These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1561 - 2014-08-16 03:42:57 UTC
unslaught wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
If you get balance right, there is no OP in any given category. There is only right for that engagement.



is it possible with such variety to ever get a good balance? the balancing of ships has been going on for many years..


not perfectly no, but some day we may get to the point where rebalancing tweaks such as the ones in OP are the only things happening. Which is good enough for me.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1562 - 2014-08-16 07:53:10 UTC
Nick Bete wrote:
Just ignore Harvey. If you look up his posting history in these types of threads all he ever argues for are more nerfs to Minmatar ships. He wants them all to be slow bricks with no DPS. He's basically a troll.

Minmatar ships aren't what they once were. With the tieracide initiative lots of other ships have gotten faster, have better damage application, etc. Just look at the once mighty Rifter. It's now outclassed in every way by the other T1 frigs. This goes for many of the Matari T2 hulls as well; Muninn, Huginn, Vagabond, Wolf, Jaguar, etc. These ships all need some love to make them competitive with their contemporaries. Sorry but another few meters per second speed boost isn't going to suddenly make the Muninn a good HAC. Please take another look at its role, slot layout, etc.

Finally, please don't make the Tempest even worse by giving it a weird slot layout.


you're just unhappy they are no longer the OP winmatar machines of past ...
its pretty impossible too advocate any speed increases on minmatar ships as they are already the fastest in most categories..
that being said i have advocated for the tempest and Maelstrom too get speed/agility increases .. ofc you glossed over that part it doesn't help you win your argument...

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

Higgs Maken
The Metal Box Company
#1563 - 2014-08-16 08:22:14 UTC
unslaught wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
If you get balance right, there is no OP in any given category. There is only right for that engagement.



is it possible with such variety to ever get a good balance? the balancing of ships has been going on for many years..



Water is very valuable, without it we all die; but how much are you willing to pay for it? It have a very low perceived value. The problem here is perceived balance rather than actual balancing. At least for 1v1 balancing we can take in all factors i.e damage, defence and etc normalised those value and do a dot product each and every ship would give a score. Tweak those factors and let all ship share the same score, some could be high on attack but compensated with weaker defence and/or other aspect, that's perfect balance at least for 1v1. However this formula can't solve perceive balance issue, human being human would simply QQ about pros of ships with higher attack and totally ignore factors that was sacrifice to achieve it.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1564 - 2014-08-16 09:18:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Xequecal
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The problem you are describing has little if anything to do with those ships. Their slot layouts and stats are just fine, many of them are powerful on their own.

But autocannons suck.

That's your real problem. And honestly, with the exception of hybrids, every weapon system in the entire game needs a balance pass. Missiles have problems with travel time and application falling off completely, lasers need better ammo variety (some Thermal damage for crying out loud, EM is the worst damage type in the game) and less restrictive cap use and fitting, and autocannons are too heavily penalized for being capless, they don't hit as hard as they should.


EM is the best damage type in the game. It's not even close. EM is the lowest resist on the vast majority of PvP ships. Even armor battleships usually go for a 3-hardener setup now leaving EM as the lowest resist.

EM used to be terrible during the winmatar days when everything had minnie T2 resists, but now Minmatar T2 ships are almost nonexistent and we have Gallente supremacy where all their T2 stuff has EM as the lowest (shield tank) or second-lowest (armor tank) resist. EM is only the strongest resist anymore on armor tanked T1 cruisers and battlecruisers, and even battlecruisers are seeing little use nowadays.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1565 - 2014-08-16 09:46:24 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The problem you are describing has little if anything to do with those ships. Their slot layouts and stats are just fine, many of them are powerful on their own.

But autocannons suck.

That's your real problem. And honestly, with the exception of hybrids, every weapon system in the entire game needs a balance pass. Missiles have problems with travel time and application falling off completely, lasers need better ammo variety (some Thermal damage for crying out loud, EM is the worst damage type in the game) and less restrictive cap use and fitting, and autocannons are too heavily penalized for being capless, they don't hit as hard as they should.


EM is the best damage type in the game. It's not even close. EM is the lowest resist on the vast majority of PvP ships. Even armor battleships usually go for a 3-hardener setup now leaving EM as the lowest resist.

EM used to be terrible during the winmatar days when everything had minnie T2 resists, but now Minmatar T2 ships are almost nonexistent and we have Gallente supremacy where all their T2 stuff has EM as the lowest (shield tank) or second-lowest (armor tank) resist. EM is only the strongest resist anymore on armor tanked T1 cruisers and battlecruisers, and even battlecruisers are seeing little use nowadays.


so it's good because people are bad?
gallaoth
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1566 - 2014-08-16 10:06:52 UTC
tempest better suit a 7/5/7, 6 turrets and a utility high slot.

tempest fleet issue 7/6/7
Gavote Greensleeves
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1567 - 2014-08-16 12:04:21 UTC
Mike Voidstar wrote:
To deal with sentries? Rohk comes to mind, as does any maurader-- large rails will do the job easily, as will beams and cruise...artillery will be in falloff and fire a bit slow for the purpose. Get outside that drone control range--- which is only 100 or less for 99.9999% of all drone boats and you are shooting a stationary cruiser. I don't care how bad you think laser tracking is, they can hit a stationary cruiser which is what a sentry looks like for targeting, and if you can't, it's not like target painters don't exist or are hard to use.

Expensive? perhaps, but it can be done cheaper by the attack battlecruisers. They can counter by picking up their sentries and chasing you, but then they are doing exactly 0 DPS. Stop letting them fight how they want, and this problem will go away.


Unfortunately, last I checked target painters have no effect against stationary targets. If I am wrong I'll be happy to hear it!
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#1568 - 2014-08-16 12:16:40 UTC
Xequecal wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The problem you are describing has little if anything to do with those ships. Their slot layouts and stats are just fine, many of them are powerful on their own.

But autocannons suck.

That's your real problem. And honestly, with the exception of hybrids, every weapon system in the entire game needs a balance pass. Missiles have problems with travel time and application falling off completely, lasers need better ammo variety (some Thermal damage for crying out loud, EM is the worst damage type in the game) and less restrictive cap use and fitting, and autocannons are too heavily penalized for being capless, they don't hit as hard as they should.


EM is the best damage type in the game. It's not even close. EM is the lowest resist on the vast majority of PvP ships. Even armor battleships usually go for a 3-hardener setup now leaving EM as the lowest resist.

EM used to be terrible during the winmatar days when everything had minnie T2 resists, but now Minmatar T2 ships are almost nonexistent and we have Gallente supremacy where all their T2 stuff has EM as the lowest (shield tank) or second-lowest (armor tank) resist. EM is only the strongest resist anymore on armor tanked T1 cruisers and battlecruisers, and even battlecruisers are seeing little use nowadays.


Yes, it's true that Gallente T2 profile has EM as the weakest resist.

But when your entire race is functionally restricted to it, if it ever becomes popular, and thus tanked against, then the entire race is toothless once again.

That's what I'm talking about, having EM, and only EM, as the highest damage in every viable ammo type is just hamstringing them, and pigeonholing them into "counter meta" only.

Some variety is not too much to ask for, surely?

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.

James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#1569 - 2014-08-16 12:37:39 UTC
unslaught wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
If you get balance right, there is no OP in any given category. There is only right for that engagement.



is it possible with such variety to ever get a good balance? the balancing of ships has been going on for many years..


That such an idea is and takes quite awhile does not mean that such an idea is impossible or can never be accomplished. Though roping in several dozen respected fitters and theory crafters, tossing them under an NDA on the projects details and letting them have at early versions of proposed ships with the stated intention of breaking them would help in many ways, as there will always be edge case fits that do something that makes people go lolwut.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1570 - 2014-08-16 12:53:54 UTC
so still not worth flying a blaster eagle .. awesome buff there Rise

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

Spugg Galdon
Last Rites.
Villore Accords
#1571 - 2014-08-16 14:07:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Spugg Galdon
afkalt wrote:
Spugg Galdon wrote:
When fitted for brawling you get a fast brawler with 600 dps (selectable) and an effective tank of 93k eHP (10 cycles XL-ASB with Invul and ASB overloaded).


Whilst you're not wrong, it's worth pointing out that if the DPS spikes enough, you can pop between cycles as you have a very small buffer to soak up a few good hits.



and the dual rep Diemos isn't exactly swimming in hp buffer but it does just fine. It also has a sig radius that's 20% larger than the Vagabonds!

But if the Vaga pushed a low to a mid and got a CPU buff it would be fan-effin'-tastic. You could even dual invul fit it and have an insane tank!


EDIT: which might make the ship silly actually. just did the maths and with HG crystal set it's an obscene tank and if you swap a T2 Invul for a Pith A-Type you're looking at an effective EHP after 10 overloaded cycles of 192k EHP. Another mid might actually break the Vagabond
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1572 - 2014-08-16 20:10:36 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Nick Bete wrote:
Just ignore Harvey. If you look up his posting history in these types of threads all he ever argues for are more nerfs to Minmatar ships. He wants them all to be slow bricks with no DPS. He's basically a troll.

