These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Assault Frigate Role Ideas

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Cade Windstalker
#21 - 2017-05-05 17:20:01 UTC
Scialt wrote:
How about just reducing the materials needed to make them.

If a wolf cost 9m instead of 25m now (or 33m for a Svipul)... it might get more use by just being a cheaper option for a similar role as a T3D. Right now the price doesn't match the utility.


At which point you've now got a ship that's massively over-performing in terms of cost to benefit compared to its T1 and even most T2 and faction counterparts. Having AFs take away the "cheap fleet" option from T1 ships isn't particularly better than the current state between T3Ds and AFs.
Blade Darth
Room for Improvement
Good Sax
#22 - 2017-05-05 20:54:42 UTC
I don't like the idea of shoe honing them into an anti-fighter support role. Especially if the meta shifts towards dreads.

t3d's are better "heavy tackle" and ceptors better tackle in general.

How about something wacky, something that would make the target feel... assaulted. Stop a random module mid-cycle. Temporary invul to ewar (including neutralizers). Massive bonus to OH and a bit of heat reduction.

Omen Navy Issue Tutorial
FT Cold
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#23 - 2017-05-06 04:36:08 UTC
Not really a fan of the proposed changes, but I do like the theme of frigates that are designed to fight upship.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#24 - 2017-05-06 04:58:42 UTC
FT Cold wrote:
Not really a fan of the proposed changes, but I do like the theme of frigates that are designed to fight upship.


Every ship can technically fight upship. The real wonder of the galaxy is ABC's applying their guns down ship sizes.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#25 - 2017-05-06 10:05:21 UTC
Make AF's not suffer a capacitor penalty to fitting MWD's so that their MWD bonus is actually useful.
Blade Darth
Room for Improvement
Good Sax
#26 - 2017-05-06 20:56:14 UTC
Or a MWD speed bonus in addition to the sig reduction... Because they are slow AF.

Omen Navy Issue Tutorial
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#27 - 2017-05-06 21:13:04 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Make AF's not suffer a capacitor penalty to fitting MWD's so that their MWD bonus is actually useful.



That doesn't solve the problem they have, which is not being able to catch or hold much of anything. AF's are still only a small bit faster than most cruisers and extremely susceptible to neuts. If you do catch a cruiser it's likely they can still deal with you relatively easily.

A price reduction isn't the worst idea. Currently I'd rather lose two cruisers than one AF.
Suitonia
Order of the Red Kestrel
#28 - 2017-05-06 21:46:50 UTC
A fitting reduction to nos could also be interesting as they all have utility highs, which would allow them to run 1x nos and perma tackle and help run tank vs cruisers, without really powering up Harpy Fleets.

They are definitely too slow. I personally think they should swap speeds with Command Destroyers.

Ewar Resistance or Control Resistance effects are interesting but you need to be really careful with these bonuses as they can become broken very easily. T3Ds already have Ewar Resistance on SS mode as well so this might not necessarily make them more unique.

Defender Launcher bonuses could be a possibility with new bomb effects outlined at fanfest (RR bombs etc.)

Contributer to Eve is Easy:  https://www.youtube.com/user/eveiseasy/videos

Solo PvP is possible with a 20 day old character! :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvOB4KXYk-o
Cade Windstalker
#29 - 2017-05-07 00:11:23 UTC
Suitonia wrote:
They are definitely too slow. I personally think they should swap speeds with Command Destroyers.


I don't think they need to swap speeds with the command destroyers. Those ships need to be able to move around well to boosh others and position.

I do think they need about a 50-60m/s buff across the board with some ancillary tweaking though. That puts them about able to keep up with a lot of other small hulls and at least not get completely run down by T3Ds. If they really need more I'd suggest a second or swapped role bonus to local repair. That meshes with the currently prevalent role in PvE Fozzie mentioned at Fanfest and gives them a potentially fun small fleet role that synergizes with a lot of existing fi fits.
FT Cold
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2017-05-07 02:35:34 UTC
Suitonia wrote:
A fitting reduction to nos could also be interesting as they all have utility highs, which would allow them to run 1x nos and perma tackle and help run tank vs cruisers, without really powering up Harpy Fleets.

They are definitely too slow. I personally think they should swap speeds with Command Destroyers.

Ewar Resistance or Control Resistance effects are interesting but you need to be really careful with these bonuses as they can become broken very easily. T3Ds already have Ewar Resistance on SS mode as well so this might not necessarily make them more unique.

Defender Launcher bonuses could be a possibility with new bomb effects outlined at fanfest (RR bombs etc.)


I like these ideas a little bit better. I've had a lot of experience with enyos and I'm a pretty big proponent of using the nos to keep up guns and tackle. They're pretty useful in WH space for invading a crit or frig hole and dealing with the inevitable neuts that show up. It's a really underrated module and surprisingly powerful in some situations.

How would you feel about keeping the base speed slow, while buffing agility, and swapping ship bonuses from range/tracking to tanking or utility bonuses for a few of the hulls? Slow base speed and worse application would be useful to help balance them in 1v1 frigate matchups, but good agility would be useful to get under the guns of bigger ships. Using the enyo as an example, keep the base speed the same, buff it's agility to a little worse than t1 frigate levels, and replace its tracking speed and optimal bonuses with an armor resistance bonus and global sig radius reduction. It would be strong vs other blaster matchups, like the merlin, but weak against scram kiters or anything with range control, but very strong fighting upship.

Anyhow, I like that you're calling attention to AFs as a CSM member. It's nice to see someone who's got a clue regarding ship balance as a representative of the players here, you'll always get my updoot.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#31 - 2017-05-07 03:30:57 UTC
Phaade wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Make AF's not suffer a capacitor penalty to fitting MWD's so that their MWD bonus is actually useful.



