Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Back on topic , CCP Rise , if find the changes pretty decent , it does not make them OP and they can still be strong with the right people flying them .The more i think about it the more i do not think they need more buffs, the role bonus is pretty strong imo. Just make sure to double check the CPU and powergrid, maybe add a bit to some especially since you dont want to gimp their fit if you fit a mwd , maybe even add a fitting bonus to mwd. GL

They're worse than T1s, the only people who would use the HACs are the people with too much isk burning a hole in their wallet.

The role bonus may be good for some of them, but most HACs still aren't viable.

As terrible as most of Rise's changes are, they seem so much less terrible when compared to the stuff you guys are coming up with.

I just cannot see how you can buff them more without shyeting on the T1 and navy cruiser rework . Small changes are good , CCP rise could work permanently on ballance , after the`` big one`` he can see who uses what in case X and Y and decide then what needs more buffs and what not. Don`t stop after 1 balance on a ship.

Stop introducing new ship and just play around with what is in the game there is allot of potential for change every year or 6months.

This is not LoL so you have to introduce new ships all the time for people to spend money to buy it. Just introduce new features in game for example and give the useless ships bonuses to that particular feature for example .

I still think that the direction to take the HAC line in should be to split them into two roles, similar to the Recon lineup. There should be a Heavy Assault Cruiser (Heavy Brawler) Role, and a Heavy Strike Cruiser (Heavy Skirmish/Kiter) Role.

The HAC Role would be optimized for close range, tanky DPS, perhaps with the -50% to Overheat effects role bonus, perhaps one or preferably some (hull-by-hull basis) of the role bonuses already brainstormed in this thread.

The HSC Role would be optimized for damage projection, mobility and raw speed, perhaps with the MWD sig bloom bonus (though -70-80% bloom would be more useful), perhaps with MJD capability, +to AB speed, or other hull-by-hull bonuses.

The changes to the HAC linup should consider the current state of the T3's and ABC's, but also the future balancing that needs to be done on those hulls. Unfortunately, only CCP knows where those are going in the future... all we can do is hope that they're going somewhere good.

At the very least, the new HACs should have 16 fitting slots and be able to perform their intended function on-par with, or only ~5% below, the current T3's. The advantage that T3's were/are supposed to have is versatility - i.e. able to perform most/all roles equally well, assuming they are fit for that role. A specialized ship designed for a role should perform at least as well in that role...

I'm ok with T3's excelling at any role that they are fit for, since the added cost (I'm thinking lost skill points, which translates into lost Time, and Time is the only real currency in EVE) is something that no other hull has, but a ship that is supposedly specialized for the same role that a T3 is fit for should perform equally well. The point that the proposed changes seem to miss is that the T1/Navy variants of the HAC hulls have been elevated to the point of completely overshadowing the supposedly more advanced option.

shield tank all the things?

kind of expected a nice little buff for the deimos, mostly speed (which you are giving it) and slightly better EHP to give it more time to get into blaster range.

as it stands, for an armor tanked heavy hitting cruiser, why would I fly this over a navy exeq?

am I missing something here?

+1. double damage bonus would allow for damage application and easier cap management. /me wants it

Yo - less modules, same damageoutput. 3 Guns acting as 6 with tuned down shiphullboni should be matching.

(3 mostly cause I was interested to see how those marauderhighs would affect CS, sacrifing two guns each for a link in such a scenario, and CS would be clearly 33% more effective dps-wise following straight on such an idea)

I also didn't even think about fittings, but having smaller variation in used powergrid depending on weapontier should make for some more predictable PG/CPU-allocation and less overwhelming fitting differences between shield- and armortanking, as curently most HACs can't use higher tier weapon systems unless shieldfitted. (which is kind of a KO-criteria for the 720-armor-muninn against it's loki-pendant)

4 Weapons with double damage would solve virtually all DPS related concerns as well.

Supported.

They are obviously something from a straight PITA in solosituations with their sigradius/active tank (thx to baseresists), Escortships for even bigger ships (like the shielddeimos is/used to be a support ship for alphanados) or oversized Wolfpacks (see shadoo on arrrrrrrrrrrrmorrrrrrrhacs) - at least that what I believe they do best.