These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Sal Landry
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1561 - 2013-07-24 23:16:33 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Brawler HACs:
100% Bonus to all medium (insert racial weapon type)
30% reduction in damage taken from overheating modeules OR

Kiting HACs:
100% Bonus to all medium (insert racial weapon type)
-50% MWD signature penalty.

Opinions?

Surely you're joking
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#1562 - 2013-07-24 23:21:45 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
Sal Landry wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Brawler HACs:
100% Bonus to all medium (insert racial weapon type)
30% reduction in damage taken from overheating modeules OR

Kiting HACs:
100% Bonus to all medium (insert racial weapon type)
-50% MWD signature penalty.

Opinions?

Surely you're joking


[bad joke]

I am serious. And don't call me Shirley.

[/bad joke]

Sad thing is I've never even seen that movie.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Broxus Maximas
Perkone
Caldari State
#1563 - 2013-07-24 23:25:52 UTC
ISHTAR - We are replacing the medium hybrid damage bonus with a drone bonus and removing one high slot to put its total 1 below the rest of the class, as is standard for drone-focused ships.

Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty

Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to drone tracking and optimal range(was 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage)

Can we please get the optimal range changed for MWD speed. Honestly we don't need a sniper domi and a sniper HAC. This will kill the ship being useful and gives the HAC MWD bonus no use. This ship should get up close and personal and unleash drones not sit back and snipe. Otherwise give it another bonus over the 50% signature bonus.

Really upset at this change its a cookie cutter answer from a terrible Domi concept no one really liked.
Zeena Baren
Tactical Chaos Corp
#1564 - 2013-07-24 23:32:16 UTC
A -50% reduction to MDW on a HAC isnt enough, its still as be as a battleship then
Akturous
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1565 - 2013-07-24 23:32:31 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Baren wrote:
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Dysgenesis wrote:
I like the idea of 3 guns with a 100% damage role bonus. It would also be nice if all HACs then had 1 (or 2) utility highs, too many of them have been removed lately yes i'm looking at you megathron).


With a double damage bonus, I think 4 guns would be better served, plus a utility slot, since that way they can compete with BCs without having to have bigger tanks.


HACs should have 4 guns. and the bonus for brawlers should only effect Close range medium weapons and the the Bonus for Kitting should only effect long range medium weapons


Vaga is a kiter, and a Vaga with artillery would be utterly sh*t


Kiting with autocannons is for scrubs. Artillery is perfect for kiting, seriously what's wrong with you.

Vote Item Heck One for CSM8
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#1566 - 2013-07-24 23:33:17 UTC  |  Edited by: M1k3y Koontz
Zeena Baren wrote:
A -50% reduction to MDW on a HAC isnt enough, its still as be as a battleship then

80%?

Then the sig bloom would only be 100%, doubling sig. On a (good) HAC, the sig would be in the low 200s.


Akturous wrote:

Kiting with autocannons is for scrubs. Artillery is perfect for kiting, seriously what's wrong with you.

...surely you're joking
Gah even I'm doing it now.


With autocannons there is at least a chance of hitting anything closer than 30km.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Zeena Baren
Tactical Chaos Corp
#1567 - 2013-07-24 23:38:00 UTC
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Zeena Baren wrote:
A -50% reduction to MDW on a HAC isnt enough, its still as be as a battleship then


80%?

Then the sig bloom would only be 100%, doubling sig. On a (good) HAC, the sig would be in the low 200s.


Akturous wrote:

Kiting with autocannons is for scrubs. Artillery is perfect for kiting, seriously what's wrong with you.



...surely you're joking
Gah even I'm doing it now.


With autocannons there is at least a chance of hitting anything closer than 30km.



Have the sig radius on the Kitting class of HAcs go from -60% to -100% at LvL 5 would me a specific and unique role for them. SInce most of these ships will have lower tanks than their brawler counter parts, they would balance out with being very good for speed tanking and kitting. this would balance the classes out quite about
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1568 - 2013-07-24 23:38:22 UTC
Lucine Delacourt wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Lucine Delacourt wrote:
My first thoughts:

- Double web Deimos seems like it could be better than most are giving it credit for.

- 40% Scout Drone damage per level or something similar instead of the generic 20% drone damage bonus would promote hit and run Ishtar tactics and separate it from the plethora of cruiser/BC sized drone hulls.

