These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Isn't it about time you fix Minnie HACs CCP??

Author
Torrent Talon
Metaphysical Quantum Anomaly Research Laboratory
#21 - 2016-01-02 19:07:43 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
My natural instinct with everything is to buffer fit it. But when I did that with a muninn the result was I basically just had a rupture that cost ten times as much.

It's just not worth using.


You forget the tracking bonus that allows you to wreck frog/dessie fleets
Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#22 - 2016-01-03 02:01:53 UTC
Torrent Talon wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
My natural instinct with everything is to buffer fit it. But when I did that with a muninn the result was I basically just had a rupture that cost ten times as much.

It's just not worth using.


You forget the tracking bonus that allows you to wreck frog/dessie fleets


The tracking bonus and the optimal range bonus are both very good bonuses for the Muninn, but the ship desperately needs another mid slot instead of that utility high slot. Why? Well for one, Minnie has excellent T2 Shield resist profile and like you said, it opens the option for shield tank fits. Armor tankers needs the extra mid for prop, tackling, and cap boosting mods since the ship is practically a spacebrick when armor tanked.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#23 - 2016-01-03 03:05:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Part of the problem is not with the HAC's but with the medium AC's/Arty.
Though the Optimal bonus should be Optimal+Falloff to work on all weapons.
But the alpha on arty is not sufficient relative to the EHP of the targets to make up for the lack of range & consistent DPS, and AC's in general have issues (Ammo should affect fall off also for example, and then give them all a bit more optimal to balance so that ammo choice actually matters on AC's).
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#24 - 2016-01-03 04:05:14 UTC
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
The Muninn is just awful. Like pre-buff Deimos awful. You can't fit anything to it, it has a rubbish tank and it has wet noodle DPS.

You're unironically better off in a rupture, it's basically the same and if you die people won't laugh at you for flying a Muninn.

I laughed, because it's true.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#25 - 2016-01-03 05:54:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Segraina Skyblazer
Arya Regnar wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
The Muninn is just awful. Like pre-buff Deimos awful. You can't fit anything to it, it has a rubbish tank and it has wet noodle DPS.

You're unironically better off in a rupture, it's basically the same and if you die people won't laugh at you for flying a Muninn.

I laughed, because it's true.


Well I fly dual passive shield tanked arty Lokis because it's the best option for what I'm doing. But If that Muninn had a 4th mid slot and a bit more PWG then I could save 800 mill easy and fly it instead of these expensive Lokis.
RuleoftheBone
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2016-01-04 04:54:15 UTC
The Vagabond was formerly THE premier kiting heavy tackle and frig/dessie killer.

I am not advocating returning it to OP speed status of yore; however, make it a skilled pilots ship of choice again.
Aside from speed....perhaps think outside the box and give it the option to fit missiles up top? Something different?

As far as the Muninn goes perhaps a painter bonus and the PG to fit arty without a sham tank?

I find it sad that both ships remain non-realistic options for serious pilots in 2016.
Morrigan LeSante
Perkone
Caldari State
#27 - 2016-01-04 08:02:17 UTC
Donnachadh wrote:

Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Let's be fair here, either Med Proj or minnie HAC need some serious love.

Pick one, but don't try and deny there are issues, that's a bit like saying the earth is flat in 2016...

I am not denying any thing. The TRUTH is in front of us all you have to do is look and you will see it. As a class the HAC's got their balance pass and since then the Ishtar has been adjusted on what 3 separate occasions and still the minnie ships have not been touched. From this evidence there are only 4 conclusion that can be drawn.
1. CCP believes these ships fit nicely into the niche they created for them so no adjustments are needed.
2. They are to busy with other more pressing issues to have the time for these ships, personally I doubt that since they have made adjustments to other ships along the way.
3. CCP has painted themselves into a corner with these ships and everything the try in their in house testing has proven to be worse for the game as a whole than what we have.
4. CCP is simply blind and stupid and cannot see that which you claim to be obvious.
I will leave it to each of you to decide which of these may apply.


Given how long CCP let grossly underpowered things languish, history tells us that it's fairly obviously #2 & #4, in that order.

You did forget a possible option though - the CCP think they'll be fine when they whack the "overpowered" stuff into line. I am inclined to disagree though. Medium projectiles are suffering from the same fate as heavy missiles are - they were too good once, so they must pay for those sins through a number of years of being abysmal. People have been saying for 3 years that the HML nerf was too much and it took until the BC rebalance (I think) for them to even throw them (the wrong) bone.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#28 - 2016-01-04 13:48:55 UTC
Kasia en Tilavine wrote:
The Vagabond needs a low moved to a mid, and the Muninn needs a high moved to a mid. This would wholesale fix both ships. End of story.


