These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Assault Ships - 4th Bonus and Retribution Fix
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
tankus2
HeartVenom Inc.
#81 - 2011-12-24 04:57:03 UTC
what is this thread doing without both a dev actually giving their piece (even a simple 'nein' would be nice, if the case) AND not on the first page?

back ye go

Where the science gets done
Alara IonStorm
#82 - 2011-12-24 05:32:33 UTC
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#83 - 2011-12-24 14:10:43 UTC
Hahahaha. Those preliminary changes would make them so OP it isnt even funny. T1 fit AFs would dwarf officer fit pirate frigs for Goddess sake .. extra slots AND more bonuses ....

No wonder CCP has had issues sorting them if they start at the utmost extreme and then whittle away on them .. waste of time.

PS: Drool at prospect of Retribution with not only the original god-range but with god-tracking and 2nd mid .. trolololol.
tankus2
HeartVenom Inc.
#84 - 2011-12-25 04:05:28 UTC
I'm guessing CCP doesn't do as much research in their own game than just pukes up ideas, implements them, then fixes them as needed.

Where the science gets done
Mfume Apocal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#85 - 2011-12-25 08:21:01 UTC
tankus2 wrote:
I'm guessing CCP doesn't do as much research in their own game than just pukes up ideas, implements them, then fixes them as needed.


They give them OP stats to begin testing and nerf from there (remember the 90% web Talos?). It's not a terrible way of doing things.
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#86 - 2011-12-25 09:53:11 UTC
Mfume Apocal wrote:
They give them OP stats to begin testing and nerf from there (remember the 90% web Talos?). It's not a terrible way of doing things.

For sure, it is a very reasonable way to sort out new ships prior to introducing them, but to balance existing ships within a very crowded weight-class and you are better off going at it in reverse, that is tweak upwards rather than downwards. Not a whole lot of room to maneuvre in the light class before you end up having to changing everything.
CobaltSixty
Fawkes' Loyal Professionals
#87 - 2011-12-26 03:04:45 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
For sure, it is a very reasonable way to sort out new ships prior to introducing them, but to balance existing ships within a very crowded weight-class and you are better off going at it in reverse, that is tweak upwards rather than downwards. Not a whole lot of room to maneuvre in the light class before you end up having to changing everything.

I have to agree with Hirana here - for pre-existing ships, fine adjustments of the ships in relation to the rest of the class is the way to go. After that is complete, the necessity and specifics of a flat role bonus for the class can be evaluated separately as it will significantly alter how they compare to other classes.

Currently, Assault Ships have 10 or 11 slots. My proposal for the lineup saw the first of the class with 12 slots - the Vengeance - and I agree that it may very well be necessary to bring up the bottom end (Ishkur with 10) to compensate but not every ship needs a new slot to stay competitive with these changes. I don't want to comment any further on the Chaos build changes as they're far from final. I will say that I am encouraged by the direction the devs seem to be going with this and was very humbled to see a lot of the bonus proposals make it into preliminary testing. The extent to which they took it has given me a lot to think about, so keep your eyes peeled for further revisions this week.

Thanks to everyone who has pitched in thus far with commentary and keeping this thread visible. Please keep it up!
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#88 - 2011-12-28 13:22:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Xindi Kraid
I haven't flown every single frigate extensively (Sadly, there are some situations where you HAVE to take a bigger ship, else I would have never trained battleships), but I do know my way around small craft.

I think these proposals are much better than what CCP wants to do. The biggest thing is that they seem to be buffing all the ships evenly, when some need more help than others. I am also unsure about the MWD bonus. I'm sure it will help survivability, but it just doesn't seem right. When I hear the descriptor 'assault' I think of something that can take a few solid hits that is capable of maiming things. As frigates, they should still be speedy, but I'd rather see a bonus that lets them punch a class up.
Ines Tegator
Serious Business Inc. Ltd. LLC. etc.
#89 - 2011-12-28 21:02:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Ines Tegator
The MWD bonus on Chaos is exactly what AF's need. However, it's also exactly what every frigate in the game needs. It seems to me to be a waste of a role bonus, and should be rolled into the base stats of the 1mn module. I'd rather see this, and then have each AF hull balanced with a unique 4th bonus in the way that HACs are.

The other changes on chaos don't do much to fix the disparity between the hulls (retribution excepted). Minmatar and Ishkur are still ahead in every area and everyone else is playing catch up. But at least it's going the right direction.

