These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: Assault Ships

First post First post
Author
Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#301 - 2012-01-08 20:16:57 UTC
Change role bonus to: Immune to ECM Big smile
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#302 - 2012-01-08 20:32:00 UTC
@Plutonian
They could EASILY just nerf the **** out of ECM modules and increase the bonus to the jamming ships Blink
Voila, ECM is now next to useless on non-jamming boats.

Marlona Sky wrote:
Change role bonus to: Immune to ECM Big smile

Get out.

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT

Plutonian
Intransigent
#303 - 2012-01-08 20:48:07 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
@Plutonian
They could EASILY just nerf the **** out of ECM modules and increase the bonus to the jamming ships Blink
Voila, ECM is now next to useless on non-jamming boats.


They could.

Though they have not.
Hungry Eyes
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#304 - 2012-01-08 20:55:24 UTC
Alex Medvedov wrote:

Although you seem to be awfuly proud of that whole AF boost idea iam afraid that it is not the same Eve we are playing. As had been mentioned many times before by many AF veterans, currently theres nothing wrong with AFs balance/effeciency or anything except frequently mentioned need for 2nd med slot for Retribution.


on TQ, AF's cant kill anything. they are instapopped by large guns when MWD is on, and AB AF's can be kited and shredded by a Rupture, and most other t1 cruisers.

current changes look fantastic. AF's should be able to stand toe to toe with t1 cruisers, and do other stuff as well like heavy tackling and staying alive longer.
Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
#305 - 2012-01-08 21:03:58 UTC
The Enyo turns like a brick. It takes some getting used to. You can't just hit approach and land in the 3 km sweetspot. You usually overshoot the target and have to claw your way back under web and scrambler. This leads to more hooked approaches and/or work with ctrl + spacebar. Something to chew on. I would not call it OP.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#306 - 2012-01-08 21:11:25 UTC
@Zarnak
While that is all true, a Neutron fit with Null does more damage at range than Wolf/Jag while tanking a bit more.
I really don't think the Enyo needs that extra 200 hitpoints. I would give that extra 200 to the Ishkur

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT

Il Feytid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#307 - 2012-01-08 21:37:28 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
Marlona Sky wrote:
Change role bonus to: Immune to ECM Big smile

Get out.


I was joking ofc.

That said, the mwd role bonus seems OKish. Not as bad, but still feels like it is a fix for another issue that should be addressed. The whole BS gun one shotting an AF while he has his mwd on. If that was dialed back then the AF role bonus could be something that is an actual role, not a band-aid. Big smile

Do me a favor and have them turn the fitting requirements of the small remote armor, shield and energy transfer modules back a bit. Really would like to see a small form of frigate logi support possible. I am not talking about increasing the range of them, just ease up a bit on the fitting.
Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
#308 - 2012-01-08 21:59:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Zarnak Wulf
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
@Zarnak
While that is all true, a Neutron fit with Null does more damage at range than Wolf/Jag while tanking a bit more.
I really don't think the Enyo needs that extra 200 hitpoints. I would give that extra 200 to the Ishkur


You would have take the 200 HP off of the Wolf then as well. As it is it can have 200mm, a nuet, a TE, named DC, reactive nano, 200mm plate, gyro, and the equivalent of a second gyro in damage mods. A gank fit Enyo has 13xx armour on SISSI. The wolf I just described has 17xx armor.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#309 - 2012-01-08 22:09:49 UTC
Said Wolf has gigantic resist holes though P

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT

Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
#310 - 2012-01-08 22:16:19 UTC
The fights that I have had - wolf vs Enyo - have been neck and neck affairs that end in structure. I' ve been in both ships and won and lost in both ships. It's usually too close to call.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#311 - 2012-01-08 22:18:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
The Retribution could lose some hitpoints as well if it gets -1 +1 med and has its then unnecessary tracking bonus replaced by a second damage bonus. The current design is trying to fit square peg into the round hole and all that.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#312 - 2012-01-08 22:28:50 UTC
@Zarnak
Fair enough, statistically speaking though the Enyo is far stronger than the Wolf.
I suppose is really boils down to who is piloting and how said ships are fit

@Takeshi
The damage could just as easily be increased with the bonuses it has now, and it would still work really well.
The Retribution is quite good right now, but IMO like the Jag it's not *quite* there

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT

Tawa Suyo
Hun-Select
#313 - 2012-01-08 22:32:04 UTC
Bloodpetal wrote:
The Role Bonus to MWD is very poor.

...snip...

I recommend a resistance to Webifier effectiveness, a resistance to Neutralizers - a general reduction to signature radius, regardless of MWD or not.

It has been repeatedly discussed and explained to be essential for the use of these ships in nullsec. A web/neut resistance is a horribly overpowered idea. And are you honestly suggesting that a 33m sig radius ship should be harder to hit?


Zarnak Wulf wrote:
You would have take the 200 HP off of the Wolf then as well. As it is it can have 200mm, a nuet, a TE, named DC, reactive nano, 200mm plate, gyro, and the equivalent of a second gyro in damage mods. A gank fit Enyo has 13xx armour on SISSI. The wolf I just described has 17xx armor.

The enyo has more damage and much more balanced resists tho. Generally the Wolf currently wins by making use of it's superior damage projection to wear the enyo down before going in for the kill. In a point blank brawl the Enyo wins, if piloted well it's far more equal due to the difference in flying style of the two ships.



And just to warn you, about to triple post some very wall of text stuff on both the overall AF balance as well as the Hawk specifically...
Tawa Suyo
Hun-Select
#314 - 2012-01-08 22:32:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Tawa Suyo
I've split the following into two posts, partly to allow me to rant at length, as I tend to do. But also to separate an overall summary of the issues with the assault frigate changes as well as what I feel is the major balance issue currently outstanding.

Firstly, a summary of the Assault Frigate changes that need addressing;

Ishkur/Vengeance/Wolf/Harpy – These four ships seem balanced within the AF line up as well as in relation to other frigates. As such it makes sense to both leave them as they currently stand as well as use them as a base line for balancing the remaining ships.

Enyo – The only real issue with the Enyo is a slightly too power tank/gank when compared to the other ships. Obviously, a gank focussed short range blaster boat (even with buffed null the Enyo has one of the shortest effective ranges of any AF except an AC Jaguar) is always going to appear better than it actually is if both parties fight by pressing approach and switching on mods to play EFT Rating Online. However even with this accounted for the Enyo is still slightly too strong.
Removing the 200 armour that was added would fix this easily, retaining the Enyo as one of the most powerful pure brawlers in the line up without overpowering it.

Retribution – The Retribution, sat similar to the Wolf as a dogfighter, suffers from not being able to achieve quiet the same levels of damage even when accounting for the optimal rather than falloff focus of Scorch. Combined with lasers fixed damage type this leads to the Retribution being slightly inferior in its role.
This could easily be fixed by a minor damage increase, although numbers would have to be tested and refined to avoid overpowering when used as a pure brawler.

Jaguar – The Jaguar is currently one of the weaker AFs with both issues fitting effectively as well as a lower tank/gank than the rest of the line up.
This could easily be solved by a moderate increase to tank (given the choice, shields would make more sense than armour, however, this would make the use of armour tanked Jags less viable) as well as slightly increasing fitting room (powergrid seems to be more of an issue than CPU in this case). Again, exact numbers would have to be tested to ensure balance.

Hawk – The Hawk currently stands out in that, while balanced as an active tank ship, it is possible to use fits that make it incredibly powerful when making use of its slots rather than the intended bonuses. I have added a post below dedicated to addressing the issues inherent in the Hawk's design and attempting to reach a solution to these issues.
Tawa Suyo
Hun-Select
#315 - 2012-01-08 22:33:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Tawa Suyo
The Hawk

The Hawk suffers due to a difficult combination in it's design philosophy, namely the mixture of an active shield tanked frigate as well as a ship that relies on missiles for damage.

Due to the nature of active shield tanks, in order to fit an effective tank the Hawk must use two of its limited midslots for this, leaving just two slots for prop and point. One choice currently is a pure active tank; using a medium shield booster to provide sufficient repairs along with a cap injector to allow this cap hungry module to run. However, this suffers from the need to carry cap booster charges (generally Navy 400s) making extended roams without the ability to resupply impossible with this fit, especially given the preference for faction cap boosters at the frigate level. This leaves this pure active setup limited to lowsec or the area around a pilot's home system.
In order to address this issue a combined passive/active shield fit is used, utilising a shield extender and a small shield booster. While this fit has nowhere near the same level of repair as the previous fit, it has the advantage of being able to run purely through use of a nosferatu while the shield extender provides enough buffer to balance it when compared to the medium booster/cap boosted fit.

The problem with both these fits arises when they are combined with a ship that uses missiles. In order to achieve effective damage with these weapons the target must be webbed in order to bring them below the explosion velocity of the missiles, especially when fighting afterburner using frigates. Obviously a four mid slot ship that requires two of those slots for tank is unable to fit a web and is forced to sacrifice much of its damage (or alternatively, to forgo the active tanking bonus and use the commonly seen passive shield tank along with a web).

In order to address these conflicting aspects of the ship, a fifth mid slot was added, allowing the fitting of both an active tank and a measure of ensuring damage was effectively applied (as well as giving the relatively slow caldari ship some chance of range control). In this form the Hawk is entirely balanced...


Unfortunately, this has also given rise to very, very powerful ship. If people continue to ignore the active tanking bonus it is possible to fit a passive tank comparable to other assault frigates as well as two webs, not only giving the ship unmatchable levels of range control (something incredibly important in pvp, hence the prevalence of afterburner fits at the frigate level in any area where speed is not required for survival) but also allowing it to negate any of the downsides to using T2 ammo. The following ship fitting is able to dictate range against nearly all existing frigates as well as apply full damage at any range within scrambler (and slightly beyond this);

Quote:
[Hawk, Dual Webs]

Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
[Empty High slot]
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket

Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I

Internal Force Field Array I
Ballistic Control System II

Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I
Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I

While this ship is not unbeatable, it has far less counters and weakness than the rest of the lineup. Capable of inflicting nearly 250 dps at any point within its engagement range (due to the dps increase the webs provide) as well as having a 9.5k ehp tank (comparable to or surpassing many other of the assault frigates). Due to the range control provided from the webs, it is also able to dictate the terms of many fights, either out ranging the full dps of a ship or positioning itself under the tracking of those better able to project damage.

Obviously, the solution to this is to remove the additional midslot the Hawk gained. Unfortunately this returns to the current problem with its inability to fit an effective active tank. There are two ways of then solving the issue of applying effective damage; either let the Hawk fit a viable active tank with only 1 midslot dedicated to this purpose or allow the Hawk to apply damage without the need for a web.

The best way I can see to do the first is to change the shield boost amount bonus into a reduction in the capacitor usage of shield boosters, allowing the hawk to use a medium shield booster without requiring a cap injector (although for the sake of balance, a nosferatu should probably be required to be cap stable while running the booster). This would allow for an active tank that is capable of fitting a web as well as avoiding reliance on hard to replenish cap booster charges for longer roams.

To achieve the second solution the Hawk would require one of the missile bonuses to be changed to an explosion velocity bonus. While I favour changing the new rate of fire bonus in this case, in order to achieve balance the kinetic damage bonus would probably have to be changed to all damage types (and possibly reduced slightly) so that damage type selection can be used to balance the reduced overall damage compared to the other buffed assault frigates. However, this solution would require a larger amount of testing to ensure that the Hawk remains balanced within the assault frigate line up.

The first of these solutions produces a slightly more damage focussed ship, the second a more tank focussed solution. For preference I would suggest the first solution since not only would it be easier to balance, it would also provide the fairly slow Hawk with means to control range and prevent targets disengaging

tl;dr – Dual web hawk has nearly 10k ehp, does almost 250 heated dps at any point within web range and can range control anything except a cruor/daredevil. Solutions are proposed...
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#316 - 2012-01-08 22:34:54 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:

@Takeshi
The damage could just as easily be increased with the bonuses it has now, and it would still work really well.
The Retribution is quite good right now, but IMO like the Jag it's not *quite* there


Well, I would be surprised if CCP Tallest is going to 'break the rules' and give the ship a fifth bonus (that would be a 10% damage/level instead of 5% while keeping the other bonuses it has now) or fifth turret.
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#317 - 2012-01-08 23:09:28 UTC  |  Edited by: PinkKnife
Bloodpetal wrote:
The Role Bonus to MWD is very poor.


It's usage for MWDs would only be used a minority of the time, not really a "defining element" or a ROLE Bonus.


The Role Bonus would be used to burn in really quickly to get the MWD turned off. Also, it piggy backs on the INTERCEPTOR bonus which is already being used MORE EFFECTIVELY than an AF bonus.


Assault Frigates shouldn't be "more interceptors" which is all this bonus will do. This bonus will only promote longer sniper fit Assault Frigate fits, rather than the close range support roles that they are currently the best at doing. Also, they are NEVER going to be as effective as Snipers across the board as ANY OTHER larger ship, including the Heavy Kiters such as the Vagabond - which IRONICALLY are the ONLY SHIPS this bonus really helps with, by being able to MWD into heavy kiter range more effectively to gain tackle, these ships are the only ships that would be effective against those kiters, again - a minority usage scenario.


The MWD Bonus is totally ineffectual as a ROLE BONUS. It doesn't DEFINE the role of an Assault Frigate anymore than any other ship. Unless of course you expect them to all become 20+km snipers (which other ships will and can do better in general)


THE MOST Dangerous Thing to an Assault Frigate are Neutralizers. Across the board, it doesn't matter what ship you're up against, the Neutralizer will disable an Assault Frigate IMMEDIATELY. So it doesn't matter if you can MWD or not - you're going to get it disabled because most ships fit neutralizers just to kill small ships easily!


