Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Necrologic
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 08:05:00 -
[1]
Everybody knows assault frigates pritty much suck in comparison to interceptors. They have less firepower due to inty double damage bonuses, they have less speed and so cannot catch anything much, they have more mass so they can't escape larger targets, and their tanks arn't good enough to take on larger targets. Interceptor speed tanking is much better than af armor or shield tanking. To make matters worse, we now have interdictors coming. They actually have less mass and more speed than assault frigs, despite being based off destroyers (t1 destroyers have less mass to)...
Rifter= 11,00,000kg / 300m/s Claw= 1,125,000kg / 475m/s Wolf= 1,825,000kg / 295m/s Thrasher= 1,500,000kg / 240m/s Sabre= 1,500,000kg / 455m/s
I think it is clear that assault frigs are soon going to be totally useless once interdictors are in. They will have less firepower, way less speed, and only slightly better tanks. It is really time for AFs to get fixed. They need their missing 4th bonus (another dmg wouldn't hurt to bring them inline with ceptor's dmg output), and the crappy ones need the slots they are missing. They also need either a speed increase or mass reduction. It is important that they not usurp the role of the interceptor, so i think it should just be a mass reduction (faster accel and warp speed) so the inties still have the advantage of being able to close and have higher warp speeds.
|
F'nog
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 09:24:00 -
[2]
I think the fix will come from removing the ceptors' stupid 2nd damage bonus. They should get a bonus for speed or tackling, not damage.
That will make the AFs make more sense.
Originally by: rowbin hod Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage.
|
kebab v2
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 10:38:00 -
[3]
well most AF's need a bit of a buff now after tux has gone and changed all the tech 1 frigs, i totaly agree they all need a mass nerf back down to tech 1 levels perhaps they will get the tux treatment before rmr.
"I made this sig while i should of been working"
|
Hehulk
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 11:08:00 -
[4]
Originally by: kebab v2 well most AF's need a bit of a buff now after tux has gone and changed all the tech 1 frigs, i totaly agree they all need a mass nerf back down to tech 1 levels perhaps they will get the tux treatment before rmr.
Unfortunatly RMR is in code lock now, so that's not likely to happen. Here's to hoping for kali... ---------- "EvE isn't a game, it's a lifestyle" Jaegerknack, 5punkorp
|
HippoKing
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 11:09:00 -
[5]
AFs need a 4th bonus, a mass decrease and the hawk/venge/jag need one more slot
|
Aakron
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 11:27:00 -
[6]
I dont think Intys should be nerfed, but AF's could really do with some loving! I totally agree that another damage bonus and more speed less mass would help these ships compete against the new buffed up markII ships
|
Grut
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 12:02:00 -
[7]
last time i checked afs did prettymuch the same damage as inties +-5% and thats alot when you consider most of them have optimal bonus's aswell.
The lack of a 4th bonus's hurts them quite abit, id like to see it go on taking rather then dmg though, think the +5% resists for amarr/caldari -rep time for gal and something for mim would be nice.
hawks need + 2 launcher slots + one mid jag +1mid +grid/cpu.
Think the speed/mass on them is ok as it sets them out from other friggies
dont know about the others Kinsy > deadman you there? Kinsy > are either of us in pods, becase we dont know...
Mostly harmless |
Imhotep Khem
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 13:58:00 -
[8]
The problem is each race has a tackling inty already and a fighting inty. There will be only 1 super tackler per race and the other will be useless.
I don't see what choice they have than to kill the fighting inty since they introduced the Assault Frigates. They are trying to do the same things. One uses signature and one uses resistance; The signature one is WAY better.
Frigates are about speed and all fittings and strategies are about speed. Resistance is not about speed. I can't see it ever working. Well if they gave the AF a big ole cap perhaps. ____ If your not dyin' your not tryin'. |
Kyozoku
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 14:46:00 -
[9]
Yeah they are prety pathetic. I hink I'll be flying my merlin instead of my harpy in rmr.
|
Wolfstriked
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 15:51:00 -
[10]
Oh manhere I am almost done training for a Wolf only to read this.I thought that inty's were elite frigates that have a great advantage in not getting hit while the AF's where elite frigs that deal alot of damage"assault".Now I see that inty's deal same damage and are better at not getting hit.So why did they even bother making assault frigs for then?
|
|
Taketa De
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 15:52:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Hehulk Unfortunatly RMR is in code lock now, so that's not likely to happen. Here's to hoping for kali...
