Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Yeah but currently they get the same reactivation delay as a T1 BS using a MJD... Think about it...

difference between "being able to use" them and gaining bonuses "for their use".
an mjd bonus on a marauder is an awesome idea. we discussed it several times. but thats for the marauder page.

altho the idea was kewl, i agree i dont think its the way to go for hacs.

recon get nasty ewar. some loose a little ewar for covert and cyno bonuses. (40k points and webs, huge neut range)
hics gain nasty tank and big bubble efects. 20k+ bubble
logi gain extreme rep range plus some tank (75k+ rep/cap, tracking)

hacs need some tank/mobility but shyt loads of dps. they need to dish it out.
fast striking, hard hitting then call in the clean up crew.

dont worry about power creep. we are setting the standard right now. you cant have nasty t2 bonuses on all BUT hacs, there deffinately needs a step up for t2. the training time and price justifies it.
i dont care money, its a t2. but it needs balls dewd. no more wussy t2. from now on, t2 rawk (in their specialty).

and hacs specialize in dps on smaller ships. bc and below..that would leave abc for bc and above

Other than the fact the ships are called "heavy assault", I see no reason why HACs should have very high dps. It's enough for their dps to be somewhere in between T1 cruisers and Battle cruisers IMO.

Use a loki, is a better muninn with higher speed, smaller sig, improved tank, more agility ad a longrangeweb. And 20% more alpha.

Confirming this thread no longer regards HACs.

Ishtar

Hi,

I use a Navy Vexor for select moments of PvP I was expecting to "upgrade" to the Ishtar but with the initial proposed changes the Navy Vexor will still be better imo.

I agree with several suggestions here on the Ishtar regarding the changes, the must for me is it needs that additional low slot even if it means losing a mid for balance or changes to high.

The only role i see for the Ishtar with the current changes is as sniper with sentries but that then questions the turret/high slot changes.

Trying to make a close or mid range Ishtar with the current fitting restrictions is difficult, maybe i'm not to supposed to but then why the turret changes without the fitting/bonuses, i.e optimal, to put something useful in them.

Point 1. The HAC bonuses need to be addressed IMO although i can understand the range control bonus if the role is sniper.
Point 2. Additional low slot especially if the role is close/mid range.
Point 3. PWG/CPU increase.
Point 4. Decide on how you are expecting pilots to fit this then give bonuses and make changes to suit the optimal playing style. If it is sniper then the turret high slots need looking at and maybe a relevant bonus, if its mid range then points 1,2,3.

These points seem to have been raised in part already but i felt i needed to put my 2pence in. Rather than whine after without making a contribution.

Thanks,
Boz.
aka Bozzith, Columbo Miner.

nope... we are not... hopefully tuesday... ccp never starts anything new on a monday.

Indeed. Mwd scram immunity would be much more suited for hacs

And worth the price... Remember hacs were at thier best before the great nano nerf.

on top of changes from the OP


Sacrilege: +1low +50pg
Zealot: +1mid
Cerberus: +1low +80pg
Eagle: +1 high +1gun +150pg -400shield
Deimos: +1low +245pg +30cpu +450armor switch mwd cap bonus for 7.5% med hybrid tracking bonus
ishtar: +1low +175pg +40cpu +400armor roll drone bay bonus into hull add 10% to drone mwd speed per level change control range bonus to all drone types
Vaga: +1gun +1low 145pg +150shield -shield boost bonus +10%to med proj falloff per level
Muninn: +1med +1gun +215pg +120shield

those are the changes that would make HACs good enough to warrant their cost and possible be an alternative to tech 3 cruisers

tech 1 BC will still have more tank and dps in most cases, still cost only halve as much and require less skills to fly