Minmatar ships aren't what they once were. With the tieracide initiative lots of other ships have gotten faster, have better damage application, etc. Just look at the once mighty Rifter. It's now outclassed in every way by the other T1 frigs. This goes for many of the Matari T2 hulls as well; Muninn, Huginn, Vagabond, Wolf, Jaguar, etc. These ships all need some love to make them competitive with their contemporaries. Sorry but another few meters per second speed boost isn't going to suddenly make the Muninn a good HAC. Please take another look at its role, slot layout, etc.

Finally, please don't make the Tempest even worse by giving it a weird slot layout.


The problem you are describing has little if anything to do with those ships. Their slot layouts and stats are just fine, many of them are powerful on their own.

But autocannons suck.

That's your real problem. And honestly, with the exception of hybrids, every weapon system in the entire game needs a balance pass. Missiles have problems with travel time and application falling off completely, lasers need better ammo variety (some Thermal damage for crying out loud, EM is the worst damage type in the game) and less restrictive cap use and fitting, and autocannons are too heavily penalized for being capless, they don't hit as hard as they should.



Agreed.

They REALLY need to start looking at weapons ASAP.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1573 - 2014-08-16 21:26:29 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Yes, it's true that Gallente T2 profile has EM as the weakest resist.

But when your entire race is functionally restricted to it, if it ever becomes popular, and thus tanked against, then the entire race is toothless once again.

That's what I'm talking about, having EM, and only EM, as the highest damage in every viable ammo type is just hamstringing them, and pigeonholing them into "counter meta" only.

Some variety is not too much to ask for, surely?


It's absurdly difficult for non-Minmatar shield tankers to plug the EM hole. Single-resist shield hardeners are never used, as doing so eliminates one of the major advantages of a shield tank, namely that invulns are so much stronger than EANMs. Most shield tanked ships below BS size don't have the slots to fit hardeners at all.

Armor tankers are also unlikely to overcompensate against EM regardless of its popularity. Right now there is more kinetic damage being thrown around than everything else combined, but you don't see ships fitting multiple kinetic hardeners. The worst for EM damage would be people going back to EANM fits, but using EANMs stacking nerfs your armor ganglinks into uselessness.

Also, only Minmatar gets a T2 resist bonus against EM. The other three races don't. Hybrids are mostly kinetic and they're the most popular weapon system after drones despite the fact that they basically don't do any damage against Amarr, Caldari, and Gallente T2 shield tanks.

Quite honestly it's the thermal damage that holds lasers back, not the EM damage. Lasers would be much better if they were 100% EM, and the fact that Scorch is mostly EM is another big reason why it's so ridiculously good.
kurage87
EVE University
Ivy League
#1574 - 2014-08-17 07:02:08 UTC
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
Xequecal wrote:
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:
The problem you are describing has little if anything to do with those ships. Their slot layouts and stats are just fine, many of them are powerful on their own.

But autocannons suck.

That's your real problem. And honestly, with the exception of hybrids, every weapon system in the entire game needs a balance pass. Missiles have problems with travel time and application falling off completely, lasers need better ammo variety (some Thermal damage for crying out loud, EM is the worst damage type in the game) and less restrictive cap use and fitting, and autocannons are too heavily penalized for being capless, they don't hit as hard as they should.


EM is the best damage type in the game. It's not even close. EM is the lowest resist on the vast majority of PvP ships. Even armor battleships usually go for a 3-hardener setup now leaving EM as the lowest resist.

EM used to be terrible during the winmatar days when everything had minnie T2 resists, but now Minmatar T2 ships are almost nonexistent and we have Gallente supremacy where all their T2 stuff has EM as the lowest (shield tank) or second-lowest (armor tank) resist. EM is only the strongest resist anymore on armor tanked T1 cruisers and battlecruisers, and even battlecruisers are seeing little use nowadays.


Yes, it's true that Gallente T2 profile has EM as the weakest resist.

But when your entire race is functionally restricted to it, if it ever becomes popular, and thus tanked against, then the entire race is toothless once again.

That's what I'm talking about, having EM, and only EM, as the highest damage in every viable ammo type is just hamstringing them, and pigeonholing them into "counter meta" only.

Some variety is not too much to ask for, surely?

I'm with the Goon on this one. EM is a fantastic damage type for PvP.

Being restricted to EM is only bad for PvE.

Being restricted in general in PvP is bad of course; though if you're restricted to the best then it doesn't really matter, does it?
Crazy KSK
Tsunami Cartel
#1575 - 2014-08-17 08:20:46 UTC
why does the cerb loose cago space while the sacri doesn't? do you think the cerbs active tank needs to be nerfed that badly?

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

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#1576 - 2014-08-17 10:01:06 UTC
kurage87 wrote:

I'm with the Goon on this one. EM is a fantastic damage type for PvP.

