Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Myryaminda
Khanid Vegabond Inc United Systems of Aridia
0
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 20:02:39 -
[1] - Quote
Hello Everyone.
I am sure everyone will be feeling that Assault Frigates are not really a ship to train in because it's role has been taken over by the T3 destroyers. As such I think it is time to brainstorm how to make the assault frigate a ship which is a viable option and different from the T3D's.
To calculate why and how it should change we have to look at the T3D's different roles. The AF used to be the small sniper or assault frigate that had a lot of tank. Both roles have been taken over by the T3D.
Although this is ofcourse a shortcut I think giving all AFs the same role bonus as the interceptor (immunity to interdiction spheres) would make it viable to train in it again.
Please let me know what you think of this idea.
|
Jonah Gravenstein
Machiavellian Space Bastards
27008
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 20:21:49 -
[2] - Quote
I think you should have posted in Features and Ideas.
Civilised behaviour is knowing that violence is barbaric, but paying other people to do it is business.
New Player FAQ
Feyd's Survival Pack
|
Tiberius NoVegas
Stellar Exploration Consortium
2
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 20:29:27 -
[3] - Quote
This does need to be moved.
how ever my 2 cent is the T3 destroyers are too easy to get into. You can get into a T3D faster then you can train up for T2D or even T2C. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18356
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 20:41:16 -
[4] - Quote
Best buff AF can get is for T3D to get nerfed. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
45222
|
Posted - 2016.10.22 21:10:31 -
[5] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Best buff AF can get is for T3D to get nerfed. This will hopefully go a long way to redressing the way Assault Frigates were essentially made irrelevant overnight.
In the end, T3Ds are never going away. That cat is out of the bag, so even post T3D balance, I hope CCP look at the AFs and find a way to differentiate them a bit more. Whether through the ability to fit 1 command burst, or some other mechanism, they were always so fun to fly.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Memphis Baas
2124
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 00:23:21 -
[6] - Quote
No clue what they can do with the AF's, but technically the difference between frigate and destroyer is the sig radius, and thus, basically, survivability vs. large ships, so maybe they can do something with that. |
Ralph King-Griffin
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
18769
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 00:24:34 -
[7] - Quote
*Cough*Ab bonus*cough*
Praposal:Un-F**k Locator Agents
Praposal:Un-F**k NPC Corps
=]|[=
|
Gneeznow
Ship spinners inc
192
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 01:11:22 -
[8] - Quote
I trained AF 5 by accident, I have a few of them lying around but rarely use them but there's a lot of cool things that could be done with them. D-scan invisibility like Combat Recons is my favourite idea though, or a 20% afterburner speed increase per level like the Succubus. |
Nikea Tiber
Backwater Enterprises RD
36
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 02:03:46 -
[9] - Quote
In my 10 years as a capsule pilot, assault frigates have *never* been in a good place.
There has been a lot if discussion on what can be done to correct the problem over the years.
The TL;DR of the entire situation is
-T3ds could use a bit of a nerf, mobility being the main problem. Destroyers should wreck frigates; it's the class role so no problems there.
-AFs need base mobilty that matches thier T1 counterparts. Speed and agilty are the lifeblood of a frigate, take those away and you are left with the weak tanking ability of small modules, assault resists don't help much as frigates havent got enough low slots to fit resists, an active tank or buffer, and damage mods, or mids to do the same thing + propulsion and tackle.
Personally, I think the role bonus assault frigates should get is resistance to cap warfare. A large neut will cap out any frigate in a single cycle. This is a bigger threat to tackle than the applied dps from a T3d, imo.
my other nano is a polycarb
|
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union SONS of BANE
572
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 02:25:46 -
[10] - Quote
I'm against more ships with bubble immunity. The ability to avoid fights is not "assault" enough ;)
Would rather see something like E-War resistances, a bit more speed / sensorstrenght and perhaps something like a bonus to overheating.
