These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Veskrashen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1321 - 2013-08-02 14:50:36 UTC
The cost is due to the new metamaterial requirements, and the current low supply thereof.

See:
Scientist's Life: Metamaterials
Scientist's Life: Jita Connundrum

We Gallente have a saying: "CCP created the Gallente Militia to train the Fighters..."

nikar galvren
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1322 - 2013-08-02 14:53:29 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi guys

Sorry I've been away. Been out of the office for two days because of barfing etc.

I'm behind on the thread so I'm going to get caught up today and respond to some of the common points in a few hours.

I stand corrected. Hope you feel better.
Rek Seven
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1323 - 2013-08-02 15:06:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Meh, most of these changes don't go far enough and i'd consider some of these changes to result in a worse ship that the round 1 proposals. Not interested in reading your crappy "fixes" anyone ccp but good luck o/
columbo miner
Rekall Incorporated
#1324 - 2013-08-02 15:13:22 UTC
Hi,

Ishtar:

I am still hoping for a 6th low slot even if we lose something for balance and to appease the non drone boat pilots.

With regards to the Ishtar HAC skill bonuses, they become useless when using the std 5x OGRE fit for med/close range. So is it excepted that you only need HAC lvl 1 to fly the Ishtar if you don't intend to snipe? Could the bonuses be tweaked even further please, i feel we are nearly there .

I think the drone bonuses are correct but why separate? Other HAC's have bonuses that stack with there choice of weaponry i.e. Dmg, rate of fire, fall off and optimal all applied to the weapon they have mounted. What is been currently given to the Isthar is the same as giving separate bonuses to auto-cannons and Artillery on a Minmatar HAC or separate rail and blasters bonuses.
This will then allow you to add a separate small but useful bonus as currently the Ishtar is not quite there yet.

I think the majority realize that it's going to take a few rounds to get it right /GL pleasing everyone.

Thanks,
Boz.

aka Bozzith, Columbo Miner.

Danny John-Peter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1325 - 2013-08-02 15:31:35 UTC
columbo miner wrote:
Hi,


I think the drone bonuses are correct but why separate? Other HAC's have bonuses that stack with there choice of weaponry i.e. Dmg, rate of fire, fall off and optimal all applied to the weapon they have mounted. What is been currently given to the Isthar is the same as giving separate bonuses to auto-cannons and Artillery on a Minmatar HAC or separate rail and blasters bonuses.



That is how it currently works.

Thats why the Muninn has a tracking bonus and the Vaga has a falloff bonus.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1326 - 2013-08-02 15:33:10 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi guys

Sorry I've been away. Been out of the office for two days because of barfing etc.

I'm behind on the thread so I'm going to get caught up today and respond to some of the common points in a few hours.


Is this where you give the deimos a rep bonus ? =D

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

XXSketchxx
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#1327 - 2013-08-02 16:42:06 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi guys

Sorry I've been away. Been out of the office for two days because of barfing etc.

I'm behind on the thread so I'm going to get caught up today and respond to some of the common points in a few hours.


WTB +1 low on sac

TIA
XXSketchxx
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
#1328 - 2013-08-02 16:42:40 UTC
You can take the drones and/or the utility high as payment.
Doed
Tyrfing Industries
#1329 - 2013-08-02 16:54:11 UTC
XXSketchxx wrote:
You can take the drones and/or the utility high as payment.


Taking the drones for a low is absolutely not worth it.
Lallante
Blue Republic
RvB - BLUE Republic
#1330 - 2013-08-02 16:58:44 UTC
Makoto Priano wrote:
Lallante wrote:
Dear CCP Rise.

Please address this point:

COST!

Many thanks

Lall


Do you mean-- how the speculators are speculating, and this is causing a price spike? As it always does?

Prices will settle back to equilibrium soon enough.


The equilibrium is still too high for how these ships compare to t1
HiddenPorpoise
Jarlhettur's Drop
United Federation of Conifers
#1331 - 2013-08-02 17:12:33 UTC
Lallante wrote:
The equilibrium is still too high for how these ships compare to t1

How so? Before the market spike they were 135-160mil each, so they're about five or six times the cost fitted for double the tank and a nice dps boost.
The markets always dive back in a few weeks.
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#1332 - 2013-08-02 17:22:14 UTC
Alright, I'm still kind of out of it and I'll probably give another check-in here after the weekend, but here's where I stand for now:

I think our biggest concern is the Deimos. While the combination of the new layout and speed, added to the rail buff probably makes for a skirmisher that will be extremely powerful, we do appreciate the fact that a lot of people feel disappointed with it as an in-your-face brawler. I think the expected performance as a brawler varies quite a bit based on what kind of PVP you like (what size etc), but I would like to push it back towards that role in some way. We want to at least give back some of the base hp in armor, maybe at the cost of some of the added shield hp. I don't have numbers for this yet but I'll get them to you guys early next week. The other thing I would really like to do is give the Deimos an armor rep bonus. I think it could fit in nicely as a replacement for the MWD cap use bonus as long as the cap recharge is high enough that the kiting fits are handicapped. This wouldn't have much affect on large fleet AHAC type application, but would open up more possibilities at small scale. It also fits really well racially compared to the cap use bonus which is sort of unusual. I'm sure a lot of you won't love an active bonus because it doesn't apply to your style of play, but it would come in at little-to-no cost and offer smaller scale fighters more diversity and a more efficient brawler.

Following the Deimos there's a few ships which seem to be drawing more attention than any others, but for most of these I don't expect to make big changes before 1.1 goes out. This list would include Vagabond, Muninn, and Sacrilege.

Vagabond: I'm still fairly confused about how there is so much resistance on this ship design. The complaints range quite a bit but I think the most legitimate one is that the Vaga struggles to project damage compared to its competition (Deimos/Cerberus mostly). I think you have to accept that the Vaga has huge advantages in some other areas that should easily outweigh its slightly lower damage projection. Compared to Cerberus for instance, you have an enormous speed advantage, a utility high, and significantly lower Signature. How valuable you think these things are will vary of course, but you can't expect the Vaga to push damage out as well or it simply becomes better in all cases.

Muninn: I understand wanting the 4th mid, but I don't think we will do that. I think by adding a low the Muninn will get better at everything it already does (mostly arty/shield fleets), by using the low for more speed or more damage, while also picking up the possibility to run armor variations. This might not be insanely popular but I think it's important for Minmatar to have the option to do both, and the Vaga is pointed towards shield even more now than it already was.

Sacrilege: The Sacrilege was definitely one of the more difficult ones to pin down, but I think we're in a pretty good place. We looked at a few other options for its layout and bonuses but because of the power of the resist buff it's very easy for it to become too strong. We also really like that it tends to fit in to fleets as a ship with enormous utility rather than being all tank and gank like a lot of the other HACs. For that reason we really wanted to leave the utility high and the 4th mid. It would often make a better straight up brawler with another low, but by going the route we went of adding more drone dps and more fitting room, we improved it a lot as a brawler while preserving its character as a very high-utility HAC that can do a lot of different things.

Ishtar: A little side note here. If you are confused about the slot count being one lower, thats very standard for our primary drone weapon ships. In general I think the Ishtar is certainly among the most powerful ships coming out of this rebalance so we definitely aren't looking to make it any more so.

On 1 slot vs tech 1 counterpart rather than 2: Honestly we never talked about adding a slot to every ship, but I don't think it makes much difference. If we did do that, we would have to pull power away from other metrics to make up for it. Whether the whole class has 12 or 15 or 18 it should hopefully still be balanced to function in the role we have in mind, and so it's not as if adding a lot to all of them would suddenly make them all much more powerful.

Thanks for the well wishes, I'm doing pretty okay now. Please comment on the Deimos changes and I'll check back tonight or early next week after the alliance tournament is over. Also - if you want to hear me get grilled about HACs and other things as well, tune in to EVE Radio tonight at midnight EVE time where DJ Funkybacon is going to interview me on all this stuff.

@ccp_rise

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#1333 - 2013-08-02 17:28:05 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I think our biggest concern is the Deimos. While the combination of the new layout and speed, added to the rail buff probably makes for a skirmisher that will be extremely powerful, we do appreciate the fact that a lot of people feel disappointed with it as an in-your-face brawler. I think the expected performance as a brawler varies quite a bit based on what kind of PVP you like (what size etc), but I would like to push it back towards that role in some way. We want to at least give back some of the base hp in armor, maybe at the cost of some of the added shield hp. I don't have numbers for this yet but I'll get them to you guys early next week. The other thing I would really like to do is give the Deimos an armor rep bonus. I think it could fit in nicely as a replacement for the MWD cap use bonus as long as the cap recharge is high enough that the kiting fits are handicapped. This wouldn't have much affect on large fleet AHAC type application, but would open up more possibilities at small scale. It also fits really well racially compared to the cap use bonus which is sort of unusual. I'm sure a lot of you won't love an active bonus because it doesn't apply to your style of play, but it would come in at little-to-no cost and offer smaller scale fighters more diversity and a more efficient brawler.

.


Please think about making the repair bonus a dule bonus like the drone damage/HP

So the bonus would read as:
7.5% to effectiveness of Armor repair and reduction in Capacitor activation cost Per level

This would help the ship out greatly as its extreamly cap hungy and lack of high slot means it cant fit a nos.

also. pretty please change one of the damage bonus for a 7.5% to rate of fire and remove the 5th high slot for a 7th low.

