Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 60 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 16 post(s) |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
310
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:32:00 -
[451] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz interesting fit.... but is it worth using over a cyclone dual ASB 1200 plus tank for a 4th of the price? Which is always an issue if you care about your wallet and your kb... Also when CS get buffed .. similar price which is more useful to the fleet?[/quote wrote:
And that is why HACs are bad, even with these changes
I'm also going to point out that a Vaga goes twice as fast and has a lower sig giving it the ability to speed tank. Cyclone is likely superior in most situations though.
It makes me sad that CCP don't seem to get it .. HACS with these changes are stil... what else can i fly that is cheaper and does the same job than a HAC? and besides the zealot its hard too think of any reason to fly a HAC atm even if they made them mostly better than T1 attack cruisers but slightly slower for instance i would still look at ABC's T3's Recons and Navy/pirate cruisers before these HACS.
Maybe in the future they will nerf ABC's, T3's and change pirate cruisers bonuses maybe they might become a genuine go to choice. But in the current climate and the future climate i am still struggling to find a reason beyond the token MWD bonus on a kiting HAC IF they make any of them fast enough and the sig radius isn't the size of a battleship that is. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
975
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:32:00 -
[452] - Quote
Romar Thel wrote:Raging Beaver wrote:Great changes! Time to go to Jita and sell all HACs... And let me guess, you're going to make them more expensive as well, right? They worth being more expensive after THAT boosting! hahahah. Good point bro
Just bring more of T1 versions and accomplish the same job for a fraction of the cost. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Romar Thel
Mythos Corp Nulli Secunda
1
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:38:00 -
[453] - Quote
Yeah probably t1 will get even more expensive after this change.. Higher demand! lol |
Alsyth
46
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:42:00 -
[454] - Quote
And just give them their third rig slot, honestly.
You removed the dumb 375 calibration of faction ships, why should T2 still have only 2 rigs when T3 have 3?
That's one of the thing that makes HAC underwhelming when compared to faction cruisers, t3 and BCs. |
Lithorn
The Dark Tribe Seventh Sanctum.
24
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:44:00 -
[455] - Quote
Munin needs more grid/cpu and some may tell me i'm crazy and go screw myself but, the zealot could use a bit more of both also. |
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
1857
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:46:00 -
[456] - Quote
i can't even remember how medium beam lasers sound. Do they wubwub or wub? eve style bounties (done) dust boarding parties imagine there is war and everybody cloaks - join FW |
Tankn00blicus
sleep Deprivation INC. LLC The Kadeshi
25
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:49:00 -
[457] - Quote
CCP Rise wrote:ISHTAR - We are replacing the medium hybrid damage bonus with a drone bonus and removing one high slot to put its total 1 below the rest of the class, as is standard for drone-focused ships.
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to drone tracking and optimal range(was 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage) 10% bonus to drone hitpoints and Damage
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses: 5 km bonus to Drone operation range per level 50 m3 extra Drone Bay per level
Slot layout: 4H(-1), 5M, 5L; 4 turrets(+1), 0 launchers Fittings: 700 PWG, 285 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1400(-6) / 1600(-18) / 2300(+191) Capacitor (amount) : 1300(+175) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 185(-6) / .52 / 11700000 / 8.43s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 125 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 60km / 294 / 7 Sensor strength: 16 Magnetometric Signature radius: 145 Right, the Ishtar totally isn't one of the most notoriously CPU-gimped hulls in the game, no need to fix. That previous lack of a 4th turret hardpoint was a major problem though! |
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
132
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:51:00 -
[458] - Quote
Lithorn wrote:Munin needs more grid/cpu and some may tell me i'm crazy and go screw myself but, the zealot could use a bit more of both also.