Code lock has nothing to do with mass changes and stuff like that, those fall under data. Code is how that data is used and interpreted in the game so the changes could still happen.
|
Slan Traveller
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 16:16:00 -
[12]
AF sport cruiser durability and cruiser maneuverability. They mirror a cruiser anti frig setup with extra range.
It is not the Interceptors fault, that AF cannot meet the standards required of a frigate. Frigates must be able to disengage/blockade run. AF cannot do this due to their slow warp alignments and combat speed with required weapon/midslot loadout. They perform at point defense for heavier ships, but are locked to the movement patterns of battleship formations.
There is no reason to modify a functional ship to fix a disfunctional one.
|
Harry Voyager
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 16:20:00 -
[13]
And modifying a functional ship never fixes a dysfunctional one, when it is faults within the dysfunctional one itself that have lead to its uselessness. ____________________ I'm not an idiot; I just play one on the forums. |
Meeko Gloom
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 16:28:00 -
[14]
I totaly agree it seem like the techII version should be better than tech1 in everyway... speed included
Give my enyo and ishkur some love ________________________________________________
Pls Dont Flame Me Cuz I DONT Give A ****
Demons of Razgis
|
Arleonenis
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 16:56:00 -
[15]
AF`s arent that bad but yes they need better tanking capabilities, this missing 4th bonus should be same as tanking bonus on battlecruisers and around 50-75% MORE CAPACITOR for all AF`s. Than af`s will really have decent tanking capabilities, as it stand now... they are quite fun but cant really tank well
|
Montero
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 17:32:00 -
[16]
it'd be interesting to see the 4th bonus on AFs being a bonus to the sig on its guns. would be a unique feature and make them much less vulnerable to other frigs.
|
Wolfstriked
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 19:54:00 -
[17]
I just dont get it....I just checked up on interceptors and it says....Lightning-fast, highly maneuverable frigates.This to me was an indicator that they have less in the way of armament since armament adds weight to a ship.
Ok so a claw and a wolf both have 5 hardpoints to attach weapons.Ok they are pretty equal then until I read that they have differences in damage bonus.
Now what just totally blew my mind is why a ship made for all out speed gets a 10% to small projectile damage while an AF gets 5% to damage.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 20:03:00 -
[18]
Originally by: F'nog I think the fix will come from removing the ceptors' stupid 2nd damage bonus. They should get a bonus for speed or tackling, not damage.
That will make the AFs make more sense.
So then they'd just be no better compared to T1 frigs which are 30x cheaper? Yay, great idea. Some of the AF's need looking at, yes, but bluntly an AF is NOT a solo ship.
AF vs Inty CAN go the Intys way. Sometimes, with a VERY good inty pilot. 2 AF vs 2 Inty? Intys better RUN.
PS, Tanking changes will favour AF heavily in RMR. PPS, Ishkur is being MASSIVELY boosted in damage in RMR.
Wolfstriked, because that's *2* bonuses for the Claw, and it's a ship with 2 midslots which seriously restricts its tactical versatility. And an untanked claw is fragile as heck. And, er, the Claw has *4* highslots. Only 3 of which can take guns (and most people CAN'T afford the grid for a launcher in the other one...)
If anything, AF should get more range bonuses and possibly a few grid/CPU tweaks so they can mount reasonable long range guns AND a reasonable tank...
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Wolfstriked
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 20:10:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Wolfstriked on 04/12/2005 20:15:04 Edited by: Wolfstriked on 04/12/2005 20:14:51 Why not give the interceptors speed and tackling bonus and AF get the double damage bonus like f-nog said.Makes more sense to me.
Also with new tanking abilities of ships going way up and from what I hear DPS of ships being nerfed than what will AF's be like then.They need the double damage bonus!!
|
Tryvus
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 20:13:00 -
[20]
Mmm, I'm quite happy with my Harpy the way it is, but if the general population wants to boost it a bit more, well who am I to stand in your way.
