These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Rynnik
Evasion Gaming
The Ancients.
#101 - 2013-03-27 21:35:08 UTC
We waited so long for a 3 mid Amarr laser frig and finally got one with the Tormentor and Executioner. I was really hoping for a 4 mid Amarr laser cruiser with this balance pass. I understood why you left the Omen and Maller at 3 mids. But now we are looking at 5 Amarr laser cruisers (Omen, Navy Omen, Maller, Navy Aug, Zealot) all with exactly the same 5-3-7 slot layout! Please consider changing this.

Looking at the options we REALLY don't want to open the can of worms that a kiting shield NOmen would be with 4 mids, and being as shield tanking would negate one of the Navy Augs bonuses immediately it seems like the best candidate. Lose a low slot and gain a mid or if you are really afraid of the obvious laser, dual-neut, full tackle + cap booster monster that would follow then drop one of the utility highs to a mid. Either way it would be a real shame to go through all this balancing and leave all 5 laser cruisers with identical slots - please think about switching something around to get to a 4 mid count.
Quontor Zarrkos
Island Monkeys
#102 - 2013-03-27 21:38:08 UTC
I really agree with you here on the fact that all the amarr laser cruisers now have the same slot layout! I'm also eagerly waiting for the phantasm rebalance as it's the only laser ship with a 'native' shield tank. And a shield tanked kiting NOmen/phantasm would actually be really cool imo, it would be a monster, but it'd be cool as a kiting ship after the TE nerf that hits the minie kiting ships so hard. Scorch is awesome regardless, fozzie will probably hit that as well with his nerfbat, or buff long range guns/ammo as right now the long range ammo for shortrange guns is all overpowered as hell.
BadFC
Doomheim
#103 - 2013-03-27 21:42:34 UTC
Pinky Feldman wrote:

Anyways Fozzie, it sounds like you guys are going to be doing some serious changes to the game Meta and I hope you guys go through with some of the more drastic changes despite player protests.


Yeah, because moar tears are legendary for their use of t1 faction cruisers... derp.
WInter Borne
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#104 - 2013-03-27 21:43:42 UTC
I havent had a chance to read the entire thread, but shouldn't the Navy Caracal get a -5% bonus to explosion radius? Or do I have the equation variables upside down?
Bosquit
Revenent Defence Corperation
Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive
#105 - 2013-03-27 21:44:07 UTC
Pinky Feldman wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Bosquit wrote:
Sort of agree with that as well, doesn't really make sense giving them weird roles that are so drastically different from their T1 variants. They are just supposed to be slightly superior ships that the Factions use, not completely different.

The trend is to give every single ship something different w.r.t bonus and performance. No ship is simply a better version of another ship anymore. So, these bonuses make perfect sense.


Well said, X Gal.

An optimal range bonus for the Nomen adds much needed change to the Meta for solo, small gang, and larger fleet doctrines, since right now its just a more expensive, slightly better Maller. The loss in DPS makes sense in the context of "Currently ships with good range do too much dmg" changes ie: the Drake. Though, it still feels odd that the raw gun DPS is the least out of all T1 Amarr cruisers now. Maybe more drone bandwidth? *Shrugs*

Having less armour than the SFI is a bit silly as well.

Anyways Fozzie, it sounds like you guys are going to be doing some serious changes to the game Meta and I hope you guys go through with some of the more drastic changes despite player protests. Mixing up the game meta is great because of the explosion of PVP that happens as groups test whats good and develop counters of their own.



Totally don't agree with either of you. The Navy faction ships are not supposed to be some unique line of ships. They are supposed to represent a counter to Capsuleers ships by adding improvements that the Navy's have added, essentially making them slightly better versions of their T1 counterparts.

I mean what are we gonna get when we get the Faction Battlecruisers, Blaster Drakes, Missile Hurricanes. There aren't supposed to be completely different ships, there supposed to be something that represents an improvement from T1 but not as specialized or good as T2.

When they went and made T1 logistics, they should have committed to making Faction Logistics as well, or they should change the hulls in my opinion.

"Insert Philosophical Statement Here"
Maegor Stark
State War Academy
Caldari State
#106 - 2013-03-27 21:50:16 UTC
wait,
Quote:
5% bonus to Heavy Assault and Heavy Missile explosion radius


that's supposed to be a -5, right? Since explosion radius decreases damage against small targets?
Psigno Jenny
Perkone
Caldari State
#107 - 2013-03-27 21:54:07 UTC
Escobar Slim III wrote:
FIRST.


