These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#221 - 2013-07-18 14:55:39 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
This worries me for the T3 balance, many of these ships cant compete with the Navy balance pass. Will this mean T3 ships will be worse than T1?


Yup.
All hail the great "rebalance".
Nothing wrong with paying 400 M for a hull and subssytems, plus risk 3-5 days SP every time you fly it, for the privilege of gutting the rigs every time you want to change its role.

Yes, will be doing that instead of buying 20 T1 cruiser hulls that outperform the T2 and T3 equivalent.


Agreed entirely. The mob hunger for T3 nerfs risks doing real damage to the game.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#222 - 2013-07-18 14:56:49 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright I've been pretty busy today but I'm trying to catch up on feedback. Here's some initial thoughts:

I'll look at the Ishtar fitting. To me it seems like one of the stronger HACs already and it gained a bonus to damage projection and application so I didn't see a need to give it even more buffs. I don't think of it as a ship that ought to be running medium sized mods in all its high slots. All that said, I'll have another look.

While the Sacrilege didn't gain bonuses or slot changes, the added PG and added drone bay push it over the edge I think it would become a solid heavy brawler with a lot of utility. I spent some time trying to find a 4th bonus that fits better than the cap recharge bonus but it's actually very difficult. I think keeping its character as a really sturdy bruiser seems more interesting than anything else I've come across, but I'll keep watching feedback on this. Its really important to me that this both useful and fun.

I think the Cerberus is going to be really powerful. It can now do the extremely long range thing with HML as well as added capacity to be an amazing HAM skirmisher. The role bonus means it has a lot of added survivability while it establishes or maintains range for both roles.

On a related note: someone commented that because HACs with MWD active have larger sig than battleship gun resolution the role bonus is useless. This is not true and I recommend you hop over to the medium weapon balance thread and read some of the explanation for the way tracking works to find out why.

Generally on the role of HACs I think theres a lot of disagreement because people seem to have different ideas of what they are supposed to do. The easiest thing to say on this is that they are not supposed to out-perform t1 or faction cruisers in every way. With this role bonus addition we are really emphasizing that they are supposed to be harder to kill than t1 or faction variations, which is true also for Assault Frigs. They have much better effective HP coming from both base HP and resists. This lends them to both large fleets, where they can be very difficult to kill, or small engagements where they provide a great platform for both primary damage and anti-support which isn't nearly as easy to kill as lower tech variations.

Keep it coming, glad that a lot of you seem excited


The ishtar's bonus to 'damage application' only works on sentries. Giving it drone speed as well wouldn't be making the sentry blob setup more powerful. That bay/level bonus is dumb, it's like dropping the zealot to 1 gun, then giving it +1 per level of hac.

You'll never do this, but I still think giving it 50 bandwidth and a double damage drone bonus would be cool, then it would project damage more like a conventional turret or missile ship. ~500 dps of medium drones going around at 3km/s would be nice. Sentries are great, but being stuck with them isn't always great.
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#223 - 2013-07-18 14:57:28 UTC
Mr Rise

Nice to see this happen, not played yet with all numbers yadaya but with Rails changes aren't we going to see stupid Raxes and Deimos everywhere?

Just a first feeling, maybe second dmg bonus needs to be turned in to better optimal or fall off. Notice I will not complain at all if I have full Gallente doctrines going around but rails changes +bonus might make these 2 ships a bit out of whack.

4 meds = enough to make it a-la ASB Vigilant with JUST better resist profile and lows full of dmg mods which might finish with a ship taking on all others specially in numbers.
Hope I'm wrong and it's just a bad feeling, I want my Gallente ships better but not out of whack to see them nerf to the ground in 6months.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
riando
FishRobot
#224 - 2013-07-18 14:57:33 UTC
Guys, I hope you're joking,
" Vaga anyway as a close range active brawler"
Or you know nothing about vaga, or ... i hope you're joking, vaga its a kite long range ship! It has not slots from active tank!
So, ideal would be maximize bonus for tracking&faloff. And nothing new not need!
JerseyBOI 2
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#225 - 2013-07-18 14:57:37 UTC
yeah well now you see how much drones as the prime weapons system sucks so yeah all those and it still only decent. but anyway just support sentries on it is all.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#226 - 2013-07-18 14:58:27 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright I've been pretty busy today but I'm trying to catch up on feedback. Here's some initial thoughts:

I'll look at the Ishtar fitting. To me it seems like one of the stronger HACs already and it gained a bonus to damage projection and application so I didn't see a need to give it even more buffs. I don't think of it as a ship that ought to be running medium sized mods in all its high slots. All that said, I'll have another look.

