These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#1221 - 2013-08-01 16:58:59 UTC
Stick - meet dead horse...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Red Woodson
Estrale Frontiers
#1222 - 2013-08-01 17:03:30 UTC
Rise, have you taken into account the effect of the nerfs to skirmish and armored warfare links on the survivability.. err, sorry, resiliency... of these ships when used in the ahac role? While i haven't flown in an ahac gang in years, from all I understand they were already on the edge of being worthwhile, and your rather minor boosts to the hulls didn't do much for them.
Cearain
Plus 10 NV
It Burns When I'm PvPing
#1223 - 2013-08-01 17:04:26 UTC
Danny John-Peter wrote:
Oh My Boobs wrote:
-1 low +1 med for the vagabond
-1 low +1 med for the muninn

DONE


That will again, make the Vaga worse, as it relies on those lows for DPS and projection.




No it will make it much better and more veratile. Worst case: use a tracking computer in a mid instead of a te in lows.

Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815

Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel
#1224 - 2013-08-01 17:13:02 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Danny John-Peter wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

BTW, you forget two things with your 400dps at 25km : with AC, that mean 700dps at 2km ; and the others all have HUGE damage application problems.

Yes you are asking too much.


That would be true if you buffed the raw DPS, I'm talking about buffing the range specifically so we don't get the issue of the Vaga out brawling some of the other HACs.

But you seem to have some issue with there actually the Vagabond actually being viable so I'm not sure why I keep bothering to respond to you.

I have nothing against a second falloff bonus for example, eventhough I think that would pigeonhole the Vaga in a kiting role only. But some requests for it clearly were completely unreasonable, and asking for it to be able to fit top gun + top tank is one of them. EVE is a game of trade offs.


I wish it was but the vaga has a lot of utility and goes totally against the idea of hacs being truly specialized, focusing on only few traits and one type of weaponry but being the best at it

vaga with 6 425s dual 10% falloff but no drones or utility high slot

Quote CCP Fozzie: ... The days of balance and forget are over.

Danny John-Peter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1225 - 2013-08-01 17:21:43 UTC
Crazy KSK wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
Danny John-Peter wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:

BTW, you forget two things with your 400dps at 25km : with AC, that mean 700dps at 2km ; and the others all have HUGE damage application problems.

Yes you are asking too much.


That would be true if you buffed the raw DPS, I'm talking about buffing the range specifically so we don't get the issue of the Vaga out brawling some of the other HACs.

But you seem to have some issue with there actually the Vagabond actually being viable so I'm not sure why I keep bothering to respond to you.

I have nothing against a second falloff bonus for example, eventhough I think that would pigeonhole the Vaga in a kiting role only. But some requests for it clearly were completely unreasonable, and asking for it to be able to fit top gun + top tank is one of them. EVE is a game of trade offs.


I wish it was but the vaga has a lot of utility and goes totally against the idea of hacs being truly specialized, focusing on only few traits and one type of weaponry but being the best at it

vaga with 6 425s dual 10% falloff but no drones or utility high slot


Oh good, another kiting ship that can't solo because a single T1 frig can kill it.

Just give it a dual falloff bonus, bump its DPS up by 50 or so and it will at least be somewhat competitive.
Michael J Caboose
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#1226 - 2013-08-01 17:25:41 UTC
It's over guys. Put the defibrillators away and let the HACs rest in peace.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1227 - 2013-08-01 17:30:52 UTC
2 rep bonused command ships (Where its a useless bonus)

But no rep bonused HAC (Where its a useful bonus)

Why CCP, Why?

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Lucien Cain
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1228 - 2013-08-01 17:54:43 UTC
Are you going to let us wait any longer CCP? We are seriously pounding our heads against each other in order to solve the whole f...ing HAC Issue, but where is your response?! This is really stretching our nerves and i'm confident that you got enough productive imput to finally reach a conclusion. So please, with all due respect, give us an honest answer or tell us right away that we are waisting our time!

And btw, reading all those comments here from people all over the world, who are desperately trying to fix something they love( and which they have not broken!)...makes me seriously proud to be an EVE player. Perhaps you give a S..t about that CCP. But i want to thank all those people who investet their precious time into this matter. THANK YOU.
Karak Bol
Low-Sec Survival Ltd.
#1229 - 2013-08-01 18:23:29 UTC
I like these changes, a clear role for HACs. *puts in HAC V skill*
Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1230 - 2013-08-01 18:50:03 UTC
I like how after almost every minmatar said that these vagas is worth *** rise has left the thread.
nikar galvren
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1231 - 2013-08-01 18:52:47 UTC  |  Edited by: nikar galvren
Lucien Cain wrote:
Are you going to let us wait any longer CCP? We are seriously pounding our heads against each other in order to solve the whole f...ing HAC Issue, but where is your response?! This is really stretching our nerves and i'm confident that you got enough productive imput to finally reach a conclusion. So please, with all due respect, give us an honest answer or tell us right away that we are waisting our time!