AB bonus would also be nice and perhaps the easiest fix. But's that allready the trademark of the Sansha Faction |
|
Rain6637
NulzSec
34301
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 05:08:39 -
[11] - Quote
Balance is heavily based on usage statistics, and EVE is about to have a new dynamic in the way of alpha clones. I think we'll see a shift where a ship might be objectively bad but see more use because it's accessible to alpha clones. If there's a serious problem with ships in the frigate to cruiser range, part of the solution might be in magically allowing them for alpha clones. Including assault frigates, for example.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
112
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 05:24:27 -
[12] - Quote
Personally I think AFs are too close to interceptors in terms of combat ability... t3's aren't the problem I think. |
Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
107
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 06:03:26 -
[13] - Quote
+ 20 base sig radius would actually do the trick or -10 for AFs. |
Eternus8lux8lucis
Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM
1050
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 06:20:29 -
[14] - Quote
Incredibly small sigs, perhaps more speed boosts or base speed wouldnt hurt and neut resistance, more to bigger neuts. And a hell NO to bubble immunity. OP wants AF gangs running around null sec instead of inty gangs.
Have you heard anything I've said?
You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right?
That's right.
Had to end sometime.
|
Rain6637
NulzSec
34301
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 07:02:18 -
[15] - Quote
Elsa Hayes wrote:+ 20 base sig radius would actually do the trick or -10 for AFs. hah -10 sig radius for assault frigates would be freaking awesome after skills, but I think it's a bit much. Putting T3 destroyer base sig slightly higher than T1 destroyers would seem fair though. So yeah +20.
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Vincent Pelletier
Pelletier Imports and Exports
91
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 07:05:21 -
[16] - Quote
No point in asking for, or discussing, AF rebalancing till they get T3D sorted. It's been awfully quiet on that front, I wonder why that is. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18360
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 09:08:03 -
[17] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:*Cough*Ab bonus*cough*
Tried that, it led to some "interesting" results and was rightly pulled. |
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
270
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 09:24:46 -
[18] - Quote
Well at least in fw space The T3Ds cannot enter small plexes whereas AFs can. So they actually still have a role and I see more and more of them in FW space.
"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker
|
Cristl
504
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 12:24:04 -
[19] - Quote
i like the idea of electronic warfare resistance: small ships are traditionally heavily affected by this, and resistance to ewar could be a great niche.
I think it would need to extend to webs, cap warfare etc to really shine, but it could give them the role of 'tenacious tackle', to complement fast and heavy tackle. |
Myryaminda
Khanid Vegabond Inc United Systems of Aridia
1
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 12:45:39 -
[20] - Quote
Jonah Gravenstein wrote:I think you should have posted in Features and Ideas.
Great idea! But what is the exact link to that forum part?
Edit: I found it. |
|
Algarion Getz
Aideron Corp
218
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 13:46:42 -
[21] - Quote
Simply remove T3 destroyers. Assault frigates and many other ship classes will be viable again. |
Valkin Mordirc
2618
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 15:03:19 -
[22] - Quote
Algarion Getz wrote:Simply remove T3 destroyers. Assault frigates and many other ship classes will be viable again.
removing means a completely failure on CCP's fault. And they won't do that unless they have no other option. A T3 nerf/change will be coming in soon anyways. It was promised in the November release but we will see.
#DeleteTheWeak
|
sero Hita
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
270
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 15:05:31 -
[23] - Quote
Algarion Getz wrote:Simply remove T3 destroyers. Assault frigates and many other ship classes will be viable again.
or just into a small plex with your AFs
"I'm all for pvp, don't get me wrong. I've ganked in Empire, blobed in low sec. Got T-shirts from every which-where.. But to be forced into a pvp confrontation that I didn't want is wrong ccp." RealFlisker
|
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union SONS of BANE
575
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 15:22:30 -
[24] - Quote
sero Hita wrote:Algarion Getz wrote:Simply remove T3 destroyers. Assault frigates and many other ship classes will be viable again. or just into a small plex with your AFs
The day AF's doesn't get balanced because it's only viable use is to get in to small FW plex.... That's the day CCP really would have given up in the balancing sector. |
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
710
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 15:31:34 -
[25] - Quote
New role: heavy tackle.