All HACs need more, thats one of the bigger issues facing HAC pilots, the fact that there is NO flexibility in their fittings.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Drunken Bum
406
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:55:00 -
[459] - Quote
Diemos still sucks. Munin doesnt really look good for anything either. I like most of the changes, ishtar meeds more cpu. Deimost and munin just really dont look worth flying for anything really After the patch we're giving the market some gentle supply restriction, like tying one wrist to the bedpost loosely with soft silk rope. Just enough to make things a bit more exciting for the market, not enough to make a safeword necessary. -á-Fozzie |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
977
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:58:00 -
[460] - Quote
Romar Thel wrote:Yeah probably t1 will get even more expensive after this change.. Higher demand! lol
1 researched BPO of "whatever T1 Cruiser of the month" is cheap, requires little effort to build a couple ones and perform as well as T2, if they become more expensive because offer/demand usual florensiensis dialog blahblahblah players can always build their own for little effort and collect some tears on top.
On topic: as mentioned above there's no reason why T2 cruisers shouldn't have a third rig slot, it's not like if they were really harmful anyway. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
|
Simon BlackWell
State Protectorate Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:58:00 -
[461] - Quote
Deimos has been hit fairly hard. 4th mid is nice, but honestly, I've no use for a web for the most part.
Nerfing it's EHP was a bit of a low blow. It can't brawl properly now, not to mention that with the utility highslot gone, there went the ubiquitous small Nos to keep everything running whilst you brawl.
You've changed the Nos mechanics, then begin plucking Utility highslots away from things.
Staaaaahp |
Marlona Sky
D00M. Northern Coalition.
4071
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 19:58:00 -
[462] - Quote
What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC? . |
Fyrkraag
The Knights Templar
16
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:00:00 -
[463] - Quote
REserved |
Grath Telkin
Sniggerdly Pandemic Legion
1664
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:00:00 -
[464] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC?
You have too much money and or you dont like flying ships that don't suck
|
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
977
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:02:00 -
[465] - Quote
Drunken Bum wrote:Diemos still sucks. Munin doesnt really look good for anything either. I like most of the changes, ishtar meeds more cpu. Deimost and munin just really dont look worth flying for anything really
ASB shield extender MWD point, DCU mfs/te nano+Blasters = OMGFCKPOWNMOBILE *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
N9 Tau
Black Carbon Group
0
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:04:00 -
[466] - Quote
So...Why are we keeping 5% MWD cap bonus for Deimos? Didn't we drop this in Thorax, favoring tracking bonus? I think it would make much more sense to change it to tracking bonus + rebuff the ehp...since armor and hull nerf really took out a large chunk. |
Alundil
Seniors Clan Get Off My Lawn
230
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:10:00 -
[467] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Harvey James wrote:Fr0stle wrote:I'll just add my voice to the group and ask for some more CPU on the Ishtar. It was always CPU gimped and now we have all these new drone modules that are CPU heavy too. More CPU is needed to make this ship viable in it's intended role. that and reducing CPU on all drone mods would make sense ... also add a drone tracking for the lows like a TE for drones. GǪor, hell, just to enforce the whole GǣT2 = specialisationGǥ angleGǪ How about having the Ishtar reduce the CPU need for drone mods? That way, the ship can maintain its limited CPU to keep it from being too versatile, but you can still pack it absolutely full of the very specific set of mods that are related to its niche without making those available to every ship out there. At -10%/level, that would mean Omnilink IIs at 29.5 tf, Drone link IIs at 27.5 tf, and Drone damage amps at 15 tf when you have HAC V. This would be great to be honest.
Clone gameplay enhancements |
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
345
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:11:00 -
[468] - Quote
N9 Tau wrote:So...Why are we keeping 5% MWD cap bonus for Deimos? Didn't we drop this in Thorax, favoring tracking bonus? I think it would make much more sense to change it to tracking bonus + rebuff the ehp...since armor and hull nerf really took out a large chunk. Yeah, it'd honestly be better served by--and I can't believe I'm saying this--an armor repair bonus. If there is to be a wasted bonus, of course. TBH, T2 HACs ought to represent a straight-up increase in damage performance over a T1 attack cruiser, so the bonus really should be tracking or rate of fire. (4 turrets, 10% damage, 5% rate of fire, 5 highs and 7 lows to make it effective brawler.) Save the shield kitey to Thorax or Talos--everyone else still will and they'll outperform the Deimos every time. Gallente will have to continue to use Proteii or CSs as tanky brawlers, it seems.