Yeah this seems like the correct area to ask, so on that Vaga thing...what happened with that? I've been toying with one on SiSi, and everything about the ship, from the bonuses to the race, scream "5 mids!" like Patrick Stewart might, if you interrogated him long enough in a Cardassian prison.

Where is this thing's 5th mid? I see a lot of potential in this ship but I can't see how a shield ship from a shield race ended up with more lows than mids. Four mids is unreasaonble, it's laughable, it's a Cardinal Sin on this ship. How did this seem right to deploy in the first place, and what's stopped the fixing of this thus far?

A shield race that supposedly has versatility as a design philosophy putting out a HAC with super-tight four mids just doesn't make sense. But hey I've never been accused of knowing this game too well, so maybe someone here could explain to me the thought process behind the four mids? I'm assuming it made sense to someone at the time.
Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#29 - 2016-01-04 15:04:13 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Given how long CCP let grossly underpowered things languish, history tells us that it's fairly obviously #2 & #4, in that order.

With the new release schedule and an admission from CCP that they have been remiss in addressing in game situations in a timely manor we really need to look at more recent events as our indicator of what we can expect. The Ishtar, Gila, T3 dessies and jump fatigue changes are all examples of the more timely changes that have come out of this.

However you are correct in that I did forget an important possibility, perhaps they are not changing these ships because they are working on a yet to be announced change that will bring these ships into line, or possibly they want to wait until after this possible change and then adjust them if needed.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#30 - 2016-01-04 15:17:33 UTC
Start by making arty/auto-cannon fittings requirement more in line with pairs of other gun type. The PWG requirement is just stupid. Auto-cannon boat are completely locked into using them because nothing at all will fit if you put arty on and arty designed ship become space oddity with large amount of PWG free if you fit autos for potential over-propping or over tanking.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#31 - 2016-01-04 15:22:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Serendipity Lost
Is the point of this thread to make the munnin into a kiting arty hac?

If so - Don'e we already have enough kiting range HAC/BC/Cruiser and so on? How about we propose changes to make it a close in brawling HAC. The vagabond is the kiting minnie HAC. We don't need another. (I've always seen the rupture as a brawler)


Edit / add - Isn't the fitting requirement for artillary large to make you choose between speed and high alpha? I think a high speed AND high alpha HAC (relatively small sig radius) would be a bad idea.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#32 - 2016-01-04 15:39:36 UTC
Segraina Skyblazer wrote:
Arya Regnar wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
The Muninn is just awful. Like pre-buff Deimos awful. You can't fit anything to it, it has a rubbish tank and it has wet noodle DPS.

You're unironically better off in a rupture, it's basically the same and if you die people won't laugh at you for flying a Muninn.

I laughed, because it's true.


Well I fly dual passive shield tanked arty Lokis because it's the best option for what I'm doing. But If that Muninn had a 4th mid slot and a bit more PWG then I could save 800 mill easy and fly it instead of these expensive Lokis.


Save money now and fly a fleet hurricane. It is literally better at everything than the muninn except speed and sig, but adds MJD as a utility. Its almost the same price as well and i think it insures better. It has better tracking than a muninn, more alpha (through dmg bonus and 6 turrets), more EHP, more utility highs, and has very similar range with 25% optimal/falloff bonus.

Since i just saved you 800m, plz donate a portion to me for my informational services :)

That being said, in regards to the OP, no. At least in how you address it. Minny HACs do need a lot of love. The muninn's role has beem completely replaced by the fleet cane.

Dropping utility highs is not the answer though. Utility highs are minmatars niche. Very useful for neuts combined with capless weapons. This can be useful by capping out tackle that scrams you (vaga).

To fix the muninn, i propose dropping a turret and increasing damage bonus from 5% to 10%, maybe even 20%. Keep RoF the same at 5% per level. This would give it almost the same alpha, be easier to fit and you can move a high to a mid. You still keep the utility high which keeps it flexible and prevents it from becoming a stabber FI clone.

As to the vaga, up its speed or agility slightly, increase either the dmg or RoF bonus and add more fitting. Or another option would be to double the falloff bonus from 10% to 20% per level so medium acs can actually project decently.



Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#33 - 2016-01-04 15:46:24 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Is the point of this thread to make the rupture into a kiting arty hac?

If so - Don'e we already have enough kiting range HAC/BC/Cruiser and so on? How about we propose changes to make it a close in brawling HAC. The vagabond is the kiting minnie HAC. We don't need another. (I've always seen the rupture as a brawler)


Edit / add - Isn't the fitting requirement for artillary large to make you choose between speed and high alpha? I think a high speed AND high alpha HAC (relatively small sig radius) would be a bad idea.


The sad thing is the vaga functions better as a brawler than a kiter. Mainly because medium acs suck at projecting.