- The Sac still seems a bit lackluster, a little more CPU/Cap if you want a Neut or Tinker setup or switch a high for a low if you want it buffered.

- The ASB Vaga will eat faces.

- Zealot is pretty close. Not sure what to do without OPing it.



An ishtar with a sign radius of a frigate fitted with MSE's using battleship guns (sentries) DDA's sentry rigs and 40% bonus would not be OP at all, really.



The bonus is for SCOUT drones so it wouldn't apply to sentries or heavies but thanks for reacting without bothering to read.



You're welcome.

Do you really think there aren't enough of sentry carriers, sentry battleships, battleships with guns AND sentries then cruisers with sentries...? mkay.

Give the ishtar a real cruiser sized bonus for scout drones? -ok for dps but really needs to increase those drones speed and reduce scout drones signature significantly so those survive to small guns/smartbombing easier, no guns needed.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Wivabel
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#1569 - 2013-07-24 23:47:09 UTC
I really think we need to let them fit the micro jump drive.

On top of splitting them into kiting/brawling categories.

Adding the Micro jump drive would make them somewhat unique.

I am not sure if I am going to log in anymore.......
Sarkelias Anophius
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1570 - 2013-07-25 00:03:00 UTC
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:
Dysgenesis wrote:
I like the idea of 3 guns with a 100% damage role bonus. It would also be nice if all HACs then had 1 (or 2) utility highs, too many of them have been removed lately yes i'm looking at you megathron).



Posting to reiterate that I think this would solve, across the board, 90% of HAC issues. It would give them BC sized DPS with utility slots and high-resist, low-hp tanks and cruiser speeds.

A few ships need their speed and agility looked at, I think, but this change might justify the price tag of HACs.

I don't think that last part can be over-emphasized. CCP Rise, I'm looking at you.


Reposting, this idea must be seen by all
Vtra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1571 - 2013-07-25 00:46:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Vtra
How about special ability for hacs to be a Third* rig slot and increased calibration? maybe that could give more flexability and utility?
Oberus MacKenzie
Handsome Millionaire Playboys
Sedition.
#1572 - 2013-07-25 00:48:16 UTC
Mostly excellent changes, and that vagabond is going to be SO good.

The caldari HACs are still absolutely terrible. The cerberus needs a better capacitor and more cpu, as those have always been its biggest challenges other than the usual slothlike speed of caldari ships. The eagle mainly just got more tank, which was never its problem. It's a blaster boat... it needs speed to catch its target and put damage on it. Currently it is the slowest HAC and if these changes are implemented it will be even slower in comparison.

I'm a bit doubtful of the deimos changes, too. It loses a LOT of hitpoints and only picks up a bit more speed. If it's supposed to be a brawler it may find itself with too thin of an armor tank to do its job.

Overall, I'm looking forward to it :)
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Shadow Cartel
#1573 - 2013-07-25 00:49:19 UTC
Vtra wrote:
How about special ability for hacs to be a forth rig slot and increased calibration? maybe that could give more flexability and utility?


The two new rigs would almost definitely be used for more tank.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Vtra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1574 - 2013-07-25 00:52:13 UTC
but with 3-4 rig slots whole new fit concepts can fit , but yes most would probly add more tank lol
Doddy
Excidium.
#1575 - 2013-07-25 01:08:07 UTC
Zeena Baren wrote:
A -50% reduction to MDW on a HAC isnt enough, its still as be as a battleship then


A battle ship going at mwd speed so completely different.
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1576 - 2013-07-25 01:11:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Vayn Baxtor
Another one of those concerns about the philosophy behind "HAC"
Regardless if it can fit "Heavy Assault Missile launchers", the Cerberus to me seems to be following the real sense of the artillery-mindset of "bombardment ship" that was somewhere mentioned for the T1 Tiericide.

One could of course put it next to such likings of the hit-and-run Vagabond mentality.
But here too, I am confused if the term HAC actually fits.

Quote:
The caldari HACs are still absolutely terrible. The cerberus needs a better capacitor and more cpu, as those have always been its biggest challenges other than the usual slothlike speed of caldari ships. The eagle mainly just got more tank, which was never its problem. It's a blaster boat... it needs speed to catch its target and put damage on it. Currently it is the slowest HAC and if these changes are implemented it will be even slower in comparison.