I don't think the problems with your bastard child interceptors can be blamed on the well designed assault frigates or even the bastard child assault frigates. They all have their places and all the assault frigates are well designed based on their donator's hulls. The mass differences are based on heavier defenses...defenses that are heavier than cruisers.
Interceptors and interdictors have less mass/higher speed because they have paper thin defenses and tiny little gnat sized signatures. They're defense is not to get hit, which works great until an intelligent pilot webs and paints them up to the size of a zeppelin.
Don't try to pander off the problems of one ship type by redesigning another.
|
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 20:15:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Wolfstriked Why not give the interceptors speed and tackling bonus and AF get the double damage bonus like f-nog said.Makes more sense to me.
Because perhaps you need to actually LOOK at the interceptors?
There are only 2 intys which make half-deacent tacklers. Now, unless you're asking for a FULL revamp of inties, involving a complete change to each of them, you're going to have ships with are bluntly worthless because tackling is VERY risky.
If you made them 1/2 the current cost, MAYBE they'd get used if they were pure tacklers. Sometimes.
Or you could look at them, and realise that 4 are designed for fighting, 2 for tackling and that the other 2 could be converted to tacklers with a minimum of changes, and end up with 4 killers and 4 tacklers, making everyone equally (un)happy!
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Wolfstriked
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 20:18:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Maya Rkell
Originally by: Wolfstriked Why not give the interceptors speed and tackling bonus and AF get the double damage bonus like f-nog said.Makes more sense to me.
Because perhaps you need to actually LOOK at the interceptors?
There are only 2 intys which make half-deacent tacklers. Now, unless you're asking for a FULL revamp of inties, involving a complete change to each of them, you're going to have ships with are bluntly worthless because tackling is VERY risky.
If you made them 1/2 the current cost, MAYBE they'd get used if they were pure tacklers. Sometimes.
Or you could look at them, and realise that 4 are designed for fighting, 2 for tackling and that the other 2 could be converted to tacklers with a minimum of changes, and end up with 4 killers and 4 tacklers, making everyone equally (un)happy!
Ok Maya how about this.Since intys and AF's seem to be both assault ships with just different abilities in avoiding damage,then at least for the love of Eve make it so that they both do the same damage.Why in the universe is the inty have more DPS than an AF??
|
Wolfstriked
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 20:22:00 -
[23]
What is happening here is that the MK2 fix is making frigates have more specific roles but overlooking tech2 frigs ....at least from what Ive read.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.12.04 20:24:00 -
[24]
Uhm...and AF sig radius is SO much bigger than inties. Quick comparison...
Claw (inty 4), 24m. Wolf, 28m. Jaguar, 30m.
Or maybe it's not! Maybe you need to do some more research before you speak on the topic?
Fact is, while inty DPS on a few ships CAN approach AF DPS, they cannot have anything like the tanking ability or range. AF's are just not the solo killships which Inties in skilled hands can be.
If I'm trying to fight in a small (say 5v5) engagement, I'm a lot more worried if they have AF's covering them than I have if they have 2 interceptors.
"Corpse cannot be fitted onto ship. Only hardware modules can be fitted." |
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 00:00:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Necrologic and their tanks arn't good enough to take on larger targets.
Sorry, Could you repeat this? I was busy passive tanking a 900k rat so I couldn't quite make that out. ------------------------------------
Quote: 1 Billion isk currently sells on ebay for about $225 90 day GTC $38.95 Currently selling for 300mill
Therefore 1Bill isk costs you $129.50. |
Robstr
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 01:22:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Robstr on 05/12/2005 01:24:19
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Necrologic and their tanks arn't good enough to take on larger targets.
Sorry, Could you repeat this? I was busy passive tanking a 900k rat so I couldn't quite make that out.
A single BS rat is nothing, especialy when you can tank specificaly for thier damage types.
A player is far, far, harder to tank.
I definently think AF's need thier 4th bonus just like HAC's have,perhaps even based off the HAC's boni. The enyo could get a second 5% damage, the jag a speed bonus. ect.
|
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 02:25:00 -
[27]
Originally by: Malthros Zenobia
Originally by: Necrologic and their tanks arn't good enough to take on larger targets.