In regards to kiting arty ships, theyre already here and have been for years. See Arty cynabal. Those arent running around and blotting out the sun like orthrus/gila. So im sure we will be ok. Besides, faster ships can get under arty pretty easily, so there are counters available already. RLML orthrus or gila, not so much.

That being said, ive already made a dual rep brawler muninn and its not bad. Think it would be a good fight against a deimos. It tanks around 600dps IIRC and does close to 500dps plus a med neut. Having a 4th mid would make it a contender in the brawling meta.
Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#34 - 2016-01-04 16:47:54 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Is the point of this thread to make the rupture into a kiting arty hac?

If so - Don'e we already have enough kiting range HAC/BC/Cruiser and so on? How about we propose changes to make it a close in brawling HAC. The vagabond is the kiting minnie HAC. We don't need another. (I've always seen the rupture as a brawler)


Edit / add - Isn't the fitting requirement for artillary large to make you choose between speed and high alpha? I think a high speed AND high alpha HAC (relatively small sig radius) would be a bad idea.


Isn't that what ships design to use long range weapons suppose to be? I don't know about you but when I'm fitted with long range weapons, I like to be able to move....... and move quickly.
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#35 - 2016-01-04 16:50:54 UTC
Slipnier proves that medium projectiles are fine... just the ship needs a little help
Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#36 - 2016-01-04 16:54:31 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Segraina Skyblazer wrote:
Arya Regnar wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
The Muninn is just awful. Like pre-buff Deimos awful. You can't fit anything to it, it has a rubbish tank and it has wet noodle DPS.

You're unironically better off in a rupture, it's basically the same and if you die people won't laugh at you for flying a Muninn.

I laughed, because it's true.


Well I fly dual passive shield tanked arty Lokis because it's the best option for what I'm doing. But If that Muninn had a 4th mid slot and a bit more PWG then I could save 800 mill easy and fly it instead of these expensive Lokis.


Save money now and fly a fleet hurricane. It is literally better at everything than the muninn except speed and sig, but adds MJD as a utility. Its almost the same price as well and i think it insures better. It has better tracking than a muninn, more alpha (through dmg bonus and 6 turrets), more EHP, more utility highs, and has very similar range with 25% optimal/falloff bonus.

Since i just saved you 800m, plz donate a portion to me for my informational services :)

That being said, in regards to the OP, no. At least in how you address it. Minny HACs do need a lot of love. The muninn's role has beem completely replaced by the fleet cane.

Dropping utility highs is not the answer though. Utility highs are minmatars niche. Very useful for neuts combined with capless weapons. This can be useful by capping out tackle that scrams you (vaga).

To fix the muninn, i propose dropping a turret and increasing damage bonus from 5% to 10%, maybe even 20%. Keep RoF the same at 5% per level. This would give it almost the same alpha, be easier to fit and you can move a high to a mid. You still keep the utility high which keeps it flexible and prevents it from becoming a stabber FI clone.

As to the vaga, up its speed or agility slightly, increase either the dmg or RoF bonus and add more fitting. Or another option would be to double the falloff bonus from 10% to 20% per level so medium acs can actually project decently.





Unfortunately I have no plans or interest to train Minnie BC to V since none of the Minnie BCs can do what I need them to do. I need a ship that is neut resistant with a strong shield tank. The next ship I'll try out if the Muninn and Vaga continues to suck is the Broadsword.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#37 - 2016-01-04 17:04:29 UTC
RuleoftheBone wrote:
The Vagabond was formerly THE premier kiting heavy tackle and frig/dessie killer.

I am not advocating returning it to OP speed status of yore; however, make it a skilled pilots ship of choice again.
Aside from speed....perhaps think outside the box and give it the option to fit missiles up top? Something different?

As far as the Muninn goes perhaps a painter bonus and the PG to fit arty without a sham tank?

I find it sad that both ships remain non-realistic options for serious pilots in 2016.

Lol where are you going to fit that TP tho?

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#38 - 2016-01-04 17:05:27 UTC
Segraina Skyblazer wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Segraina Skyblazer wrote:
Arya Regnar wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
The Muninn is just awful. Like pre-buff Deimos awful. You can't fit anything to it, it has a rubbish tank and it has wet noodle DPS.

You're unironically better off in a rupture, it's basically the same and if you die people won't laugh at you for flying a Muninn.

I laughed, because it's true.


Well I fly dual passive shield tanked arty Lokis because it's the best option for what I'm doing. But If that Muninn had a 4th mid slot and a bit more PWG then I could save 800 mill easy and fly it instead of these expensive Lokis.