I love you.
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#108 - 2013-03-27 21:56:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Iam Widdershins
Liang Nuren wrote:
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
I can't help but feel like people are looking at the optimal bonus like it's a non-bonus because it doesn't affect the pretty EFT number. It's one of the most powerful bonuses in the game - especially on a laser ship. I'm super excited by the new NOmen, and if it's as bad as you claim then we will see them adjust it some in a polish pass.

-Liang


Well the issue is keeping a distinction between NOmen and Zealot. Everyone loves optimal bonuses, however having 2 extremely similar boats is not that useful.


They aren't extremely similar.

-Liang


You're right, one of them does nearly 40% more damage with guns and has EHP, and the other one goes kind of fast and has a flight of drones that are pretty useless for an optimal bonused ship.

I didn't think anyone would seriously be concerned that the Zealot would be obsoleted by the changes to the Nomen. Quite the opposite, I think the Nomen is very nearly useless on release because the Zealot already exists.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
BadFC
Doomheim
#109 - 2013-03-27 22:03:40 UTC
Bosquit wrote:


When they went and made T1 logistics, they should have committed to making Faction Logistics as well, or they should change the hulls in my opinion.


Sorta.

But I think the t1 logistics bonuses should have gone to the faction versions, instead of the basic version that just anyone can manufacture...

In my mind, the progression should be a legitimate t1 > faction>t2.

It's beside the point, but it might be interesting if FW got some sort of 'enlistment' bonuses that made these ships a little better when used in the faction warfare part of the game...
BadFC
Doomheim
#110 - 2013-03-27 22:05:09 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
I can't help but feel like people are looking at the optimal bonus like it's a non-bonus because it doesn't affect the pretty EFT number. It's one of the most powerful bonuses in the game - especially on a laser ship. I'm super excited by the new NOmen, and if it's as bad as you claim then we will see them adjust it some in a polish pass.

-Liang


Well the issue is keeping a distinction between NOmen and Zealot. Everyone loves optimal bonuses, however having 2 extremely similar boats is not that useful.


They aren't extremely similar.

-Liang


You're right, one of them does nearly 40% more damage with guns and has EHP, and the other one goes kind of fast and has a flight of drones that are pretty useless for an optimal bonused ship.

I didn't think anyone would seriously be concerned that the Zealot would be obsoleted by the changes to the Nomen. Quite the opposite, I think the Nomen is very nearly useless on release because the Zealot already exists.


I agree.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#111 - 2013-03-27 22:07:49 UTC
Bosquit wrote:

Totally don't agree with either of you. The Navy faction ships are not supposed to be some unique line of ships. They are supposed to represent a counter to Capsuleers ships by adding improvements that the Navy's have added, essentially making them slightly better versions of their T1 counterparts.
Example: Comets are better overall frigates, but they are slower than the atron. They can't rep as much as the incursus. They don't have as many drones as the tristan. None of these ships has the same set of bonuses.
Anaphylacti
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#112 - 2013-03-27 22:14:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Anaphylacti
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Scythe Fleet Issue: This is my attempt to redeem the Minmatar split weapons tradition. Instead of forcing both weapon systems it gives both as viable choices.


This worked so well for the Naga...

R.I.P. Torp Naga the best ship that never was.

Also all the faction cruisers -vexor need more drones.
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#113 - 2013-03-27 22:18:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonas Sukarala
exqueror navy issue is lacking a lot of armour here its not able to structure tank quite like an frigate can like the enyo.
Navy omen i am confused about its role if you look at the zealot they are very similar same optimal range bonus....
Also the sensor strength creep is too much 21 is better than a drake........

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#114 - 2013-03-27 22:21:25 UTC
Anaphylacti wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Scythe Fleet Issue: This is my attempt to redeem the Minmatar split weapons tradition. Instead of forcing both weapon systems it gives both as viable choices.


This worked so well for the Naga...

R.I.P. Torp Naga the best ship that never was.


Not this **** again.
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#115 - 2013-03-27 22:25:01 UTC
I like the focus on extreme combat doctrines for that faction and it basically feels like one faction attack cruiser and one faction combat cruiser.