Immunity to warp scramble MWD shutoff Immunity to stais webifiers
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
642
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 15:38:34 -
[26] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:New role: heavy tackle.
Immunity to warp scramble MWD shutoff Immunity to stais webifiers
This is actually something I would think could work. Very different and defined roles
@lunettelulu7
|
Myryaminda
Khanid Vegabond Inc United Systems of Aridia
1
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 18:06:23 -
[27] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:New role: heavy tackle.
Immunity to warp scramble MWD shutoff Immunity to stais webifiers
I think just one of these would be great. Both of them would just be too OP. But I like these ideas. |
Tanthos
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
128
|
Posted - 2016.10.23 21:38:49 -
[28] - Quote
Immunity to Webber's gets my +1. |
Memphis Baas
2129
|
Posted - 2016.10.24 11:47:24 -
[29] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:New role: heavy tackle.
Immunity to warp scramble MWD shutoff Immunity to stais webifiers
How exactly is that an assault role? How exactly would it be viable, when the AF is still a frigate, and you're leaving it vulnerable to neuts? You want heavy tackle, use a cruiser, that's the "heavy tackle" meta.
AF's are frigates, and because they are frigates they don't tank with an armor or shield tank, not really, so those resist bonuses are somewhat crap. They help, but they don't have the same effect that a HAC's resists have compared to a T1 cruiser.
If CCP wants assault frigates to assault, i.e. apply DPS and be more resilient, then they need to enhance the AF's "frigate" defenses, i.e. sig/speed tanking, not resists. Speed tanking is interceptor territory, so the only thing left is to reduce sig. radius.
Or, they could give immunity or resistance to anti-frigate measures, as suggested previously. Of those, neuts are the highest threat, and as far as I know no subcap has neut immunity, so it would be a unique ability for AF's only, making them a lot more desirable in all sorts of "assault" roles.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18364
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 05:19:55 -
[30] - Quote
AF don't need any new bonuses they are already good ships. The problem is the t3d which have utterly wiped out AF usefulness in the same way they completely invalidated the T1 destroyers. If it wasn't for the fact the sabre has a bubble launcher that too would have been dumped on the pile of useless ships.
The key here is getting t3d nerfed down to the level of destroyers. No more tiny sig, no more crazy high speeds, no more high level cruiser tanks and no more overpowering firepower and range. You must be able to kill these things with a t1 frigate like a t1 frigate can kill a sabre, then AF will be able to shine like they did before t3d broke ship balance. |
|
Rain6637
NulzSec
34307
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 05:27:37 -
[31] - Quote
Everyone keeps saying T3D but I think what you mean is "Svipul" lol
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Nikea Tiber
Backwater Enterprises RD
37
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 06:46:14 -
[32] - Quote
Re: t3ds invalidating other ship classes.
A non shitfit tech 1 dessie will scrap an AF; thrasher and coercer in particular, so this was a "problem" even before tactical destroyers. Not as much a problem as evidence the "food chain" in eve works, though.
Destroyers wreck frigates; that is their role. Assuming equal pilot skill and fitting level, a destoyer has got a snowballs chance in hell vs medium and even some large short range turrets by merit of a destoyers poor mobility to sig radius ratio (i.e. cruisers, BCs, and short range BS' all have little trouble vaporizing destroyers within disruption range).
So yeah, tactical destroyers are too strong in terms of use of propulsion mode or defensive mode to improve the sig:mobility ratio to survive or escape encounters that should have scrapped any destroyer. This is an entirely different topic, though.
In terms of making AFs strong enough or nerfing tactical destroyers hard enough that an AF can reliably solo a tactical destroyer it is never going to happen. It shouldn't.
EWAR resistance is probably the best baked in role for AFs; considering that with all types, tracking isnt involved so avoiding it through speed isnt possible. In cases of ewar like cap neutralization, the problem is accentuated because if you are in range of a large neut and locked your cap is gone as soon as they trigger the neut even if you are at velocities that keep you safe from turrets and miasiles. Since they are frigates, they don't have particularly impressive sensor strength or locking range, so again are easily jammed, or damped to where they are forced to operate within web and scram ranges.
