These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ninevite
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#681 - 2012-01-12 17:36:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Ninevite
Buffing the minmatar AFs any more would massively OP then over the other races when considering all of the advantages minmatar has already with their turrets. Jaguars and Wolves are single-handidly the most useful AFs on the market right now. Also, the retribution already has massive damage output and does not need any buffs that increase it's damage. It was designed to be a gank ship with no mids, and now it has an extra mid, eliminating it's previous disadvantage...
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#682 - 2012-01-12 17:45:24 UTC
DARKSTAR POWNYOUALL wrote:
m0cking bird wrote:
The problem with the Firetail is that it's to versatile. However, there are alot of lame boat set-ups for this ship. Like the one below (which can school a standard nichebill). You can have very large shield or armour tank set-ups. While being able to do 140 - 150 damage per second (without heat). Some pilots choose to go with alot of electronic warfare. Some pilots even roll with artillery. I'm honestly surprised @ the amount of setups pilots come up with for the Firetail (there are alot!). Point is. Firetail is a nice looking ship. However, it is no Federation Navy Comet or Imperial Navy Slicer, but it can spank them...

Firetail
Damage Control II
Gyrostabilizer II
200mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I

1MN Afterburner II
Faint Epsilon Warp Scrambler I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I

200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
200mm AutoCannon II, Republic Fleet EMP S
[empty high slot]

Small Auxiliary Thrusters I
Small Anti-Kinetic Pump I
Small Auxiliary Nano Pump I


-proxyyyy

thats a bad fit not just for the auxiliry thrusters that hurts your armor, but also for the nano pump that boosts the rep time of a repper that you don't even have fitted

even if u did have a repper fitted an auxiliry PUMP would do more



Awesome set-up, I know. Big UPS!
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#683 - 2012-01-12 18:15:28 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
You must be completely oblivious to the world to think that the Firetail can even compare to the Hookbill, Comet, or Slicer..

Not at all, my experience with comes from fighting the damn things in my Coercer's, Slicer's, Punisher's and Nomen's .. what point of reference do you use .. and no EFT/SiSi shenanigans does not count.
It is one of the two frigates that I actually hesitate engaging when in my brawling Slicer, what you call super-punisher I reckon, the other being Daredevil's.

FW breeds the best frigate/cruiser pilots in game .. I have been in FW since beginning (missed first week or so) .. dismiss my evaluation of frigates at your own peril (not that I expect you to care about a snooty FW monkey).

PS: Poke the Devs on the CSM board and get those damned blogs out already!
Ninevite
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#684 - 2012-01-12 18:18:29 UTC
Hirana Yoshida wrote:
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
You must be completely oblivious to the world to think that the Firetail can even compare to the Hookbill, Comet, or Slicer..

Not at all, my experience with comes from fighting the damn things in my Coercer's, Slicer's, Punisher's and Nomen's .. what point of reference do you use .. and no EFT/SiSi shenanigans does not count.
It is one of the two frigates that I actually hesitate engaging when in my brawling Slicer, what you call super-punisher I reckon, the other being Daredevil's.

FW breeds the best frigate/cruiser pilots in game .. I have been in FW since beginning (missed first week or so) .. dismiss my evaluation of frigates at your own peril (not that I expect you to care about a snooty FW monkey).

PS: Poke the Devs on the CSM board and get those damned blogs out already!


Holy ****, you mean you have formed your opinions based on your actual flight experience with the ships discussed? SOMEONE GET THIS MAN A BEER
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#685 - 2012-01-12 18:25:55 UTC
CobaltSixty wrote:
Summary:

Hawk - 7.5% to shield boost amount should stay. Again, it should not be the first ship with 5% instead of 7.5% to this amount. If it has to be different amount for balance's sake, it should be a different bonus altogether considering the Harpy's new tanking ability.


The Hawk is terrifying in the right hands. The best pilots can hold a target at that 8-10 km sweetspot where most of the small turret damage starts to falloff and tank what's left over. The gang boosted hawks are really scary.

CobaltSixty wrote:

Wolf - Still not sold on the 5th low vs a 3rd mid. I understand the whole idea is that it doesn't need a web so much with good damage projection, but why should the Wolf be WORSE than the Rifter in any way? The new Retribution has the same amount of mids as a Punisher, more highs and lows. Enyo has same amount of mids now as an Incursus, with more highs and lows. The Harpy has the same amount of mids as a Merlin, with more highs and lows. Wolf should have the same amount of mids as a Rifter, with more highs and lows. It's not rocket science.

