These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#541 - 2012-01-11 11:02:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
Personally I'm excited at the prospective of frigates making a comeback in PvP as more than the odd tackler or soloer and approve of any changes needed to accomplish that.

The request by some to balance the game around low sec does not see the bigger picture in my opinion. While I can understand the concerns about upsetting the faction/pirate frigate balance in relation to AFs, it's worth keeping in mind that the current CCP seems more willing to address balance issues instead of leaving them untouched. As Zarnak Wulf said earlier, let the dust settle on faction/pirate frigates and then iterate. It's also quite likely that AFs themselves may need small adjustments because a few hundred SiSi testers (at best) simply cannot provide the same feedback as the Tranquility player base will be able to over the course of some months (in fact, I would like to see another SiSi update with minor changes to some AFs).

As far as AF vs cruiser or destroyer balance goes, I haven't seen any real problems.
Axel Greye
Unlikely Suspects
#542 - 2012-01-11 11:11:28 UTC
Really what we need is T2 frigs to be just pricier beefier versions of their T1 counterparts, and for CCP to release Tech 3 Frigates that have subsystems.
THEN we're cooking. Lol
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#543 - 2012-01-11 12:09:01 UTC
Bleh forums ate my reply so this one will be shorter.

In general, I agree with these changes. Currently only the Hawk & Vengeance can reliably beat all other Frigates discounting any extremely one sided engagements such as an AB AF vs a Slicer etc, pimped out AF etc.. Same deal with Destroyers, mostly due to the flexibility of rockets. After these changes, I expect more AFs to be capable of this also.

Prom if you're still questioning why a Hawk with 5 mids has the potential to be "OP", check out the following fit and tell me exactly how you would beat it in a standard AF, barring flying a Retribution or a Vengeance:

[Hawk, Gank with Rawketz]
Ballistic Control System II
Overdrive Injector System II

Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters
X5 Prototype Engine Enervator
X5 Prototype Engine Enervator
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I

Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
200mm AutoCannon II, Barrage S
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket

Small Bay Loading Accelerator II
Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II

Equivalent Battle Helios fit currently has half the DPS, but a touch more speed (~30m/s slower approximately, neglecting acceleration etc.)

Some of the Pirate Frigates no doubt need a good look at, in particular the Succubus, Cruor and Worm. Something like this:

Cruor
+1 low slot
-1 high slot
Ship bonuses changed to
• 25% bonus to energy neutralisers and nosferatus drain amount per level of Amarr Frigate
• 10% bonus to velocity factor of stasis webifier per level of Minmatar Frigate

Worm – Role changed to close range drone boat, supported with Rockets
+1 Launcher hardpoint
Dronebay increased to 50m3
Base Powergrid increased from 35 to 45
Base CPU increased from 160 to 190
Ship bonuses changed to
• 5% shield resist bonus per level of Caldari Frigate
• 10% bonus to drone damage, hitpoints & speed per level of Gallente Frigate

Succubus is actually a fairly amusing ship. On paper, it seems pretty viable - adequate gank & tank whilst not appearing too slow. In reality, it handles much like a plated Vengeance.

Succubus – Role unchanged (close range Laser boat)
Base shield increased from 609 to 700
Mass reduced by ~15%
Base speed increased from 287 to 300
Zaine Maltis
Innsmouth Enterprises
#544 - 2012-01-11 12:18:14 UTC
Suleiman Shouaa wrote:
Bleh forums ate my reply so this one will be shorter.
Prom if you're still questioning why a Hawk with 5 mids has the potential to be "OP", check out the following fit and tell me exactly how you would beat it in a standard AF, barring flying a Retribution or a Vengeance:

[Hawk, Gank with Rawketz]
Ballistic Control System II
Overdrive Injector System II

Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters
X5 Prototype Engine Enervator
X5 Prototype Engine Enervator
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I

Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
200mm AutoCannon II, Barrage S
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket
Rocket Launcher II, Thorn Rage Rocket

Small Bay Loading Accelerator II
Small Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer II


You're missing a mid? MSE?
Tawa Suyo
Hun-Select
#545 - 2012-01-11 12:38:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Tawa Suyo
Zaine Maltis wrote:
You're missing a mid? MSE?


Yeh.

Can also fit both a BCU and a meta DCU.

Pretty sure I posted the fit a few pages back...

Edit: Here; https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=623020#post623020
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#546 - 2012-01-11 12:44:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Exenthal
@Axel
The Hawk actually tanks MORE on TQ right now, so consider that amount of tank as a nerf Blink
I've always pirate implants and links as a problem at ANY scale. The fact that you can do similar things to any hull in the game is a larger issue than a couple of AFs doing it. Unlike larger hulls that tank shitloads, you can easily be alphad Smile

@Suileman
So you want to use a niche fit, that would never be standard, cut out the obvious Caldari counters and claim a ship is overpowered... wat?

I'll bite, Wolf will eat it, rail Ishkur will eat it (I use Acolytes) & rail Enyo will as well.
Railgun fits arent really practical for larger targets, but for kiting work like your Hawk...they will do.
That and the hybrid weapon tank on the Hawk isn't too strong as a passive tank, so if you want to go ahead and kill the drones, you're not helping yourself.

Someone tried to pull that stunt on me today, several times. It didn't work once Lol

As for the Vengeance, I have already expressed concerns in this thread that the ROF bonus is a bit too high.

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

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

Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#547 - 2012-01-11 12:49:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington
Personally I just hope the MWD bonus is here to stay. Looks like that'll have some very interesting applications.
Generally I'm just loving these changes though, I can see AFs V on my training queue in the near future...

To be a bit more specific though:
- The Hawk's 5th mid opens up some very nice options, but I've not been on sisi yet to test how difficult it is to fit so I can't really comment further. Seems potentially OP but that depends on a lot of things.
- Exactly what I would've done on the Harpy. Wouldn't change a thing. I've messed about with fitting this on sisi and the results are great.

- Retribution - that's been a long time coming, and I can see that getting used a lot more now.
- Vengeance - combined with the cap recharge bonus that utility slot for a nos will make it very, very hard to neut down while still doing solid DPS. Glad I have one of these sitting in my hanger already.

- Jaguar and Wolf - pretty minor changes (relatively speaking) - which is a good thing. These two have always been very good ships

- Enyo - it's needed to be differentiated from the Ishkur for a long time, and that seems to have been accomplished. Personally I'm thinking of rail fitting mine, it still does solid DPS but rules out enemies kiting it at 9km or so.
- Ishkur - can't really say too much on the extra slot without trying it but the extra bonus is a good one. I'm just glad it didn't get +damage as well, or we would've been right back to square one on AF balance.
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#548 - 2012-01-11 13:05:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington
To be honest though, the thing I like best about this buff is now it's finally something that's catering to smaller gangs/soloers rather than nullsec blobs.

(Something the aformentioned nullsec blobbers seem hilariously upset about)
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#549 - 2012-01-11 13:31:36 UTC
No the missing mid is supposed to be a TD.

How exactly is it niche? Hookbills sporting the like are still fairly common, with the chief complaints being that the damage is a bit low - only about 156, significantly lower than a Hawk and same deal with the tank unless you fit a plate.

Rail Ishkur at range would be dicey if he has Spike or Lead, but up close the Rails wouldn't track and you would be able to drop drones fast by keeping 1 web on the Ishkur and leaving 1 for the drones. Rail Enyo would be dicer due to the tracking bonus, but I'm fairly confident you could do it.

Not even going to talk about the Wolf - with 150mms, an Ambit Rig and Barrage loaded you're looking at 69DPS at 8km with no ability to close in.

Prom most Hawks currently on TQ are in my experience buffer tanked. With the addition of a 5th mid, I can't see this changing - whilst an active tank is now viable the appeal of dual webs is just too great for the range control and the ability to always use Rage Rockets on frigates.

Also re-reading your comments on the Vengeance's tank being too weak unless if you dual rep it - try buffer + rep. Can get almost 10k EHP with a 77 dps (coreli c-type, unheated) which is more buffer than most AFs and still the same or greater repping ability with a web to boot. DPS isn't too bad for a rocket ship either.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#550 - 2012-01-11 13:36:14 UTC
I'm just saying, that whole idea has been thrown at me a couple of times and it was over before it really started.
I was like, "oh, that was it? mmkkkk"

And in regard the vengeance, 77dps isnt too much of a tank. Sure, it's not small by any means but when you compare that to how much DPS would be coming in, its not much of a tank at t2/faction frigate levels.
Also, that's just it, the dps on the vengeance may be a bit TOO high.

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

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

Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#551 - 2012-01-11 13:37:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington
Quote:
Also re-reading your comments on the Vengeance's tank being too weak unless if you dual rep it - try buffer + rep. Can get almost 10k EHP with a 77 dps (coreli c-type, unheated) which is more buffer than most AFs and still the same or greater repping ability with a web to boot. DPS isn't too bad for a rocket ship either.

This is true ^ buffer + rep is how I fit mine and it works very well. The single rep and cap bonus is a very nice combination.
Oh plus it frees up a mid for a web, rather than the cap booster that the dual rep fit really needs.
Volstruis
Mise en Abyme
#552 - 2012-01-11 13:55:09 UTC
Jaxemont wrote:
How about the AF’s 4th bonus is something like “15% reduction in opponent Neut amount per level”? It will help in making the AF more viable against cruisers and battlecruisers because it can turn an opponent’s 2 staggered medium neuts to effectively 1 small neut. This makes them nice heavy tackle since they get into scram/neut range (something fleet inty pilots dread), but the AFs still have to worry about drones and guns due to their low speed.

It shouldn’t affect AF engagement envelope against other frigs too much (then again I don’t know how important a neut is when flying a faction frig versus an AF). The main problem would be the vengeance having the 5% capacitor recharge rate along with the anti-neut bonus. That would certainly make it OP, so maybe give it a different bonus? Perhaps to rockets?

(This bonus shouldn’t work against NOS, though. Enemy NOS does not get the 15% reduction per level.)

Just an idea on how to make AFs better versus cruisers, but still make them engageable in other frigs.

(Didn't read the whole thread, so sorry if this was already thought of or shot down.)


This can't work. Kills the Sentinel outright.
Anja Talis
Sal's Waste Management and Pod Disposal
#553 - 2012-01-11 13:57:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Anja Talis
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
I'm just saying, that whole idea has been thrown at me a couple of times and it was over before it really started.
I was like, "oh, that was it? mmkkkk".


Perhaps as a pilot you are too good to be able to properly comment on balancing issues? P

We may find mediocre pilots hitting far above their weight in the buffed ship? I'm certainly having some success in the Harpys and Hawk which I probably/possibly don't deserve. (I really did not expect to beat Wensley 1v1 in a Harpy with a mwd Hawk) Could be luck I guess, not done enough to be able to tell.

As to the low seccers in here complaining about the balance affect this may have on low sec, I'm not convinced about this yet. I live and roam out in the Amarr/Minmatar FW areas and hardly ever see other assault frigs. It's virtually all Slicers, Dramiels, Daredevils and the odd Hookbill, (none of which I'm confident enough in the AF to engage and feel like I stand any change of winning!) along with FW blobs (and the Stealth Bombers running plexes). You'll see the odd T1 frigate usually pilots by someone who seriously knows what they doing, or are scouting for a blob. What has changed with Crucible is an increasing number of destroyers now, and you can see why. Why bother with a Rifter when you can use a ZOMG Thrasher eh?

After playing with the new AFs on SISI, I wouldn't hesitate in engaging those pirate ships in low sec, which is a good thing, but does it indicate a balance issue? No bloody idea :D
Suleiman Shouaa
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#554 - 2012-01-11 14:02:22 UTC
Prom have you actually been on the recieving end of a Battle Helios or a dual web Hookbill with a TD? They are not simple to kill at all unless you're in a missile boat.

Removing the RoF bonus of the Hawk and replacing it with an explosion velocity would make it great. If they really want to add a slot, add a high slot & launcher slot. DPS on paper would be approximately the same BUT you wouldn't have a frigate with 5 mids.