Being restricted to EM is only bad for PvE.

Being restricted in general in PvP is bad of course; though if you're restricted to the best then it doesn't really matter, does it?

This is why the killboards show lasers as the top weapons and EM Missiles on every kill right?
Stats simply don't hold up showing EM is good.
Xequecal
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#1577 - 2014-08-17 12:38:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Xequecal
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
This is why the killboards show lasers as the top weapons and EM Missiles on every kill right?
Stats simply don't hold up showing EM is good.


Weapons have other stats besides damage type. Just because EM is the best damage type doesn't mean EM weapons are automatically the best, they can be held back by other problems. For example, the Ishtar, Tengu, Vulture, and Eagle are all incredibly weak to EM damage. Unfortunately, they can snipe from 130km where no cruiser-sized weapons that deal EM damage can hit them. The missile ships that are actually good tend to be pigeonholed into Kinetic damage as well, and we've already established that autocannons are an awful weapon system right now for a variety of reasons.

In general, large lasers are held back by fitting costs and poor slot layouts, and medium lasers are held back by the fact that if you're fitting medium lasers it means you're not flying an Ishtar. Having a better damage type doesn't mean **** when your ship natively has half the DPS and tracking at any given range to begin with. Also, when you're using the game's best weapon system (sentry drones) you run into the problem that Praetors are terrible. What genius thought giving these things a 12km falloff on a 42km optimal was balanced? Bouncers are 42+48 and even Gardes have an 18km falloff.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1578 - 2014-08-17 13:32:57 UTC
You mean curators and their advantage is they track like a boss.
Ninteen Seventy-Nine
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#1579 - 2014-08-17 19:58:05 UTC
An 8/4/7 tempest would allow it to focus on something,
8/7/4 would as well.

But slot layout alone isn't going to fix the ship.

I think what would be really nice for the hull is for it to be able to output dps on the level of a battleship. The active tank specialized BS (mael) and the tier 3 battlecruiser both put it to shame.

7 turrets w/ the fleet issue getting 8,
or an upped bonus (one of the 5% per level gets changed to 7.5%).
or just take the thing in a different direction entirely like the geddon, maybe give it a bonus to web and TP range.

The muninn also suffers and a velocity change isn't going to do anything about that.
If autocannons and artillery are to stay as they are, the muninn needs to fill one of it's rolls better.

Sniping? Larger alpha (5% damage bonus to 7.5%)
Brick brawler? lose the optimal bonus and give it an armor resist bonus, or again, maybe bonus to web and TP

Both the ships are in the same boat. Neither snipes that well, neither brawls that well. When we compare the ability to find a solid competitive function for either ship when compared to drone boats? It's just laughable.

It's a larger issue than 10m/s buffs or the shifting of a slot will address.

We're sold "hit and run and versatility"; but what we find in the box when we get home is "fail and run and lack of focus"

Either let this ships hit harder, last longer... or give them some ability to control an engagement.
Because there is nothing either of them can do that isn't done SIGNIFICANTLY better by every other ship holding that role in it's class (or in some applications, done significantly better by lesser class ships)

"The unending paradox is that we do learn through pain."

Vincintius Agrippa
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#1580 - 2014-08-18 01:31:20 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi guys

You may or may not have seen me make a post a while back saying that we were intending to do a revisit on battleship and heavy assault cruiser balance for this summer, and I can now be a little more specific with you about that!

After digging into this we were both happy and a bit surprised to find that there weren't a lot of clear changes needed. Battleships especially seem to be in a pretty solid place. There are ships within the class getting less use than others, but that is almost completely due to either the meta favoring certain things (this is why the Abaddon isn't seeing a lot of action for example) or due to the ship falling into a niche that isn't extremely popular even though the ship performs exceptionally in that niche (the Hyperion is a great example of this). So the result is that for now we are going to leave BS alone and keep checking back for opportunities to make improvements.

HACs on the other hand are a slightly different story. In general the class gained a lot of power in the last pass and it's seeing plenty of use across the board, but there are some pretty clear imbalances between certain ships in the class. If you've undocked lately you probably know the Ishtar especially is a little out of control. Here's the small set of changes we're going to make:

Ishtar:
Bonus to drone tracking and optimal range from 7.5% per level -> 5% per level
Max Velocity from 195 -> 185

Eagle:
Max Velocity from 180 -> 190

Muninn:
Max velocity from 210 -> 230

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

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

Note for clarity: Hyperion release date is August 26


Eagle: +15Mbit Drone bandwidth. Problem Solved.

No way in hell a T1 Moa should do 50 or more dps than its Hac variant. Its struggles to break past 430 dps, maybe 450. Shame.
Only YOU can prevent internet bullying!