulnerability Field II
Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters
J5b Phased Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I
Small Capacitor Booster II

Rocket Launcher II x4
Small 'Knave" Energy Drain

Small Anit-EM Screen Reinforcer I x2

It has 6.6k EHP and 158 DPS with kinetic with a 177 DPS tank. Outside of blob warfare this looks more effective at what it was intended for and still easily dispatched by destroyers and larger hulls. I have read all 52 pages of this and not much effort has been put into posting fits and stats of these alleged inferior ships.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1033 - 2012-01-22 23:52:55 UTC
People were trying to argue that the Hawk has become overpowered not underpowered.
I don't think Lily actually looked at what the Hawk is now capable of P

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
Zircon Dasher
#1034 - 2012-01-22 23:53:03 UTC
<3 to the new harpy in gangs. Also the jag became my new dram for tackle. I actually feel bad for the enyo and retri as they got the smallest useful boost. I thought the +1 mid on the enyo was gonna be totally ****, but outside of "lets 1v1 dood!!" scenarios I have been underwhelmed.

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Ormaz
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1035 - 2012-01-23 00:16:14 UTC
Zircon Dasher wrote:
<3 to the new harpy in gangs. Also the jag became my new dram for tackle. I actually feel bad for the enyo and retri as they got the smallest useful boost. I thought the +1 mid on the enyo was gonna be totally ****, but outside of "lets 1v1 dood!!" scenarios I have been underwhelmed.


I do not understand why the additional mid on the Enyo may be underwhelming it was an awesome ship before the changes just lacked a mid for EWAR, and a web is always nice for dispatching drones. As for the Retribution I have flown one in a long time and can't make a substantiated comment about what the changes do for it except now it can use a prop and tackle. I am curious what changes would you expect for the Enyo that you think bring it on par with the others in fleet scenarios.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#1036 - 2012-01-23 04:41:41 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
It always made good sense to me for the non-cloaky T2 frigates to get a sig bonus.
ie: interceptors, afs, eafs


I'm going to derail. I've read some of your ideas on another forum. Smile Some are quite appealing. Trading the T2 resists of EAF over to the combat recons of the same class is a great, simple idea. I also like the concept of EAF being the counterpart to their AF cousins. The extra powergrid to fit a tank I'm on board with. The Hyena getting more web range is also appropriate. It is impossible to use that ship when the ideal spot for it - 10km to 26km - is often the easiest kill zone.

Other ideas I'm not excited about. The EAFs are larger then all other frigates. (Hell, the Thrasher is smaller then some now.) This makes them horrendously squishy. I can squeeze a medium shield extender and DC onto a hyena. It nets about 5.7k EHP while stealing from the ship's e-war capabilities at the same time. Also - at 51m the Hyena is the SMALLEST eaf. With the same MWD bonus the AF have it would 'only' be 178.5m while MWD. That's simply not good enough. The bonus is sufficient for a ship like the wolf because it starts with a signature of 33m and has a raw 422 shields, 903 armour, and 774 structure with full T2 resists. The hyena? 498, 469, and 258 respectively. Straight At 51 signature. Not even in the same class. They need a more hit points in general and the signature of their T1 counterpart. The Hyena, for example, would be 44m. That's still large for a frigate but workable.

The ships are all cap hungry too. Their bonuses are horribly thought out currently. The hyena has a MWD cap bonus. The Keres has two cap conservation bonuses. The Kitsune has two. The sentinel has one. They cry out for a 25% cap regeneration bonus as a role. So here's how that would work -

Hyena - TP and MWD sig radius reduction. Web range (30%) and 3% sig reduction bonus as EAF. 25% cap recharge bonus. 44m sig radius. (37.5m at lvl 5 EAF. 131m with MWD on.) Give it 650 Armour and 450 Structure. Enough PG to fit a 400mm plate. Decrease it's speed as you wanted. Swap the T2 resists. No drone. No projectile bonus. (Really?!?) Increase lock range to Vigil status.

The other ships? Take off one of the cap bonuses in exchange for the cap role bonus. Throw on your MWD role bonus if desired. Adjust hit points and such. Profit.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1037 - 2012-01-23 07:02:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Exenthal
I only mentioned the thought in passing.
I'd rather discuss the EAFs in a separate thread (ie: that one) rather than fly off topic here P

And just since you mentioned it, they aren't supposed to be tanky ships. Their tanks are EWAR, so they only really need to be able to deal with the occasional drones. 60% off their MWD sig is a ~40% increase in survivability.

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#1038 - 2012-01-23 17:59:24 UTC
BTW, how does the tracking bonus help in the supposed role of an Assault frig to take on Cruisers? Is the assault frigs role really to tackle larger ships? If it is, then create some space for other frigs by removing this bonus.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1039 - 2012-01-23 19:25:04 UTC
Tracking takes care of drones which is one of the first lines of defense that larger ships have.

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
Mors Sanctitatis
Death of Virtue
#1040 - 2012-01-23 19:33:20 UTC
Soooo, which ships are the clear winners here? I can't fly all four race's ships with maximum ability due to only 30m SP on this char, so I can't compare them personally with max skills and implants across the board.

So far I think that Gallente is the most underwhelming. The Enyo should have kept it's 200 HP increase in addition to the other changes. The Ishkur's 10% drone HP bonus is again very unimpressive. Very disappointing. The extra low slot is nice, too bad there's no CPU increase to allow it to be fully utilized.

Intelligence shouldn't be free.   Mining, reloaded.   ADDICTED.