These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#81 - 2013-07-18 12:51:48 UTC
If sig bonuses don't help AFs and inties survive being on grid with tier 3 BCs for more than 10s, I don't see how it will help HACs out much more. Sig bonus really seems kind of a deimos/sacrilege kind of bonus, not the kind of thing you want on an eagle or cerberus chilling at long range.
MyrddinBishop
NOMADS.
#82 - 2013-07-18 12:53:24 UTC
mynnna wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU

The vexor is gun bonused and sort of expected to use them, the ishtar is not. You can fit a 1600mm plate based tank and "basically anything you want" to the vexor already if you don't make much use of the highs, or you can fill your highs with utility modules at the cost of a lighter tank and tighter fitting. It's a fair trade off.

And what is the reason the navy vexor has the same power grid and +10 CPU over the vexor yet only has 2 unbonused turrets, where as the Ishtar got an extra turret.

Lol Okay, can't argue with you there.

I really think that the Ishtar needs some sort of buff to fitting. I fully expected it to get some sort of love in this regard with this balance pass and am disappointed that it has not. I think that the comparison to the Faction Cruiser equivalent is a fair one to make. The Vexor Navy Issue(VNI) and the Ishtar have very similar bonuses to drones. However, it is a toss up and maybe even more of a nod toward using the VNI just because of fitting. I don't believe this should be the case. I feel that the nod towards preference should not be towards the Faction Cruiser but toward the HAC. I think this could be done simply by expanding the fitting to be more in line with the VNI.

VNI Fittings: 800 PWG, 310 CPU

Ishtar Fittings: 700 PWG, 285 CPU

Just under 10% more CPU and well over 10% more PWG is pretty signigicant and I would like to see this addressed or at the very least I hope to hear the reasoning behind making the Ishtar or even some of the other HACs either very similar in power or even having the Faction Cruisers be slightly better than there equivilant HAC.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#83 - 2013-07-18 12:53:30 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
If sig bonuses don't help AFs and inties survive being on grid with tier 3 BCs for more than 10s, I don't see how it will help HACs out much more. Sig bonus really seems kind of a deimos/sacrilege kind of bonus, not the kind of thing you want on an eagle or cerberus chilling at long range.


well at the moment 50% won't do much good to the shield ships with there high sig radius they have and low speed

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

Adwokat Diabla
WeebFleet
Tsundere Triad
#84 - 2013-07-18 12:53:47 UTC
cerb could really use a rapid light missile bonus along with the ham/hml bonus seens how hml's are pretty ******* worthless atm
David Kir
Dominionist Commonwealth of Confederated States
#85 - 2013-07-18 12:54:18 UTC
Jureth22 wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Zer Res wrote:
No damage on the ishtar??


Hah, sorry, fixed =)


what about ishtar getting another low slot for the one lost?also vaga getting another mid?

5 mids on the Vaga would make it OP: same tank as a Sleipnir, more speed and a smaller sig.
I love the new Vagabond, please leave it alone or they'll nerf it.

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.

Adwokat Diabla
WeebFleet
Tsundere Triad
#86 - 2013-07-18 12:55:52 UTC
MyrddinBishop wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU

The vexor is gun bonused and sort of expected to use them, the ishtar is not. You can fit a 1600mm plate based tank and "basically anything you want" to the vexor already if you don't make much use of the highs, or you can fill your highs with utility modules at the cost of a lighter tank and tighter fitting. It's a fair trade off.

And what is the reason the navy vexor has the same power grid and +10 CPU over the vexor yet only has 2 unbonused turrets, where as the Ishtar got an extra turret.

Lol Okay, can't argue with you there.

I really think that the Ishtar needs some sort of buff to fitting. I fully expected it to get some sort of love in this regard with this balance pass and am disappointed that it has not. I think that the comparison to the Faction Cruiser equivalent is a fair one to make. The Vexor Navy Issue(VNI) and the Ishtar have very similar bonuses to drones. However, it is a toss up and maybe even more of a nod toward using the VNI just because of fitting. I don't believe this should be the case. I feel that the nod towards preference should not be towards the Faction Cruiser but toward the HAC. I think this could be done simply by expanding the fitting to be more in line with the VNI.