As soon as you step onto the battlefield, you're already dead, born again at the end of the battle to live on and fight another day. |
Vic Teishikuro
Rescue Team
4
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:15:00 -
[469] - Quote
Deimos still needs more Love.
The tho the Sacrilige is nice. it needs more its still something nobodys gunna fly
and a few of the other ships have some CPU and Power grid issues
Deimos, Sacrilige, Munin needs more love
|
Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:16:00 -
[470] - Quote
Posting again to un-**** the Sacrilege for the love of all that is good.
5/4/6 slot layout, 4 launchers, 10% damage bonus. Fitting, tank and utility problems, all solved.
dooooooo eeeeeeet |
|
M1k3y Koontz
Thorn Project Surely You're Joking
132
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:16:00 -
[471] - Quote
Grath Telkin wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC? You have too much money and or you dont like flying ships that don't suck
Ships that don't suck? Have you SEEN the T1 cruisers? They are far superior to HACs when cost is considered. In some cases they are simply better than their T2 variants, cost be damned.
How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
310
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:18:00 -
[472] - Quote
poor CCP Rise .. i bet he will go home tonight crying WHY me!!!!! .. there all so mean :P they don't give fozzie the same amount of abuse :) Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Sarkelias Anophius
Strange Energy Gentlemen's Agreement
14
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:18:00 -
[473] - Quote
M1k3y Koontz wrote:Grath Telkin wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC? You have too much money and or you dont like flying ships that don't suck Ships that don't suck? Have you SEEN the T1 cruisers? They are far superior to HACs when cost is considered. In some cases they are simply better than their T2 variants, cost be damned.
I think you lost one of the negatives in his post |
Leskit
The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est
32
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:19:00 -
[474] - Quote
Maximus Andendare wrote:
But back to the point: CCP likely wants HACs to be what their name implies: A heavy assau--attack--cruiser. A T1 cruiser with more tank. But that distinguishment will never justify the 10:1 increase in cost, and if they don't balance based on cost, then there's really no point in having these ships cost more just so we can get a marginal increase like extra optimal range. (And besides, Navy ships are already T1 ships with more tank.) These ships have to do more: project damage better, better falloff, better tracking, faster rate of fire, stronger cap, stronger tank, etc. There needs to be a reason to buy one--and a much better reason than a marginal performance increase.
CCP, I urge you to have a hard look at the Zealot and why it's been so successful in the game. Ask yourselves why Deimoses, Eagles and the others have been shelved. Then, once you answer those questions, work in solutions to this line that addresses those answers.
Mr. Floydy wrote:Looking at the Zealot as an example. It's a big chunk slower in a straight line than an Omen, whilst taking a few extra seconds to align. If you don't want to make it and the other ranged HACs faster can you consider giving them more fitting - powergrid in particular - so they can actually fit the full size guns, MWD and some tank without needing fitting mods / implant? Looking in EFT, with perfect skills. Can't fit a set of Heavy Beams, meta 4 800mm plate, meta mwd and even a micro cap booster without implants or fitting mods. It just needs a percent more! :p
Sarkelias Anophius wrote: The Sacrilege would benefit tremendously from going to 4 launchers with a 10% damage bonus and trading a high for a low. This would open up so much viability it's just silly. Rise, please read this and the other Sacri posts. I love this ship, I've flown it forever, and this is our chance to make it work without breaking anything.
These are good enough ideas to repost a few times... |
XvXTeacherVxV
Nightmare Machinery Illusion of Solitude
15
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:21:00 -
[475] - Quote
The Muninn still seems pretty lackluster compared to alternative options if you ask me and the fact that it uses projectiles makes Minmatar the only race not to have a HAC with an alternative primary weapon. E.g.