this will allow players to get damage mods on plus an active tank if they wanted too...
and free up room on the power grid to fit larger guns like nuetrons or 250 rails.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1334 - 2013-08-02 17:37:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
MeBiatch wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
I think our biggest concern is the Deimos. While the combination of the new layout and speed, added to the rail buff probably makes for a skirmisher that will be extremely powerful, we do appreciate the fact that a lot of people feel disappointed with it as an in-your-face brawler. I think the expected performance as a brawler varies quite a bit based on what kind of PVP you like (what size etc), but I would like to push it back towards that role in some way. We want to at least give back some of the base hp in armor, maybe at the cost of some of the added shield hp. I don't have numbers for this yet but I'll get them to you guys early next week. The other thing I would really like to do is give the Deimos an armor rep bonus. I think it could fit in nicely as a replacement for the MWD cap use bonus as long as the cap recharge is high enough that the kiting fits are handicapped. This wouldn't have much affect on large fleet AHAC type application, but would open up more possibilities at small scale. It also fits really well racially compared to the cap use bonus which is sort of unusual. I'm sure a lot of you won't love an active bonus because it doesn't apply to your style of play, but it would come in at little-to-no cost and offer smaller scale fighters more diversity and a more efficient brawler.

.


Please think about making the repair bonus a dule bonus like the drone damage/HP

So the bonus would read as:
7.5% to effectiveness of Armor repair and reduction in Capacitor activation cost Per level

This would help the ship out greatly as its extreamly cap hungy and lack of high slot means it cant fit a nos.

also. pretty please change one of the damage bonus for a 7.5% to rate of fire and remove the 5th high slot for a 7th low.

this will allow players to get damage mods on plus an active tank if they wanted too...
and free up room on the power grid to fit larger guns like nuetrons or 250 rails.


Yes adding a cap hungry dps bonus to a active tanked ship makes a lot of sense

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1335 - 2013-08-02 17:39:19 UTC
RISE

Please for the love of god talk to me about the eagle ... its slow as **** and does nothing particularly well the fact that it needs 2 optimal range bonuses tells you something does it not?

Please look at making it a viable blaster kiter... speed and proper dps please drones and a stronger damage bonus /lower sig comes to mind..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Romar Thel
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1336 - 2013-08-02 17:39:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Romar Thel
CCP Rise wrote:


Vagabond: I'm still fairly confused about how there is so much resistance on this ship design. The complaints range quite a bit but I think the most legitimate one is that the Vaga struggles to project damage compared to its competition (Deimos/Cerberus mostly). I think you have to accept that the Vaga has huge advantages in some other areas that should easily outweigh its slightly lower damage projection. Compared to Cerberus for instance, you have an enormous speed advantage, a utility high, and significantly lower Signature. How valuable you think these things are will vary of course, but you can't expect the Vaga to push damage out as well or it simply becomes better in all cases.




But by giving it a bonus that wont help at all in most of the cases isnt really a bonus...
For the time it is treated like the zealot that doesnt get any significant change.

After TE changes it still needs something more to compensate. DPS bonus instead of range is somehow better in the way that you risk alot if you get in stasis range with this ship and it stills does around 75% if it's damage in the range that it usually stands.


PS. All HACs have a different role. They shouldnt be all so fast...
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#1337 - 2013-08-02 17:44:51 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
RISE

Please for the love of god talk to me about the eagle ... its slow as **** and does nothing particularly well the fact that it needs 2 optimal range bonuses tells you something does it not?

Please look at making it a viable blaster kiter... speed and proper dps please drones and a stronger damage bonus /lower sig comes to mind..


this is just me but i would remove one of the optimal range bonus replace with a tracking bonus and replace the damage bonus with a rate of fire bonus.

this would give that ship great range. good tracking and really good applied damage.

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

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Nabuch Sattva
The Green Cross
#1338 - 2013-08-02 18:02:21 UTC
On the Deimos:

In my mind the preferred change would be to give the TRACKING BONUS instead of the MWD cap bonus. Would suit more play styles. Would be very nice with the new hybrid changes... So I say: Do eeeeeet!!!

The active armor bonus, with the 4th mid could work. But will see more resistence from the player base I imagine. Useless in big fleets etc etc..



Danny John-Peter
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1339 - 2013-08-02 18:03:27 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Alright, I'm still kind of out of it and I'll probably give another check-in here after the weekend, but here's where I stand for now:

Vagabond: I'm still fairly confused about how there is so much resistance on this ship design. The complaints range quite a bit but I think the most legitimate one is that the Vaga struggles to project damage compared to its competition (Deimos/Cerberus mostly). I think you have to accept that the Vaga has huge advantages in some other areas that should easily outweigh its slightly lower damage projection. Compared to Cerberus for instance, you have an enormous speed advantage, a utility high, and significantly lower Signature. How valuable you think these things are will vary of course, but you can't expect the Vaga to push damage out as well or it simply becomes better in all cases.



Because the new "Bonus" you gave it is terrible and won't really be used.

Ships with high speed and low EHP have to have decent applied DPS to make use of said speed, otherwise you get a ship with good disengagement options and not much else.
Phoenix Jones
The Markoni Dragons
#1340 - 2013-08-02 18:08:30 UTC
The Deimos... Ok let's see. It's massively cap hungry, and everybody hates armor rep bonuses, but the most recent changes to reppers maybe enough to use it....

Maaaaybe...

Yaay!!!!