Overhaul Dscan!
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#90 - 2011-12-28 22:00:47 UTC
Ines Tegator wrote:
The MWD bonus on Chaos is exactly what AF's need. However, it's also exactly what every frigate in the game needs. It seems to me to be a waste of a role bonus, and should be rolled into the base stats of the 1mn module...

Oy, that brain-fart is mine you hear, MINE!. Big smile

Otherwise yea, disparity within the class remains .. still more concerned about all the other lights (and most cruisers) that will be completely overshadowed by cruiser-power AFs though.
CobaltSixty
Fawkes' Loyal Professionals
#91 - 2011-12-28 22:54:06 UTC  |  Edited by: CobaltSixty
I would agree with 1MN microwarpdrives getting their sig bloom toned down like Hirana's post, but not having the same applied as a bonus to all ships. If the module change happened, the only necessary fix is to tone down the bonus Interceptors get so they more or less stay where they are now but the rest of 1MN-using hulls come down a bit.

What about, as a role bonus for Assault Ships: -80% to powergrid requirements of 10MN afterburners.
I know it sounds silly at first but consider it for a moment.

  • This would allow AFs to fit 10MN afterburners (only) for the cpu requirements of a 1MN MWD, yet with identical powergrid as a 1MN AB.
  • Capacitor usage should be left unchanged so the module's demand is felt.
  • The mass addition from the 10MN module means they're not very agile and would feel sluggish and cruiser-like with it activated. The module would mainly be used for depositing oneself into an orbit against a larger target and egressing from a threat.
  • This gives the Assault Ship a unique approach to the tackle-above-itself role in boosted afterburner speed if you're willing to accept the drawbacks, such as conceding a significant edge in agility to T1 frigates and Interceptors.
  • 1MN modules would still be preferred for hunting other frigates but are more dangerous against larger targets.
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#92 - 2011-12-29 07:15:34 UTC
Except it would widen the gap between good/bad within the class in the same way the AB boost did, ships with enough range/tracking or agility/speed could care less about extra mass for the most part (ref: 100Mn Tengu).
You also have to contend with the problem of having frigs running around at MWD+ speeds with no way other than the now weaker webs to slow them down .. scrams represent a pretty hefty balancing measure when it comes to MWD use.
Basically a repeat of all the "evil" from the AB boost attempt, only with oversizing as the tool that gives them the insane speed with no sig bloom rather than a bonus.

For a scheme like that to work "as intended" you'd need to increase the mass added by the drives substantially which negatively impacts their legitimate users (cruisers/BCs) and that is a bit hamfisted I think you agree.

It is just insanely hard to come up with a bonus that is combat oriented without slamming ones head into the familiar walls of intra-/extra-class balance.
Major Kim
Fawkes' Loyal Professionals
#93 - 2011-12-30 14:32:58 UTC
I think Cobalt has the right idea, Focus on ship bonni not role bonni. Not all of the ships have these role bonuses, (the force recon for instance only has the role bonus to cyno`s). Even though the chaos info is pre-sisi in house testing, it scares me to think they would give them a reduction to sig bloom, and i sincerely hope that it doesn`t go live. BTW, the reduction they propose only reduces the sig bloom by 100m on these frigates.
Mars Theran
Foreign Interloper
#94 - 2011-12-31 03:20:51 UTC
This stuff just makes my head spin, and I tend to feel a certain empathy for CCP Tallest everytime I see one of these threads.

I think the main reason for this, is that I see the tiers and tech levels as being limited by an inability to create a true role for each ship class. Calling it an Assault frigate doesn't really make it so, and people just tend to fit willy nilly until they find something that works.

Often, the most effective fit is something that was never intended in design. Adding bonuses and slots just makes matters worse, as the ships become exponentially more prone to breakage with every modification, and you may inadvertantly wreck a favorite wtflol fit in the process, or worse: make it better.
zubzubzubzubzubzubzubzub
tankus2
HeartVenom Inc.
#95 - 2012-01-09 02:53:13 UTC
Despite the fact that most people see frigates and only see a warp scram and/or web (or torpedos), Assault Frigates are meant to break out of this mold with firepower that would frighten most cruisers and, with a few numbers, scare battlecruisers. Drones? they'll get taken care of too. Random 300% damage? fine, be my guest.

These are supposed to be frigates that put 'combat' in 'combat frigate'. Changing them in the manner that Cobalt has conveniently listed out in two replies highlights this role, their intended role.

Where the science gets done