Deimos - Hybrid, Ishtar - Drones Zealot - Lasers, Sacrilige - Missiles Eagle - Hybrid, Cerberus - Missiles Vagabond - Projectile, Muninn - Projectile?
Seems weird. How about tossing this projectile Muninn nobody's ever cared much for and replacing it with a missile Muninn so those Minmatar missile folks aren't left without a HAC to fly? I'd give it similar bonuses to the Cerb but replace the Flight Time bonus with an explosion radius bonus, giving it a nice edge against smaller ships. Not crazy about the type specific damage bonus, but it'd be weird if the cerb had one and the muninn didn't.
Something like this:
Muninn
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Explosive Missile damage 10% bonus to Missile velocity
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile explosion velocity 5% bonus to Missile Launcher rate of fire |
Aloe Cloveris
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
114
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:23:00 -
[476] - Quote
The introduction of 8-turret ABCs was definitely not short-sighted at all. Should be easy as pie to balance every other ship in existence around them. Dunno what the problem is here. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
310
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:23:00 -
[477] - Quote
Sarkelias Anophius wrote:Posting again to un-**** the Sacrilege for the love of all that is good.
5/4/6 slot layout, 4 launchers, 10% damage bonus. Fitting, tank and utility problems, all solved.
dooooooo eeeeeeet
I think all the HACS could use stronger damage bonuses more 10% damage bonuses across the board also that 16th slot would certainly make sense here.. The eagle could do with a 5th low and a 10% damage bonus Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
310
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:25:00 -
[478] - Quote
Aloe Cloveris wrote:The introduction of 8-turret ABCs was definitely not short-sighted at all. Should be easy as pie to balance every other ship in existence around them. Dunno what the problem is here.
I believe they were given fair warning in the ABC balance pass Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Jureth22
the unified Negative Ten.
104
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:28:00 -
[479] - Quote
please kil2 for the love of god give zealot drones.thanks |
Maximus Andendare
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
345
|
Posted - 2013.07.18 20:29:00 -
[480] - Quote
XvXTeacherVxV wrote:The Muninn still seems pretty lackluster compared to alternative options if you ask me and the fact that it uses projectiles makes Minmatar the only race not to have a HAC with an alternative primary weapon. E.g.
Deimos - Hybrid, Ishtar - Drones Zealot - Lasers, Sacrilige - Missiles Eagle - Hybrid, Cerberus - Missiles Vagabond - Projectile, Muninn - Projectile?
Seems weird. How about tossing this projectile Muninn nobody's ever cared much for and replacing it with a missile Muninn so those Minmatar missile folks aren't left without a HAC to fly? I'd give it similar bonuses to the Cerb but replace the Flight Time bonus with an explosion radius bonus, giving it a nice edge against smaller ships. Not crazy about the type specific damage bonus, but it'd be weird if the cerb had one and the muninn didn't.
Something like this:
Muninn
Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Explosive Missile damage 10% bonus to Missile velocity
Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile explosion velocity 5% bonus to Missile Launcher rate of fire It'd be a great idea to have missile ships represented--even using the sort of dual damage bonus a Scythe FI gets, but I think it's too tricky to bake that into a hull that gets 4x damage/application bonuses. I think the stat overload on have 4x missile bonuses and 4x projectile bonuses would be too much visually, too much to balance around, etc. I'm fairly certain that the Claymore changes (making it into a missile boat) is what CCP is going to say is the "interim" missile boat for Minmatar, along with the aforementioned Scythe FI, of course (and likely an updated Huginn I'd wager (Super Bellicose, anyone?).
Besides, the two Minmatar HACs do represent two aspects of Minmatar playstyle: one is a fast, kitey monster (which is absolutely Minmatar), while the other performs well as a high range, high alpha arty monster. Notice, though, that they both are monsters :)
As soon as you step onto the battlefield, you're already dead, born again at the end of the battle to live on and fight another day. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 60 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |