These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] T1 Frigate Polish Pass and Naglfar fix

First post
Author
Reppyk
The Black Shell
#41 - 2013-03-11 15:31:39 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I'll start us off with the Nag change. Many of you know that in the past CCP has expressed a desire to remove the outdated and very annoying split weapon systems on the Naglfar Dreadnaught, but that fitting a third capital turret on the hull was too problematic and held up the idea. Instead of requiring a complete redesign of the classic Naglfar hull to do our rebalancing, or waiting until our comprehensive Dread rebalance to touch this most glaring flaw, CCP Ytterbium decided that we'd get the job done using the tools available to us.
One word : lazy.

Madracoon wrote:
What about the Moros doing a ton more DPS than the others?
What about the new nag not needing cap to pew and having access to tracking-bonus ammos ?
'Not saying that the nag is becoming the new OP dread, but people needs to remember that the moros is the most cap-hungry dread of the game (yes, worst than a reve).

I think the new nag is fine. But a better solution would be to... change some numbers with the cap missiles. Explosion radius buff, explosion velocity buff, the nag model/stats don't need any modification and the phoenix/levie are playable.

Don't be lazy.

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !

Bloodpetal
Tir Capital Management Group
#42 - 2013-03-11 15:32:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Bloodpetal
Ashen Darksabre wrote:
Bloodpetal wrote:
Quick Naglfar Comments ::

Ok, so you still get the double dps bonus for the Nag hull, correct?

On a separate note on the Nag...

There was a fringe case using the Naglfar, because it had 5 high slots... and that the launchers weren't actually bonused... you could drop one launcher, and lets say... use a Neut, or a NOS or something else.

Would you be interested in doing -1 high slot, and leaving the utility slot on the Naglfar - something that Minmatar hulls do have a tendency of having anyways?


They gotta keep the art department happy Blood. Can't demand anything too drastic like adding a turret hardpoint. A utility slot would be cool, but I don't see myself nos-ing much other than tackle, and we all know dreads that can take on tackle is OP.



HAAAAAI AAAAAAAAASHHH!!

I don't know what you're talking about, I'd be totally running Salvager Dread while blapping. Pro-PVP and ISK making!

I think we need more Utility High slot options honestly. That's another discussion for another day though...

Neut/Nos/Salvager/Auto-Target Module as the only options are a bit lackluster. Ugh

WTB more variety in the Utility High Slots!

Where I am.

Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
#43 - 2013-03-11 15:36:55 UTC
Every 'change thread' there are invariably demands for a return of SP. To be honest most of us roll our eyes at those demands. However- when you get to capital ships- there really aren't too many options to use those skills elsewhere. I have citadel torps trained to lvl 5 and citadel cruise trained to lvl 4. I have no intention of training into a Phoenix and I'm sure I'm not the only one in this boat.

Also - you made the Tristan faster? That ship is borderline OP as is!
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#44 - 2013-03-11 15:37:51 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


One some ships its a lot easier than others. On the Ferox they were able to do it without too much trouble for Retri 1.1. For the Nag we evaluated the cost-benefit of changing the model vs adding the role bonus and decided the role bonus was the better stewardship of the time we have available.

It comes down to the fact that if we make the most efficient use of the time we have available we can make the best product possible for you all.

Edit: (and the Enyo as well)



I understand, just it's easier to say the resource cost just isn't economically viable.

To be honest I like the change you've made- the only issue would be someone wanting to split fire but in a dread I don't see anyone with a brain ever doing that.

Can yo9 edit your first post also to reflect that the change will drop a high? for a while I was getting all excited over 3 utility highs.

Thanks, and you are doing god's work, son.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.

Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#45 - 2013-03-11 15:40:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Gaines
Madracoon wrote:
What about the Moros doing a ton more DPS than the others?



Moros @ 30km vs Nag @ 30km, yes
Moros @ 50km vs Nag @ 50km.... someone with time crunch that for me.

Remember you don't need to cloud lows with BCS anymore.

Nag also has best shield recharge time. I'm not going to say neuts won't hurt it, but it can hold up better than the moros which needs cap like a fat man needs McDonald's.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.

Ava Starfire
Khushakor Clan
#46 - 2013-03-11 15:40:14 UTC
With regard to the frigate changes:

The Tormentor stats are appealing. Its a good ship; basically a slower rifter with a drone bay. After this, it should be a good matchup for the Tristan, and better able to deal with even some faction frigates like hookbills.

Punisher getting a small cap regen bonus at the expense of cap amount puzzles me, and feels like a change "just to change things". It still suffers from its poor speed, but post-round1 changes, it is much, much better than it was.

Tristan is fine. Why does it need more velocity and less mass? Its already probably the best stand-and-fight frigate, overall, in the T1 lineup. Solid tank, fitting, and generous drone bay. Why does it need to be faster? What does a droneboat have to chase down, exactly?

