These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Hyperion] Heavy Assault Cruiser tweaks

First post First post First post
Author
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1381 - 2014-08-12 00:16:40 UTC
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?




Am I the only one who feel like ALL Battleships should have 8 high slots?
I mean.... what's the point of a BShip that isn't armed to the teeth? Real-life ocean-going battleships are the scariest things on the water. It should be the same, in space.



no.. we just prefer them to be good and useful isntead of following a completely asthetic and irrelevant target of having 8 high slots.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Jack Miton
Perkone
Caldari State
#1382 - 2014-08-12 00:43:11 UTC
No offense but the issue with the Munnin is not its speed, it's the fact that it does no DPS and has rubbish tank.
Please fix it properly and make it into a viable T2 armour brawl ship as this is something the Minmatar lineup sorely lacks at the moment.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

Erutpar Ambient
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1383 - 2014-08-12 00:45:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Erutpar Ambient
I don't know if this has been suggested....

Why not just give the Ishtar a Sentry Drone Range penalty. The biggest problem with the Ishtar is that it fills the same role as a BS because of the damage and range but also has the mobility of a cruiser. Kiting Ishtars wouldn't be such a big deal without the range on sentries.

On a related topic,

Why are Sentries in the same class as the other drones? Why not split drones into 2 groups: Mobile Drones and Sentry Drones and then you can have a small medium and large of each and spread them out appropriately. Every other weapon class has it's short and long range groups. Why not drones too?
Jarod Garamonde
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1384 - 2014-08-12 01:18:19 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?




Am I the only one who feel like ALL Battleships should have 8 high slots?
I mean.... what's the point of a BShip that isn't armed to the teeth? Real-life ocean-going battleships are the scariest things on the water. It should be the same, in space.



no.. we just prefer them to be good and useful isntead of following a completely asthetic and irrelevant target of having 8 high slots.


Goes without saying.... but it just bothers me that there are Battleships in the game that can only mount 4 turrets.

That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...

    [#savethelance]
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#1385 - 2014-08-12 02:12:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Jack Miton wrote:
No offense but the issue with the Munnin is not its speed, it's the fact that it does no DPS and has rubbish tank.
Please fix it properly and make it into a viable T2 armour brawl ship as this is something the Minmatar lineup sorely lacks at the moment.


Sadly in many ways it is a severely underwhelming ship that doesn't quite seem to know what it is other than having pg and bonuses relevant to artillery. I'd rather see it be a little more versatile for armour or shields though than restricted just to an armour brawler where artillery is less useful.
Jack Miton
Perkone
Caldari State
#1386 - 2014-08-12 02:20:49 UTC
Rroff wrote:
Jack Miton wrote:
No offense but the issue with the Munnin is not its speed, it's the fact that it does no DPS and has rubbish tank.
Please fix it properly and make it into a viable T2 armour brawl ship as this is something the Minmatar lineup sorely lacks at the moment.

Sadly in many ways it is a severely underwhelming ship that doesn't quite seem to know what it is other than having pg and bonuses relevant to artillery. I'd rather see it be a little more versatile for armour or shields though than restricted just to an armour brawler where artillery is less useful.

It has 3 mid slots. the shield tank ship has sailed.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout

darkneko
Black Cat mining Inc.
#1387 - 2014-08-12 02:36:49 UTC
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?




Am I the only one who feel like ALL Battleships should have 8 high slots?
I mean.... what's the point of a BShip that isn't armed to the teeth? Real-life ocean-going battleships are the scariest things on the water. It should be the same, in space.



no.. we just prefer them to be good and useful isntead of following a completely asthetic and irrelevant target of having 8 high slots.


Goes without saying.... but it just bothers me that there are Battleships in the game that can only mount 4 turrets.


It's not really about the amount of high slots but the fact that Battleships are not very useful in pvp unless you are doing long range sniping with a big fleet or structure bashing, they do plenty of dps just **** tracking and are to slow to stay in range of anything during a long fight. considering the scramblers affect that 100km jump system and the mwd.
Viciash
Volkskorp
#1388 - 2014-08-12 04:18:19 UTC
make sentries extra heavy (50 m3) with the same bandwidth. ishtar drone bay 325 allows for one spare sentry. target the sentries and they lose their dps. maybe drop sentry drone hp a bit to make them either have to rr their sentry or let it pop quickly. also increase sentry sig radius substantially as it shouldnt be hard to lock and certainly not shoot a stationary target. increase drone bay for battleships like domi to offset the increase in size of sentry.
Sister Bliss
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#1389 - 2014-08-12 06:39:05 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:

We expect that some of you will feel this is far too gentle on the Ishtar, and we understand that (it's what we heard from the CSM as well), but we get releases very often now and we're happy to be conservative here, rather than nuke it out of the game, and just make more changes if they're needed in the following release.