And btw, reading all those comments here from people all over the world, who are desperately trying to fix something they love( and which they have not broken!)...makes me seriously proud to be an EVE player. Perhaps you give a S..t about that CCP. But i want to thank all those people who investet their precious time into this matter. THANK YOU.

The new threads on Command Ships, Gang links & local reps confirm that CCP has abandoned this thread.

Also,
CCP Rise's final postt:
#596 Posted: 2013.07.30 11:27 | Report

634+ posts and no CCP presence.

EDIT: At this point, the only feedback we can give that they can't ignore is to leave the non-viable HAC hulls in the hangar. That seems to be the defining statistic for which ships get the balance team's attention.
Rynnik
Evasion Gaming
The Ancients.
#1232 - 2013-08-01 18:57:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Rynnik
Danny John-Peter wrote:
How many times does it have to be said, BEING FAST ISNT BALANCE, a Badger Mk II could go 2.7K/s and it still wouldnt be a good PVP ship.

The Vaga needs DPS to capitalise on that speed, otherwise its fast, and thats all it has.


Saying it doesn't make it true. Remember the Dramiel? Speed + DPS is the fastest path to being distinctly overpowered in this game. Are you honestly suggesting that ship speed should be discounted when considering balance? I do however agree that if you gave a Vaga the equivalent stats of a Badger you would free up some balance room for a bit more DPS projection. Roll

I get what you want - I really do, and I also know there is a huge segment of the risk adverse pvp crowd that also want the same thing. But I haven't heard ANY arguments as to why it would actually be good for the game. You can't have a 'pick and choose your fight, run if pressured, OMGWTFBBQPWN machine'. (okay you can but remember Cynabal, Rise is coming for you and hopefully he bitchslaps ABCs on the way by)

The proposed Vaga has insane speed together with:
  • enough tank (plus some treasured flexibility on how it chooses to implement that tank)
  • enough damage (with some gameplay decisions on how to apply that damage with reasonable consequences for those choices)
  • is probably in one of if not the best places to really shine with the new role bonus, beefed up cap, and even extra resilience to dishonour drones
It will be a good ship to fly rather than a mandatory train for any up-and-coming leet pvpers. Barring SiSi testing it looks to be in a good place right now.
Boss McNab
Tactical Chaos Corp
#1233 - 2013-08-01 19:03:46 UTC
Soo is CCP RISE MIA, it`s been over 500post from plays, alot good feed back and ideas and it seems he has had nothing to say?
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1234 - 2013-08-01 19:04:59 UTC
Round 3 when ? :D
Rynnik
Evasion Gaming
The Ancients.
#1235 - 2013-08-01 19:15:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Rynnik
It may be 500 posts but half of them are whines about him not posting enough. Pretty sure he has additional work to do besides forum updates and I think there might be other stuff on his plate besides just this thread (isn't there some sort of tourney on the go?) Personally I hope he is crunching numbers on Deimos tank and scratching his head right now! Twisted I am willing to bet reasoned discussion on the pros and cons of the proposed changes will bring him back sooner than random calls of 'please post, I want a pat on the back'.
Phoenix Jones
The Markoni Dragons
#1236 - 2013-08-01 19:17:16 UTC
Boss McNab wrote:
Soo is CCP RISE MIA, it`s been over 500post from plays, alot good feed back and ideas and it seems he has had nothing to say?



Just saw the Command Ship changes.

Welp I won't even bother with HAC's. Just jumping the shark and going with the Command Ships.

Though a army of hacs and command ships would be..



I would not want to fight that....\

Yaay!!!!

Pesadel0
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1237 - 2013-08-01 19:23:34 UTC
Rynnik wrote:
Danny John-Peter wrote:
How many times does it have to be said, BEING FAST ISNT BALANCE, a Badger Mk II could go 2.7K/s and it still wouldnt be a good PVP ship.

The Vaga needs DPS to capitalise on that speed, otherwise its fast, and thats all it has.


