These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Stukkler Tian
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#981 - 2012-01-20 19:04:17 UTC
Like i said I cant argue with you because we are playing two different games, in your game this buff is very much needed and still keeps it balanced, In my game this buff is a body blow. Your game has more people and brings in new subs mine doesnt so my game loses out. Im sure your not serious about it but STAY AWAY FROM MY STABBER its like your trying to kill all that i care for.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#982 - 2012-01-20 19:35:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Exenthal
John Nucleus wrote:
I'm not too strongly against the MWD role bonus but I would prefer a bonus that benefits everyone than a bonus that benefits only a specific play style. I think it would be a bad design to give a role bonus to a specific module when the role of the ships isn't defined by the module in question.

That said, I think the biggest problem with the Retribution is that it only has 3 bonus vs 4 for all other AF.

Range, tracking, cap usage, range. That's 4 bonuses. Saying that one of those is not a real *bonus* doesn't hold any water as you can claim the same thing for any other ship.

The MWD bonus benefits everyone. You don't need to use it, and if you do. you aren't restricted to using it for one purpose. Giving a module role bonus is how many of the T2 ships are actually designed. In fact, HACs are the only T2 ships that don't get a bonus to a specific module (not including weapons & tanks). Every other T2 hull has a bonus that specifically benefits its hull Blink

Interceptors -> MWD sig, Tackle
CovOps -> Cloaks, CovCyno, Probes
EAFs -> Racial EWAR module x2
Bombers -> Torps, Bombs, CovCyno, Cloaks
Interdictors -> Bubbles
HICtors -> Bubbles
Recons -> Cloaks*, Cynos + CovCynos, Racial EWAR module x2
Commands -> Links + Command Processors
BlOps -> Cloaks*, CovCynos
Marauders -> Tractor Beams
and now AFs -> MWD sig

@Stukkler
I was being sarcastic in regard to nerfing the Stabber Lol
My point was that everything destroys T1 frigates. In fact, it takes less time to get in a T1 Cruiser then an AF.

@Proxyyyy
You are so impossibly wrong, I can't even imagine how you take to any changes in eve.
Your arguments are so inconsistent that it makes you come across as someone who is oblivious to the game and how things actually work. Every time you make a claim you fail to back it up, most notably the AFs replacing Interceptors.
I even asked you to prove it with an AF fit that would perform better than a bog standard Interceptor while retaining it's AF perks & cost effectiveness, and you've failed to even do that.

Come back when you have something constructive to say rather than *rabble rabble AFS ARE OP rabble rabble*
In the meantime, just stop typing, you're wasting bandwidth.

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

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
CaptainFalcon07
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#983 - 2012-01-20 19:50:52 UTC  |  Edited by: CaptainFalcon07
As a pilot who is training in Amarr AF's I am glad that the Vengeance does more damage and the Retribution is no longer gimped by its lack of midslot.

Oh and the retribution is finally getting the 7.5% tracking bonus it needs not the gimped 5%.
John Nucleus
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#984 - 2012-01-20 20:23:14 UTC  |  Edited by: John Nucleus
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
John Nucleus wrote:
I'm not too strongly against the MWD role bonus but I would prefer a bonus that benefits everyone than a bonus that benefits only a specific play style. I think it would be a bad design to give a role bonus to a specific module when the role of the ships isn't defined by the module in question.

That said, I think the biggest problem with the Retribution is that it only has 3 bonus vs 4 for all other AF.

Range, tracking, cap usage, range. That's 4 bonuses. Saying that one of those is not a real *bonus* doesn't hold any water as you can claim the same thing for any other ship.

Go ahead, how would you claim that one of the bonus on the Wolf for example isn't a real bonus?
5% damage per level
5% damage per level
10% Falloff Range per level

The problem with the amarr bonus is that it is necessary for the weapon system to work. So it's not a real bonus, just a patch for a weapon system that cannot work without it. If the weapon system was superior to the other, we could considere the ability to use it a bonus, but since it's not, it isn't a bonus, just a patch.