It should be kept in mind though about Cerb that there needs to be at least some sort of weakness.
Since Cerb usually can warpout long before people reach it in fortunate situations, I'd say raise the sloth'iness a bit on aligntime (more mass too) and therefore give more CPU (I think CPU is more desired than Cap in this case, or not?)

Note that such give-n-take suggestion would only be fair if all racials HACs are treated likewise. Since more CPU is quite drastic, I still think that would suffice it being more sluggish.

Quote:
The two new rigs would almost definitely be used for more tank.


Might have to do a bit of rig-Calibration tweaking. If necessary, that is.

Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all.

Lowska Psyca
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#1577 - 2013-07-25 01:18:48 UTC
Onictus wrote:
Lowska Psyca wrote:

Other long term effects I see are more mission grinders, which will increase the mission ISK faucet driving the inflation even higher (who remembers the golden days when plex were 300M and battleships 120M for tier3?)



That has more to do with drone poo nerfs than mad peope running missions, that is tinfoil hat territory.


True, the ratting bots in the drone regions that made mineral prices low and thus making mining ******** except for ABCs, now there is a huge influx in ISK, from the drone bounties, and mining is only slightly more profitable in neg sec than it is in hisec.

but yes, tinfoil hattery... though you can't say my theory is completely far-fetched.
Doddy
Excidium.
#1578 - 2013-07-25 01:25:34 UTC
They are "assault" cruisers. They should be tough as hell brawlers that get in your face and break you. Ahacs epitomise this.

A bonus that should be considered is one to the reactive armour hardener, allowing the hac to react to incoming damage quicker than other ships. Its not suiable for shield hacs obviously but hey you can give them a bonus to asbs in some way. Maybe a role bonus that allows armour hacs to react twice as fast as normal with reactive hardener and allows shield hacs to load twice as many boosters in asb?

Allowing them to use the Micro jump drive could work also. Or use target breaker without losing own lock. The "more enemies shooting you the more effective it is" thing totally fits. Really this is a big opportunity for ccp to do something a bit different.

More boring bonuses are the obvious ab speed like assault frigs were going to have back in the good old days. Or an overloading bonus so they can go trully all in (steps on t3s toes too much in my view).
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#1579 - 2013-07-25 01:30:32 UTC
I like the proposed changes, although I still think the sacrilege could use a damage application bonus rather than a cap bonus.

However my biggest issue is lock range. Muninn has too short a lock range for a long range gun platform. Minimum lock range for these should at least be 60-65km.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#1580 - 2013-07-25 01:51:43 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
nikar galvren wrote:
I'm personally of the opinion that the key to making the HAC lineup attractive to more pilots is not to reduce the cost, or overpower them relative to T1/T3/ABCs. Call me crazy, but I don't think that cost is a significant deterrent for hull usage - look at the proliferation nullsec T3 blob doctrines. I think that the HAC lineup could be made relevant simply by giving them a role that no other ship fills, or *at least* that no other cruiser fills.

One example that I've seen cited in this thread is the HICs - no other hull can fit an infinipoint, thus guaranteeing a place in anti-super ops. Only the Stealth Bombers can bomb. I personally like the idea of allowing only the 'Attack' HACs the option of fitting a MJD, giving them the mobility that no other hull can boast. I like the idea of allowing the 'Combat' HACs the option of fitting Capital sized weapons, thus making them tanky anti-cap ships. I like the Target Spectrum Breaker idea, but I'm not certain that that bonus would be enough to get me to fly one. I like role bonuses that make the hull class unique.

I want to hear what role bonuses YOU want though. What would you like your HAC to do that no other cruiser can do?

MJD Vagabond would be rather annoying to catch. But otherwise I actually like this idea.
Yeah but don't forget: you'd be able to jump out and if he does, then he's 100km away, and you won't have to worry anymore anyway.

Plus, since it'd be limited to HACs, it'd differentiate the Vaga from the Cynabal that much more.

Unless he got out in hull or something, it's not like he's going to leave. More likely the vaga will jump out, load barrage and start skirmishing at a safer distance until his MJD reloads and then he'll start playing more risky again.