Save money now and fly a fleet hurricane. It is literally better at everything than the muninn except speed and sig, but adds MJD as a utility. Its almost the same price as well and i think it insures better. It has better tracking than a muninn, more alpha (through dmg bonus and 6 turrets), more EHP, more utility highs, and has very similar range with 25% optimal/falloff bonus.

Since i just saved you 800m, plz donate a portion to me for my informational services :)

That being said, in regards to the OP, no. At least in how you address it. Minny HACs do need a lot of love. The muninn's role has beem completely replaced by the fleet cane.

Dropping utility highs is not the answer though. Utility highs are minmatars niche. Very useful for neuts combined with capless weapons. This can be useful by capping out tackle that scrams you (vaga).

To fix the muninn, i propose dropping a turret and increasing damage bonus from 5% to 10%, maybe even 20%. Keep RoF the same at 5% per level. This would give it almost the same alpha, be easier to fit and you can move a high to a mid. You still keep the utility high which keeps it flexible and prevents it from becoming a stabber FI clone.

As to the vaga, up its speed or agility slightly, increase either the dmg or RoF bonus and add more fitting. Or another option would be to double the falloff bonus from 10% to 20% per level so medium acs can actually project decently.





Unfortunately I have no plans or interest to train Minnie BC to V since none of the Minnie BCs can do what I need them to do. I need a ship that is neut resistant with a strong shield tank. The next ship I'll try out if the Muninn and Vaga continues to suck is the Broadsword.


So based off your reasoning, im going to assume you are using these ships in wormholes. Even if the muninn got 4 mids it would not have a strong shield tank, nor be neut resistant. So if you dont care about having no drones and just want mids to fit a CB plus shield tank, then yea the broadsword would be your best bet. Or maybe a sleipnir (which you need minny BC to 5 for that)..

If however you want to pvp in an arty ship while roaming or want an alpha fleet, arty canes and fleet canes are your best bet and can still muster a decent shield tank (50-60k IIRC). As opposed to the muninn's 30-35k shield tank or 40k armor tank. I suppose arty cynabal would work as well, but im not a fan as it tends to outtrack itself.
Cidanel Afuran
Grant Village
#39 - 2016-01-04 17:52:11 UTC
Morrigan LeSante wrote:
Let's be fair here, either Med Proj or minnie HAC need some serious love.

Pick one, but don't try and deny there are issues, that's a bit like saying the earth is flat in 2016...


So you aren't aware of these guys?

The Flat Earth Society
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#40 - 2016-01-04 18:08:06 UTC  |  Edited by: FT Diomedes
Segraina Skyblazer wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Segraina Skyblazer wrote:
Arya Regnar wrote:
Vimsy Vortis wrote:
The Muninn is just awful. Like pre-buff Deimos awful. You can't fit anything to it, it has a rubbish tank and it has wet noodle DPS.

You're unironically better off in a rupture, it's basically the same and if you die people won't laugh at you for flying a Muninn.

I laughed, because it's true.


Well I fly dual passive shield tanked arty Lokis because it's the best option for what I'm doing. But If that Muninn had a 4th mid slot and a bit more PWG then I could save 800 mill easy and fly it instead of these expensive Lokis.


Save money now and fly a fleet hurricane. It is literally better at everything than the muninn except speed and sig, but adds MJD as a utility. Its almost the same price as well and i think it insures better. It has better tracking than a muninn, more alpha (through dmg bonus and 6 turrets), more EHP, more utility highs, and has very similar range with 25% optimal/falloff bonus.

Since i just saved you 800m, plz donate a portion to me for my informational services :)

That being said, in regards to the OP, no. At least in how you address it. Minny HACs do need a lot of love. The muninn's role has beem completely replaced by the fleet cane.

Dropping utility highs is not the answer though. Utility highs are minmatars niche. Very useful for neuts combined with capless weapons. This can be useful by capping out tackle that scrams you (vaga).

To fix the muninn, i propose dropping a turret and increasing damage bonus from 5% to 10%, maybe even 20%. Keep RoF the same at 5% per level. This would give it almost the same alpha, be easier to fit and you can move a high to a mid. You still keep the utility high which keeps it flexible and prevents it from becoming a stabber FI clone.

As to the vaga, up its speed or agility slightly, increase either the dmg or RoF bonus and add more fitting. Or another option would be to double the falloff bonus from 10% to 20% per level so medium acs can actually project decently.





Unfortunately I have no plans or interest to train Minnie BC to V since none of the Minnie BCs can do what I need them to do. I need a ship that is neut resistant with a strong shield tank. The next ship I'll try out if the Muninn and Vaga continues to suck is the Broadsword.


The Broadsword is the best Minmatar HAC. Unlike the Muninn, it has a useful utility high slot that takes the place of a mid slot (or two). Of late, however, I have switched from the Broadsword to the Onyx

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Previous page123Next page