Jaguar - It's losing a lot of ground with this patch. I think changing ONE of the damage bonii to a rate-of-fire would go a long way to helping it remain useful. RoF over damage would provide a net increase of 8% turret damage. Hardly gamebreaking.


A 5-3-4 Wolf would be flown with an MSE on it and everyone, even CCP, knows it. The Jaguar would have been even worse off had that happened. An extra low was the way to go.

The Jag definitely lost alot of shine. It's fitting is too gimped to have an impressive arty setup. Three turrets where most AF now have four too is meh.
Ninevite
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#686 - 2012-01-12 18:28:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Ninevite
Zarnak Wulf wrote:

The Jag definitely lost alot of shine. It's fitting is too gimped to have an impressive arty setup. Three turrets where most AF now have four too is meh.


I really disagree with this. If the jag had 4xProject Turret, it would be really overpowered. The fact that it only has 3 turret hardpoints is what keeps it balanced against other ships...and plenty of other AFs have only 3 hardpoints as well

I feel that people have started to believe that if a Minmatar ship isn't automatically easy-mode, it's a vastly underpowered and unbalanced ship
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#687 - 2012-01-12 18:34:20 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
CobaltSixty wrote:
Summary:

Hawk - 7.5% to shield boost amount should stay. Again, it should not be the first ship with 5% instead of 7.5% to this amount. If it has to be different amount for balance's sake, it should be a different bonus altogether considering the Harpy's new tanking ability.


The Hawk is terrifying in the right hands. The best pilots can hold a target at that 8-10 km sweetspot where most of the small turret damage starts to falloff and tank what's left over. The gang boosted hawks are really scary.


The funny thing is that you are focusing on what the hawk can do to frigates with 5 mids. What it does to everything else is oh so much more impressive. But at any rate, I <3 active tank AFs so I want my big shield bonus! Heh, heh, heh, heh.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#688 - 2012-01-12 18:46:47 UTC
I've been looking @ the Jaguar as a artillery platform for a very long time (1yr). Mainly because, of the Wolf. This set-up is quite literally the best I've been able to come with. It's sitting in Jita @ the moment and I will be flying it very soon. I mentioned this in a thread not to long ago. Some pilots have suggested I drop a small shield extender for a stasis webifier. That might be the right way to go. However, I plan on failing alot until I'm able to come to a serious conclusion on artillery-Jaguars.

With these proposed changes. The Jagabond, will be alot better.

Also, piracy and faction warfare produce some of the best frigate and cruiser pilots.*** Some of the best period (Truth)

150 damage per second. Around, 110-120 damager per second @ 20,000m or something (with republic fleet emp). Notice the Republic fleet modules for maximum RP. Anyway, tracking bonus and +1 low slot will open up more option. Damage control is more likely to be used. Instead of a Gyro.

[Jaguar, Cougar]
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Micro Auxiliary Power Core I

Republic Fleet Small Shield Extender
Republic Fleet Small Shield Extender
1MN MicroWarpdrive II
Republic Fleet Warp Disruptor

280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
[empty high slot]

Small Projectile Burst Aerator I
Small Projectile Collision Accelerator I


-proxyyyy
Ninevite
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#689 - 2012-01-12 18:54:18 UTC
Yes, so let's take the fastest assault frigate, give it even more of a long-range advantage, and leave everyone else holding their limp dicks trying to figure out how to counter it.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#690 - 2012-01-12 18:58:35 UTC
Seriously though! This is how it would look. I've not tried this on SISI and I have not used a artillery-Jaguar on TQ. No Idea how it will preform. I can only use the Wolf or Thrasher as a reference. Also, no matter what. Using artillery will limit tank.


Jagabond

280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
[Empty High slot]

Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters
Small F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Warp Disruptor II

Fourier Transform Tracking Program
Gyrostabilizer II
Pseudoelectron Containment Field I
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Small Ancillary Current Router I
Small Projectile Collision Accelerator II


-proxyyyy
Ninevite
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#691 - 2012-01-12 19:05:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Ninevite
m0cking bird wrote:
Seriously though! This is how it would look. I've not tried this on SISI and I have not used a artillery-Jaguar on TQ. No Idea how it will preform. I can only use the Wolf or Thrasher as a reference. Also, no matter what. Using artillery will limit tank.