Sorry, Could you repeat this? I was busy passive tanking a 900k rat so I couldn't quite make that out.
A generic Retribution can from experience tank all of the L4 Assault mission, or a 5mil and a pair of 750ks, without any trouble. It's a flawed little ship, granted, but anyone criticising its tank is crazy. I found out about the Assault thing because I was helping a corpmate out with said mission and he had to warp his (properly mission-kitted) apoc out because he couldn't take the damage and I held the entire spawn at 95%+ armour. Webbers can be lethal but nothing else will do more than scratch the paint. Have also tanked three gank player inties for two minutes before scratching structure.
|
Mortuus
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 06:41:00 -
[28]
Why do people see Interceptor and think only tackler. INTERCEPTOR, as in hunt down and catch/kill. They work fine.
Assault frigates need a slight mass reduction and thats about in IMO, just so they can keep up with other frigate gangs. Occassus Republica, NBSI |
Raem Civrie
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 09:36:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Necrologic Everybody knows assault frigates pritty much suck in comparison to interceptors. They have less firepower due to inty double damage bonuses, they have less speed and so cannot catch anything much, they have more mass so they can't escape larger targets, and their tanks arn't good enough to take on larger targets. Interceptor speed tanking is much better than af armor or shield tanking. To make matters worse, we now have interdictors coming. They actually have less mass and more speed than assault frigs, despite being based off destroyers (t1 destroyers have less mass to)...
Rifter= 11,00,000kg / 300m/s Claw= 1,125,000kg / 475m/s Wolf= 1,825,000kg / 295m/s Thrasher= 1,500,000kg / 240m/s Sabre= 1,500,000kg / 455m/s
I think it is clear that assault frigs are soon going to be totally useless once interdictors are in. They will have less firepower, way less speed, and only slightly better tanks. It is really time for AFs to get fixed. They need their missing 4th bonus (another dmg wouldn't hurt to bring them inline with ceptor's dmg output), and the crappy ones need the slots they are missing. They also need either a speed increase or mass reduction. It is important that they not usurp the role of the interceptor, so i think it should just be a mass reduction (faster accel and warp speed) so the inties still have the advantage of being able to close and have higher warp speeds.
Ever tried shooting an AF while in a battleship? Then switch to drones and get some better results, but it still doesn't splat as fast as you'd want, while an interceptors becomes a laughable splatter of grease.
AF's are great hunters, especially for killing other frigates. My Enyo usually greases anything around it's own size, although it may get in trouble with certain other Assaults (Harpy in snipermode that comes in at enough range), plus if I see a Hac I just run the hell away. Even if the Hac may have problems hitting you (we had a zealot shooting a wolf; the wolf laughed), the assault frigate simply will have problems penetrating the base tank on these ships.
Now I'm going to arbitrarily compare some numbers on a Taranis, Enyo and Nemesis (Nemesis added for general hiliarity).
Mass / Base Speed: Taranis - 1,075,000 / 420m/s Enyo - 1,950,000 / 240m/s Nemesis - 2,975,000 / 205m/s
Armor (base armor value multiplied with resistances): Taranis - 1119.69 Enyo - 3385.59 Nemesis - 857.24
Capacitor / Recharge Time: Taranis - 275 / 206.25s Enyo - 275 / 150s Nemesis - 235 / 188s
Signature: Taranis - 36 Enyo - 33 Nemesis - 48
I'll let someone else interpret this mass of numbers. I'm going back to bed. ---
God-King of Genitalia |
Kai Lae
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 10:25:00 -
[30]
Interceptors are fine. AF are underpowered, because of several reasons:
1. Hawk, Vengeance, and Jaguar are missing a slot. 2. All AF are missing a true 4th bonus. 3. Bonuses to Vengeance and (especially) Hawk need rethinking. Hawk needs more missile hardpoints.
There's a lot of ways to make these ships a lot more cool. Hawk as a mini cerb? Jaguar with a 5% speed bonus per level (mini vagabond?)? Hawk/Vengeance with 5% shield/armor resistance per level? The simple fact is that CCP has already looked at and "fixed" interceptors (though they need to go back and hit the ares and raptor with the unnerf bat), but AF have been ignored. Basically, when it comes down to it, AF need some attention with the coming new world order.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |