Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2909
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 19:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
The tiericide and rebalancing of ships breathed new life into a lot of the lesser AFs, but the Jaguar was not one of them. It only received very slight tweaks that did not change the underlying problem: the Jaguar has no niche or role it fits into. Some of its current problems include:
- poorest damage of all AFs by a mile
- inability to capitalize on range bonus; ACs get nothing out of it, artys are very hard to fit and automatically out-performed by the Wolf and its falloff bonus
- Fastest of the AFs, with decent tank, indicating a "heavy tackle" role, but it's outperformed here by many interceptors and even T1 frigates.
- Slot layout is not unique and makes it a much more expensive flavor of the Rifter/Firetail pattern.
- Overall eclipsed by the Wolf for damage, and other frigates for mid slot utility.
Seeing as how CCP is shifting Minmatar closer having a whole line of missile ships... why not turn the Jaguar into a missile boat? A less-tanky and faster version of the Hawk/Vengeance?
My thoughts:
Quote: Jaguar, Minmatar Assault Frigate
Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Missile Explosive Damage per level 5% bonus to Missile Launcher Rate of Fire per level
Assault Frigates Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to Missile Explosion Velocity per level 3% reduction in ship signature radius per level
Role bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty
Slot Layout: 4/4/4 Hardpoints: 3 turret hardpoints, 4 launcher hardpoints
Fittings: slightly higher than current ones to accommodate for missiles being harder to fit, but not enough to make up for it completely; this will cause fitting tradeoffs resulting in (likely) less tank.
All other stats should stay pretty much the same. The inspiration was a more offensively-focused Hawk. Because
Redone for missiles, the Jaguar can provide a credible threat on field as an "attack assauly frigate" (yeah, sounds stupid) that can be both mobile and apply damage well, but has to be cautious about overwhelming damage. I feel this conforms to the Minmatar ship archetype and serves as a nice step-up from the Breacher.
Your thoughts? Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
LtauSTinpoWErs
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
21
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 19:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
im all for more ships with missiles
+1 from me |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2909
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 19:49:00 -
[3] - Quote
Comparisons to existing AFs:
- Wolf has higher damage, projection, armor tank potential, and damage type flexibility. Jaguar has extra mobility, smaller signature radius, better utility (mids), and a lot more fit versatility.
- Vengeance has much better tank, capacitor, and overall short-range brawl ability, plus a utility high slot. Jaguar has higher damage, is significantly faster, and applies the damage better (but does much less damage with non-exp missiles). Jaguar is probably hard-countered by Vengeance.
- Hawk has much better tank and range, plus some utility (including +1 high slot) and other Caldari attributes (e.g. crazy good sensor strength). Jaguar is faster, applies damage better, and is harder to hit. They do the same damage. Jaguar is probably hard-countered by Hawk as well.
Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Ix Method
Gang Plank Industries
106
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 20:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
They weren't actually rebalanced were they, just given the mwd bonus?
Either way the whole lot need another look at. Travelling at the speed of love. |
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
460
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 21:01:00 -
[5] - Quote
Quote:They weren't actually rebalanced were they, just given the mwd bonus?
They got a fourth bonus and extra slots in addition to the MWD bonus. Problem is, they were rebalanced against T1 cruisers back when T1 cruisers were mostly crap. Buffs to destroyers and T1 cruisers (especially t1 cruisers) have pretty much relegated them to sports car-equivalent status. |
Batelle
Komm susser Tod
1617
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 21:18:00 -
[6] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:The tiericide and rebalancing of ships breathed new life into a lot of the lesser AFs, but the Jaguar was not one of them. It only received very slight tweaks that did not change the underlying problem: the Jaguar has no niche or role it fits into. Some of its current problems include:
Underlying problem? They didn't change it because it was good. You know which other AF didn't get changed much because it was good? The Ishkur. Are they both mediocre now? Maybe, I haven't flown either since before tiericide started. Am I going anywhere with this? No.
I'm inclined to disagree with your proposal because you're proposing to remove guns from a minmatar ship.
Remove guns... Minmatar ship...
Madness. But why the hell not? could be cool. "CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"
Never forget. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
2910
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 21:24:00 -
[7] - Quote
Ix Method wrote:They weren't actually rebalanced were they, just given the mwd bonus?
Either way the whole lot need another look at.
They were some of the first ships rebalanced in this balance pass: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=54037
However as Milton said, the other ships getting largely improved has put AFs in a tough spot again. Most of them are viable (yes, even the Ishkur), but the Jaguar is in an especially poor spot where it cannot shine at anything.
Batelle wrote: Remove guns... Minmatar ship...
And it's a Rifter hull, too!
I find it makes me feel a bit better to think of it as adding one extra bonused weapon, or to think of the storm of rockets around a fighting Jaguar. Rifterlings - small gang frigate PvP - lowsec pirate operation, newbie-friendly, free ship program; Join today! www.rifterlings.com
Accidentally The Whole Frigate (blog) - Learning how to pew pew, one loss at a time - www.thewholefrigate.com |
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
648
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 21:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
Batelle wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote:The tiericide and rebalancing of ships breathed new life into a lot of the lesser AFs, but the Jaguar was not one of them. It only received very slight tweaks that did not change the underlying problem: the Jaguar has no niche or role it fits into. Some of its current problems include:
Underlying problem? They didn't change it because it was good. You know which other AF didn't get changed much because it was good? The Ishkur. Are they both mediocre now? Maybe, I haven't flown either since before tiericide started. Am I going anywhere with this? No. I'm inclined to disagree with your proposal because you're proposing to remove guns from a minmatar ship. Remove guns... Minmatar ship... Madness. But why the hell not? could be cool.
minmatar = fast ships with versitile fitting (shield vs armor and guns vs missiles)
examples.. typhoon, cyclone, something.. and talwar.. i forget the frig.. and the naglfar used to be able to use missiles too _______________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg
|
Milton Middleson
Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance
460
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 21:59:00 -
[9] - Quote
Petrus, regarding your suggested stats
Quote:slightly higher than current ones to accommodate for missiles being harder to fit, but not enough to make up for it completely; this will cause fitting tradeoffs resulting in (likely) less tank.
I'm not sure that would be necessary. The Jag already has a merely average tank for an assault frigate, so I'm not sure there's a need to offset the moderate gains from switching to rockets. My greater concern would be that with that set of bonuses and the Jag's speed and slot layout, an LML Jag would be able to do terrible things to pretty much any other frigate. |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
132
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 22:02:00 -
[10] - Quote
Batelle wrote:[. Am I going anywhere with this? No.
.
That made me laugh. Have a good weekend. |
|
Deryn Angrard
Quantum Cats Syndicate Samurai Pizza Cats
55
|
Posted - 2014.02.07 22:43:00 -
[11] - Quote
Sure, turn it into a missile boat if it loses no damage, tank, speed, sig or anything while changing. Jag is atm the best AF for piracy, tanky enough to kill pretty much any drones, fast enough to avoid guns, and enough damage to kill targets before next DT.
It is terrible for "honorable" 1v1 pvp, which doesnt matter if you can use the ship. |
Sugar Kyle
Calamitous-Intent Feign Disorder
303
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 00:07:00 -
[12] - Quote
Please no. I'm a very dedicated frigate pilot and spend most of my time in a Jaguar. It does several things well but it does not do everything well, it doesn't have to. It is an amazing, tanky, heavy tackle boat that can chase down interceptors with a seriousness.
Missiles will not help the Jaguar. Minmatar already has missile focused frigates and ship platforms. Not everything needs to have missiles.
My poor love of my life. Do not harm it so. Tilde soaked words from something kinda like a pirate. |
Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
90
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 00:17:00 -
[13] - Quote
I can't say I like the idea of a rocket Jaguar. I'd just as prefer getting a 4th turret on there (with a little extra pg/cpu for it) and call it at that. Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |
seth Hendar
I love you miners
437
|
Posted - 2014.02.08 00:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
STOP with this missile thingy on matars, if i wanted missiles, i'll fly a drake or any other caldari missile boat.
CCP already turnd +- half the matar ships into useless missile platform, this is bad enought |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |