These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 - round two

First post First post First post
Author
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#301 - 2013-07-29 18:10:28 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:

Shame you can't fit neutrons on either of them.


well since its a shield tank you can always use a reactor core II or a rig slot right? i mean in the meta everyone knows just how op the diemos is.


I think he assumed you weren't making an awful shield thorax.


pro tip never assume

it makes an
ass out of
u and
meBlink


Sheild thorax>armour thorax.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#302 - 2013-07-29 18:11:14 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
this is teh deimos i would like to see:

DEIMOS


Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty

Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
5% increase to MicroWarpdrive capacitor bonus and decrease MicroWarpdrive cap activation cost

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
15% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff
7.5% Medium Hybrid Turret rate of fire

Slot layout: 5H(-1), 4M(+1), 6L; 4(-1) turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 1150 PWG(+160), 360 CPU(+10)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1350(+190) / 1750(-290) / 2000(-531)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1400(+25) / 255s (-80s) / 5.5/s (+1.4)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 230(+22) / .475(-.055) / 11460000 / 7.54s(-.875)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 75 (+25m3)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 85km(+20km) / 270 / 6
Sensor strength: 22 Magnetometric(+7)
Signature radius: 150(-10)



This would fix the diemos not make it op and actually make the falloff bonus usefull.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#303 - 2013-07-29 18:13:30 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
this is teh deimos i would like to see:

DEIMOS


Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty

Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
5% increase to MicroWarpdrive capacitor bonus and decrease MicroWarpdrive cap activation cost

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
15% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff
7.5% Medium Hybrid Turret rate of fire

Slot layout: 5H(-1), 4M(+1), 6L; 4(-1) turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 1150 PWG(+160), 360 CPU(+10)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1350(+190) / 1750(-290) / 2000(-531)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1400(+25) / 255s (-80s) / 5.5/s (+1.4)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 230(+22) / .475(-.055) / 11460000 / 7.54s(-.875)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 75 (+25m3)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 85km(+20km) / 270 / 6
Sensor strength: 22 Magnetometric(+7)
Signature radius: 150(-10)



This would fix the diemos not make it op and actually make the falloff bonus usefull.


You are bad.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#304 - 2013-07-29 18:15:19 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
In case anyone wonders:

New rail deimos (no cap changes yet)

http://i.imgur.com/jOAaNsy.png

(thats more ehp/speed then pretty much any t3 any t3.

Dps graph comparing it to all t3s dps wise bar the talos (which is op) transverasl 0

http://i.imgur.com/aWKw7RW.png

With full transverasl:


http://i.imgur.com/DCBNOlZ.png

(red line is deimos btw).


totally non op, its totally not a higher ehp, speedier talos with way better tracking.



Minus the deimos having horrible speed, agree 100% Deimos / vaga / ishtar are just so far beyond the other HAC's atm.
nikar galvren
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#305 - 2013-07-29 18:16:22 UTC
I for one am overall disappointed by V2.

The Good:

Cap recharge buff is great for T2.
Ishtar changes in general. Yay CPU! Rolling in the drone bay and buffing Heavy drone speed/tracking was much needed.
Moar Sensor strength! Not quite Blackbird immunity, but ECM resilience is good.

The Bad:

Nerf Cap recharge on Sacrilege. It used to do only one thing well... now it does nothing well, except maybe as a blob HAM platform if your alliance is too rich to care what the hull costs.
Possibly overbuff Vagabond... but only comparatively. The only one of these that now looks like it will be viable in a defined subset of roles. Perhaps ALL HACs should shine in certain ways like the Vaga now will.
If T2s are to be specialized, where's the specialization? If HACs are to be generalized (on-steroids), where's the +2 fitting slots? Where's the versatility?

The Ugly:

MWD bloom bonus for all! Who CARES what your ship strengths are!

I'll post more observations/suggestions later, when I get over the taste of bile in my mouth.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#306 - 2013-07-29 18:16:40 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
this is teh deimos i would like to see:

DEIMOS


Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty

Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
5% increase to MicroWarpdrive capacitor bonus and decrease MicroWarpdrive cap activation cost

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
15% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff
7.5% Medium Hybrid Turret rate of fire

Slot layout: 5H(-1), 4M(+1), 6L; 4(-1) turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 1150 PWG(+160), 360 CPU(+10)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1350(+190) / 1750(-290) / 2000(-531)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 1400(+25) / 255s (-80s) / 5.5/s (+1.4)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 230(+22) / .475(-.055) / 11460000 / 7.54s(-.875)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 75 (+25m3)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 85km(+20km) / 270 / 6
Sensor strength: 22 Magnetometric(+7)
Signature radius: 150(-10)



This would fix the diemos not make it op and actually make the falloff bonus usefull.


You are bad.


why 7.5% to rate of fire makes up for the turret loss and damage bonus. so one less turret means less cap used to fire guns. and gives the ship its utility slot back.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#307 - 2013-07-29 18:17:55 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:

Shame you can't fit neutrons on either of them.


well since its a shield tank you can always use a reactor core II or a rig slot right? i mean in the meta everyone knows just how op the diemos is.


I think he assumed you weren't making an awful shield thorax.


pro tip never assume

it makes an
ass out of
u and
meBlink


Sheild thorax>armour thorax.



If you don't mind either having no webs or no tank.. Sure.

Sure is easier to fit atleast..

Seriously Armor/shield needs a comprehensive fitting rebalance.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Hortoken Wolfbrother
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#308 - 2013-07-29 18:19:56 UTC
My problem with hacs is the same. I want a role for these ships, and these changes still fail to give them that. What were these ships meant to do, what exactly are they specialized at? Thats a question that needs to be answered before they are fine tuned to be good at it. The changes for now are only coming from the approach of slap some more stats on them until they become desirable to fly. Unfortunately, I think changes like this will always leave hacs feeling like a meh ship that is limited to specific and specialized roles.

By just slapping stats on them you are giving them general bonuses for a generalized ship. They'll have some ewar as strong as bs, but not be nearly as tough. They'll be a little better than cruisers, but cost far more. They wont have the dps of battle cruisers, but sig tank better.

Basically what you end up with in all of these situations is a ship that may be better sometimes at some things, but generally is in some sort of middle ground between the three, yet costs more than all the other options, and isn't nearlly good at its role in the middle as a t3 ship. On the whole I find these changes entirely underwhelming, but at least you've given them enough stats now that about half are useless. If this is the route you take, I suggest you keep looking at the other half. The deimos and vaga both especially just dont feel there yet
Kane Fenris
NWP
#309 - 2013-07-29 18:25:37 UTC
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
The problem with the vaga is that med autocannons are awful for kiting and it doesnt have anything close to the grid needed to fit artillery


Have you ever tried to fit 180's or 220's on your hull? -doesn't seem so, 180's are simply drones/frigate assassins and dps difference with 425's is acceptable considering such high tracking of those guns.


this is partly true

180's murder small stuf but th dps isnt just "a bit smaller" because of falloff you have a significant dmg reduction aut long kite ranges and therefore limit your vaga's engagement potential further.

the problem with 425's is vice versa + eventuall grid issues.

still 220s are the "best choice" but they dont have the 425's range pattern which i find is the minimum you need to have a actual edge over most ships that arent just outclassed by you beeing plain stronger.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#310 - 2013-07-29 18:26:18 UTC
CCP Rise, why did you listen to everything except the MWD bloom reduction feedback? It is a useless bonus as it even still makes the ships too large to avoid damage form BS sized weapons and they are still to slow to out run the tracking.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#311 - 2013-07-29 18:29:07 UTC
Kane Fenris wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
The problem with the vaga is that med autocannons are awful for kiting and it doesnt have anything close to the grid needed to fit artillery


Have you ever tried to fit 180's or 220's on your hull? -doesn't seem so, 180's are simply drones/frigate assassins and dps difference with 425's is acceptable considering such high tracking of those guns.


this is partly true

180's murder small stuf but th dps isnt just "a bit smaller" because of falloff you have a significant dmg reduction aut long kite ranges and therefore limit your vaga's engagement potential further.

the problem with 425's is vice versa + eventuall grid issues.

still 220s are the "best choice" but they dont have the 425's range pattern which i find is the minimum you need to have a actual edge over most ships that arent just outclassed by you beeing plain stronger.


425s still horribly wreck small ships all the time with falloff bonus and TEs. Why you have to be bad?
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#312 - 2013-07-29 18:30:22 UTC
Tuxedo Catfish wrote:
Morwen Lagann wrote:

Deimos: I can't really express how glad I am to see the Deimos keeping its MWD cap penalty reduction bonus (the Thorax losing it as part of the first round of Tiericide made me very sad), though I will miss that utility highslot a bunch.


Would you still be sad if it were simply rolled into the hull?

It's not a hull attribute, so not possible. Speed, cap recharge and dronebay are core attributes. You would have to make it a role bonus.

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}

Aglais
Ice-Storm
#313 - 2013-07-29 18:34:27 UTC
I am a fan of the fact that the Cerberus will now be able to comfortably fit six launchers, tank and a MWD. Good change, we'll see where this takes the ship in future.

Eagle: Your rail changes strike me as something that'll basically make the Eagle try to be a ship whose purpose is 'drop reasonably high long range DPS into something at dumb ranges that is practically stationary', which doesn't make it very useful at all. I don't remember the numerical relation of pre-hybrid buff railgun tracking to after, but what I do remember is back in the day completely ditching medium railguns and putting lasers on Caldari ships because they were so abominably bad at actually hitting things, at optimal.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#314 - 2013-07-29 18:34:34 UTC
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:
Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
Michael Harari wrote:
The problem with the vaga is that med autocannons are awful for kiting and it doesnt have anything close to the grid needed to fit artillery


Have you ever tried to fit 180's or 220's on your hull? -doesn't seem so, 180's are simply drones/frigate assassins and dps difference with 425's is acceptable considering such high tracking of those guns.


this is partly true

180's murder small stuf but th dps isnt just "a bit smaller" because of falloff you have a significant dmg reduction aut long kite ranges and therefore limit your vaga's engagement potential further.

the problem with 425's is vice versa + eventuall grid issues.

still 220s are the "best choice" but they dont have the 425's range pattern which i find is the minimum you need to have a actual edge over most ships that arent just outclassed by you beeing plain stronger.


425s still horribly wreck small ships all the time with falloff bonus and TEs. Why you have to be bad?


yes you can wreck small ships with 425...
thats not the problem with 425's

the problem with 425's youll clip your dmg with barrage loaded easy
Nikuno
Atomic Heroes
#315 - 2013-07-29 18:34:36 UTC
I see why you dropped the Diemos hp, it keeps everything around the 5k hp mark (before resists etc), except the vaga which has speed for tank; but with the vaga you've shown that you consider individual usage when looking at hp.

I fail to see why this fell by the wayside with the Diemos hp drop, it hardly seems justified given the closer range kill-or-be-killed combat style the ship supports. I think this alone will help kill the Diemos as a close range brawler. If that's the intention then fair enough, the rail change may accomodate this, but it is a favourite playstyle and I'll be sad to see it fade a little more into the background with such an iconic ship.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#316 - 2013-07-29 18:38:07 UTC
When are deimos' green engine trails coming back?
Hannott Thanos
Squadron 15
#317 - 2013-07-29 18:38:49 UTC
Michael Harari wrote:

The problem with the vaga is that med autocannons are awful for kiting and it doesnt have anything close to the grid needed to fit artillery

The what now?

while (CurrentSelectedTarget.Status == ShipStatus.Alive) {

     _myShip.FireAllGuns(CurrentSelectedTarget);

}

Dave PSI
Haendlergilde
Gilde Alliance
#318 - 2013-07-29 18:40:27 UTC
Dear CCP Rise,
could you explain your thoughts on the Eagle?
Like i said before it is the worst Hac since years. The nearly only reason it get sold in Jita is because it get reprozessed (i probably reprozessed 500+ myself, so i know what i am talking about) when the material prices change.

What did you dramatically changed, so that people will now begin to use them?
Why does it not have a second damage bonus, like every other hac?
If you are sniping, why would you use an Eagle instead of a Zealot or a Minunn?

This ship needs much more loving or nobody will ever use it.
Hashi Lebwohl
The Graduates
The Initiative.
#319 - 2013-07-29 18:41:49 UTC
I notice you really haven't got an idea of what an Eagle should do - so its a kinda brawler, but not since it lacks damage/ tracking or falloff bonuses and drones. Or its a kinda sniper, but not since it cannot "head shot" anything.

You could devote the entire ship to a sniper role, but give it cannot clean kill its targets it needs to survive at range ... introduce medium micro jump drives and give the Eagle bonuses for its use - take away the shield % bonus or one of the optimal bonuses
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#320 - 2013-07-29 18:42:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
Phoenix Jones wrote:
TrouserDeagle wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Except for the Deimos, seems everybody is ok with the changes, minus personal tweaks.

I see the intention of the Deimos though, they don't want it as a point blank brawler. They want this gallente ship to use rails.

The thorax, both rail and blaster platform, decentish tank, it dies no big deal.

The Deimos. Rail platform (the Ishtar would never make a viable pure rail platform, (rail sentry sure but not pure rail). Blasters is somewhat considered suicidal. Tank issues

Proteus, blaster platform (cause most don't fit rails), good tank for surviving at point blank.

If the above was the intention of CCP in regards to the Deimos, thorax and proteus... Great job, balance and you gave the ships identity.

If (and if that was your intention), with the gallente race, you nailed it.



The falloff bonus is totally wasted on rails.


Then I have nothing to tell you cause I would not send that ship in at point blank range to go shoot a target with ion blasters... I'll bring a thorax, shoot it with neutrons, and laugh as the ship blows up.

The Deimos will not survive under fire


Before I start ranting, I'll say this..

1) I like quoting myself.

2) The Deimos is in somewhat of a bad place, and its not inherently the ship, its the play style people want from it. You really do have two camps here regarding this ship. The first is the point blank blaster max damage fit, the second is this shield fit kiting rail fit. Now the kiting fit isn't a big issue, but there is a very VERY large camp out there that do not want the Deimos to be the Gallente Version of the Eagle. Now there is a camp that wants the Deimos to be this awesome zippy Blaster Platform ship....

It really isn't. With Blasters, it really does not have the projection with damage, even with the fall off bonus, and the reason isn't because of the range that blasters get, its because it will Die in a ball of melted scrap because it has to get into range. Now if your flying a thorax, its not a big deal, 10 million isk ship, few modules, probably 30 mil. This ship is 150 million at the lower end. Its chiefly the main complaint that people have in regards to using a regular industrial vs using a deep space transport.

"Why am I going to use a 150 million isk ship vs a 1 million isk ship if they both get caught and blown to hell. They'll both die in a ball of fire if someone catches them."

Now this arguement has been argued.. ALLOT, but its specifically pertinent to the Deimos as you have to fly this ship, as a blaster setup, at 10km to apply viable damage, which is both in Scrambling Range (shutting down MWD propulsion), and also its in POINT BLANK RANGE of the fleet/fighters. This is not the ship you want to put in the frontline, as it does not have the defenses to survive as a frontline ship.

The Diemos would need the following IF you want this to be a viable frontline HAC.

1) Don't split the Hybrid Turret damage into two different bonuses, merge them into 1 (instead of 5%, just make it 10% bonus Medium Hybrid Turret Damage.

2) With the free slot you have by combining the above (moving it all into Gallente Cruiser), increase its hit points. I'd say about 5% per level. It should bring the typical 35 to 50k ehp Diemos to around 68 to 75k ehp, giving both some dynamic to fitting active reps, or a passive tank, and giving it enough time to brawl its way through the fire to actually land a shot or two. It offers extra fitting variations as it would not be deemed as totally suicidal to fit a blaster fit with a non 1600 plate (you got the extra hit points, fit a different plate, now you have the option to fit a bigger gun and/or increase your mobility.)


Gallente Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
5% increase to MicroWarpdrive capacitor bonus

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff
5% Armor Hit Points per level. "Do it here as it forces people to level up Heavy Assault Cruiser if they want a brawling Deimos."

I hate (actually i REALLY hate) doing the whole hit point bonus with a ship, but this is really the only way I can see this ship living as a blaster boat. It needs the buffer, which gives it about an extra 10 to 15 seconds under fire, to get in range.

Yaay!!!!