I don't care what you think the Role Bonus will successfully accomplish - when you have 50 ships in Null Sec trying to shoot at you with a 50% bloom reduction, you are DEAD. Only interceptors with their speed and superior MWD bloom reduction have a CHANCE (chance) of even making it there in time. Not to mention, any competent FC who has an assault frigate squad would never tell them "MWD those 40km to get there".




This.

Having spent around 8 hours on SiSi last night, I can attest to the fact that this happens. Every other frigate now sports a scram to counter AFs, and as soon as you're in range of one you're DOA. I found I sported AB fits often just to counter the scrams, completely negating the whole point of the role bonus.

It may work better on Tranq, where you're not consistently engaged with any/everything around you, and where the moment you take any damage the entire field turns against you. However I found that the only ships that effectively kept from being blown up were those that kit fit, with a long point and the speed to stay out around 14-18 km. I.e. scorch fit retributions.

Gangs were effective however, as with an enyo/retribution/daredevil we took down some more notorious ships, cynabal, vagabond, curse, etc.

So, it makes me wonder just what the point to this was, the MWD bonus is moot in solo combat as it will always be countered for,

In gangs, we did usually burn some 40-50km to get to the target, often having one tackle and tank it while we popped the drones (if any) and the tackle got underneath the guns, at that point between 3-4 AFs it went down pretty fast. We would often loose one of the ships though.

Role bonus aside, they do feel a lot more viable in pvp combat than before.

Also, with the right rigs, most of them can perma-run the MWD. At least I could in the retribution.
CobaltSixty
Fawkes' Loyal Professionals
#318 - 2012-01-08 23:19:39 UTC  |  Edited by: CobaltSixty
Tawa Suyo wrote:
tl;dr – Dual web hawk has 10k ehp, does 250dps at any point within web range, can range control anything except a cruor/daredevil. Solutions are proposed...

The new bonus combined with the fit you linked should yield 206 DPS. Webs help rockets to hit properly, but missiles NEVER have their damage "boosted" to exceed the base damage value. Even overloaded, that fit manages 243 DPS, and we don't balance ships based on their overloaded performance. That's a module consideration.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#319 - 2012-01-09 00:06:11 UTC
My browser crashed with my long reply Ugh
So forgive me is this sounds harsh or anything, I just want to rewrite it all Lol

@Takeshi
It wouldn't be a new bonus, just a tweak to the bonus it already has
The Enyo is doubled counting a two bonuses for redundancies sake. They could just as easily move one of its current bonuses to the frigate level, and then have the second 5% bonus as the AF level one. Would be similar to how the Wolf/Jag work Smile

@Tawa
I agree with everything you've said about the AFs (despite some factual errors) except for the Hawk.
The situation you've described, while threatening, isn't a terrible concern.
The ship can only reach that level of damage after implants, full skills, and overloading. And that damage is only in Kinetic.
Even the biggest passive tank (while retaining tackle) is flawed and has holes large enough for the majority of the other AFs to counter. The only ships I can see having any potential issues would be the Harpy, Enyo, and (atm) the Jaguar.
Every other AF would shred the ship silly.

As we discussed elsewhere;
The fit is so exploitable that if such a fit were to become popular, the counters would spread just as quickly.
If it were to remain a niche thing, then it's not more of a concern than ships like the BattleHelios P

@PinkKnife
On TQ, most ships who are looking for close range combat will fit a scrambler. The ability to limit ones escape & propulsion is extremely valuable. I trying see what you're so concerned about, as that's pretty much the norm.

Also on TQ, afterburning fits typically trump equivalent AB fits when entering close range.
This is also normal and doesn't change anything with the ships. If you are in an MWD fit AF looking to fight another AF, you need to be aware of what your target is using and if it's worth your risk or not. All the AFs are sufficient damage projection across scramble range, but the advantage (fitting/cap/combat speed) is tipped in favour of the AB fit.

Each has their advantages and disadvantages.
The goal isn't to replace AFs with ABs, but rather add extra versatility allowing people to fit MWDs.

Judging by your post it seems to me like you've already noticed that fitting can MWD can be advantageous.
Just keep in mind that if you had even attempted to pull a stunt like that on TQ, you would have been shredded long before you'd managed to get some tackle Blink

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT

Anja Talis
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal
#320 - 2012-01-09 00:19:16 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
My browser crashed with my long reply Ugh
Each has their advantages and disadvantages.
The goal isn't to replace AFs with ABs, but rather add extra versatility allowing people to fit MWDs.


Doesn't sound much like the "role" an "assault" frigate would have though? *shrugs*