Jagabond

280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
280mm Howitzer Artillery II, Republic Fleet EMP S
[Empty High slot]

Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters
Small F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Fleeting Propulsion Inhibitor I
Warp Disruptor II

Fourier Transform Tracking Program
Gyrostabilizer II
Pseudoelectron Containment Field I
Nanofiber Internal Structure II

Small Ancillary Current Router I
Small Projectile Collision Accelerator II


-proxyyyy


Did you mean to use a t2 rig? And I don't see what the problem is with these jag fittings..they seem pretty on par to me with other AFs.
Morgan North
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#692 - 2012-01-12 19:07:39 UTC
A small shield extender? On a frigate? REALLY? OMG! It finnaly happened. It. Finnaly. I can't express my feelings adequatly over this instead of...

...Are you sure? I was under the sensationthat Medium Shield were the way to go.
Axel Greye
Unlikely Suspects
#693 - 2012-01-12 20:11:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Axel Greye
WOLF: 10% bonus to Small Projectile Turret Optimal Range per level

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
WHY YOU DO THIS CCP. WHYYYYYYYYY.
WOLF WAS PERFECTLY BALANCED BEFORE, DONT GO MESSING WITH IT.

Wolf with optimal is useless. USELESS. It implies you are turning it into an arty boat, which are terrrrrible.
Let jaguars have the optimal and arty setups, GIVE ME BACK MY FALLOFF.

The reason Wolfs were good and balanced with 2 mids, was because they had the falloff to make up for not being able to dictate, you take away that bonus and Wolfs will essentially be neutered by anything that kites.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#694 - 2012-01-12 20:37:52 UTC
Axel Greye wrote:
WOLF: 10% bonus to Small Projectile Turret Optimal Range per level

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
WHY YOU DO THIS CCP. WHYYYYYYYYY.
WOLF WAS PERFECTLY BALANCED BEFORE, DONT GO MESSING WITH IT.

Wolf with optimal is useless. USELESS. It implies you are turning it into an arty boat, which are terrrrrible.
Let jaguars have the optimal and arty setups, GIVE ME BACK MY FALLOFF.

The reason Wolfs were good and balanced with 2 mids, was because they had the falloff to make up for not being able to dictate, you take away that bonus and Wolfs will essentially be neutered by anything that kites.


That's been there for the last two days on SISSI. The bonus is still falloff though. No news yet on if it's a typo or not.
CobaltSixty
Fawkes' Loyal Professionals
#695 - 2012-01-12 20:45:32 UTC  |  Edited by: CobaltSixty
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
The Hawk is terrifying in the right hands. The best pilots can hold a target at that 8-10 km sweetspot where most of the small turret damage starts to falloff and tank what's left over. The gang boosted hawks are really scary.

A specialized (re: T2) ship should be terrifying in the right hands, no? Perfectly training for something should enable some rather awesome performance if equipped and flown quite well (your "best pilots" argument). Also, gang-boosted AFs should be powerful... sort of like an armor linked Vengeance always has been? Just saying.

Zarnak Wulf wrote:
A 5-3-4 Wolf would be flown with an MSE on it and everyone, even CCP, knows it. The Jaguar would have been even worse off had that happened. An extra low was the way to go.

The Jag definitely lost alot of shine. It's fitting is too gimped to have an impressive arty setup. Three turrets where most AF now have four too is meh.

Just like I'm automatically going to fit a plate to my Harpy with its new low-slot, right? There are in-built restrictions on MSE use with the 5-3-4 Wolf, mainly CPU usage. Even with +10 to base CPU (which is more than enough), you're going to face a decision of having to abandon (or downgrade) your Damage Control and/or abandon the nosf/neut/rocket just to equip a meta-4 MSE and meta-4 warp scrambler. And that's with an afterburner, microwarpdrive + MSE would require further compromise. The choice between the range control of a web (and armor tank) or cool Minmatar shield tank should be sufficiently vexing for most pilots and makes the Wolf more unpredtictable. Minmatar's ethos is versatility, not cloning the slot layout of the hated Amarr.

(EDIT: If the Wolf really receiving an optimal bonus, the 3rd med-slot is even more necessary.)