The Hawk is easily one of the best AFs out there currently and I have no issues dealing with Thrashers in it currently. This, it needs a smaller boost than other AFs such as the Jaguar.
Volstruis
Mise en Abyme
#555 - 2012-01-11 14:22:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Volstruis
I have a question, and sorry for the noobness of my assertion in advance:

If you are in a nulsec fleet fight, I'm sure now you will be able to close and get a point, but you won't then instantly be 1 shot because you have settled into a tight orbit around your target? EDIT: I mean by the other big guns on the field, like that hurricane 15 clicks away.

So really the MWD bloom bonus is only delaying 1 shot insta-death, not preventing it?
Cpt Cosmic
Perkone
Caldari State
#556 - 2012-01-11 14:23:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Cpt Cosmic
Axel Greye wrote:
Cpt Cosmic wrote:
I have not played eve for long time now but my mate told me about the AS buff and showed it to me on the test server.

here are my opinions:
the ishkur is the weakest on the test server. he gets the least from the boost. The drones still die in a matter of a second when another frigate targets them.

It also is strange that the wolf gets a low and the enyo a mid slot. The additional low slot on the wolf is not very minmatar like. The wolf should get the mid slow, especially because the base hull (the rifter) also has 3 mid slots.


The ishkur receives least from the buff as it is already one of the most used and most balanced assault frigates.
The difference between the enyo and the wolf is that the enyo being a blaster boat, needs the 3rd midslot for a web so it can close the range gap and apply its DPS, whereas the wolf with its falloff bonus does not. The lowslot makes sense for the wolf over another midslot.


I understand your point but the other AS receive huge buffs compared to the ishkur which makes the ishkur alot weaker. why take an ishkur when I can take an enyo that does more damage, has more ehp and comparable tank? no only that, you can kill ishkurs damage. why not just scratch that +5 bandwith/lvl, give it 25 base and turn that bonus into turret tracking or something else that is useful. beside the low slot it does not gain any fitting to use the slot properly even with max skills. On test I can fit an enyo that does 300 dps and has 10kehp, can sustain its cap via nos and with the 3rd mid should have no issue holding its target in range (no faction mods, no implants). the ishkur is not even close to that. for me it looks like the guy that made the changes like the enyo too much, great balance... not -.-

While it is true that the enyo needs the midslot and wolf can use the lowslot fine, I think the CPU of the wolf is too restricting to use an additional slot properly, it does not really matter which slot it is. In my opinion the +10 is not enough, all my old fittings with MWD are already tight on CPU and I use named gear, the wolf should atleast get +15 extra base cpu.
Zarnak Wulf
Amarrian Vengeance
#557 - 2012-01-11 15:09:20 UTC
Winmatar doesn't have enough fitting! Not in my Eve!

Gank Wolf:
200mm II x 4
Named nuet

Limited MWD I What?
Named Scrambler

200mm rolled tungsten
Reactive nano II
F85 DC
Gyro II
TE II

Projectile Burst
Projectile collision
Cpt Cosmic
Perkone
Caldari State
#558 - 2012-01-11 15:20:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Cpt Cosmic
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
Winmatar doesn't have enough fitting! Not in my Eve!

Gank Wolf:
200mm II x 4
Named nuet

Limited MWD I What?
Named Scrambler

200mm rolled tungsten
Reactive nano II
F85 DC
Gyro II
TE II

Projectile Burst
Projectile collision

now take the enyo, which has more EHP without plate thus also more agility. enyo also has 3 mid slots for tackling. in short, it can hold its target better in place better and for longer then wolf. winmatar? dont make me laugh.
Alex Medvedov
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#559 - 2012-01-11 15:24:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Alex Medvedov
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
@Alex
Sure.
Within themselves, here's whats wrong (imo):

  • Enyo: 2 mids, no range control and the closest range weapons. Outperformed in every way by its counterpart, the Ishkur
  • Ishkur: 1 of the only good AFs.

  • Vengeance: damage output is far too low and tank is too weak (when not injected). The *good* AFs outperform it
  • Retribution: 1 mid slot makes this ship worthless.

  • Jag: Currently one of the good AFs. Nothing terribly wrong with it beyond AFs being crap overall.
  • Wolf: Currently decent, but suffers greatly against smaller/faster ships. I routinely kill these with rocket Maledictions.

  • Hawk: low damage output, and 4 mids which further limits its damage output and tanking ability
  • Harpy: very similar to the Enyo, only it's insanely difficult to fit well and doubly as fat making it more useless.