VNI Fittings: 800 PWG, 310 CPU

Ishtar Fittings: 700 PWG, 285 CPU

Just under 10% more CPU and well over 10% more PWG is pretty signigicant and I would like to see this addressed or at the very least I hope to hear the reasoning behind making the Ishtar or even some of the other HACs either very similar in power or even having the Faction Cruisers be slightly better than there equivilant HAC.


honestly, the better comparison to make is gila vs ishtar, and the gila literally does everything x10 times better fitting wise then the ishtar
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#87 - 2013-07-18 12:56:38 UTC
MyrddinBishop wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
mynnna wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU

The vexor is gun bonused and sort of expected to use them, the ishtar is not. You can fit a 1600mm plate based tank and "basically anything you want" to the vexor already if you don't make much use of the highs, or you can fill your highs with utility modules at the cost of a lighter tank and tighter fitting. It's a fair trade off.

And what is the reason the navy vexor has the same power grid and +10 CPU over the vexor yet only has 2 unbonused turrets, where as the Ishtar got an extra turret.

Lol Okay, can't argue with you there.

I really think that the Ishtar needs some sort of buff to fitting. I fully expected it to get some sort of love in this regard with this balance pass and am disappointed that it has not. I think that the comparison to the Faction Cruiser equivalent is a fair one to make. The Vexor Navy Issue(VNI) and the Ishtar have very similar bonuses to drones. However, it is a toss up and maybe even more of a nod toward using the VNI just because of fitting. I don't believe this should be the case. I feel that the nod towards preference should not be towards the Faction Cruiser but toward the HAC. I think this could be done simply by expanding the fitting to be more in line with the VNI.

VNI Fittings: 800 PWG, 310 CPU

Ishtar Fittings: 700 PWG, 285 CPU

Just under 10% more CPU and well over 10% more PWG is pretty signigicant and I would like to see this addressed or at the very least I hope to hear the reasoning behind making the Ishtar or even some of the other HACs either very similar in power or even having the Faction Cruisers be slightly better than there equivilant HAC.


This whole balance pass looks much like the battleship pass... a rush job....:(((((
unlike the Navy cruisers which seem to have a lot more thought put into them.

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

darius mclever
#88 - 2013-07-18 12:58:26 UTC
Two step wrote:
Sac should get some sort of scram/disrutper/web range/strength bonus instead of the mostly useless cap bonus.


that cap bonus is actually pretty nice for its tanking role. especially when active tanked for small/solo work.
add the cap battery changes from a few patches ago. planned nos changes will also help.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#89 - 2013-07-18 13:03:57 UTC
>> Give the Cerb a rapid light missile bonus aswell. <<
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#90 - 2013-07-18 13:05:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
darius mclever wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus?
seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ?

look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos....
missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship

Also more speed on these things please


The cerb used to have 250k range, which was especially nice to annoy falcons to death.
IMHO it needs the range.


well if we had the TD missile change (when are we getting that btw CCP?) it would be fine without it.

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

darius mclever
#91 - 2013-07-18 13:08:01 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
darius mclever wrote:
The cerb used to have 250k range, which was especially nice to annoy falcons to death.
IMHO it needs the range.


well if we had the TD missile change (when are we getting that btw CCP?) it would be fine without it.


How would a module that lowers the effective range of the cerberus, help the cerberus?
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#92 - 2013-07-18 13:09:48 UTC
First impressions, I like the changes, I particularly like the change to the Ishtar, not sure on giving the Sac more drones though, remember you can't balance everything with drone bay. I'd still like to see more capacitor across the board for all ships and the cap bonus on the Deimos changed out for something else.

Ishtar needs CPU, it's kind of ridiculous how short on CPU it is. I have no idea why it gets so little.

ALL HACS need better lock range. The **** poor lock range on these things interfears with their intended specialised role, for example the Muninn is supposed to be a sniper, but its lock range is 55km... Not enough.

Vaga needs more CPU if you want it to fit an ASB. It needs more PG as well frankly, the TE nerf has hit Auto kiting hard and it hasn't got the powergrid to fit Artillery, the SFI does a shield arty boat better which is sad. Unless you want to pigeon hole it into dual 180 XL ASB config.

