These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Assault frigate dual prop idea
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Fek Mercer
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2017-05-04 20:59:54 UTC
I came across a comment in a reddit thread about AFs, saying that giving AFs an "afterburner mode" would be a good idea for assault frigates.

Afterburner mode would be akin to that of a built in afterburner, ensuring that you would never have to fit an afterburner to your ship. In essence, fitting a microwarpdrive to your ship would make it dual prop. I've decided to take it a step further and make it so assault frigates could switch between microwarpdrive and afterburner mode.

It's my belief that assault frigates should be good at both tackling ships and surviving the process, ie: a heavy tackle ship. Before i had the idea to give assault frigates an afterburner bonus, but with the ability to fit oversized afterburners, i concede that this is probably too overpowered. With this "built in" dual prop system, I think AFs could become a good ship for its role without becoming too overpowered.

A further, more tentative, idea would be to transform AFs into t3 ships with the introduction of this mode switching power.
Cade Windstalker
#2 - 2017-05-04 21:03:55 UTC
Just for a start AFs are not T3s, and they should not behave like T3s.

On top of that the bonus AFs have make them better with a MWD in almost all situations to the point that fitting an AB would have little impact on them except when scrammed.

This really isn't the buff AFs need.
Fek Mercer
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2017-05-04 21:54:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Fek Mercer
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Just for a start AFs are not T3s, and they should not behave like T3s.


pretty close minded thing to say without backing up your claim. You need to explain why exactly you think AFs shouldn't behave like t3s, better than "they are not t3s"

Cade Windstalker wrote:
On top of that the bonus AFs have make them better with a MWD in almost all situations to the point that fitting an AB would have little impact on them except when scrammed.


"Except when being scrammed" - The purpose of dual prop ships is to remain effective when either at range or being scrammed.
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#4 - 2017-05-04 22:00:36 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
On top of that the bonus AFs have make them better with a MWD in almost all situations to the point that fitting an AB would have little impact on them except when scrammed.


Only if the AB bonus came in the form of speed. What if, for example, the AB bonus was to set the capacitor use to zero so you couldn't neut off their AB. Or to greatly reduce AB cycle time so you can immediately switch back to MWD once you escape the scram instead of waiting for the AB to end. If you're creative enough there are options besides "make ABs equal to MWDs but without the sig bloom or cap problems".
Cade Windstalker
#5 - 2017-05-04 22:14:48 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Just for a start AFs are not T3s, and they should not behave like T3s.


pretty close minded thing to say without backing up your claim. You need to explain why exactly you think AFs shouldn't behave like t3s, better than "they are not t3s"


Fair enough, let me elaborate.

First off, T3 ships are all about flexibility. AFs don't have that, and they've never really had it. They've always been big tanky DPS boats.

On top of that T3s are generally a bit worse than T2 ships of the same hull size. The main reason T3Ds can compete at all is because they're faster than a Destroyer normally is when they've got speed mode engaged, and then they've got the base Dessy DPS to shore up the lack of a DPS bonus.

If you make AFs into a T3 you've just got a kind of sad Frigate that now can't really compete much of anywhere.

On top of *that* AFs already have things that make them good, that people like and are attached to, and want to keep around. None of those fit into the "t3 ship" box. They're tanky, they've got good DPS, and they're fun to fly. People don't want them super-buffed or changed massively, they just want them to be a bit more usable in the current Meta.

Fek Mercer wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
On top of that the bonus AFs have make them better with a MWD in almost all situations to the point that fitting an AB would have little impact on them except when scrammed.


"Except when being scrammed" - The purpose of dual prop ships is to remain effective when either at range or being scrammed.


But just being dual-prop fit isn't inherently a big advantage, and even if you are scrammed being dual-prop fit doesn't guarantee *enough* of an advantage to remain a threat. AFs are inherently not terribly fast ships, and these days they get beat out in Scram range by quite a few things, meaning that even if you dual-prop an AF they're still pretty screwed since an AB isn't going to let them disengage from most opponents, and it's contribution to tank against small weapons or RLMLs is minor at best.

Merin Ryskin wrote:
Only if the AB bonus came in the form of speed. What if, for example, the AB bonus was to set the capacitor use to zero so you couldn't neut off their AB. Or to greatly reduce AB cycle time so you can immediately switch back to MWD once you escape the scram instead of waiting for the AB to end. If you're creative enough there are options besides "make ABs equal to MWDs but without the sig bloom or cap problems".


OP's idea is literally just to give them a built-in AB or something similar, not any sort of special AB bonus.

If you bonus an AB to the point that it's competitive in speed to an MWD what you have is a broken OP little monster of a ship.
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
#6 - 2017-05-04 22:29:07 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
On top of that T3s are generally a bit worse than T2 ships of the same hull size.


Lolwut? You mean the same T3 cruisers that are effectively command ships on a cruiser hull, and just plain better than HACs/combat recons except for their cost?

Quote:
OP's idea is literally just to give them a built-in AB or something similar, not any sort of special AB bonus.

If you bonus an AB to the point that it's competitive in speed to an MWD what you have is a broken OP little monster of a ship.


Well yes, I'm just pointing out that the concept of a dual-prop or AB bonused AF is not inherently impossible, you just can't do it in the form of "100000000000% per level to AB speed LOLOLOLOLOL".
Cade Windstalker
#7 - 2017-05-05 02:30:02 UTC
Merin Ryskin wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
On top of that T3s are generally a bit worse than T2 ships of the same hull size.


Lolwut? You mean the same T3 cruisers that are effectively command ships on a cruiser hull, and just plain better than HACs/combat recons except for their cost?


The T3Cs that are about to get the crap nerfed out of them.

That's where CCP have said they want the T3Cs to land in terms of single role performance, and the T3Ds aren't that much better than the Dictors and Command Destroyers considering they're the most combat focused of the three.

Merin Ryskin wrote:
Quote:
OP's idea is literally just to give them a built-in AB or something similar, not any sort of special AB bonus.

If you bonus an AB to the point that it's competitive in speed to an MWD what you have is a broken OP little monster of a ship.


Well yes, I'm just pointing out that the concept of a dual-prop or AB bonused AF is not inherently impossible, you just can't do it in the form of "100000000000% per level to AB speed LOLOLOLOLOL".


I'm not saying it's impossible, I'm saying it's not what the class needs. AFs need like a 50m/s across the board speed buff and they'd be in a pretty good spot overall, considering they've currently got a prop-mod focused bonus but the lowest base speeds of all the T2 Frigate hulls excluding Bombers, which aren't really known for being quick.
Fek Mercer
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2017-05-05 08:09:11 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:


But just being dual-prop fit isn't inherently a big advantage, and even if you are scrammed being dual-prop fit doesn't guarantee *enough* of an advantage to remain a threat. AFs are inherently not terribly fast ships, and these days they get beat out in Scram range by quite a few things...


Can you elaborate on this a bit more? Lets say I catch a ship using an mwd and we both scram each other. How does a 50ms speed buff help over being dual prop?
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2017-05-05 10:45:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Spugg Galdon
I like the idea of a special module that only a certain ship class can fit.

This might actually be a very efficient route in balancing and creating roles for certain T2 ships.

A Hybrid afterburner-MWD is conceptually a good idea. Especially for ships like Assault Frigates that don't have many slots.

I believe a good way of balancing and "scripting" the module to be used either way would essentially be fuel.

Afterburner mode requires fuel A

Micro warp drive mode requires fuel B

Fuel "A" has a smaller volume than fuel "B". There for the ship would be able to burn afterburner fuel for longer than MWD fuel.

Fuel could simply be a product of a cap booster and rocket fuel.

Fuel "A" would be 5 Rocket Fuel + 1 Cap Booster 25 = 1 Hybrid AB Fuel Pellet (1m3)
Fuel "B" would be 5 Rocket Fuel + 1 Cap Booster 75 = 1 Hybrid MWD Fuel Pellet (3m3)

The Hybrid Propulsion Drive module would have a capacity of 30m3 and a base cycle time of 20 seconds (15 seconds at level 5 skills) . It would have a 10 second reload timer. Fuel "A" would carry the hidden stat of immunity to Scrams shutting it down.
The module would have a Capacitor Fitting penalty like MWD's have but would not use capacitor when active due to using fuel.
Cade Windstalker
#10 - 2017-05-05 14:43:22 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:


But just being dual-prop fit isn't inherently a big advantage, and even if you are scrammed being dual-prop fit doesn't guarantee *enough* of an advantage to remain a threat. AFs are inherently not terribly fast ships, and these days they get beat out in Scram range by quite a few things...


Can you elaborate on this a bit more? Lets say I catch a ship using an mwd and we both scram each other. How does a 50ms speed buff help over being dual prop?


It helps you not get caught in the first place, and if you do get caught then it gives the AF more time before being caught where it can deal damage and tank better. An extra 50m/s would put AFs just barely below the level of the EAFs and a little closer to Interceptors but still solidly below them in terms of raw speed.

Throw in the generally solid tank of an AF and they might actually stand half a chance against something like a Garmur running them down and catching them with a long-scram. Garmur by the way, would still be 8m/s faster than a Wolf *with* a 50m/s buff to its speed, and that's the fastest AF. Most of the others are in the sub-300m/s range for base speed and the Garmur sits at 415, and even the Worm (which really doesn't need a speed advantage to be effective) is faster than any of the non-Minmattar AFs, and the Jaguar (second fastest AF) only beats it by 9m/s.

On top of all of this the faster these ships are by default the better they tank, since a lot of their mitigation against larger hulls or RLML fits is going to be in speed and that 50% MWD sig reduction.