It's also a choice the Jaguar pilot doesn't have to make, which helps their cause if you ask me. I really think the Jaguar's optimal bonus should be switched to a falloff and one of the damage bonii set to a turret rate-of-fire so the Jaguar has the equivalent of approximately 5 guns (3 x 1.33 x 1.25) instead of the 4.5 (3 x 1.25 x 1.25) it is now. Even without those changes, the Jaguar is still the superior tackle while shield-tanking with 50% more base shield HP.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#696 - 2012-01-12 20:51:10 UTC
Ninevite wrote:

Did you mean to use a t2 rig? And I don't see what the problem is with these jag fittings..they seem pretty on par to me with other AFs.


The Arty jag is a curiosity more then anything else. It has - with damage bonuses - the equivalent of 4.5 turrets compared to 8.75 for the Thrasher. So it should do a little over half of the alpha in exchange for alot more survivability. The issue is that there are any number of AF that can do a better job.

With 280s the Jag can throw a 865 Alpha down range and maintain 147 DPS. It's Optimal is 12.9 km. It only has 4.4k EHP.
With 250s the Jag can throw a 678 Alpha down range and maintain 159 DPS. It's Optimal is 9.06 km. It has 7.74k EHP. Clearly the better choice.

The Retribution can shoot farther with better tracking and more EHP.
A Rail Enyo also has more DPS and better EHP.
The Hawk or Vengeance do similar DPS out to 10km - but don't miss and can have superb active tanks.
AM Rail Harpy can do better then the Jag.
Both of the fits above require the Jag to operate very close to scramble range. Arty doesn't work well if you're in close quarters. The fitting on the Jag is such that you're forced to use multiple fitting rigs/mods in order to make it work.

Mirei Jun
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#697 - 2012-01-12 23:08:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Mirei Jun
After more testing:

- While the new role bonus is a nice idea, its not all that effective. Any ship that was unable to hit AFs before this change can't hit them now. Any ship that could hit them simply hits harder, even with a good transversal (This is compared to an AB fit or NO propulsion system). AFs are inherently fragile so sacrificing damage mitigation for speed and range control is questionable. (especially when interceptors do a better job of this).

- The new role bonus is redundant with interceptors. More over, intys take significantly less damage as their bonus is better and they are faster.

- The extra slot is quite Strong. It makes AFs better at what they were already good at. That being small skirmishes involving just a few ships. It also makes the Enyo and Retribution viable. Ironically, this is where an AB fit is best.

- While the Ishkur's 4th bonus is silly and useless, it still does good damage, and is in line with ships from other races... Maybe a 5% bonus to drone damage and hit points per level?

Other thoughts:

I tested the original AB bonus (+%75 to AB speed boost) on singularity extensively. There has been a lot of talk about how it was overpowered. While it was quite strong, AFs still took plenty of damage from drones, and both medium and light guns. The problems were that missles did nothing to them, they could chase down MWD fit cruisers and BCs without ever increasing their sig (which people hated), and they could engage and disengage at will in small fights.

The only real counters were cruisers that did overwhelming drone damage, or were so fast that the AFs couldn't run. However, with the major buff to destroyers, there are now plenty of good options to counter AB fit AFs (and that counter is really inexpensive). Additionally, rockets have received a major boost and hit properly now.

Therefore: The original + %75 AB speed bonus deserves another look.
Zircon Dasher
#698 - 2012-01-12 23:42:55 UTC
Mirei Jun wrote:
After more testing:

- While the new role bonus is a nice idea, its not all that effective. Any ship that was unable to hit AFs before this change can't hit them now. Any ship that could hit them simply hits harder, even with a good transversal (This is compared to an AB fit or NO propulsion system). AFs are inherently fragile so sacrificing damage mitigation for speed and range control is questionable. (especially when interceptors do a better job of this).

- The new role bonus is redundant with interceptors. More over, intys take significantly less damage as their bonus is better and they are faster.

- The extra slot is quite Strong. It makes AFs better at what they were already good at. That being small skirmishes involving just a few ships. It also makes the Enyo and Retribution viable. Ironically, this is where an AB fit is best.

- While the Ishkur's 4th bonus is silly and useless, it still does good damage, and is in line with ships from other races... Maybe a 5% bonus to drone damage and hit points per level?

Other thoughts:

I tested the original AB bonus (+%75 to AB speed boost) on singularity extensively. There has been a lot of talk about how it was overpowered. While it was quite strong, AFs still took plenty of damage from drones, and both medium and light guns. The problems were that missles did nothing to them, they could chase down MWD fit cruisers and BCs without ever increasing their sig (which people hated), and they could engage and disengage at will in small fights.

