These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Winter] Attack Cruisers

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ashriban Kador
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#541 - 2012-09-28 20:07:40 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
-20% Penalty per lvl of Rig Skill Trained instead of -10%.


I don't think that's ever going to happen, or at least I hope not.

I'd think they should instead adjust rig penalties in such a way that every kind of rig is available to your fit. (IE Speed rigs for armor ships as an example.)

There should always be a trade off for a player to think about when fitting a ship, it makes things more interesting.

Your goals may align with some ... and with others, collide with the force of suns.
Alara IonStorm
#542 - 2012-09-28 20:11:09 UTC
Deerin wrote:
People have already begun talking about last batch of cruisers....Fozzie where is the last batchof changes.

Please consider following bonus for Moa:

+30% tracking per level on RAILS only. (might be too much but you get the idea)
+%5 resists per level
6 turrets


I would prefer 5% Dmg / 5% Opt / 6 Turrets / 6H 5M 4L / No Drones.

With proper fitting for 250mm of course. I don't think it needs close range weapons tracking or a super tank. About 30-35K would be fine, what it needs is project-able mid range Dmg and speed.
Alara IonStorm
#543 - 2012-09-28 20:13:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Ashriban Kador wrote:

There should always be a trade off for a player to think about when fitting a ship, it makes things more interesting.

Their is a trade off, Nano's cut hull, Plates increase Mass, Extenders blow up Sig.

We do not need double penalties and we don't need penalties just for the sake of penalties.

Module penalties are enough, these don't make the game interesting they just make some classes of rigs unusable on certain ships and that limits variety.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#544 - 2012-09-28 20:17:09 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Ashriban Kador wrote:

There should always be a trade off for a player to think about when fitting a ship, it makes things more interesting.

Their is a trade off, Nano's cut hull, Plates increase Mass, Extenders blow up Sig.

We do not need double penalties and we don't need penalties just for the sake of penalties.

Module penalties are enough, these don't make the game interesting they just make some classes of rigs unusable on certain ships and that limits variety.


I want to see rig go one of two ways:
- Rigs are completely optional. Trade shield HP for shield resists, trade weapon ROF for weapon alpha, etc.
- Rig penalties go away at rig level 5.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Alara IonStorm
#545 - 2012-09-28 20:19:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Alara IonStorm
Liang Nuren wrote:

- Rigs are completely optional. Trade shield HP for shield resists, trade weapon ROF for weapon alpha, etc.

That is pretty interesting. Difficult to implement but interesting.

Sort off increase one area of a ship by lessening it in the same stat tree. So you can tweak a shield setup or Arty setup to preform a specific more narrow role.
Sigras
Conglomo
#546 - 2012-09-29 06:45:07 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:

- Rigs are completely optional. Trade shield HP for shield resists, trade weapon ROF for weapon alpha, etc.

That is pretty interesting. Difficult to implement but interesting.

Sort off increase one area of a ship by lessening it in the same stat tree. So you can tweak a shield setup or Arty setup to preform a specific more narrow role.

now that is the most interesting idea ive heard on rigs to date.

Of course there would be some rigs with basically no drawback IE +Falloff -Optimal on any autocannon ship is basically no drawback but its an interesting idea.
Sigras
Conglomo
#547 - 2012-09-29 06:52:05 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Ashriban Kador wrote:
Fixing armor tanking is easy (dunno why they haven't done it yet)

Move speed penalty from armor rigs to agility penalty.
Move armor penalty from astronautics rigs to hull penalty.

Done.

On a side note: Why not have the Gallente have a similar play-style to minmatar? Armor or Shield tank with a lean towards armor, the minmatar leaning towards shields.


I think you hugely underestimate the importance of agility. I don't think we'd see a real improvement with this solution.

-Liang

I disagree, right now, any idiot can kite a gallente ship:
1. Turn Guns On
2. Set "Keep At Range" or "Orbit At Range"
3. ???
4. Profit

If the gallente ships were faster but less agile than the matari ships, it would at least take intelligence and a quick eye to kite instead of just using one of the CCP prescribed buttons.

No ship should be fastest and most agile and longest ranged, and thats what the hurricane is right now (if you count the HAM drake not the HML drake)

This wouldnt make gallente ships totally OP, but it would make them more powerful than they are now, and would add some interesting risk/reward ideas for fitting IE do you want to lose some hull and a low slot for a nanofiber to counteract your agility?
FleetAdmiralHarper
Kitchen Sink Kapitals
#548 - 2012-09-29 11:28:54 UTC  |  Edited by: FleetAdmiralHarper
are all of the cruisers getting visually revamped like the stabber?

or is the moa still going to look like a r3t@rd-osaurus-rex glued to the ass-end of idk what?

im looking forward to seeing some cool looking caldari cruiser for a change. its the reason i skipped them all. =P

but hey the stabber looks grate!
so if its the only one. i guess ill defect to winmatar when i wanna pilot a cruiser =)
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
Doomheim
#549 - 2012-09-29 14:43:22 UTC
Quote:
are all of the cruisers getting visually revamped like the stabber?

or is the moa still going to look like a r3t@rd-osaurus-rex glued to the ass-end of idk what?

im looking forward to seeing some cool looking caldari cruiser for a change. its the reason i skipped them all. =P

but hey the stabber looks grate!
so if its the only one. i guess ill defect to winmatar when i wanna pilot a cruiser =)


U mad?
CCP will never give the other races half the love like they give it the minnies.
New Stabber, new Tempest.... and caldari and galente don´t even have the V3 shader update.
So: everything as usual.
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#550 - 2012-09-29 16:06:35 UTC
Alara IonStorm wrote:
Deerin wrote:
People have already begun talking about last batch of cruisers....Fozzie where is the last batchof changes.

Please consider following bonus for Moa:

+30% tracking per level on RAILS only. (might be too much but you get the idea)
+%5 resists per level
6 turrets


I would prefer 5% Dmg / 5% Opt / 6 Turrets / 6H 5M 4L / No Drones.

With proper fitting for 250mm of course. I don't think it needs close range weapons tracking or a super tank. About 30-35K would be fine, what it needs is project-able mid range Dmg and speed.



Now that would be a decent Thorax !!

Ho wait... Lol

Blink

brb
Alara IonStorm
#551 - 2012-09-29 16:31:42 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:

Now that would be a decent Thorax !!

Ho wait... Lol

Blink

What?
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#552 - 2012-09-29 21:48:53 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
Glad @tleast some of you noticed what the proposed Thorax would be capable of. I alluded to it an earlier post, but I might as well go further. The proposed Thorax is a pseudo-Stabber fleet issues with more tracking. You could shield fit it, but why would you? There's something called signature tanking and because medium turrets cannot track cruisers without being effected by a ship bonus. A dual propulsion stabber fleet issue or the proposed Thorax can abuse the tracking of a shield-hurricane and sustain next to know damage from it's turrets (neuts will still f*uck you though).

I hope they give the Rupture a forth mid slot or else Thorax and possible a Vexor with increased velocity and 3 mids alone will own any other cruiser under warp scrambler/web range.

With that said. If CCP gave the Vexor another mid slot, then It will be king under 10k.

Also the Caracal will become a demon. The nano-drake of t1 cruisers without the silly tank, but still.

Anyway, the Thorax's real strength will be with dual propulsion. Which would make it an above class ship killer. All battlcruisers, hacs and cruisers without a tracking bonus, 2 med neuts or web on thier ship will be it's prey. Example: ferox, prophecy, cyclone, vagabond, cynabal etc.

These changes may mean that the Caracal and Omen will dominate "nano/kiting" and the Thorax and Vexor will dominate close range. Leaving the Rupture as the odd man out... Sad day if it comes to past but, I'm hoping the Rupture gets a 4th mid slot = (

Edit: also if you believe those light web drones will help you against the new omen hull in a shield thorax you are mistaken. Use a shield Harbinger against a shield Brutix and figure out the rest (dirty dub face = /).



Cross postings an old post = Posted: 2012.09.20 18:40

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Lin-Young Borovskova
Doomheim
#553 - 2012-09-30 13:29:57 UTC
Major Killz wrote:
Major Killz wrote:
Glad @tleast some of you noticed what the proposed Thorax would be capable of. I alluded to it an earlier post, but I might as well go further. The proposed Thorax is a pseudo-Stabber fleet issues with more tracking. You could shield fit it, but why would you? There's something called signature tanking and because medium turrets cannot track cruisers without being effected by a ship bonus. A dual propulsion stabber fleet issue or the proposed Thorax can abuse the tracking of a shield-hurricane and sustain next to know damage from it's turrets (neuts will still f*uck you though).

I hope they give the Rupture a forth mid slot or else Thorax and possible a Vexor with increased velocity and 3 mids alone will own any other cruiser under warp scrambler/web range.

With that said. If CCP gave the Vexor another mid slot, then It will be king under 10k.

Also the Caracal will become a demon. The nano-drake of t1 cruisers without the silly tank, but still.

Anyway, the Thorax's real strength will be with dual propulsion. Which would make it an above class ship killer. All battlcruisers, hacs and cruisers without a tracking bonus, 2 med neuts or web on thier ship will be it's prey. Example: ferox, prophecy, cyclone, vagabond, cynabal etc.

These changes may mean that the Caracal and Omen will dominate "nano/kiting" and the Thorax and Vexor will dominate close range. Leaving the Rupture as the odd man out... Sad day if it comes to past but, I'm hoping the Rupture gets a 4th mid slot = (

Edit: also if you believe those light web drones will help you against the new omen hull in a shield thorax you are mistaken. Use a shield Harbinger against a shield Brutix and figure out the rest (dirty dub face = /).



Cross postings an old post = Posted: 2012.09.20 18:40



What he said, the shield Thorax will just murder anything of it's size/class and in gangs will simply be the sight you don't want to have by any means when you cross whatever gate, witch is silly but due to game mechanics and since you can shield/armor fit any ship.
Does Thorax needs and deserves an extra mid? -absolutely BECAUSE armor tanking/weapon system
Does Thorax needs and deserves more PG/CPU? - absolutely BECAUSE armor tanking/weapon system

But what in hell prevents or says you can't shield fit it and make it twice as strong as any other cruiser? -nothing, so do it.

brb
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#554 - 2012-09-30 13:47:22 UTC
Lin-Young Borovskova wrote:

What he said, the shield Thorax will just murder anything of it's size/class and in gangs will simply be the sight you don't want to have by any means when you cross whatever gate, witch is silly but due to game mechanics and since you can shield/armor fit any ship.
Does Thorax needs and deserves an extra mid? -absolutely BECAUSE armor tanking/weapon system
Does Thorax needs and deserves more PG/CPU? - absolutely BECAUSE armor tanking/weapon system

But what in hell prevents or says you can't shield fit it and make it twice as strong as any other cruiser? -nothing, so do it.

Armor versus shield once again.

I think, as CCP did with missiles, they should have balance armor tank versus shield tank before the ships.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#555 - 2012-09-30 13:56:09 UTC
one way to solve the problem of armour tank vs shield tank is for large plates and shield extenders too be impossible to fit on medium hulls this will halve the penalties of sig bloom and mass increase and nerfs t3's and bc's tank in one go making battleships more desirable.
Now ofc the medium plates/extenders may need a slight buff/balance to bridge some of the loss of tank and too increase their fitting requirements so frigs have to use smalls etc.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#556 - 2012-09-30 13:57:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
I keep saying this: armor vs shield needs to be balanced or tiericide will not fully achieve its goals. The redesigned cruisers still have the same problem: their performance is mostly measured in how good they are at the shield kiting game. It's stupid that a LSE Omen with shield rigs seems like a better choice than a trimarked 800mm plate fit.

Speed is a defensive and offensive stat in its on right. Gaining hitpoints in exchange for speed is just not a good trade for anything small than battleships.


PS:

The imbalance goes deeper than merely plates vs extenders and rig penalties which have been discussed at length already. There are other factors that contribute:

Falloff enhancers like TEs, TCs and the respective rigs act like a second set of damage mods for ships that fight in falloff.

Out of these, TEs are the optimal choice since they're the easiest to fit and give +30% falloff. Laser, long range turret and soon missiles ships benefit less but TEs are still generally the optimal choice.

When it comes to rigs, defensive rigs are stronger than offensive or speed enhancing ones. The optimal choice is thus to use the rig slots for defensive stats.

The balance paradigm favors using the low slots for damage mods, tracking enhancers and speed mods, while using mid and rig slots to gain resistances and hitpoints. Doing anything else is an inferior choice by design even before we consider the merits and deficiencies of plates and extenders. Unfortunately for armor tankers, there are no armor tanking mid slot modules.


- Adjusting Tracking Enhancers, falloff rigs and Tracking Computers so that they have bonuses appropriate for their fitting requirements. This could mean lowering the falloff bonus on TEs or lowering the fitting requirements of TCs. Personally I think TEs giving +30% falloff for 15 cpu is too good.
- Changing the penalty for speed rigs to make them compatible with armor fits.
- Bringing non-defensive rigs up to a similar level as defensive rigs.



The idea by Alara Ionstorm to change each rigging skill to reduce penalties by -20% per level (for no penalties at V) would be a good start.
Operative X10-4
Doomheim
#557 - 2012-09-30 23:00:33 UTC
The caracal buffer is great, it seens that finaly Caldari will have a cruiser that can go toe to toe against other cruisers as a brawler, the most closely thing we have is the moa but still subpar. thumbs up +1

FOREVER PIRATE 07 FLY DANGEROUSLY.
Garr Earthbender
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#558 - 2012-10-01 00:40:42 UTC
Range you say? Tracking Disrupting Arbitrator I say.

-Scissors is overpowered, rock is fine. -Paper
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Einheit X-6
#559 - 2012-10-01 08:53:46 UTC
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang wrote:
Quote:
are all of the cruisers getting visually revamped like the stabber?

or is the moa still going to look like a r3t@rd-osaurus-rex glued to the ass-end of idk what?

im looking forward to seeing some cool looking caldari cruiser for a change. its the reason i skipped them all. =P

but hey the stabber looks grate!
so if its the only one. i guess ill defect to winmatar when i wanna pilot a cruiser =)


U mad?
CCP will never give the other races half the love like they give it the minnies.
New Stabber, new Tempest.... and caldari and galente don´t even have the V3 shader update.
So: everything as usual.



wtf dude !?
caldari & gallente got V3'ed 6 months or more before minmatar (which was btw the last race to get V3'ed)
as you not seem to have noticed, there are different factional paint jobs to be seen in the market for the catalyst, which is a hint of beeingV3'ed as subtle as a punch in your face.
caldari already got 2 ships redesigned, amarr got 1 and this by good measure beforehand of any changes to minmatar ship design.


on the topic of attack cruisers; please make them testable like now? :D
Dr Sheng-Ji Yang
Doomheim
#560 - 2012-10-01 09:11:53 UTC
Quote:
wtf dude !?
caldari & gallente got V3'ed 6 months or more before minmatar (which was btw the last race to get V3'ed)
as you not seem to have noticed, there are different factional paint jobs to be seen in the market for the catalyst, which is a hint of beeingV3'ed as subtle as a punch in your face.
caldari already got 2 ships redesigned, amarr got 1 and this by good measure beforehand of any changes to minmatar ship design.


on the topic of attack cruisers; please make them testable like now? :D


Okay our level is already sinking here....
Then compare the "remodeled" drake with the old drake and you will see almost no difference. Then compare old stabber and new stabber. WOW!!!!! Awesome model.
And if caldari really already has v3...erm then ccp has really screwd sth.
It never looks as good like amarr or minmatar ships.