Prometheus Exenthal wrote:


The MWD bonus benefits everyone. You don't need to use it, and if you do. you aren't restricted to using it for one purpose. Giving a module role bonus is how many of the T2 ships are actually designed. In fact, HACs are the only T2 ships that don't get a bonus to a specific module (not including weapons & tanks). Every other T2 hull has a bonus that specifically benefits its hull Blink

Interceptors -> MWD sig, Tackle
CovOps -> Cloaks, CovCyno, Probes
EAFs -> Racial EWAR module x2
Bombers -> Torps, Bombs, CovCyno, Cloaks
Interdictors -> Bubbles
HICtors -> Bubbles
Recons -> Cloaks*, Cynos + CovCynos, Racial EWAR module x2
Commands -> Links + Command Processors
BlOps -> Cloaks*, CovCynos
Marauders -> Tractor Beams
and now AFs -> MWD sig


Thank you for doing the list.

All of these examples shows role bonus that boost a module that defines the role of the ship. An interdictor isn't an interdictor without its bubble. A CovOps isn't a CovOps without its cloak. An Interceptor, even though you can use it with an AB, isn't an interceptor without its MWD. Since the role of the AF isn't defined by its ability to use a MWD, its role bonus shouldn't boost that module. The AF's role bonus should boost something that define its role.

That said, maybe the MWD will end up defining the role of the AF, if that's the case then boosting it is a the right idea. If not, then we should look elsewhere to find the right Role Bonus for the AF.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#985 - 2012-01-20 20:46:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Exenthal
You missed one bonus on the Wolf, tracking.
Lasers can work just fine without the tracking bonus, and ships like the Punisher & Slicer both prove that.
The big advantage to Amarr ships are their range and their tank. The Retribution has a huge tank, and it has huge range.
The extra tracking just makes them better for dealing with smaller targets, and ships like the Crusader prove that point very well. 15+km of Scorch with awesome tracking & damage isn't something a ship should have without the aid of bonuses, so the Retribution gets it and is awesome for it.

And your right, the AFs don't need to fit an AB to do their job as big-game hunters, but it certainly helps them out a fair bit. All the ships above don't *need* to fit their bonused modules to be decent ships, they just start trying to fill roles of other ships.

Do you need to fit a Helios with a cloak? No.
Do you need to fit a Recon with EWAR? No.
Do you need to fit a CS with links? No.
Do you need to fit an AF with an MWD? No.

Are those ships fulfilling their roles? No.
Are those ships still now bad because of that? No.

You don't need to fit a bubble launcher on an Interdictor to make the ship good. They're just as good at anti-support as they are at spewing bubbles. Just like you don't need to fit links on a Command Ship to make it any better at pvp.

Do all those things help their intended roles? Of course, but they aren't required to make the ships worth flying.
So again, AFs don't need to fit MWDs, true. But it certainly makes their jobs easier.

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

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#986 - 2012-01-20 21:05:55 UTC
John Nucleus wrote:
The problem with the amarr bonus is that it is necessary for the weapon system to work. So it's not a real bonus, just a patch for a weapon system that cannot work without it. If the weapon system was superior to the other, we could considere the ability to use it a bonus, but since it's not, it isn't a bonus, just a patch.


The laser cap usage bonus is fine on T2 ships, it's only on certain T1 ships without a damage bonus that it's a real issue.
John Nucleus
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#987 - 2012-01-20 22:12:18 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
You missed one bonus on the Wolf, tracking.

I was listing the one live. Not the new one.
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:

Lasers can work just fine without the tracking bonus, and ships like the Punisher & Slicer both prove that.

Actually, the popularity of the AC punisher suggest that many people think it's better off not using Lasers.

Prometheus Exenthal wrote:

And your right, the AFs don't need to fit an AB to do their job as big-game hunters, but it certainly helps them out a fair bit. All the ships above don't *need* to fit their bonused modules to be decent ships, they just start trying to fill roles of other ships.