Recieving actual frigate mobility as well as keeping an extra turret or launcher (vs the t1 base hull) + an application bonus would ensure that it doesn't hit too hard above its weight class, but is extremely useful in removing hostile hostile ewar and providing fast tackle in most other circumstances. Fittings could also use adjustment; they should be able to fit the most power and cpu hungry high slot modules expected for the hull as well as fit standard tank, damage, and tackle mods with a maxed advanced fitting skills character without having to make *really* tough decisions. Isn't the assault frigate the pinnacle of a combat frigate? There should be fitting space to match without severe limitations.
my other nano is a polycarb
|
Elmund Egivand
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
1704
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 08:31:30 -
[33] - Quote
I think that, indeed, the assault frigate is too slow for their anti-tackle anti-frigate beefcake tanky murderboat. It's ridiculous. The HACs are either equal, slightly slower or slightly faster (or alot faster in some cases) than their T1 counterparts. So why is it that the AFs, which are supposed to be the frigate equivalent of these cruiser-sized murderboats, SLOWER? Is there even a reason to be fitting an AF other than a Destroyer for murdering frigs? Beyond inviting dudes to come and have a go at you because they think AFs are shite, that is.
A Minmatar warship is like a rusting Beetle with 500 horsepower Cardillac engines in the rear, armour plating bolted to chassis and a M2 Browning stuck on top.
|
Gregorius Goldstein
Ze One Man Show
806
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 09:08:15 -
[34] - Quote
When I made lists with ships to train I was surprised by the long training time for Assault Frigs. Perhaps if T3 Dessis took longer to train and Assault Frigs were a short train they could be viable ships for newbies like me? Perhaps make them cheap to build too? And/or make them trainable for Alpha accounts?
Or just give Assault frigs above avarege slots and flexible bonuses, a bit like the Gnosis. That would make them a wildcard and you woul never know what they have fitted until you engage them? |
Rain6637
NulzSec
34309
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 09:52:54 -
[35] - Quote
welll signature radius is kind of important, and in terms of DPS per meter of signature radius I'm pretty sure assault frigates are the highest. I guess I agree with the mobility buffs such as a bonus against web effects so the assault frigate can take advantage of its signature radius.
I like the web reduction the most because that's the range where two ships equalize each other. At that point what matters is who brought more ship.
If not a web effect reduction I could agree with a 50% web range bonus so assault frigates can have a good chance to kite, but more importantly take advantage of their signature radius.
With skills, assault frigates have the sig of a light drone. 200 dps in a scout drone would be kind of awesome. I'll take 5 please
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Rain6637
NulzSec
34310
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 10:34:19 -
[36] - Quote
Wait. Web range bonus would be dumb because then they'd have to kite outside their own gun range. lol
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Pandora Carrollon
Dawn of a New Horizon The Republic.
675
|
Posted - 2016.10.25 22:28:01 -
[37] - Quote
To me an AF should be the ultimate hit and run raider. Very fast, can hit hard (high alpha) but low loiter time.
So I agree with the -10% sig radius, maybe even -20%. Also increase base speed by at least 10% or give AB +20% speed boost.
Pinpoint active targeting modules only useable on AF's making them ECM proof, but they need to take up a Medium Slot. Essentially the ultimate target painter. Also makes them awesome single target blasters.
Allow them to use Medium size weapons by giving them the energy reductions like the BC gun platforms get when using large guns.
Reduce native tanking by 10% making them more vulnerable than their normal frigate cousins.
This would essentially make them T3 Assault Frigates but they would be nasty customers.
8 Golden Rules of EVE GÇó EVE is entirely PvP
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
113
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 00:15:21 -
[38] - Quote
Pandora Carrollon wrote:To me an AF should be the ultimate hit and run raider. Very fast, can hit hard (high alpha) but low loiter time.
So I agree with the -10% sig radius, maybe even -20%. Also increase base speed by at least 10% or give AB +20% speed boost.
Pinpoint active targeting modules only useable on AF's making them ECM proof, but they need to take up a Medium Slot. Essentially the ultimate target painter. Also makes them awesome single target blasters.
Allow them to use Medium size weapons by giving them the energy reductions like the BC gun platforms get when using large guns.
Reduce native tanking by 10% making them more vulnerable than their normal frigate cousins.
This would essentially make them T3 Assault Frigates but they would be nasty customers. I could see this, but keep the small weapons and give them more cpu and power grid. AFs are a NIGHTMARE to tech 2 fit even with max skills. They might just be the hardest sub cap to fit due to CPU and PG. |
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
203
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 04:14:01 -
[39] - Quote
Tiberius NoVegas wrote:This does need to be moved.
how ever my 2 cent is the T3 destroyers are too easy to get into. You can get into a T3D faster then you can train up for T2D or even T2C.
its not that T3D are too easy to get into.
Say you prolonged the time to get into it something ridiculous like 10 years.
10 years later, T3D are what you should be in and not an AF.
The problem is T3, not AF.
Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
|
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
203
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 04:14:56 -
[40] - Quote
Pandora Carrollon wrote:To me an AF should be the ultimate hit and run raider. Very fast, can hit hard (high alpha) but low loiter time.
So I agree with the -10% sig radius, maybe even -20%. Also increase base speed by at least 10% or give AB +20% speed boost.
Pinpoint active targeting modules only useable on AF's making them ECM proof, but they need to take up a Medium Slot. Essentially the ultimate target painter. Also makes them awesome single target blasters.
Allow them to use Medium size weapons by giving them the energy reductions like the BC gun platforms get when using large guns.
Reduce native tanking by 10% making them more vulnerable than their normal frigate cousins.
This would essentially make them T3 Assault Frigates but they would be nasty customers.
Oh, you mean like interceptors?
Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
|
|
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
203
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 04:19:03 -
[41] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Khan Wrenth wrote:New role: heavy tackle.
Immunity to warp scramble MWD shutoff Immunity to stais webifiers How exactly is that an assault role? How exactly would it be viable, when the AF is still a frigate, and you're leaving it vulnerable to neuts? You want heavy tackle, use a cruiser, that's the "heavy tackle" meta. AF's are frigates, and because they are frigates they don't tank with an armor or shield tank, not really, so those resist bonuses are somewhat crap. They help, but they don't have the same effect that a HAC's resists have compared to a T1 cruiser. If CCP wants assault frigates to assault, i.e. apply DPS and be more resilient, then they need to enhance the AF's "frigate" defenses, i.e. sig/speed tanking, not resists. Speed tanking is interceptor territory, so the only thing left is to reduce sig. radius. Or, they could give immunity or resistance to anti-frigate measures, as suggested previously. Of those, neuts are the highest threat, and as far as I know no subcap has neut immunity, so it would be a unique ability for AF's only, making them a lot more desirable in all sorts of "assault" roles.
RELATIVE to T1 frigates, T2 frigates are superior in EHP on base stats. That's what assault ships are designed for: lots of armor, lots of firepower.
Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
|
Nikea Tiber
Backwater Enterprises RD
38
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 08:23:24 -
[42] - Quote
Pandora Carrollon wrote:To me an AF should be the ultimate hit and run raider. Very fast, can hit hard (high alpha) but low loiter time.
So I agree with the -10% sig radius, maybe even -20%. Also increase base speed by at least 10% or give AB +20% speed boost.
Pinpoint active targeting modules only useable on AF's making them ECM proof, but they need to take up a Medium Slot. Essentially the ultimate target painter. Also makes them awesome single target blasters.
Allow them to use Medium size weapons by giving them the energy reductions like the BC gun platforms get when using large guns.
In your first sentance you are describing skirmish rather than assault. Further increasing the speed over parity with the t1 counterpart is creating another class of interceptors... the very definition of a skirmisher.