  • Thank you Prom for your post. Iam going to break my answer into two parts. You are wrong on some asumptions about current AFs weaknesses.

    *Enyo - it has one major advantage over the Iskhur - its DPS is not dependant on drones, but in general I agree with you that poor range control ability is its biggest issue. So the ability to field a web will help Enyo greatly and might not be so OP if no other tanking bonuses are added and even some reduction of Enyo´s DPS might be in order.

    *Iskhur - no argument there

    * Vengeance - you are completly wrong on this one - Current Vengeance´s DPS might not be great but it can easily beat ist opponents by outtanking them. Very few AFs setups are actually able to break the tank of Vengeance in 1v1 scenario.

    *Retribution - it is certainly not worthless, but iam agree with you that the lack of second mid limits its usefulness greatly. In my opinion it should get the 2nd mid but at the expense of a low slot.

    *Jaguar - in its current state it can engage anything from frigs to BCs with reasonable chance of success. Which in my opinion is far from prooving overal crapiness of AFs...

    *Wolf - it really needs the tracking bonus, I agree with you on that, but does it need more tank or dps? I seriously doubt that.

    *Hawk - as it is now, its very close to vengeance - its DPS is not great but it tends to outlast its opponents and your statement that you cannot fit a good tank on a Hawk is simply untrue.

    *Harpy - it can fit a web and it has a range bonus so its ability of range control is uncomparable with the Enyo.

    Prometheus Exenthal wrote:


    All AFs suffer from lack of survivability. They are only useful against (relatively) noob/oblivious targets in empire space.
    AB fits are popular in low-sec because you don't have gate hazards or grid spanning fights (generally). They also make it really easy to tank plexes and such. The benefits of low-sec are spread equally for each class (ie: plex camping) but are more relevant for AFs because you can do such things without a really need for mobility.


    So if I may rephrase what have you said - AFs need a buff to increase their survivability in combat with larger ships.
    I agree with that idea, but lets examinate what the proposed changes are actually going to do in this regard.

    * Enyo - the added mid slot is going to improve Enyos chances in combating larger ships a lot, so in this case mission accomplished.

    *Iskhur - the added mid slot is not going to improve the ships surviveability against larger crafts much, neither the drone HP bonus will. So the Iskhurs overall performance will ramain largely the same in Iskhur vs Cruiser and bigger scenarios.

    * Vengeance - added dps is not so large to be of significant advantage in fights againts plated Rupture or something like that.

    *Retribution - the ability to fit a propulsion and scram will obviously increase ship survivability greatly, but still its not going to get anywere near the new Enyo.

    * Jaguar - the added low will not improve its chances in fight with bigger ships at all largely due to fitting constrains.

    *Wolf - tracking bonus will help it to quickly dispose of enemy drones but the lack of web and slowness of plated setups will not improve its survivability much at the end.

    * Hawk - you are simply not getting this - passive tanked Hawk, with 5 med slots will be the best option for engaging big ships. Its going to do great.

    * Harpy - again the added low slot will not help the overal performance of this ship a lot.

    CONCLUSION
    Only some AFs will be having its survivability improved with regards to combat with cruisers and bigger ship. Considering the main reason for this buff was to improve AFs survivability across the board, Iam convinced this buff is going to miss its target.
    Alex Medvedov
    Brutor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #560 - 2012-01-11 15:27:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Alex Medvedov
    Suleiman Shouaa wrote:
    Prom have you actually been on the recieving end of a Battle Helios or a dual web Hookbill with a TD? They are not simple to kill at all unless you're in a missile boat.

    Removing the RoF bonus of the Hawk and replacing it with an explosion velocity would make it great. If they really want to add a slot, add a high slot & launcher slot. DPS on paper would be approximately the same BUT you wouldn't have a frigate with 5 mids.

    The Hawk is easily one of the best AFs out there currently and I have no issues dealing with Thrashers in it currently. This, it needs a smaller boost than other AFs such as the Jaguar.


    I completly agree on this with Sulei and I belive we both have a pretty hard evidence about that... I seriously doubt you Prom can prove otherviseBig smile