Do you need to fit a Helios with a cloak? No.
Do you need to fit a Recon with EWAR? No.
Do you need to fit a CS with links? No.
Do you need to fit an AF with an MWD? No.

Are those ships fulfilling their roles? No.
Are those ships still now bad because of that? No.

You don't need to fit a bubble launcher on an Interdictor to make the ship good.

True but an Interdictor without its bubble, even though it's a very viable choice, is not filling the role of an Interdictor.
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:

They're just as good at anti-support as they are at spewing bubbles. Just like you don't need to fit links on a Command Ship to make it any better at pvp.

Do all those things help their intended roles? Of course, but they aren't required to make the ships worth flying.
So again, AFs don't need to fit MWDs, true. But it certainly makes their jobs easier.


True it makes its jobs easier for certain people in certain very specific scenario but for all other scenario this Role Bonus is not helping them doing its jobs.

Maybe the AF is already good at being an AF in its current state and adding a bonus to MWD just makes it more rounded up and versatile. I mean, fine, it still feels like bad design choice since it isn't a bonus that defines its role like all the other ship and feel wasted for anyone not using a MWD.

Takeshi Yamato wrote:

The laser cap usage bonus is fine on T2 ships, it's only on certain T1 ships without a damage bonus that it's a real issue.


I believe the pros and cons of Laser are balanced with other weapon system. Therefore, having to waste a bonus in order to use them is not justified. Apparently, this bonus was introduced when Laser were better than other weapon system and the bonus needed to use them was then justified. If it's no longer the case, the bonus should be replaced by something else.
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#988 - 2012-01-20 22:25:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
By the way I agree that the current slot layout of the Retribution is still as if the intent was to make the ship sub-par on purpose. It needs a web so badly.

The Punisher doesn't have a tracking bonus and is still used. Why is that?
It's used in lowsec with an afterburner. Afterburner have better close range control. Also many of them use ACs so the argument that the Punisher is fine without a tracking bonus and therefore the Retribution can't possibly be that bad is a bit wonky.

Since we're testing changes aimed at making AFs viable in nullsec, we should be testing the ship with MWDs, not afterburners. I did this. I only flew Retributions with a MWD and no funny fits such as MWD+web like some players have been doing. I lost about 20 of them on SiSi, maybe more. A tracking bonus, tracking rig and tracking enhancer and hit quality is still an issue at closer ranges.

The ship can be instantly fixed by +1 mid -1 low.
Tsubutai
Perkone
Caldari State
#989 - 2012-01-20 23:07:16 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
By the way I agree that the current slot layout of the Retribution is still as if the intent was to make the ship sub-par on purpose. It needs a web so badly.

The Punisher doesn't have a tracking bonus and is still used. Why is that?
It's used in lowsec with an afterburner. Afterburner have better close range control. Also many of them use ACs so the argument that the Punisher is fine without a tracking bonus and therefore the Retribution can't possibly be that bad is a bit wonky.

Since we're testing changes aimed at making AFs viable in nullsec, we should be testing the ship with MWDs, not afterburners. I did this. I only flew Retributions with a MWD and no funny fits such as MWD+web like some players have been doing. I lost about 20 of them on SiSi, maybe more. A tracking bonus, tracking rig and tracking enhancer and hit quality is still an issue at closer ranges.

The ship can be instantly fixed by +1 mid -1 low.

I disagree - I had a fair bit of success with an mwd/longpoint fit, and tbh, the tracking is rather good - if you carry drop, you can easily get it to around 0.6 rad/s with gatling pulses or DLPs, which is plenty for tracking other frigates or popping drones.
Dorian Tormak
RBON United
#990 - 2012-01-21 00:35:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Dorian Tormak
What I personally wish for the Enyo: 5% Bonus to Warp Scrambler and Warp Disruptor range per level... and change the optimal bonus to a falloff bonus Twisted oh and 10% to damage, not 5% Roll

There are really way too many opinions in here though, if CCP is serious about taking advice they need to halt the work on Assault Ships this instant and take a good long look at everything as a whole with maybe a couple months of discussion. Don't rush some stupid Afterburner or Micro Warp Drive boost onto Tranquility without seriously considering everything for a while.