Looking forward to your feedback as always

Note for clarity: Hyperion release date is August 26


Thanks for your continued efforts on balancing, however;

* The entire eve community has already told you the Ishtar changes are not effective and demonstrated why

* The CSM has also told you this change is not effective

* Over 70 pages of feedback in this thread are telling you that this is not good enough

* Why aren't you listening?


Expecting us to be happy with this dogmatic position is an insult in the context of the statement "we get releases very often now" considering the Ishtar will have been in this broken state for what...8+ months before this completely ineffective change?

Assuming you do not change your position, how long until we get the next iteration with an effective, balanced fix? Another 8 months? Genuine question.

Can we open the [next release] HAC changes thread now to get the ball rolling? (can we also include a look at the BS and Bombers issues (separate) which you acknowledge as well please).
Mylea Chanlin
Royal Damsels in Distress
#1390 - 2014-08-12 06:40:26 UTC
Frankly, I think we've done well enough to the Ishtar.

In the last 12 months we've seen several consecutive nerfs to the Ishtar and its weapon systems.


  • Sentry optimals were (deservedly so) severely reduced.
  • Garde tracking and damage were recently reduced, in turn reducing the maximum theoretical and applied damage of the weapon system.
  • The upcoming changes provide a significant reduction in the effectiveness of the Ishtar speed tank.
  • The upcoming changes provide a total loss of 12.5% on tracking, optimal, and falloff.


These are all big changes. I'm a drone pilot myself, and I'm not opposed to many of these changes. I do think, though, that we have done well enough for now, and should sit tight and see what happens before neutering the Ishtar to the point of obsolescence.

Very many of the "Do this to harm the Ishtar" comments can be summed up simply as "Do this to harm the ship/weapon/style that I didn't train for." I sense a prevailing attitude of selfishness in many of the comments, and urge a more objective look at data instead of the "recommendations" of the CSM and the attitudes of the self-serving.
Ravay Kanjus
Infinity Blue
#1391 - 2014-08-12 06:43:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Ravay Kanjus
CCP Rise wrote:
Ishtar:
Bonus to drone tracking and optimal range from 7.5% per level -> 5% per level
Max Velocity from 195 -> 185


So, putting it's tracking in range with the Vexor Navy Issue, then. Alright. I am looking at gettig into an ishtar for DED sites soon, and frankly, I despise Sentry drones. Their immobility is a massive turn-off, and their DPS when compared to Geckos or Augmented Ogres, even with a sentry damage rig, is crap. Remove the sentry drone bonuses to the Ishtar, and give them something else. Maybe a defensive level bonus or drone something. Hell, maybe Hybrid damage.

Mylea Chanlin wrote:
Frankly, I think we've done well enough to the Ishtar.

In the last 12 months we've seen several consecutive nerfs to the Ishtar and its weapon systems.


  • Sentry optimals were (deservedly so) severely reduced.
  • Garde tracking and damage were recently reduced, in turn reducing the maximum theoretical and applied damage of the weapon system.
  • The upcoming changes provide a significant reduction in the effectiveness of the Ishtar speed tank.
  • The upcoming changes provide a total loss of 12.5% on tracking, optimal, and falloff.


These are all big changes. I'm a drone pilot myself, and I'm not opposed to many of these changes. I do think, though, that we have done well enough for now, and should sit tight and see what happens before neutering the Ishtar to the point of obsolescence.

Very many of the "Do this to harm the Ishtar" comments can be summed up simply as "Do this to harm the ship/weapon/style that I didn't train for." I sense a prevailing attitude of selfishness in many of the comments, and urge a more objective look at data instead of the "recommendations" of the CSM and the attitudes of the self-serving.


And this. I feel EVE and most of it's players are way, way too fanboyish over turrets- mainly projectiles. (I loathe projectile turrets, myself.) Woopee, a tiny optimal and huge falloff. I get to do half damage!) I've been a missile fan for ages, and a rising love of drones over the last year or so. Still, lasers and hybrids have peaked my interest from time to time. However yeah, the bias towards projectiles is sickening at times.
Mylea Chanlin
Royal Damsels in Distress
#1392 - 2014-08-12 06:57:09 UTC
I actually really like that the Ishtar's bonuses are geared toward sentry drones. It allows the Ishtar to be characteristically different than the Gila which, while not fit for sentries, provides a fabulously effective drone weapon system.