If you give an AF a dual-prop bonus of some kind, lets just say it gets the best possible dual prop where it's just a mode that immediately kicks in if the MWD is off for no cap, no fitting, ect. The only way that's going to really save your bacon is if you're pinned by someone with a scram who you can also scram, who is not dual prop fitted themselves.

This excludes:

  • Anyone with a long-scram.
  • Anyone with a dual-prop fit themselves.
  • Anyone with a dual-web fit of some kind, or stronger or longer webs, since in either case you either won't be able to get out of scram range, or as soon as you do they MWD again and catch you again due to longer webs.


That's a pretty significant chunk of the meta right there. The long-scram one is particularly brutal, since not only are the EAFs and the Garmur faster than you are, but you can't scram them in return unless they massively screw up their piloting, so even if you are dual-prop fit you're just making a faster thing for them to orbit, and tanking missiles a *little* better.

Overall I think I'd rather just have the AFs get a speed buff, and maybe an extra mid slot each if that's not enough, which at least gives you the *option* to dual prop them and if you don't want to it gives more tank, projection, or general utility.
Fek Mercer
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2017-05-05 23:36:50 UTC
You may notice that long scram (enemy has mwd), dual web, and counter prop mod (enemy has mwd), are all ways to counter dual prop fits, and by extension, afterburner fits. My idea works on the assumption that many people, enough to make an assault frigate pilot have plenty of engageable targets, bring just standard fits.

Cade Windstalker wrote:


It helps you not get caught in the first place, and if you do get caught then it gives the AF more time before being caught where it can deal damage and tank better.


With the above points you made, plus the fact you said you don't want to get caught, seems to imply that the only way to fight in null is kiting with an mwd. Which means our argument is really about whether brawling is viable in null or not.
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2017-05-06 06:57:35 UTC
@Fek Mercer

What do you think about my "Fuelled" propulsion module? Would this be something that would fit your idea?
Cade Windstalker
#13 - 2017-05-06 13:39:06 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
You may notice that long scram (enemy has mwd), dual web, and counter prop mod (enemy has mwd), are all ways to counter dual prop fits, and by extension, afterburner fits. My idea works on the assumption that many people, enough to make an assault frigate pilot have plenty of engageable targets, bring just standard fits.

Cade Windstalker wrote:


It helps you not get caught in the first place, and if you do get caught then it gives the AF more time before being caught where it can deal damage and tank better.


With the above points you made, plus the fact you said you don't want to get caught, seems to imply that the only way to fight in null is kiting with an mwd. Which means our argument is really about whether brawling is viable in null or not.


It's not just not getting caught, it's that if your prop mod is the deciding factor in a fight it's because it's a fight where your only hope is fancy footwork and maneuvering rather than just charging in. In a small guns fight, especially where webs are involved, an AB provides very little in the way of tank, and is of questionable value as a disengagement tool with how slow AFs are already.

The main place a dual-prop fit is useful is when you need to get in close and hold point on someone and the sig bloom from a MWD is going to make you take more damage from his friends you can't maintain transversal on. The sig radius bonus on an AF largely mitigates this already.

In any fight where an AF can win by diving in and brawling they're likely to win whether they have an AB or not, and the number of other fights where an AB is going to make much difference is pretty small.
Fek Mercer
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2017-05-06 20:43:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Fek Mercer
Yes but with the low number of midslots an AF has, It's all very well trying to tackle a target, but holding onto it is another thing entirely. ABs are useful for maintaining range control. I never said that ABs were to add tank to the AF, I wanted a way for AFs to not only tackle a target but have more of a guarantee of staying at its preferred range too.

As you say, however, AFs are slow and even with an AB you may not be able to disengage or maintain range control, perhaps both a 50ms buff and built in dual prop would send the AF on its way to becoming great again.

@Spugg, A dual prop module could be interesting, but be wary of overcomplicating what I'm trying to do here. It really merits its own thread.
Cade Windstalker
#15 - 2017-05-06 21:57:54 UTC
Fek Mercer wrote:
Yes but with the low number of midslots an AF has, It's all very well trying to tackle a target, but holding onto it is another thing entirely. ABs are useful for maintaining range control. I never said that ABs were to add tank to the AF, I wanted a way for AFs to not only tackle a target but have more of a guarantee of staying at its preferred range too.

As you say, however, AFs are slow and even with an AB you may not be able to disengage or maintain range control, perhaps both a 50ms buff and built in dual prop would send the AF on its way to becoming great again.

@Spugg, A dual prop module could be interesting, but be wary of overcomplicating what I'm trying to do here. It really merits its own thread.


I really don't think the free ab is needed or even particularly desirable. If they really need a buff like that I think just adding a mid dlot but little or no fitting space to go with it would do it. Really though I feel like the biggest thing holding the AFs back right now is their lack of speed.