Not that anyone cares, but personally I think giving them a Role Bonus is silly; what should really be done is to look at each Assault Ship individually and tweak each one into balanced perfection.

Holy Satanic Christ! This is a Goddamn Signature!
Hawkeye2816
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#991 - 2012-01-21 01:24:34 UTC
Okay, so I know that this has been mentioned before, and I also haven't really looked into the other AFs yet, but the enyo is still not quite viable. The way I used to fit out the midslots was AB and web; no point, because A. the enyo was bloody slow and needs the web to keep up with the other guy, and B. because I was assuming I would be running with others there to supply the point.

After the addition of the midslot and the +10 CPU, I tried to add a point, and swapped out the AB for MWD to fit the new role bonus; this does not work. The enyo is dreadfully short on CPU, and I don't have anything in the utility/rocket slot in the highs. While I suppose the thing could get by with AB since it got a mild speed buff, It would be nice to have the ability to cover large distances quickly in the event of a misplaced warpin.

What I look for in an AF:
1. The ability to put down a decent amount of DPS while,
2. Maintaining the ability to have a decent tank for something its size.

The third midslot will help with the former, to be sure, and the added armor definately helps with the latter, but I don't think that +10 CPU was enough, considering that a meta 4 web uses (correct me if I'm wrong) 22 CPU. Fitting an enyo was tight before; the CPU bonus helps, but I don't think it's enough.

PS I haven't had the time to check to see if that CPU bonus was changed, so if it was, I apologize.
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#992 - 2012-01-21 01:38:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Exenthal
The Enyo makes up for its comparability weak tank by being capable of having nearly double the damage output of the other AFs.
As for fitting, yes it's quite tight and will require you to fit named mods rather than throwing T2 at the ship and having it fit without issue (they're all like that). I've managed to fit a decent tank w/ rep, full tackle w/ mwd, and neutrons w/ nos WITHOUT resorting to anything lower than best-named mods (when needed) or faction items.

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

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
John Nucleus
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
#993 - 2012-01-21 03:08:52 UTC
Dorian Tormak wrote:


There are really way too many opinions in here though, if CCP is serious about taking advice they need to halt the work on Assault Ships this instant and take a good long look at everything as a whole with maybe a couple months of discussion. Don't rush some stupid Afterburner or Micro Warp Drive boost onto Tranquility without seriously considering everything for a while.

Not that anyone cares, but personally I think giving them a Role Bonus is silly; what should really be done is to look at each Assault Ship individually and tweak each one into balanced perfection.


I agree.

But just give the Retribution its second mid slot while you take the time to really rebalance AFs, that one is a given.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#994 - 2012-01-21 04:41:31 UTC  |  Edited by: m0cking bird
Tsubutai wrote:
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
By the way I agree that the current slot layout of the Retribution is still as if the intent was to make the ship sub-par on purpose. It needs a web so badly.

The Punisher doesn't have a tracking bonus and is still used. Why is that?
It's used in lowsec with an afterburner. Afterburner have better close range control. Also many of them use ACs so the argument that the Punisher is fine without a tracking bonus and therefore the Retribution can't possibly be that bad is a bit wonky.

Since we're testing changes aimed at making AFs viable in nullsec, we should be testing the ship with MWDs, not afterburners. I did this. I only flew Retributions with a MWD and no funny fits such as MWD+web like some players have been doing. I lost about 20 of them on SiSi, maybe more. A tracking bonus, tracking rig and tracking enhancer and hit quality is still an issue at closer ranges.

The ship can be instantly fixed by +1 mid -1 low.