In the cruiser tier I feel like there must exist a ship which appropriately represents the sentry drone weapon system with all of its strong advantages and equally strong disadvantages. There are already ships that boast various drone bonuses, so to eliminate the sentry aspect of the Ishtar would damage the uniqueness and flavor of the Gallente HIC.

While I do not agree entirely with the nerf to Ishtar optimal and falloff, it seems to me to not be unreasonable, and it does so without completely reenvisioning the ship. There should not be a need to eliminate the role of sentry cruiser to accomplish balance in New Eden.
Mylea Chanlin
Royal Damsels in Distress
#1393 - 2014-08-12 07:12:13 UTC
Malwadas Kadmos wrote:
ishtar changes are good but wont be enough, 125mbit drone boats with tracking bonus are just a joke(in small scale pvp) since the release of geckos ... heavy drones going with over 4k m/s and having good enough tracking to hit full speed moving frigates without needing web/scram/target painting is pretty strong.


The fact that Ishtars are, arguably, too powerful with Geckos is not the fault of the Ishtar. It is the fault of the overpowered Geckos. The same argument could be made of the Eos or the Domi, if fit with Geckos. "Fixing" the DPS of Gecko-fit ships should happen in the drone, not the ship.

Phrased another way, I don't think that limited edition drones and ammunition should really be considered when defining the specifications of a ship. There is no replacement plan for the Gecko, and in time it will disappear. Should you neuter the Ishtar to compensate for limited edition equipment, then when the limited edition equipment is gone, you will have a grossly underpowered Ishtar.

I would not be opposed to a modest Gecko nerf, as I feel that they interfere with reasoned thinking about the viability, advantages, and disadvantages of drone systems.
Vesan Terakol
Trollgrin Sadface
Dark Taboo
#1394 - 2014-08-12 08:43:45 UTC
I've seen as a concern that sentries get way too much alpha damage. Is there any limitations in the code to allow them a ROF bonus instead of pure damage?
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1395 - 2014-08-12 09:37:07 UTC
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Jarod Garamonde wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


PS - how would you feel about an 8/4/7 Tempest?




Am I the only one who feel like ALL Battleships should have 8 high slots?
I mean.... what's the point of a BShip that isn't armed to the teeth? Real-life ocean-going battleships are the scariest things on the water. It should be the same, in space.



no.. we just prefer them to be good and useful isntead of following a completely asthetic and irrelevant target of having 8 high slots.


Goes without saying.... but it just bothers me that there are Battleships in the game that can only mount 4 turrets.



If you allow a tempest to mount 8 guns then suddenly it becomes overpowered. Things cannot be like that.

TEmpest was supposedto be a battleship taht traded 1 of the damage bonuses to free extra slots while keeping high enough damage. The free slots are there, but the damage is Not high because only 6 lows means tempest uses 1 less damage mod than other battleships.

For long time temepst was still used as a shield heavy BC. But since the warp speed changes and the batttleships rebalance (when it got larger for no freacking reason) it became useless on that role, because even normal BC are too slow.

Tempest issue is simple. The 5% damage bonus does not pay off . The same problem was faced in the hyperion but the hyperion got preferencial treatment and got a 10% damage bonus and 125m drone bay. Even if the hypeiron bonuses were to AC, the hyperion would do MORE damage than a tempest... that while usign 1 damage bonus and having a repair bonus, while the tempest would need to use 2 damage bonuses for that.

That simple math shows how HORRIBLY unbalanced the tempest is. It needs an Uplift on the 5% damage bonus to 7.5% or change the rof bonus to 8% per level and make the damage bonus into something more interesting (not trackign.. not the worst and most uselles bonus possible)

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1396 - 2014-08-12 09:38:04 UTC
Vesan Terakol wrote:
I've seen as a concern that sentries get way too much alpha damage. Is there any limitations in the code to allow them a ROF bonus instead of pure damage?



They decided to make that to reduce server load. Each boat drops 5 drones, so they create 5 times mroe firing events than a normal boat would. Focusing the damage mods in damage not ROF was made to mitigate that.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1397 - 2014-08-12 09:39:25 UTC
Mylea Chanlin wrote:
Frankly, I think we've done well enough to the Ishtar.

In the last 12 months we've seen several consecutive nerfs to the Ishtar and its weapon systems.


  • Sentry optimals were (deservedly so) severely reduced.
  • Garde tracking and damage were recently reduced, in turn reducing the maximum theoretical and applied damage of the weapon system.
  • The upcoming changes provide a significant reduction in the effectiveness of the Ishtar speed tank.
  • The upcoming changes provide a total loss of 12.5% on tracking, optimal, and falloff.