Saying it doesn't make it true. Remember the Dramiel? Speed + DPS is the fastest path to being distinctly overpowered in this game. Are you honestly suggesting that ship speed should be discounted when considering balance? I do however agree that if you gave a Vaga the equivalent stats of a Badger you would free up some balance room for a bit more DPS projection. Roll

I get what you want - I really do, and I also know there is a huge segment of the risk adverse pvp crowd that also want the same thing. But I haven't heard ANY arguments as to why it would actually be good for the game. You can't have a 'pick and choose your fight, run if pressured, OMGWTFBBQPWN machine'. (okay you can but remember Cynabal, Rise is coming for you and hopefully he bitchslaps ABCs on the way by)

The proposed Vaga has insane speed together with:
  • enough tank (plus some treasured flexibility on how it chooses to implement that tank)
  • enough damage (with some gameplay decisions on how to apply that damage with reasonable consequences for those choices)
  • is probably in one of if not the best places to really shine with the new role bonus, beefed up cap, and even extra resilience to dishonour drones
It will be a good ship to fly rather than a mandatory train for any up-and-coming leet pvpers. Barring SiSi testing it looks to be in a good place right now.


Well i guess all of us saying that the vaga bonus is ******** without a change in the slots are all wrong then , lets close the thread boys mister Rynnik has spoken.
nikar galvren
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1238 - 2013-08-01 19:23:41 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:

Just saw the Command Ship changes.

Welp I won't even bother with HAC's. Just jumping the shark and going with the Command Ships.

Thus summing up the main issue that the HAC re-balancing was supposed to address...
Rynnik
Evasion Gaming
The Ancients.
#1239 - 2013-08-01 19:58:46 UTC
Pesadel0 wrote:
Rynnik wrote:
Danny John-Peter wrote:
How many times does it have to be said, BEING FAST ISNT BALANCE, a Badger Mk II could go 2.7K/s and it still wouldnt be a good PVP ship.

The Vaga needs DPS to capitalise on that speed, otherwise its fast, and thats all it has.


Saying it doesn't make it true. Remember the Dramiel? Speed + DPS is the fastest path to being distinctly overpowered in this game. Are you honestly suggesting that ship speed should be discounted when considering balance? I do however agree that if you gave a Vaga the equivalent stats of a Badger you would free up some balance room for a bit more DPS projection. Roll

I get what you want - I really do, and I also know there is a huge segment of the risk adverse pvp crowd that also want the same thing. But I haven't heard ANY arguments as to why it would actually be good for the game. You can't have a 'pick and choose your fight, run if pressured, OMGWTFBBQPWN machine'. (okay you can but remember Cynabal, Rise is coming for you and hopefully he bitchslaps ABCs on the way by)

The proposed Vaga has insane speed together with:
  • enough tank (plus some treasured flexibility on how it chooses to implement that tank)
  • enough damage (with some gameplay decisions on how to apply that damage with reasonable consequences for those choices)
  • is probably in one of if not the best places to really shine with the new role bonus, beefed up cap, and even extra resilience to dishonour drones
It will be a good ship to fly rather than a mandatory train for any up-and-coming leet pvpers. Barring SiSi testing it looks to be in a good place right now.


Well i guess all of us saying that the vaga bonus is ******** without a change in the slots are all wrong then , lets close the thread boys mister Rynnik has spoken.


Arthur is the thread closing advocate, not me. I actually am very flattered though that you find my opinions reasonable enough to accept them as stated. Logic FTW! Blink I am actually really interested in any well thought out counter arguments, but looking at it I suspect there isn't anything that would keep me from agreeing with CCP Rise's stated belief that this Vaga will be just fine as proposed.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#1240 - 2013-08-01 20:27:18 UTC
Rynnik wrote:
It may be 500 posts but half of them are whines about him not posting enough. Pretty sure he has additional work to do besides forum updates and I think there might be other stuff on his plate besides just this thread (isn't there some sort of tourney on the go?) Personally I hope he is crunching numbers on Deimos tank and scratching his head right now! Twisted I am willing to bet reasoned discussion on the pros and cons of the proposed changes will bring him back sooner than random calls of 'please post, I want a pat on the back'.


pretty much this.

I mean in a perfect world

the mwd sig radius bonus would be changed to a reduction in heat damage to modules

the deimos would be more akin to a mini mega (see rate of fire bonus and tracking)

and the sac would have a explosion velocity bonus.

the vega would have 5 mid slots

the munin would have 4

the eagle would loose one if its optimal range bonus for tracking

the zelot would get 25 m3 drones...

honestly the only ones i am happy are the cerb and the ishtar. which are the only ones rise said he was concerned about in the first thread. so i guess it makes sence that he has no intention to do anything about he remaining ships.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.