These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#701 - 2012-10-24 08:19:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Unforgiven Storm
CCP Fozzie wrote:
New changes, designed to solve some of the problems brought up so far:
Note that we've upped the mass of all the Combat cruisers in part to help keep them feeling distinct from the other cruisers.

Maller: More fittings and cap to help it operate with the still difficult to use lasers. Added 3 light drones to help with damage application.
+150 PG, +20 CPU
-200 Shield, +200 Armor
+75 Capacitor, -50s Cap Recharge Time, +0.5 Cap/s
-10 Velocity, -0.04 Agility, +500,000 mass, -0.2s Align time
+15m3 Dronebay, +15mbit bandwidth

Moa: Moving a high to a mid provides more tackle and tank options at the expense of the utility high. Slightly lower speed and higher mass alongide a better tank layout and more fittings.
-1H, +1M
+50 PG, +5 CPU
+200 Shield, -200 Armor, +100 Structure
+75 Capacitor, +0.15 Cap/s
-5 Velocity, -0.02 Agility, +500,000 mass

Vexor: Upped the mass, as the old values were just a bit too insane in practice. Added 25m3 dronebay to allow more more spare drones to be carried.
-10 Velocity, -0.07 Agility, +1,000,000 mass, -0.2s Align time
+25m3 Dronebay

Rupture: As many of you pointed out, the Rupture speed was simply too good. My bad.
-1 Launcher
-100 Structure
-30 Velocity, -0.04 Agility, +550,000 mass, -0.2s Align time

OP has been updated



Hi, with all these mass changes and tier removal, please tell us that the BPO's prices and materials are going to be changed also to reflect these changes, if not for this first release, at least in the next patch in january like 1.1 or 1.2 !??? Please don't forget to adapt the BPOs of all the frigs, destroyers and crusiers before you move to battleships...

Unforgiven Storm for CSM 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13. (If I don't get in in the next 5 years I will quit trying) :-)
Kai'rae Saarkus
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#702 - 2012-10-24 08:31:18 UTC
Hellrain Choochoo wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Vexor:
Cruiser skill bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
10% bonus to drone hitpoints, damage and mining yield
Slot layout: 4 H (-1), 4 M (+1), 5 L (+1), 4 turrets
Fittings: 800 PWG (+125), 300 CPU (+30)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1100(-73) / 2000(+515) / 2000(+515)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1450(+200) / 482.5s(+36.25s) / 3 (+0.2)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 205(+36) / 0.53(-0.04) / 11310000 (+1000000) / 5.6s (+0.1)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 125 (+25)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 52.5km / 280(+4) / 6(+1)
Sensor strength: 16 Magnetometric (+2)
Signature radius: 145 (-5)
Cargo capacity: 480


Why a droneboat with gun ? droneboat is a droneboat !

Vexor:
Cruiser skill bonuses:
7% bonus to Medium drone damage
5% bonus to MWD of light drone
10% bonus to drone hitpoints, damage and mining yield
Slot layout: 2 H (-3), 4 M (+1), 6 L (+2), 0 turrets
Fittings: 800 PWG (+125), 300 CPU (+50)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1100(-73) / 2000(+515) / 2000(+515)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1450(+200) / 482.5s(+36.25s) / 3 (+0.2)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 205(+36) / 0.53(-0.04) / 11310000 (+1000000) / 5.6s (+0.1)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 (-25) / 150 (+50)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 52.5km / 280(+4) / 6(+1)
Sensor strength: 16 Magnetometric (+2)
Signature radius: 145 (-5)
Cargo capacity: 480

That bring it to 508dps with hammerhead and 228dps with hobgobelin.

And lower a bit the cpu for drone module:
- Drone link augmentor I 35 CPU 100PG
- Drone link augmentor II 40 CPU 100PG
- Omnidirectional tracking link I 30 CPU
- Omnidirectional tracking link II 35 CPU (like tracking computer II)

Lets dream =)


No.

Vexor's aren't pure drone boats, never have been. They are GANKboats.
They've just always had such god awful PG that you've never really been able to fit them with a decent tank + Med Blasters.

Now, Ishtars... then I'd agree with you; make that the "Pure" Drone boat. But leave Vexor's as the more versatile introductory hull.
Alghara
Les chevaliers de l'ordre
Goonswarm Federation
#703 - 2012-10-24 08:40:22 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
Alghara wrote:
Now with the new maller, it's completly stupid to put laser on them because you don't have dps, you have a **** of tracking etc.
when i see the new maller without dps bonus, it's clear that the best idea it's to fits them in mwd / blaster.


Have you actually looked at the Maller after the second round of changes? It's a real beast. It will kill any other cruiser not specifically fit to fight it.


Lol I need to take more coffee, this morning.

I don't a see the modification on the bonus.

Look great now the Maller.
sten mattson
Red Sky Morning
The Amarr Militia.
#704 - 2012-10-24 08:47:49 UTC
no , they are ot moving away from the cap use bonus , it seems the theme now is that the "top tier" boats ,are losing it in favor of tanking bonus.

i would not be surprised if the prophecy suffured the same fate as the maller and punisher , despite being tier 1 and not tier 2

IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!
Alara IonStorm
#705 - 2012-10-24 08:53:03 UTC
sten mattson wrote:

i would not be surprised if the prophecy suffured the same fate as the maller and punisher , despite being tier 1 and not tier 2

CCP Fozzie posted in the minutes and somewhere else that he wants to make it a Drone Boat.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#706 - 2012-10-24 09:04:17 UTC
Unforgiven Storm wrote:

Hi, with all these mass changes and tier removal, please tell us that the BPO's prices and materials are going to be changed also to reflect these changes, if not for this first release, at least in the next patch in january like 1.1 or 1.2 !??? Please don't forget to adapt the BPOs of all the frigs, destroyers and crusiers before you move to battleships...


All of the BPOs for the rebalanced ships will be changed in Retribution.

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Kai'rae Saarkus
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#707 - 2012-10-24 09:07:56 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Unforgiven Storm wrote:

Hi, with all these mass changes and tier removal, please tell us that the BPO's prices and materials are going to be changed also to reflect these changes, if not for this first release, at least in the next patch in january like 1.1 or 1.2 !??? Please don't forget to adapt the BPOs of all the frigs, destroyers and crusiers before you move to battleships...


All of the BPOs for the rebalanced ships will be changed in Retribution.


Can we have data on the Min costs etc for the new hulls? If these aren't already on Duality?
Zhephell
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#708 - 2012-10-24 09:18:08 UTC
amarr ships cap recharge must be improved, a ship with a 50% turret cap reduction bonus needs a 60% more cap that a ship using blasters, this should be a 10% or 20% more with the bonus, not a 60%

Some ships can be nice ships despite having a 50% turret cap reduction bonus, but need a scrambler, and a stasis then.
In cruiser sizes, you can put a cap booster with a 800 charge and it ll work, despite have lose the cap bonus, the problem are battleships.
At least an abaddon must be stable if you put only your guns, ok i understand that you need boosters if you use beams, or a mwd or active tank, but need boosters only to shoot is't anoying.

For me the ship that need more that the other to have the cap bonus in it's hull and then use 2 real bonuses, is the apoc, with the balance if it has the cap bonus like now, it ll be the only battleship with no dps bonus, (the rock ll be like the naga, or like the moa now, so it ll have a 5% damage bonus surely),
At the same time the apoc need the 7,5% range bonus to be a long range weapon, why? Because if it lose that, it ll be like the abaddon and the armageddon but worst.

I know that some players can say that tachyons beams have many dps and don't need a dps bonus.
But now an oracle with tachions, has less cap problems, is faster, and have that dps bonus, it is much easier to fit too, ok it has less range but with a mwd and a good agility it can choose the range easier.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#709 - 2012-10-24 09:31:11 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:

One question, do you have any plans about buffing Nos's? ATM they are largely considered worthless for ships larger then frigates. It would be nice if you could run guns + 1 repper reasonably under one nos.


I have ideas, but no specific release plans attached to them yet.


easy solution

if your cap percentage is greater then what you are targeting then you only get 50% efficancy for cap consumption... then if you go less then 50% of the target you get 100% cap consumption rate for the mod...

not a hard fix tbh...


Terrible idea, really awful. All this does is turn Nos back into its old version, obsoleting neuts and leading to a "Nos on everything" effect even more pronounced than the current "neuts on everything". At least with current neuts you have to pay cap to activate them - your future Nos would simply be a free lunch. Or half a free lunch, anyway.

The mechanic of Nos is perfect - it's an entirely defensive module that sits opposite the offensive neuts. Don't blur those lines. Instead, improve Nos by making it easier to fit and increase the drain amount. Say halve the PG and double the drain amount?

It might also be worth introducing a module that gives resistance to neut/nos too. I know we have cap batteries that provide that effect, but cap batteries are far too hard to fit, both in terms of medslots and PG/CPU, and the resistance effect is far too small. A better neut/nos-resistance module would be a highslot mod that gave around a 30-40% reduction in neut/nos drain amount, subject to normal stacking penalties. This would give a useful degree of protection against neuting and work well in conjunction with Nos.

There might be a problem with cap/supercaps fitting full racks of these neut-resist mods, but what use is, say, a triage Archon that has four neut-resisters fitted? It can't remote repair anything. Exchanging RR power for cap defense seems like it should be a reasonably self-balancing mechanism.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#710 - 2012-10-24 10:15:36 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:

One question, do you have any plans about buffing Nos's? ATM they are largely considered worthless for ships larger then frigates. It would be nice if you could run guns + 1 repper reasonably under one nos.


I have ideas, but no specific release plans attached to them yet.


easy solution

if your cap percentage is greater then what you are targeting then you only get 50% efficancy for cap consumption... then if you go less then 50% of the target you get 100% cap consumption rate for the mod...

not a hard fix tbh...


Terrible idea, really awful. All this does is turn Nos back into its old version, obsoleting neuts and leading to a "Nos on everything" effect even more pronounced than the current "neuts on everything". At least with current neuts you have to pay cap to activate them - your future Nos would simply be a free lunch. Or half a free lunch, anyway.

The mechanic of Nos is perfect - it's an entirely defensive module that sits opposite the offensive neuts. Don't blur those lines. Instead, improve Nos by making it easier to fit and increase the drain amount. Say halve the PG and double the drain amount?

It might also be worth introducing a module that gives resistance to neut/nos too. I know we have cap batteries that provide that effect, but cap batteries are far too hard to fit, both in terms of medslots and PG/CPU, and the resistance effect is far too small. A better neut/nos-resistance module would be a highslot mod that gave around a 30-40% reduction in neut/nos drain amount, subject to normal stacking penalties. This would give a useful degree of protection against neuting and work well in conjunction with Nos.

There might be a problem with cap/supercaps fitting full racks of these neut-resist mods, but what use is, say, a triage Archon that has four neut-resisters fitted? It can't remote repair anything. Exchanging RR power for cap defense seems like it should be a reasonably self-balancing mechanism.



I agree the mechanic is alright

Just needs to leech more and get more reasonable fittings.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#711 - 2012-10-24 10:15:45 UTC
THANK YOU for actively listening to feedback, do your own testing and making sound conclussions.
I hope you reserve a 2 week test window soon so we can get to really throw them at eachother and perhaps even at some battlecruisers thought the task might be too much until those are rebalanced too.

Happy Pinky
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#712 - 2012-10-24 11:11:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Spugg Galdon
Alara IonStorm wrote:
sten mattson wrote:

i would not be surprised if the prophecy suffured the same fate as the maller and punisher , despite being tier 1 and not tier 2

CCP Fozzie posted in the minutes and somewhere else that he wants to make it a Drone Boat.



Which would be a sad day. Amarr drone boats should be restricted to their EWAR brawlers.

A 5% HML/HAM RoF bonus and the 5% armour bonus would be so much better (would also have synergy with T2 and be the armour option for HML/HAM)

Gypsio III wrote:


A better neut/nos-resistance module would be a highslot mod that gave around a 30-40% reduction in neut/nos drain amount, subject to normal stacking penalties. This would give a useful degree of protection against neuting and work well in conjunction with Nos.



You mean like a Nos works now? It's a high slot module which gives the effect of a neut resistance as a by product. Smile Sorry Gypsio, just trollin'. But you're right. The Nos isn't strong enough but it's current mechanic is ideal. Just needs a buff but I would say that reducing its cycle time would be better than increasing its "suck per cycle". Why? Well if you can cycle your nos faster than the neut you should be able to keep clawing back your cap between the neuts cycles.
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#713 - 2012-10-24 11:16:46 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Alara IonStorm wrote:
sten mattson wrote:

i would not be surprised if the prophecy suffured the same fate as the maller and punisher , despite being tier 1 and not tier 2

CCP Fozzie posted in the minutes and somewhere else that he wants to make it a Drone Boat.



Which would be a sad day. Amarr drone boats should be restricted to their EWAR brawlers.

A 5% HML/HAM RoF bonus and the 5% armour bonus would be so much better (would also have synergy with T2 and be the armour option for HML/HAM)

Why not drone/EWAR prophecy ?
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#714 - 2012-10-24 11:20:48 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

Why not drone/EWAR prophecy ?


Cause it would make Arbitrators pointless
Reppyk
The Black Shell
#715 - 2012-10-24 11:48:21 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Why not drone/EWAR prophecy ?
Battlecruisers are not ewar ships.

Gypsio III wrote:
The mechanic of Nos is perfect
That's why nobody (but some bears on high spare slots) are using them.

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#716 - 2012-10-24 11:52:36 UTC
Reppyk wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Why not drone/EWAR prophecy ?
Battlecruisers are not ewar ships.

Gypsio III wrote:
The mechanic of Nos is perfect
That's why nobody (but some bears on high spare slots) are using them.

BS are not EWAR ship either, except for the Scorpion and the Widow.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#717 - 2012-10-24 12:50:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
Reppyk wrote:

Gypsio III wrote:
The mechanic of Nos is perfect
That's why nobody (but some bears on high spare slots) are using them.


Well, come up with a better mechanic then - and make sure that this mechanic doesn't intrude into Neuts' role. I don't think you can do this, so we're stuck with making the module more useful within the current mechanic.

Anyway, I like Nos. They're fantastic for keeping tackle running under neuts, in fact I prefer a med Nos to an injector on a WH tackle Proteus. They're unpopular because they're too hard to fit and because the drain amount isn't enough. There's scope for cutting the cycle time too.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#718 - 2012-10-24 14:41:02 UTC
Goldensaver wrote:
Parsee789 wrote:
New changes are much better and make more sense.

You should just remove that silly 10% cap usage for lasers bonus and make all amarr ships have a higher cap recharge rate and replace that cap usage bonus for a better bonus.

After all Amarr ships should have superior capacitor to other races in both size and average recharge amount per second, just like how minmatar ships have superior speed and agility.

The only issue with that is that if the bonus wasn't a significant enough bonus to lasers, then people would strap on projectiles and have the ridiculous cap-boats. MWD's, points, and reppers all running pretty well close to stable because the cap was meant to run the guns, etc. Some strange things could happen, and I'm not sure if it would be good strange, or bad strange.

'Course, same could be said for the 'Matar ships, because the inherently high speed means they can save slots usually used for Nano's and the sort, but should they choose to use the slots for Nano's and the sort, they can get some ridiculously fast ships. And that doesn't inherently imbalance them...


A way to combat this would be and I know its a pain but add a skill that recycles laser unused power so something like 1% reduction of laser cap consumption per laser per lvl. So an Oracle with laser fitted would receive 40% reduction in laser cap usage if it has laser fitted. Could be a skill or could be a role bonus to ships.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#719 - 2012-10-24 14:46:44 UTC
Reppyk wrote:
That's why nobody (but some bears on high spare slots) are using them.


You're bad if you can't see a use for nos in pvp... While not as insanely broken as they were back in 05/06 they still have a use. I've managed many kills that would have not been possible in HACs and AFs simply by fitting a small/med nos in a utility high.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#720 - 2012-10-24 14:57:01 UTC
Another Idea I had would be to get rid of the active tank bonus and change it to a HP bonus. This would work very well for the Gallente Line as they would get more HP on some ships and that would open up the door to not add trimarks and instead add speed rigs or others. Would be interesting on Mimmy ships also although I think it would make more sense on the Caldari hull and to give Mimmy ships the Resist bonus.