That doesn't solve the problem they have, which is not being able to catch or hold much of anything. AF's are still only a small bit faster than most cruisers and extremely susceptible to neuts. If you do catch a cruiser it's likely they can still deal with you relatively easily.

A price reduction isn't the worst idea. Currently I'd rather lose two cruisers than one AF.


Maybe making their MWD not shut off under scrams? There are all kinds of BS bonuses out there in the game now this one isn't that crazy they still get ballooned up and it sucks cap like crazy
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#32 - 2017-05-07 13:56:00 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Phaade wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
Make AF's not suffer a capacitor penalty to fitting MWD's so that their MWD bonus is actually useful.



That doesn't solve the problem they have, which is not being able to catch or hold much of anything. AF's are still only a small bit faster than most cruisers and extremely susceptible to neuts. If you do catch a cruiser it's likely they can still deal with you relatively easily.

A price reduction isn't the worst idea. Currently I'd rather lose two cruisers than one AF.


Maybe making their MWD not shut off under scrams? There are all kinds of BS bonuses out there in the game now this one isn't that crazy they still get ballooned up and it sucks cap like crazy



Well, that would awkward. Even with the sig reduction bonus, they would still be hit pretty well due to weird orbit vectors and a large sig radius. Still have problems with neuts etc. I don't think it's necessarily the right way to balance them.

I really do like the concept of them being inherently dual prop. I don't like a module like that being scripted only because swapping ammo in Eve is a nightmare. It would be nice to have two different modes you can switch between with a cool down.

Personally I'm in favor of web resistance and something to help with neuts, like an increase to Nos cycle time or fitting.
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2017-05-07 22:15:46 UTC
I like the idea of a realistic supcap way to counter fighters, which really doesn't exist right now for any type of semi-massed carrier fleets, and I like the idea of reinvigorating AFs. However, I think anti-fighter is too narrow. I think it would need to be anti-fighter, anti-drone, and anti-missile ship in order to really make it viable enough for common use (with defenders that have been modified in order to be useful, like an area defense weapon, rather than just protecting the target ship). While I think a ship like that would have some utility, I also think it may be impressively boring to fly, and I'm not sure how you'd change that.
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#34 - 2017-05-08 05:46:51 UTC
I watched the fanfest video where they said AF will be rebalanced towards PVE. Don't know why they are taking this direction and tbqh I just don't see how it could even work.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#35 - 2017-05-08 09:08:50 UTC
Problem with them being anti fighter ships is superiority fighters are extremely effective against them when used correctly i also feel this role is not only too niche but also makes carriers even worse than haw than they already are

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Soldarius
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#36 - 2017-05-08 14:22:17 UTC
What about allowing them to use more than one prop mod at a time? Game used to be like that way back in the beginning. I know it was cancer on large ships. But on small ships with limited fitting...

http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Lisa Sophie d'Elancourt
Empusa.
#37 - 2017-05-08 19:28:19 UTC
Phaade wrote:
Alphas or not, I'd still never fly them unless I had some weird desire to lose an expensive frigate.

They need a buff, I think web resistance or a speed buff would be the right direction.

Web resistance/immunity sounds like an very interesting idea. On the one hand it would be both unique and useful bonus, on the other - factor which doesn't make AFs overpowered.
Scialt
Corporate Navy Police Force
Sleep Reapers
#38 - 2017-05-09 14:42:20 UTC
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Scialt wrote:
How about just reducing the materials needed to make them.

If a wolf cost 9m instead of 25m now (or 33m for a Svipul)... it might get more use by just being a cheaper option for a similar role as a T3D. Right now the price doesn't match the utility.


At which point you've now got a ship that's massively over-performing in terms of cost to benefit compared to its T1 and even most T2 and faction counterparts. Having AFs take away the "cheap fleet" option from T1 ships isn't particularly better than the current state between T3Ds and AFs.


Well... we're talking about making an AF match a T1 cruiser in terms of price. It's been a long time since I flew an AF, but would you say it's utility in a fleet matches a T1 cruiser? If it does... I'm not sure what giving it the same price point would harm. Yes.. it would take away the "cheep fleet" option from T1 frigates... the same way T1 cruisers do. Is that a problem?
Lugh Crow-Slave
#39 - 2017-05-09 14:47:30 UTC
Soldarius wrote:
But on small ships with limited fitting...



it was still cancer

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Lugh Crow-Slave
#40 - 2017-05-09 14:49:13 UTC
Scialt wrote:
Cade Windstalker wrote:
Scialt wrote:
How about just reducing the materials needed to make them.

If a wolf cost 9m instead of 25m now (or 33m for a Svipul)... it might get more use by just being a cheaper option for a similar role as a T3D. Right now the price doesn't match the utility.


At which point you've now got a ship that's massively over-performing in terms of cost to benefit compared to its T1 and even most T2 and faction counterparts. Having AFs take away the "cheap fleet" option from T1 ships isn't particularly better than the current state between T3Ds and AFs.


Well... we're talking about making an AF match a T1 cruiser in terms of price. It's been a long time since I flew an AF, but would you say it's utility in a fleet matches a T1 cruiser? If it does... I'm not sure what giving it the same price point would harm. Yes.. it would take away the "cheep fleet" option from T1 frigates... the same way T1 cruisers do. Is that a problem?



frigates have advantages a cruiser doesn't T1 cruisers do not take away the cheap fleet option from T1 frigs


apples and oranges

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Previous page123Next page