The Kestrel, Rifter, and Breacher changes just make me ask "what"? Why? is there an outcry regarding their armor and hull amounts? More armor is better than nothing, I guess, just not sure what purpose these changes have? A speed bonus, especially given the prevalence of Condors at the moment, if you intend to leave them as is (see below) would make more sense to me.

Also, seriously? Youre leaving the condor alone? Seriously? They are far, far more aggravating - and common - than Dramiels ever were.

Once again, these changes feel like theyre being implemented just so changes can be implemented.

"There is no strength in numbers; have no such misconception." -Jayka Vofur, "Warfare in the North"

Ava Starfire
Khushakor Clan
#47 - 2013-03-11 15:45:15 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Going to requote one paragraph from the OP that is important, even while apologizing for the fact that it is necessarily vague at this time.

Quote:
Some of you will notice that there are certain imbalances that these changes do not fully rectify (for instance the current strength of light missile speed fits, the slight relative weakness of the Rifter, Breacher and the solo Punisher). We're hoping to smooth out a few of the rough edges via stat changes to the ships themselves, while some others will be addressed via changes to other parts of the metagame.


Ahhh. Read whole thread, then post.

Ok, you know about lml stuff, and you recognize it. Hope fixes come soon™!

"There is no strength in numbers; have no such misconception." -Jayka Vofur, "Warfare in the North"

Weasel Juice
Mayhem and Destruction
#48 - 2013-03-11 15:48:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Weasel Juice
Bagehi wrote:
[quote=AyayaPanda]
Moros does more damage, Revelation doesn't use ammo. Rev also has better base resists, so you can sacrifice a tank mod for a cap mod, leaving you with a ship that can exit siege, after shooting, at around jump cap (unlike the Moros). There is a good trade off between the two ships.



Confirming you are lying. The resist profile are practically the same, and in fact the Moros has a slightly better profile. Why? Well. Higher kinetic resistance because - guess what - ANTI MOROS.

In addition, if you really wanted to sacrifice a tank mod, it would the Moros. Why? Because with the massively superior damage and tracking at any given range (yes, ANY) the chances of finishing your job in one siege cycle less are much much better anyway, while the Revelation is more likely to derp around for extended periods. Also you are assuming a case where you are never being shot or neuted at. Pretty weak to use the "I can gtfo if nobody looks at me" argument here.

The only 3 advantages the Revelation has are:

It's pretty.
It's not as crappy as the Nag or Phoenix at the moment.
It does not use much ammo.

And these are not worth sacrificing much needed tracking and a whopping 60% damage at point black, and 25-30% damage at any comparable optimal/falloff over the Revelation.

But I have trust in Fozzies infinite wisdom - Moros will probably receive a significant nerf. Hopefully in terms of optimal range, since that's what the Blasters downside should be.
Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#49 - 2013-03-11 15:52:54 UTC
Reppyk wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I'll start us off with the Nag change. Many of you know that in the past CCP has expressed a desire to remove the outdated and very annoying split weapon systems on the Naglfar Dreadnaught, but that fitting a third capital turret on the hull was too problematic and held up the idea. Instead of requiring a complete redesign of the classic Naglfar hull to do our rebalancing, or waiting until our comprehensive Dread rebalance to touch this most glaring flaw, CCP Ytterbium decided that we'd get the job done using the tools available to us.
One word : lazy.

Madracoon wrote:
What about the Moros doing a ton more DPS than the others?
What about the new nag not needing cap to pew and having access to tracking-bonus ammos ?
'Not saying that the nag is becoming the new OP dread, but people needs to remember that the moros is the most cap-hungry dread of the game (yes, worst than a reve).

I think the new nag is fine. But a better solution would be to... change some numbers with the cap missiles. Explosion radius buff, explosion velocity buff, the nag model/stats don't need any modification and the phoenix/levie are playable.

Don't be lazy.


The model for a dread is a LOT bigger. It has a lot more vertices. Monkeying with larger wire frame models takes a lot more time and effort than smaller ones (like the Enyo).
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#50 - 2013-03-11 15:53:59 UTC
Weasel Juice wrote:
the massively superior damage and tracking at any given range (yes, ANY) the chances of finishing your job in one siege cycle less are much much better anyway, while the Revelation is more likely to derp around for extended periods. Also you are assuming a case where you are never being shot or neuted at. Pretty weak to use the "I can gtfo if nobody looks at me" argument here.

The only 3 advantages the Revelation has are:

It's pretty.
It's not as crappy as the Nag or Phoenix at the moment.
It does not use much ammo.

And these are not worth sacrificing much needed tracking and a whopping 60% damage at point black, and 25-30% damage at any comparable optimal/falloff over the Revelation.

But I have trust in Fozzies infinite wisdom - Moros will probably receive a significant nerf. Hopefully in terms of optimal range, since that's what the Blasters downside should be.