I disagree - I had a fair bit of success with an mwd/longpoint fit, and tbh, the tracking is rather good - if you carry drop, you can easily get it to around 0.6 rad/s with gatling pulses or DLPs, which is plenty for tracking other frigates or popping drones.



Indeed. Not sure what Takeshi is on about. Not sure about the new changes CCP has done. Stopped using the SISI 4 days ago (do not plan on using it again @ all). Whole reason I was there was to fool around with rail-gun Ferox and shield-Brutix FLEET SETUPS. 5 shield transporter Basilisk too... Nice work with rails CCP = )


I've been linking set-ups for these ships that prove many things (Facts). In 2 serious post and many not so serious post including ship set-ups. There is no doubt the Enyo (mid slot = effective dual repair set-up, with warp scrambler), Ishkur, Wolf and Hawk. Have gained a significant increase in defence compared to current values. Mainly because of increased slot amount. The Harpy has gain a significant increase in defence because of 5% bonus to shield resistances. Increasing damage output of ships with the most significant defences (Vengeance and Hawk). Is just ********. Why is the Vengeance receiving a high slot? You do know a Hawk is able to do 290 damage per second, correct? Even more with some set-ups and have a insane active defence.The set-ups I linked before in this thread were conservative compared to extremes.

Prom has been denying alot of facts threw-out this whole discussion. I don't even read his post. Someone else does and and "bra's" me. Makes jokes @ my expense then asks me if "you're going to take that bro?" (lol peer pressure). Then we laugh @ this clown (prom) comments and I write words... Many pilots in this thread have proven many of proms statements to be false. Many have misjudged stup!dity for rigidity. Not to mention he has insulted multiple players opinions (lol).

There's a unbelievable majority that have said these changes make assault ships overpowered in comparison to Interdict-ors, Destroyers (why even bother changing destroyers?), Interceptors, Navy and Pirate faction frigates (apparently all my characters).

Also, I do waste bandwidth. I have 4 connection within my house. 1 for my media server ( I use to download p0rn, music, and other media). One I use for gaming online or LAN parties. The last is for my multiple laptops and anyone who chills @ my crib (mainly used for browsing and downloading p0rn)...

Anyway. @ 11:59 am (-5gmt) on January 21. This character will be deleted. Her job is p much done (s1ut).

Cool! I'm off to watch "Anonymous" now. Also FREE Kim DOTCOM (Schmitz). BRING BACK MEGAUPLOAD YOU DIRTY MOFUCKING FEDS!


-proxyyyy
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#995 - 2012-01-21 05:32:32 UTC
John Nucleus wrote:
I believe the pros and cons of Laser are balanced with other weapon system. Therefore, having to waste a bonus in order to use them is not justified. Apparently, this bonus was introduced when Laser were better than other weapon system and the bonus needed to use them was then justified. If it's no longer the case, the bonus should be replaced by something else.


The part of the buff that has always interested me was getting my beloved Wolf a tracking bonus and to see the Enyo get a double damage bonus. Proxyyy loves to see how much a ship can tank. I'm at the opposite side of the spectrum. How much firepower can I fit on this thing?!? Twisted

And so I have always raised my nose at the Retribution. It's hard pressed to get up to 200 DPS with Scorch. Not for me. I do have the skills to fly one though and out the new two mid version. I have to say it was a pleasant surprise. I probably didn't approach it like a traditional Amarr would.....

High:
Dual Light Pulse Laser II x 4
Small Nuet or Small Nos
Mid:
Named MWD
Named Scrambler
Low:
TE II
Heat Sink II
F85 Damage Control or DC II depending on nos or nuet choice
200mm Rolled Tungsten
Adaptive Nano Plating Ii
Rigs:
Energy Burst
Energy Collision

181 DPS with an optimal of 17.5km. 10k EHP without putting too much effort into it. And as for that worthless cap bonus? I can run the nuet completely cap stable. I outlasted more then one Enyo - tanked the damage and eventually shut down their cap. You want to try to speed tank my pulses? Say hello to my little friend.... Pirate I might have to get small pulse laser specialization to lvl 5 to match my specializations in small ac...and arty.... and blasters... and rails... Cool
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#996 - 2012-01-21 05:43:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Prometheus Exenthal
Nobody has proven me wrong yet, proxyyyy.
I've asked people to, and it's not happened, so I don't know what thread you're reading.