While the Sacrilege didn't gain bonuses or slot changes, the added PG and added drone bay push it over the edge I think it would become a solid heavy brawler with a lot of utility. I spent some time trying to find a 4th bonus that fits better than the cap recharge bonus but it's actually very difficult. I think keeping its character as a really sturdy bruiser seems more interesting than anything else I've come across, but I'll keep watching feedback on this. Its really important to me that this both useful and fun.

I think the Cerberus is going to be really powerful. It can now do the extremely long range thing with HML as well as added capacity to be an amazing HAM skirmisher. The role bonus means it has a lot of added survivability while it establishes or maintains range for both roles.

On a related note: someone commented that because HACs with MWD active have larger sig than battleship gun resolution the role bonus is useless. This is not true and I recommend you hop over to the medium weapon balance thread and read some of the explanation for the way tracking works to find out why.

Generally on the role of HACs I think theres a lot of disagreement because people seem to have different ideas of what they are supposed to do. The easiest thing to say on this is that they are not supposed to out-perform t1 or faction cruisers in every way. With this role bonus addition we are really emphasizing that they are supposed to be harder to kill than t1 or faction variations, which is true also for Assault Frigs. They have much better effective HP coming from both base HP and resists. This lends them to both large fleets, where they can be very difficult to kill, or small engagements where they provide a great platform for both primary damage and anti-support which isn't nearly as easy to kill as lower tech variations.

Keep it coming, glad that a lot of you seem excited


lots of fluff without answering anything at all .. you would make a good politician :P

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
Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#227 - 2013-07-18 14:58:30 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright I've been pretty busy today but I'm trying to catch up on feedback. Here's some initial thoughts:

I'll look at the Ishtar fitting. To me it seems like one of the stronger HACs already and it gained a bonus to damage projection and application so I didn't see a need to give it even more buffs. I don't think of it as a ship that ought to be running medium sized mods in all its high slots. All that said, I'll have another look.

While the Sacrilege didn't gain bonuses or slot changes, the added PG and added drone bay push it over the edge I think it would become a solid heavy brawler with a lot of utility. I spent some time trying to find a 4th bonus that fits better than the cap recharge bonus but it's actually very difficult. I think keeping its character as a really sturdy bruiser seems more interesting than anything else I've come across, but I'll keep watching feedback on this. Its really important to me that this both useful and fun.

I think the Cerberus is going to be really powerful. It can now do the extremely long range thing with HML as well as added capacity to be an amazing HAM skirmisher. The role bonus means it has a lot of added survivability while it establishes or maintains range for both roles.

On a related note: someone commented that because HACs with MWD active have larger sig than battleship gun resolution the role bonus is useless. This is not true and I recommend you hop over to the medium weapon balance thread and read some of the explanation for the way tracking works to find out why.

Generally on the role of HACs I think theres a lot of disagreement because people seem to have different ideas of what they are supposed to do. The easiest thing to say on this is that they are not supposed to out-perform t1 or faction cruisers in every way. With this role bonus addition we are really emphasizing that they are supposed to be harder to kill than t1 or faction variations, which is true also for Assault Frigs. They have much better effective HP coming from both base HP and resists. This lends them to both large fleets, where they can be very difficult to kill, or small engagements where they provide a great platform for both primary damage and anti-support which isn't nearly as easy to kill as lower tech variations.

Keep it coming, glad that a lot of you seem excited


So what you are saying is basically that t2 variants arent mean to be more powerfull than t1/navy? So tell me why should i prefer to use the vaga per exemple against a sfi?
Lixia Saran
Perkone
Caldari State
#228 - 2013-07-18 14:59:12 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
This worries me for the T3 balance, many of these ships cant compete with the Navy balance pass. Will this mean T3 ships will be worse than T1?


Yup.
All hail the great "rebalance".
Nothing wrong with paying 400 M for a hull and subssytems, plus risk 3-5 days SP every time you fly it, for the privilege of gutting the rigs every time you want to change its role.

Yes, will be doing that instead of buying 20 T1 cruiser hulls that outperform the T2 and T3 equivalent.


Agreed entirely. The mob hunger for T3 nerfs risks doing real damage to the game.


Agreed here as well. I can barely see the justification of flying a vaga over a SFI (granted one's a shield the other's mostly an armor ship) because of the price difference vs the 'gain' in power.
Haradgrim
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#229 - 2013-07-18 14:59:35 UTC
I really like most of the changes (especially the eagle) but I still have 3 primary concerns:

1) The 50% reduction to MWD is great but I think it might need to be higher for HACs than it was made for AFs. With AFs, the range on small guns is such that the MWD puts you out of range before someone with sufficient tracking can kill you and the sig reduction is enough to keep you from getting Alpha'd or DPS'd to quickly. Now I haven't looked closely at what the tracking looks like post-MWD-sig-reduction but my initial feeling is that it will be too easy to Alpha a HAC with medium long range weapons with a tracking fit or if their velocity drops at any point (which happens more frequently than in frigs).