EWAR resistance shouldn't be a module; for the most part there are already modules that give a certain amount of resistance or cou teract the forms of existing EWAR. As it is, mids are tight on all AFs, this needs to be a role bonus, not some new module.
Medium guns? You are proposing interceptors that have medium guns? I have perfect gunnery skills and a 5% tracking implant and still easily overspeed the tracking of my own SMALL turrets when I am flying an inty. Hell, a few of the faster t1 frigates are capable of it. You don't get high damage from medium turrets at or vs high speeds and angular velocities; you get no damage. This is why destroyers have a lot of small turrets rather than a few mediums. A frigate with medium guns would be useless at engaging other frigates, and at enough velocity to avoid getting hit by cruisers, can't hit cruisers itself.
ABCs work because the projection range of large turrets greatly reduces the drawback of having slower tracking and larger sig resolution on the turrets, and also because they aren't large turrets mounted on a cruiser hull.
my other nano is a polycarb
|
Agamemna Sheridan
Die Gesandten des Todes Worlds United Fedo Force
8
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 13:11:15 -
[43] - Quote
No bubble imunity please.
We allready have to mutch (allmost) uncatchable interceptor gangs out there.
In order to fix them, I would suggest to first fix their massive fitting problems. Many AF are way to tight in PG and CPU. I mean look at the Retribution vs the Punisher.
The Punisher is Tech 1 and has 175 CPU and 83,75 PG The Retribution is Tech 2 and has 175 CPU and wooping 70 PG while having one highslot more.
Thats just a slap in the face.
A Assault Frigate should easyly be able to fitt the "big" small guns without gimping the entire fitt. AF should be the hard hitters in a fast moving gang. Tackling is for interceptors. |
Galinius Valgani
Albertross Mining Corp. Off The Reservation.
42
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 13:27:31 -
[44] - Quote
I think we should wait for the 08.11. when the T3D nerf comes. Then decide if we really need a buff to all AFs or if there are only very poor performing ships needing a buff? I am already thinking they are changing to much in Ascension to be honest. Let the new Meta settle. On Grid Boosting Nerfed T3d Mining and Production Shakeup( EC )
Later TM |
Rain6637
NulzSec
34321
|
Posted - 2016.10.26 13:39:09 -
[45] - Quote
Clearly the solution is introduce a T3 frigate that has 3 modes: Heavy Assault, Interceptor, and ?
Was there talk of introducing T3 everything, including Battleships?
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Pandora Carrollon
Dawn of a New Horizon The Republic.
678
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 00:11:38 -
[46] - Quote
Skirmish vs Assault Skirmish and Assault are actually similar tactically to me. The difference is normally a line between just there to damage or to have follow up and take an objective.
If the idea is to STAY and pound, then speed is less important and tank is more important but the idea of a frigate that can take damage runs counter to the class, so that definition of 'assualt' doesn't really work well when talking about a frigate. Thus, I can only see the other side of it being 'hit and run' or what is being called skirmishing. I don't know of a class called Skirmish Frigate either.
EWAR Frigates are very suscptible to EW as even a drone can take down their sensors without module backup help, and given the breadth of ECM types and jamming, a Frigate can't fit one size fits all defenses. So it's luck of the draw if you fit any kind of ECCM and hope it works. If you had something similar to a super target painter that only worked for t he painting ship and let all the weapons track on that, have it cost power, cpu, and a medium slot, as well as being restricted to ONLY AF's and maybe a skill requirement, then you have something that makes the Assault Frigate viable again. When you REALLY have to hit that medium/small target, send in the AF's.
TANK If the base tank is reduced by 10% but speed bonuses increased, then the AF really becomes a speed tank only ship. It forces it to be flown by a competent pilot and make darned sure it avoids being multi-webbed, but the super webbers out there will still take it down to a killable speed. So it's not invincible, but it means that if it's flown right, it's nasty.
The options I laid out would make these ships very dangerous to larger ships, especially in groups, but they can be countered effectively if you know their weaknesses. If they were slowed down enough, they'd pop almost worse than Stealth Bombers. It's just another variant on the Glass Cannon concept.