The only real counters were cruisers that did overwhelming drone damage, or were so fast that the AFs couldn't run. However, with the major buff to destroyers, there are now plenty of good options to counter AB fit AFs (and that counter is really inexpensive). Additionally, rockets have received a major boost and hit properly now.

Therefore: The original + %75 AB speed bonus deserves another look.


How did you fit so much derp into one post?!

Nerfing High-sec is never the answer. It is the question. The answer is 'YES'.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#699 - 2012-01-12 23:44:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Exenthal
@Mirei
- I thin you're doing something wrong here, the AFs are significantly more survivable with the role bonus than without.
- Interceptors are supposed to take less damage and be faster. They are Intereceptors designed to keep targets tackled.
- Why would you say that the Ishkur is balanced, and then ask for more damage...

As for the AB speed bonus. It was way too strong.
They were tanky frigates that can reach mwd speeds without a signature penalty.
If that doesn't raise any red flags for you I don't know what will.

It was even easier to get under the turrets of larger ships, and significantly harder for said targets to do any damage.
Drones hit them you say? Big deal, as those AFs didn't have an issue tanking them long enough to kill them, while mitigating all damage from the main turrets because they were still damn fast. Not to mention these ships didn't have a cap penalty (from MWD) so they were even harder to shake.

No matter what you can try to say to back up that bonus, everyone knows (CCP included) that it was afar too powerful and idea. The victims were at a significantly huge disadvantage when it came to shooting down the frigates. With that bonus, AFs would supersede T1 cruisers without a second thought rather than be on par with them.

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

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
Mirei Jun
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#700 - 2012-01-13 00:32:51 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
@Mirei
- I thin you're doing something wrong here, the AFs are significantly more survivable with the role bonus than without.
- Interceptors are supposed to take less damage and be faster. They are Intereceptors designed to keep targets tackled.
- Why would you say that the Ishkur is balanced, and then ask for more damage...

As for the AB speed bonus. It was way too strong.
They were tanky frigates that can reach mwd speeds without a signature penalty.
If that doesn't raise any red flags for you I don't know what will.

It was even easier to get under the turrets of larger ships, and significantly harder for said targets to do any damage.
Drones hit them you say? Big deal, as those AFs didn't have an issue tanking them long enough to kill them, while mitigating all damage from the main turrets because they were still damn fast. Not to mention these ships didn't have a cap penalty (from MWD) so they were even harder to shake.

No matter what you can try to say to back up that bonus, everyone knows (CCP included) that it was afar too powerful and idea. The victims were at a significantly huge disadvantage when it came to shooting down the frigates. With that bonus, AFs would supersede T1 cruisers without a second thought rather than be on par with them.


Glance and see a response, how nice. ^^


"- I thin you're doing something wrong here, the AFs are significantly more survivable with the role bonus than without."

They are better at dictating range. They take quite a bit more damage, though. To put it in the clearest terms possible, they still take a significant amount of damage from any weapon system with the MWD on -even large guns, even when maintaining a closing transversal. Sure, they take less then if they had no bonus but to actually keep that low sig you really need to stay alive you are forced to choose a fit that ignores a significant role bonus on the ship... Go test it yourself.

"- Interceptors are supposed to take less damage and be faster. They are Intereceptors designed to keep targets tackled."

My point exactly. This bonus is redundant. AFs should do something different.

"- Why would you say that the Ishkur is balanced, and then ask for more damage..."

I wasn't clear enough. The Ishkur still does less damage then an Enyo -by a large margin, in fact. However when looking at AFs overall its damage is still good. I would, in any case like to see a 4th bonus that is actually useful. Its current 4th bonus is not useful. That is the point there.

In regards to your response on the old bonus:

Tanky friagtes that can reach the MWD speed of a BC or slow cruiser, can get under the guns of large ships easily and stay alive versus those large ships, all while maintaining that speed because of a sustainable cap... I see no issue. This is what AFs should do. They were and are still killable. They were and are still weak to nuets, drones, light and medium weapon systems, and focused fire. A slippery tanky little ship that battleships and BC need to fear is exactly what this game needs. Bigger should not always be better. That is part of the problem with overall combat in Eve right now.

As I stated originally there is a blanket response: "It was too powerful, book closed". There were reasons it was strong, and reasons it was not. AFs need a special role. The current bonus does not give this to them -irregardless of the old AB bonus.

In any case, thanks for the response. Good discussion.