No AFs can tank much more than what's already possible on TQ. You're just being stubborn and ignoring me when I prove you wrong. I mean seriously, show me this Hawk fit of yours that does 290dps and has an OP tank Roll

And to correct you;
There's an unbelievable number of people who know absolutely nothing, and claim that AFs will make x ships useless. The argument is plain silly and holds no water. It's been beaten to death and disproved, so maybe you should read the thread and save yourself from looking foolish.

You're also incorrect in suggesting I've denied facts. On the contrary, I've disproved those *facts*.
People have been messaging me during this whole ordeal via evemail and test server pm's. I've yet to be shown an overpowered ship that isn't aided by about a billion isk worth of implants and a link alt. And those that brought that combo were easily dispatched by a single medium neut.

If something is broken, it needs to brought to attention for adjusting. So far nothing is broken.
So please, prove me wrong. I want someone to prove me wrong with more than WAAHHH MY RIFTERRRR and WAHHH MY INTERCEPTOOORRRR. That's not helpful and doesn't show anything.

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

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#997 - 2012-01-21 06:08:21 UTC
Zarnak Wulf wrote:
John Nucleus wrote:
I believe the pros and cons of Laser are balanced with other weapon system. Therefore, having to waste a bonus in order to use them is not justified. Apparently, this bonus was introduced when Laser were better than other weapon system and the bonus needed to use them was then justified. If it's no longer the case, the bonus should be replaced by something else.


The part of the buff that has always interested me was getting my beloved Wolf a tracking bonus and to see the Enyo get a double damage bonus. Proxyyy loves to see how much a ship can tank. I'm at the opposite side of the spectrum. How much firepower can I fit on this thing?!? Twisted

And so I have always raised my nose at the Retribution. It's hard pressed to get up to 200 DPS with Scorch. Not for me. I do have the skills to fly one though and out the new two mid version. I have to say it was a pleasant surprise. I probably didn't approach it like a traditional Amarr would.....

High:
Dual Light Pulse Laser II x 4
Small Nuet or Small Nos
Mid:
Named MWD
Named Scrambler
Low:
TE II
Heat Sink II
F85 Damage Control or DC II depending on nos or nuet choice
200mm Rolled Tungsten
Adaptive Nano Plating Ii
Rigs:
Energy Burst
Energy Collision

181 DPS with an optimal of 17.5km. 10k EHP without putting too much effort into it. And as for that worthless cap bonus? I can run the nuet completely cap stable. I outlasted more then one Enyo - tanked the damage and eventually shut down their cap. You want to try to speed tank my pulses? Say hello to my little friend.... Pirate I might have to get small pulse laser specialization to lvl 5 to match my specializations in small ac...and arty.... and blasters... and rails... Cool



Props zak. Welcome to something I suggested you;re able to do long before this thread even went up (ships and modules). Vengeance does similar. I tend to get as much damage out of a set-up as possible, without sacrificing to much defence. I lean more to damage. However, ridiculousness over-tanked ships tend to smoke everything else. @lest if they stay in scram range or have no abil to dictate range in scram range. I don't like over-tanked ships, but I respect what they're able to do and their effectiveness. One of my arguments is against he abil of more ships to over tank. Which is why I bring that up.

I prefer gats on the close range slicer and the proposed retribution. Nice set-up zak!


-proxyyyy
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#998 - 2012-01-21 12:04:49 UTC
Quote:
...people who know absolutely nothing...