8 Golden Rules of EVE GÇó EVE is entirely PvP
|
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
204
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 02:18:53 -
[47] - Quote
Pandora Carrollon wrote:Skirmish vs Assault Skirmish and Assault are actually similar tactically to me. The difference is normally a line between just there to damage or to have follow up and take an objective.
If the idea is to STAY and pound, then speed is less important and tank is more important but the idea of a frigate that can take damage runs counter to the class, so that definition of 'assualt' doesn't really work well when talking about a frigate. Thus, I can only see the other side of it being 'hit and run' or what is being called skirmishing. I don't know of a class called Skirmish Frigate either.
EWAR Frigates are very suscptible to EW as even a drone can take down their sensors without module backup help, and given the breadth of ECM types and jamming, a Frigate can't fit one size fits all defenses. So it's luck of the draw if you fit any kind of ECCM and hope it works. If you had something similar to a super target painter that only worked for t he painting ship and let all the weapons track on that, have it cost power, cpu, and a medium slot, as well as being restricted to ONLY AF's and maybe a skill requirement, then you have something that makes the Assault Frigate viable again. When you REALLY have to hit that medium/small target, send in the AF's.
TANK If the base tank is reduced by 10% but speed bonuses increased, then the AF really becomes a speed tank only ship. It forces it to be flown by a competent pilot and make darned sure it avoids being multi-webbed, but the super webbers out there will still take it down to a killable speed. So it's not invincible, but it means that if it's flown right, it's nasty.
The options I laid out would make these ships very dangerous to larger ships, especially in groups, but they can be countered effectively if you know their weaknesses. If they were slowed down enough, they'd pop almost worse than Stealth Bombers. It's just another variant on the Glass Cannon concept.
You keep suggesting that frigates are not meant for tanking by EHP and are meant for tanking by speed, but that does not compute on the frigate vs frigate level.
Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
|
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
204
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 02:38:16 -
[48] - Quote
Nikea Tiber wrote:Pandora Carrollon wrote:To me an AF should be the ultimate hit and run raider. Very fast, can hit hard (high alpha) but low loiter time.
So I agree with the -10% sig radius, maybe even -20%. Also increase base speed by at least 10% or give AB +20% speed boost.
Pinpoint active targeting modules only useable on AF's making them ECM proof, but they need to take up a Medium Slot. Essentially the ultimate target painter. Also makes them awesome single target blasters.
Allow them to use Medium size weapons by giving them the energy reductions like the BC gun platforms get when using large guns.
In your first sentance you are describing skirmish rather than assault. Further increasing the speed over parity with the t1 counterpart is creating another class of interceptors... the very definition of a skirmisher. EWAR resistance shouldn't be a module; for the most part there are already modules that give a certain amount of resistance or cou teract the forms of existing EWAR. As it is, mids are tight on all AFs, this needs to be a role bonus, not some new module. Medium guns? You are proposing interceptors that have medium guns? I have perfect gunnery skills and a 5% tracking implant and still easily overspeed the tracking of my own SMALL turrets when I am flying an inty. Hell, a few of the faster t1 frigates are capable of it. You don't get high damage from medium turrets at or vs high speeds and angular velocities; you get no damage. This is why destroyers have a lot of small turrets rather than a few mediums. A frigate with medium guns would be useless at engaging other frigates, and at enough velocity to avoid getting hit by cruisers, can't hit cruisers itself. ABCs work because the projection range of large turrets greatly reduces the drawback of having slower tracking and larger sig resolution on the turrets, and also because they aren't large turrets mounted on a cruiser hull.
Interceptors can't hit that hard, they're for pinning people down.
Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
113
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 02:39:16 -
[49] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote:Nikea Tiber wrote:Pandora Carrollon wrote:To me an AF should be the ultimate hit and run raider. Very fast, can hit hard (high alpha) but low loiter time.
So I agree with the -10% sig radius, maybe even -20%. Also increase base speed by at least 10% or give AB +20% speed boost.