Given the sort of mildness of these changes, I presume Tech 3's will be getting the nerf bat straight up the clacker.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8

Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#93 - 2013-07-18 13:10:12 UTC
The bonuses for gal cruiser and HAC on the ishtar should be swapped. Right now the ishtar is super good even with hac 2, while some others like the zealot need hac 2 to function well.
Michael Harari
Genos Occidere
HYDRA RELOADED
#94 - 2013-07-18 13:11:15 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
>> Give the Cerb a rapid light missile bonus aswell. <<


Yes pls
Teens in Jeans
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#95 - 2013-07-18 13:14:56 UTC
So what was the problem to give AHACs the rolebonus "imune to EWAR" ?

Tech2 HeavyAssaultCruiser are the ship no1 which should be a counter to falcon and co.
David Kir
Dominionist Commonwealth of Confederated States
#96 - 2013-07-18 13:15:03 UTC
Akturous wrote:
First impressions, I like the changes, I particularly like the change to the Ishtar, not sure on giving the Sac more drones though, remember you can't balance everything with drone bay. I'd still like to see more capacitor across the board for all ships and the cap bonus on the Deimos changed out for something else.

Ishtar needs CPU, it's kind of ridiculous how short on CPU it is. I have no idea why it gets so little.

ALL HACS need better lock range. The **** poor lock range on these things interfears with their intended specialised role, for example the Muninn is supposed to be a sniper, but its lock range is 55km... Not enough.

Vaga needs more CPU if you want it to fit an ASB. It needs more PG as well frankly, the TE nerf has hit Auto kiting hard and it hasn't got the powergrid to fit Artillery, the SFI does a shield arty boat better which is sad. Unless you want to pigeon hole it into dual 180 XL ASB config.

Given the sort of mildness of these changes, I presume Tech 3's will be getting the nerf bat straight up the clacker.


I'm quite afraid that the Vaga won't be getting any more PWG.
Just think of it, it'd become a cheaper, more mobile Sleipnir, with the same tanking capacity.

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.

Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#97 - 2013-07-18 13:15:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Pesadel0
David Kir wrote:
Jureth22 wrote:
thanks for ruining the vagabond.also,eagle changes are mostly insignificant.back to drawing board


Ruining the Vagabond?

I hope you're trolling: the contrary would mean you're stupid.



Well iam with david restringing the vaga to a shield bonus is ****...

And lol at people buying hacs at 2 weeks ago.
Ivory Kantenu
Apotheosis.
#98 - 2013-07-18 13:15:44 UTC
The Sacrilege still stands, to me, as the odd man out.

While adding HMs to its possible armory, HMs are still kind of in a bad place here. Their Damage is rather lackluster on a ship that comes with a HAM Bonus, and most people will try to avoid using HMs on a ship that's always been a brawler, and instead opt in for Tech II LR HAMs.

Would tacking on, say, an explosion velocity bonus to the Sac make it far too strong? How about missile velocity? I wouldn't mind being able to throw HAMs a good deal further with this platform, and not worry about HMs at all.

Also, the Amarr and Gallente HACs really could do with a small boost to their targeting ranges. Another 5km on the Amarr ones would be absolutely fantastic for sure, especially if the HMs stick. It always bothered me that I could throw something further than I could lock on to what I'm throwing it at. :)

[i]Learn the basics of Wormhole Selling: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=101693&find=unread[/i]

Gnoshia
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#99 - 2013-07-18 13:17:33 UTC
Aaaaand the cerberus is still useless lol
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#100 - 2013-07-18 13:18:05 UTC
why did you keep the outdated mwd cap bonus?

you replaced that bonus on the thorax with a tracking bonus... why leave the deimos the same

here is the version i would like to see.

Quote:
DEIMOS - Like the Thorax, Deimos now has 4 mids and gives up the extra high. It also goes faster and aligns faster.

Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty

Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
7.5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret tracking

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

Slot layout: 5H(-1), 4M(+1), 6L; 5 turrets, 2 launchers
Fittings: 1030 PWG(+40), 350 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1350(+190) / 1750(-290) / 2000(-531)
Capacitor (amount) : 1700(+325)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 220(+12) / .475(-.055) / 11460000 / 7.54s(-.875)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 50
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 270 / 6
Sensor strength: 15 Magnetometric
Signature radius: 160

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.