Huh? So spending 80%+ of the last 3+ years in frigates/destroyers shooting all size ships is not enough to be considered knowledgeable on the topic frigates/destroyers and their place in the hierarchy?
Quote:
...I have disproved those 'facts'

Sticking ones fingers in ones ears and humming loudly does not actually disprove much of anything. You have at best ignored everything that has been said against the over-buff and at worst resorted to foul language and the rock solid argument of "just because!!!!111".
Quote:
...So far nothing is broken.

Wasn't it you who argued that it didn't matter if something was broken now since the plan is to rebalance almost everything at some point anyway?
Didn't you state that they are not broken because it is possible to counter the over-buffed AFs with some ships?
So your claim hinges on light combat in Eve surviving X number of years in a broken state and/or everyone not in an AF resort to specialized fits to stay competitive .. I would seriously love to hear what you consider broken .. hahahahahaha.

Top of pile come February with no competition from any ship sub-BC: DP Enyo, DP Ishkur, DP Hawk, and DP Jag.
With tracking removed as a hindrance any ship that has slots to DP WILL DP and thus be nigh unkillable by most everything not specifically setup to counter DP .. we finally managed to convince CCP that the Dramiel was off the reservation and now this ****.

Hope frigate/cruiser tiers gets removed come summer or LS will be a very bland indeed Sad
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#999 - 2012-01-21 15:18:43 UTC
Uninformed whiners wrote:
AFs will obsolete...

- Interceptors
Nope. It's more than an MWD bonus that makes inties good at what they do.

- T1 frigates
T1 frigates have been obsolete for everything but newbie tackle for a long time now. This changes nothing

- Pirate frigates
The crap pirate frigates will stay crap, the good ones will stay good, if used properly. They do things that AFs can't. (Unless I missed something on the OP, and one of the new bonuses is neuting power or 90% webs?)

- Navy frigates
Pretty much the same situation as above. The only one I can see getting obsoleted (theoretically) is the Hookbill, as the Hawk seems vastly better.

T1 cruisers
- See T1 frigates. These were obsoleted by battlecruisers a long time ago, and they need their own buff to be usable again. The AF buff has no effect here, really.

I think that's everything?
Ivan En'Vec
Nevermore.
#1000 - 2012-01-21 18:55:54 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
Nobody has proven me wrong yet, proxyyyy.
I've asked people to, and it's not happened, so I don't know what thread you're reading.

No AFs can tank much more than what's already possible on TQ. You're just being stubborn and ignoring me when I prove you wrong. I mean seriously, show me this Hawk fit of yours that does 290dps and has an OP tank Roll

And to correct you;
There's an unbelievable number of people who know absolutely nothing, and claim that AFs will make x ships useless. The argument is plain silly and holds no water. It's been beaten to death and disproved, so maybe you should read the thread and save yourself from looking foolish.

You're also incorrect in suggesting I've denied facts. On the contrary, I've disproved those *facts*.
People have been messaging me during this whole ordeal via evemail and test server pm's. I've yet to be shown an overpowered ship that isn't aided by about a billion isk worth of implants and a link alt. And those that brought that combo were easily dispatched by a single medium neut.

If something is broken, it needs to brought to attention for adjusting. So far nothing is broken.
So please, prove me wrong. I want someone to prove me wrong with more than WAAHHH MY RIFTERRRR and WAHHH MY INTERCEPTOOORRRR. That's not helpful and doesn't show anything.


Am I understanding it right that you're in charge of the AF changes - or at least the feedback? At a time when our faith in CCP is still about rock bottom, you guys give us a goonswarm CSM alternate that likes to offhandedly dismiss anything that he doesn't agree with? There's some valid arguments in this thread that should be given serious consideration, not a blanket denial because we peons of EVE know absolutely nothing.

It's not so much that anything will be obsolete, it's that we have here an entire ship class that the playerbase has wanted changed for years, and we have unlimited possibilities for improving it in new and creative ways. Instead we get a bonus that already exists on very similar ships.