These are all big changes. I'm a drone pilot myself, and I'm not opposed to many of these changes. I do think, though, that we have done well enough for now, and should sit tight and see what happens before neutering the Ishtar to the point of obsolescence.

Very many of the "Do this to harm the Ishtar" comments can be summed up simply as "Do this to harm the ship/weapon/style that I didn't train for." I sense a prevailing attitude of selfishness in many of the comments, and urge a more objective look at data instead of the "recommendations" of the CSM and the attitudes of the self-serving.



Sorry no. You are completely wrong. Most of the people attackign the ishtar here are people that are way over 100M sp and have ALL weapon systems and races crosstrained.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Astral Jesus
Doomheim
#1398 - 2014-08-12 10:28:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Astral Jesus
Damn it, guys. I've been training up for an Ishtar since I got this game just on account of it being a dedicated drone boat, and I think that's a cool idea. I don't know enough about game mechanics to comment on this super meaningfully, but I will say this: at least 90% of the suggested nerfs in this thread are terrible, terrible ideas on account of one thing: the Ishtar is unique.

It's one of the last unique ships in the game. That's the main reason I chose it. Most of the nerfs I've seen people calling for would flat out kill the Ishtar. That'd be a goddamn shame. I've yet to be on the receiving (or giving) end of the Ishtar's bullshit so by all means feel free to ignore me, but please think about the terrible things you suggest CCP do to my sweet drone goddess before you say them.

I read a comment somewhere ITT lamenting the fact that this quest for "balance" will basically lead to each ship just being a different skin for __ DPS @ __ km, and I couldn't agree more. Do something with the Ishtar, for the love of God, but by all means please do it gradually with small tweaks. Honestly... a lot of the suggested balance nerfs ITT looks like an equally terrible reverse power creep, where every ship just becomes bland and samey instead of each ship becoming uniquely overpowered.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1399 - 2014-08-12 10:31:22 UTC
Astral Jesus wrote:
Damn it, guys. I've been training up for an Ishtar since I got this game just on account of it being a dedicated drone boat, and I think that's a cool idea. I don't know enough about game mechanics to comment on this super meaningfully, but I will say this: at least 90% of the suggested nerfs in this thread are terrible, terrible ideas on account of one thing: the Ishtar is unique.

It's one of the last unique ships in the game. That's the main reason I chose it. Most of the nerfs I've seen people calling for would flat out kill the Ishtar. That'd be a goddamn shame. I've yet to be on the receiving (or giving) end of the Ishtar's bullshit so by all means feel free to ignore me, but please think about the terrible things you suggest CCP do to my sweet drone goddess before you say them.

I read a comment somewhere ITT lamenting the fact that this quest for "balance" will basically lead to each ship just being a different skin for __ DPS @ __ km, and I couldn't agree more. Do something with the Ishtar, for the love of God, but by all means please do it gradually with small tweaks. Honestly though... a lot of the suggested balance looks like an equally ****** reverse power creep, where every ship just becomes generically ****** instead of each ship becoming uniquely overpowered.



It is not unique. It is just a pocket dominix that can do all that the dominix can offensive wise. while all other hacs are far less powerful damage projection or dps wise than their racial battleships.

Ishtar is simply overpowered because 125m drone bay was created at a time where drone boats had only half their damage from drone bayd, sicne no drone damage mods meant usign only drones was not enough.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1400 - 2014-08-12 10:36:14 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:

With the XL ASB fit, you can fit 220's and an LSE on them. Total EHP is around 30-35K. Thats quite a bit for a kiter. You buff its tank more, you're going to have a very fast cruiser with a 700 dps tank or some 50K EHP buffer fit, that projects up to 40km, that only a few ships can catch. As much as i'd love to fly around in that kind of vagabond, it would be OP just like the ishtar.

If you wanted a brawly vagabond, it would need to get slower, and then it just becomes another brawler, instead of one of the fastest ships in the game that can kite decently.



Vaga issue is not strength, is loss of personality. It should weight less. It is effectively slower than orthrus, cynabal and navy omen because it accelerates slower. Also the vastly superior damage projection of ishtars and cerberus create problem for vaga role). Vaga needs to lose 5% of its mass, and maybe gain some 3-4% PG. Then it can keep as a good kiter.

Nothing massive. But the anti minmatar bias of the alst 2 years need to stop. Givign minmatar more mass and less agility to coutner speed is plain STUPID. Just neutralize the racial advantage. Minmatar were supposed to be weak on EHP and not suberb on raw dps applied ( AC already ensures that), and GOOD on speed and agility.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"