2) The vaga, even if people are using SBs on them, is an iconic ship with an iconic role. It used to be perhaps the most overpowered ship in the game (pre-polycarbon nerf) but was also one of the most fun. I think that if it were moved closer to its old role of being an almost interceptor style cruiser it would make for much more interesting game-play especially now that the meta is a lot different due to the changes to scrams and prevalence of tracking fits.

3) The Deimos MWD cap bonus is bad, everyone hates it and it just feels annoying and out of place. So does the cap bonus on the Sac but at least that could be useful.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#230 - 2013-07-18 14:59:59 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
Fr0stle wrote:
I'll just add my voice to the group and ask for some more CPU on the Ishtar. It was always CPU gimped and now we have all these new drone modules that are CPU heavy too. More CPU is needed to make this ship viable in it's intended role.

that and reducing CPU on all drone mods would make sense ... also add a drone tracking for the lows like a TE for drones.

…or, hell, just to enforce the whole “T2 = specialisation” angle…

How about having the Ishtar reduce the CPU need for drone mods? That way, the ship can maintain its limited CPU to keep it from being too versatile, but you can still pack it absolutely full of the very specific set of mods that are related to its niche without making those available to every ship out there.

At -10%/level, that would mean Omnilink IIs at 29.5 tf, Drone link IIs at 27.5 tf, and Drone damage amps at 15 tf when you have HAC V.

So in a bonus redo for the Ishtar we could/would like to see
Gallente Cruiser
10% Drone damage and HP per level
5% Drone Tracking and MWD velocity per level
Heavy Assault Ships
-10% to the CPU need of Drone Upgrade Modules per level
10% to Drone Tracking and Optimal range per level


certainly better than it is now at least.

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
Andrea Griffin
#231 - 2013-07-18 15:00:28 UTC
SokoleOko wrote:
I'm dissapointed. Other than repeating AFs bonus, there's really nothing new.
Exactly. This is just another "More EHP, More DPS" ship line. There isn't that something special that really sets these ships apart.

CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer.
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
#232 - 2013-07-18 15:00:35 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright I've been pretty busy today but I'm trying to catch up on feedback. Here's some initial thoughts:

I'll look at the Ishtar fitting. To me it seems like one of the stronger HACs already and it gained a bonus to damage projection and application so I didn't see a need to give it even more buffs. I don't think of it as a ship that ought to be running medium sized mods in all its high slots. All that said, I'll have another look.

While the Sacrilege didn't gain bonuses or slot changes, the added PG and added drone bay push it over the edge I think it would become a solid heavy brawler with a lot of utility. I spent some time trying to find a 4th bonus that fits better than the cap recharge bonus but it's actually very difficult. I think keeping its character as a really sturdy bruiser seems more interesting than anything else I've come across, but I'll keep watching feedback on this. Its really important to me that this both useful and fun.



Ishtar just got an extra turret slot, so not having the fitting requirement improved seams daft given the fact that you just did that. plus it was always a ***** to fit anyhow

sac, omg its still crap, but as of now you just made it worse than all of them even the now actually decent eagle, well done. remove utility high and give it that extra low it needs so badly for tank.

rest are mostly ok changes

OMG when can i get a pic here
GeeShizzle MacCloud
#233 - 2013-07-18 15:00:38 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
YAYYYY

EAGLE - The Eagle will be a lot better because of the rail change alone, but we've also increased its power grid and replaced the utility high with an extra mid slot.

Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty

Caldari Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
4% bonus to shield resistances

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage

Slot layout: 5H(-1), 6M(+1), 4L; 5 turrets, 1 launchers(-1)
Fittings: 950 PWG(+75), 430 CPU(-8)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2500(+391) / 1250(-16) / 1550(+3)
Capacitor (amount) : 1350(-25)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 175(+11) / .576 / 11720000 / 9.36s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km / 252 / 8
Sensor strength: 18 Gravimetric
Signature radius: 150



i am seeing that correct yah? so thats a 50% bonus to med hybrids optimal slapped ontop of another potential 50% bonus to med hybrids optimal yes?
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#234 - 2013-07-18 15:00:54 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright I've been pretty busy today but I'm trying to catch up on feedback. Here's some initial thoughts:

I'll look at the Ishtar fitting. To me it seems like one of the stronger HACs already and it gained a bonus to damage projection and application so I didn't see a need to give it even more buffs. I don't think of it as a ship that ought to be running medium sized mods in all its high slots. All that said, I'll have another look.

While the Sacrilege didn't gain bonuses or slot changes, the added PG and added drone bay push it over the edge I think it would become a solid heavy brawler with a lot of utility. I spent some time trying to find a 4th bonus that fits better than the cap recharge bonus but it's actually very difficult. I think keeping its character as a really sturdy bruiser seems more interesting than anything else I've come across, but I'll keep watching feedback on this. Its really important to me that this both useful and fun.

I think the Cerberus is going to be really powerful. It can now do the extremely long range thing with HML as well as added capacity to be an amazing HAM skirmisher. The role bonus means it has a lot of added survivability while it establishes or maintains range for both roles.

On a related note: someone commented that because HACs with MWD active have larger sig than battleship gun resolution the role bonus is useless. This is not true and I recommend you hop over to the medium weapon balance thread and read some of the explanation for the way tracking works to find out why.

Generally on the role of HACs I think theres a lot of disagreement because people seem to have different ideas of what they are supposed to do. The easiest thing to say on this is that they are not supposed to out-perform t1 or faction cruisers in every way. With this role bonus addition we are really emphasizing that they are supposed to be harder to kill than t1 or faction variations, which is true also for Assault Frigs. They have much better effective HP coming from both base HP and resists. This lends them to both large fleets, where they can be very difficult to kill, or small engagements where they provide a great platform for both primary damage and anti-support which isn't nearly as easy to kill as lower tech variations.

Keep it coming, glad that a lot of you seem excited


Damage application of one type of drones, sentries. Drones suck. Why are you limiting us to a one trick pony here? The Ishtar should be specializing in drones without stomping on the toes of the Vexor or VNI. It already has less DPS than both due to the lack of turret bonus and the fitting requirements. Please consider dropping drone bay bonus for the speed bonus. This will not stomp either the Vexor or the VNI. Both are much faster and make for better brawlers. This will just allow the Ishtar to brawl as well.
Voith
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#235 - 2013-07-18 15:01:06 UTC
riando wrote:
Guys, I hope you're joking,
" Vaga anyway as a close range active brawler"
Or you know nothing about vaga, or ... i hope you're joking, vaga its a kite long range ship! It has not slots from active tank!
So, ideal would be maximize bonus for tracking&faloff. And nothing new not need!

Holy **** people.

The vaga got nothing but buffs.

It's called an ASB. Look it up, fit one, experience Godmode on Vaga.
Sai Talos
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2013-07-18 15:01:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Sai Talos
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Considering that we've been shouting at the top of our lungs for a year that T2 won't get buffed as much as T1 was, I don't know why you're surprised.


Hey Fozzie, Rise, thanks for all the hard work. These changes look great, and I love the Medium gun changes.

I am a bit concerned about the upcoming giant nerf bat that's coming to T3's, however. It doesn't look like T2 has stepped up to be a viable alternative in high class wormhole pvp/pve comps like we (the WH community) have been hoping.

EDIT: These ships will not tank sleepers, and do not bridge the DPS/Tank gap between T1 and T3 effectively, at least as it stands. Unless of course T3 will also just receive a giant penalty, bringing all three tiers closer together. While you have been saying T2 will not get as much buff as T1, you have also said the T3 rebalance is predicated on a solid T2 backbone...

Just bear in mind we will need something that's going to work when the T3 changes hit, and this will not do that for us. Thanks.

The guy that does all the videos
Gripen
#237 - 2013-07-18 15:01:25 UTC
Oh... once again this stupid MWD signature bonus which makes choosing between MWD and AB even more no-brainer decision. Instead of adding choices you remove them from the game again and again.
CCP Rise wrote:
... afterburner variations that are already very strong ...

I must confess, that I haven't been active for last year but isn't ABHACs just one trick pony against incompetent foes who fail at trivial thing of providing webbing support and keeping it alive and this format popularity sharply declined after short initial spark of novelty? Am I wrong here?
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#238 - 2013-07-18 15:02:00 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

I think the Cerberus is going to be really powerful. It can now do the extremely long range thing with HML as well as added capacity to be an amazing HAM skirmisher.


"Amazing" is exactly the right word.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Lixia Saran
Perkone
Caldari State
#239 - 2013-07-18 15:02:22 UTC
Dear CCP Santa,

while you are rebalancing T2 ships, please can you please pass a note to the art team to remove space camo (I'm looking at you vagabond!)

Thanks,

Lixia

P.S.: Milk and Cookies are on the table.
Marcel Devereux
Aideron Robotics
Aideron Robotics.
#240 - 2013-07-18 15:02:30 UTC
Another minor nit. Please remove the launchers from Deimos. There is no need for them without the utility high.