As for specifics

ENI is slower but seems to be most agile will need to see how that plays out. Feels a little low on powergrid to fit say ions or 200mm rails + moderate armour tank like 800mm plate, am almost certain to be using a LSE.

Navy Vexor, really nasty brawler and I like the focus on drone bonuses but losing the equivalent of 4.25 turrets for a single heavy drone seems a bit harsh and even with the speed and tracking bonus I have concerns as to how effectively even mediums can apply damage to a fast cruiser when it is not webbed and scrammed. Hopefully more changes to drones are coming, but I still would prefer four unbonused turret hardpoints as back up.
Aeril Malkyre
Knights of the Ouroboros
#116 - 2013-03-27 22:25:11 UTC
Adding myself to 'whaaaaat is going on with the Stabber?' If the mass was outlier in your formulas and needed brought in line, I might understand. But an armor reduction, mass increase, and shield increase looks scatter-shot. What's your intent for the hull? Paired with the TE opt/fall reduction, you're looking at a tackler/brawler that's now slower and has to get closer to effect DPS. Minmatar have speed and low sig radius. Both of which are going the other direction on this hull.

Then there's the Scythe. The buffs are awesome. But the split weapons system is still split. Even if your intent is either/or, it's a hull with two opposing bonuses. On top of the fact that it has absolutely zero to do with its logi predecessor. The Republic Fleet looked at the old girl and said "Well, logistics is nice, but what we need is more guns"? Echoing the 'I thought the faction was just supposed to be a slightly fancier version of the T1?' confusion.

The old fluff text calls it a mini-Typhoon. Most are pretty sure you're going to turn the Typhoon into the Minmatar missile BS. So if the Scythe is going down the combat road instead of logi, start the trend now. Missiles, and I'd push for a shield boost bonus. falls in line with the new Cyclone.

Really, I think we'd all benefit from some more discussion of design intent with these two.
chris elliot
Seal Club Six
Plug N Play
#117 - 2013-03-27 22:28:24 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:

Also the sensor strength creep is too much 21 is better than a drake........



Sensor creep is a good thing. Ecm is broken as hell so anything to help even it out a bit is a good thing. Especially when he is adding drone flights to everything.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#118 - 2013-03-27 22:29:29 UTC
Very excited to see the birth of the first true drone boat (dual bonused drones), but I really think you ought to consider higher bonused medium drones over heavies IF this ship is to be a cruiser-killer. However, if the design intent is to fly heavies (and the Ishtar will get reworked for bonuses more sentry-oriented, leaving the "cruiser-killer" moniker to the Vexor), then I think the bonuses are appropriate for that.

I'd love to see more boats become true drone boats, and there's some great ideas floating around these forums about both ship changes and the long-overdue drone ones.

Also, I fear the NOmen will supplant or even replace the Zealot for the premier long-ranged laser platform, but I'm sure you guys ave considered that knowing what you know and having the T2 HAC crystal ball handy.

Overall, very good work, but maybe figure something else out with the dual type damage bonus on the SFI and perhaps a little more differentiation with the ONI and the Caracal.

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Labceh
Little Willies
#119 - 2013-03-27 22:29:58 UTC
It's been mentioned several times already however I feel the need to say it once more. As of late, Minmatar ships seem to have been getting the short end of the stick. What are your visions with the Minmatar line-up? I'm really confused with the direction you guys are taking and would like some clarification.

When I joined the game, Minmatar ships were fast, fought in fall-off and possessed very good damage despite having much weaker tanks. Recently, with the latest patches, their align time have been on par (or sometimes even worse) as the other ships in their category (I mean really.. the omen aligns faster than the scythe?). They deal less damage and have a terribly hard time to apply any of it; they are still unable to brawl with other ship types within their category since they simply lack the tank.

The scythe will be receiving awful bonuses where only one can be useful at a time. It can equip projectiles, it can shoot missiles, it can shield tank, it can armour tank but it sure as hell isn't good at any of them. Period.
The stabber deals with the same problem.

FIX IT.

Labceh
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#120 - 2013-03-27 22:30:55 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
exqueror navy issue is lacking a lot of armour here its not able to structure tank quite like an frigate can like the enyo

ENI: 782 dps without drones, not overheated. 1000 dps overheated with drones, and stupidfast (3 km/s overheated). It's going to die in a fire quite a bit, but each death will be glorious.