Sieged Phoenix vs a Moros at 60km the Phoenix will win every time, unless the pilot is an idiot.

edit: unless you are saying it's superior va the rev only

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.

Sven Viko VIkolander
Tang Ping
#51 - 2013-03-11 15:57:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Sven Viko VIkolander
The main issue with T1 frigates right now is that the gap between frigates and T1 cruisers is larger than ever--even before the original frigate buffs--which seems to me counter-productive to the goal of helping newer players perform useful roles in PVP. This is because cruisers (and, I'd add, BCs) track frigates far too well. It needs to be quite a bit harder to track frigates in a bigger ship unless you are sporting small guns.

More specifically with the T1 frig re-re-balances, I think the tormentor and the tristan are the two strongest T1 frigs atm, and buffing them is probably unwise. Both can already field a massive tank for a T1 frig, have great DPS and damage projection, and a utility high. I would recommend not giving them velocity bonuses--their slow speed is the only thing that hurts them atm (and honestly the tormentor is not too slow as is). Both ships got a massive buff, in fact, with the armor tanking changes, allowing 400m plates to fit quite easily.
Bagehi
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#52 - 2013-03-11 16:00:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Bagehi
Weasel Juice wrote:
Bagehi wrote:

Moros does more damage, Revelation doesn't use ammo. Rev also has better base resists, so you can sacrifice a tank mod for a cap mod, leaving you with a ship that can exit siege, after shooting, at around jump cap (unlike the Moros). There is a good trade off between the two ships.



Confirming you are lying. The resist profile are practically the same, and in fact the Moros has a slightly better profile. Why? Well. Higher kinetic resistance because - guess what - ANTI MOROS.

In addition, if you really wanted to sacrifice a tank mod, it would the Moros. Why? Because with the massively superior damage and tracking at any given range (yes, ANY) the chances of finishing your job in one siege cycle less are much much better anyway, while the Revelation is more likely to derp around for extended periods. Also you are assuming a case where you are never being shot or neuted at. Pretty weak to use the "I can gtfo if nobody looks at me" argument here.

The only 3 advantages the Revelation has are:

It's pretty.
It's not as crappy as the Nag or Phoenix at the moment.
It does not use much ammo.

And these are not worth sacrificing much needed tracking and a whopping 60% damage at point black, and 25-30% damage at any comparable optimal/falloff over the Revelation.

But I have trust in Fozzies infinite wisdom - Moros will probably receive a significant nerf. Hopefully in terms of optimal range, since that's what the Blasters downside should be.


Sorry, it wasn't the resist profile, it was the slot count that made the difference. I was wrong. 7 lows on the Moros, 8 on the Rev. Allowing you to fit either additional tank or a CPR, which is a better increase in cap recharge than the mid-slot cap recharger alternative. Coupled with the 10%/level ship bonus to cap recharge, the Rev comes out of siege at around jump cap, while the Moros has to take time to cap up.

And, let's be honest, most structure grinds you don't have to worry about external cap drain, and usually want to jump/warp out sooner than later once siege ends.

Also, Revelation has a 40% advantage over the Moros in optimal range. It is slightly tempered by the 18% decrease in falloff, but that is a rather impressive range advantage.

Vincent Gaines wrote:
Sieged Phoenix vs a Moros at 60km the Phoenix will win every time, unless the pilot is an idiot.

edit: unless you are saying it's superior va the rev only


The Phoenix is superior, unless the target is moving. Phoenix can't even get full damage on a siege-coasting dread.
Rillek Ratseye
Extropic Industries
The Initiative.
#53 - 2013-03-11 16:03:05 UTC
That Naglfar change could change the entire landscape of 0.0.

With these changes, a Arty Naglfar can alpha up to 90.000 depending on skills/fit.

With 277 Naglfars, you'll alpha a supercarrier every 19 seconds.....(+tidi factor!)
(calculating with 25m EHP per super carrier)

Before you needed 416 Naglfars, but could add 2 large smartbombs to them, so they were untouchable by fighter bombers.
(832 large smarties will destroy fighterbombers pretty fast...) Now you need a dedicated firewall against the fighter bombers, so the fight will not be completly one-sided.
There is a fighting chance for both sides, and the sup-capital part of the fight will win/loose the fight.

With current Alpha fleet doctrines already out there, I bet this will happen.

People already fly Maelstrom fleets, so they have minnie BS trained. And Large arty. And this summer the entry is lowered to BS4 to start train minny dread.

Maybe this is an intended counter to Super Capital Online....?

I look forward to the change and the tears when the first super carrier gets torn apart in less than a second.

/Ratseye
Unforgiven Storm
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#54 - 2013-03-11 16:17:13 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Full Naglfar changes are:
New Fixed Role Bonus: +50% Capital Projectile Weapon Damage
-2 High Slots
-2 Launcher Slots
-144000 Powergrid
-180 CPU



this just leaves the phoenix as the only pure and utter **** dread

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) :-)

Lydia vanPersie
Star Frontiers
Brotherhood of Spacers
#55 - 2013-03-11 16:17:39 UTC
[notadreadpilot]

The new naglfar looks significantly better, but capital missiles are currently complete rubbish. They're useless as a POS module due to the CPU requirement, and on a Phoenix it can be speed-tanked by an armor BS or even a triage carrier that's getting bumps from a fleetmate. Citadel missiles need an exp radius buff (not sure what happenned with increasing it in the last rebalance), an exp. velocity buff so that they could hit a non-triaged Archon for at least 85% damage and a reduced time of flight/increased velocity so that it could actually hit the primary target. The Phoenix really ought to get selectable damage types, and in addition to having the velocity/radius penalty removed from the siege module, should have sieged/unsieged changes handles like a Stealth Bomber cloaking, not hitting for for 0 damage regardless.

[/notadreadpilot]

(^;

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#56 - 2013-03-11 16:25:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
Lydia vanPersie wrote:
[notadreadpilot]

The new naglfar looks significantly better, but capital missiles are currently complete rubbish. They're useless as a POS module due to the CPU requirement, and on a Phoenix it can be speed-tanked by an armor BS or even a triage carrier that's getting bumps from a fleetmate. Citadel missiles need an exp radius buff (not sure what happenned with increasing it in the last rebalance), an exp. velocity buff so that they could hit a non-triaged Archon for at least 85% damage and a reduced time of flight/increased velocity so that it could actually hit the primary target. The Phoenix really ought to get selectable damage types, and in addition to having the velocity/radius penalty removed from the siege module, should have sieged/unsieged changes handles like a Stealth Bomber cloaking, not hitting for for 0 damage regardless.

[/notadreadpilot]


There's a funny thing about citadel missiles and the GMP changes - Fozzie was insistent that GMP would apply to subcapital missiles only - "Change the Guided Missile Precision skill, as well as all associated implants and rigs to affect all subcap missiles". But something may have gone wrong; when I checked last month, GMP and Rigours were affecting citadel missiles on the test server, giving citadel torps/cruise explosion radii of 1500 m and 1313 m - even EFT agrees too!

I didn't check TQ because I wasn't going to waste money on a Phoenix though - even with GMP affecting them, they're still pointless.
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#57 - 2013-03-11 16:26:20 UTC
Unforgiven Storm wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Full Naglfar changes are:
New Fixed Role Bonus: +50% Capital Projectile Weapon Damage
-2 High Slots
-2 Launcher Slots
-144000 Powergrid
-180 CPU



this just leaves the phoenix as the only pure and utter **** dread



It's not complete crap, it's very good against sieged caps as long as they're stationary, and has an amazing tank.

All it'd need is a tiny tweak to explosion velocity and it'll be stellar.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.

Grarr Dexx
The Congregation
HIDDEN LEAF VILLAGE NINJA AssAssIn SQUAD eSports
#58 - 2013-03-11 16:29:27 UTC
I'm not sure why this took three ******* pages, but is the Naglfar going to compensate in the fact that it only needs to fit two guns to deal almost as much damage as the Moros and more damage than the Revelation do with three? Cost / efficiency is skewed here. One gun less to fit and 33% less ammo to use, it seems unfair.
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#59 - 2013-03-11 16:33:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Gypsio III
Vincent Gaines wrote:
Unforgiven Storm wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:


Full Naglfar changes are:
New Fixed Role Bonus: +50% Capital Projectile Weapon Damage
-2 High Slots
-2 Launcher Slots
-144000 Powergrid
-180 CPU



this just leaves the phoenix as the only pure and utter **** dread


It's not complete crap, it's very good against sieged caps as long as they're stationary, and has an amazing tank.


Its performance against stationary caps is considerably inferior to Moros and new Naglfar.
The kinetic-only damage bonus is easily made worthless by in-combat refitting (this really should be all-damage-types).
It's only arguably better at hitting other caps than the Revelation, and even there the raw DPS figures are very similar, it's only the Rev's awful damage types vs. generic armour caps that gives the Phoenix an advantage.

It's usable against other caps, but there's no reason to fly it really.
Luscius Uta
#60 - 2013-03-11 16:42:27 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:

Someone like you says it would be nice if there were a third turret because of the graphics.
A Naglfar pilot says "SWEET! My guns work better and only require half the ammo as before!"


Unless CCP applies the same principle to other 3 dreads it's not going to be a good idea.
Because capital projectile turrets don't need capacitor and can do any type damage I sense Naglfar is going to be OP (no, I don't want it to stay sucky, just balanced...same goes for Phoenix).

Workarounds are not bugfixes.