Pinpoint active targeting modules only useable on AF's making them ECM proof, but they need to take up a Medium Slot. Essentially the ultimate target painter. Also makes them awesome single target blasters.
Allow them to use Medium size weapons by giving them the energy reductions like the BC gun platforms get when using large guns.
In your first sentance you are describing skirmish rather than assault. Further increasing the speed over parity with the t1 counterpart is creating another class of interceptors... the very definition of a skirmisher. EWAR resistance shouldn't be a module; for the most part there are already modules that give a certain amount of resistance or cou teract the forms of existing EWAR. As it is, mids are tight on all AFs, this needs to be a role bonus, not some new module. Medium guns? You are proposing interceptors that have medium guns? I have perfect gunnery skills and a 5% tracking implant and still easily overspeed the tracking of my own SMALL turrets when I am flying an inty. Hell, a few of the faster t1 frigates are capable of it. You don't get high damage from medium turrets at or vs high speeds and angular velocities; you get no damage. This is why destroyers have a lot of small turrets rather than a few mediums. A frigate with medium guns would be useless at engaging other frigates, and at enough velocity to avoid getting hit by cruisers, can't hit cruisers itself. ABCs work because the projection range of large turrets greatly reduces the drawback of having slower tracking and larger sig resolution on the turrets, and also because they aren't large turrets mounted on a cruiser hull. Interceptors can't hit that hard, they're for pinning people down. Their DPS is very close to AFs tho.
|
13kr1d1
Hedion University Amarr Empire
204
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 02:48:56 -
[50] - Quote
I agree, and interceptors need a nerf in that field.
They can already run 8.0 warp and have great align times. Those two bonuses alone should be the basis of the chassis, not giving them more damage on top.
Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
|
|
xXuber-NitsheXx
94
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 02:54:59 -
[51] - Quote
13kr1d1 wrote:I agree, and interceptors need a nerf in that field.
They can already run 8.0 warp and have great align times. Those two bonuses alone should be the basis of the chassis, not giving them more damage on top.
no no no no no no no no no no no no no NO!
no one is touching my Shaleen
no nerfs for her!
She is my one true love.
Thieving pirates discuss INTEGRITY; Anarchist gankers give us LAWS; and Whoring merc's cry then blow off clients with INSULTS.
Up is down and down is up in the C&P Forum.
|
Nikea Tiber
Backwater Enterprises RD
38
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 04:22:16 -
[52] - Quote
I wasnt suggesting any changes to inties.
@Pandora
A frigate with medium guns would only be dangerous to a BC or BS. Due to tracking and sig resolution, medium guns on a frigate won't hit **** if you are maintaining transversal, and if you reduce your velocity to hit your target you get gibbed. Speed is important to any frigate as the damage avoidance greatly amplifies the limited repair capacity small modules have. If your intent is to stay on a target until one of you pops (assault), being able to retain speed in tackle range is paramount. There arent many ships of any class that don't need to avoid being webbed by multiple sources.
Assault means you force a hard engagement that you will be unable to extract from; skirmish is the intent to never commit 100% to a fight in the attempt to keep the tactical situation liquid. Mobility has nothing to do with this as higher mobility is desireable for either tactic; you can't assail a target you can't catch. AFs don't need to step on the toes of inties by gaining a lot of speed; they just need parity with the t1 base hull.
No "super painter." Hull based role bonus to reduce the effectiveness of ewar targeting you. AFs as an entire ship class haven't got enough mids. You are suggesting to make this problem worse by introducing a mandatory bandage module.
@13kr1d1 I think you misunderstood what i meant, reading Pandora's first post she is basically suggesting that AFs become interceptors with medium weaponry, an idea that I think is a poor one due to turret mechanics. While I applaud any brainpower put to use to fix the liminal state of uselessness AFs have always been in, I do feel the need to point out what should be obvious problems.
my other nano is a polycarb
|
Elmund Egivand
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
1716
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 04:49:27 -
[53] - Quote
Brigadine Ferathine wrote:13kr1d1 wrote:Nikea Tiber wrote:Pandora Carrollon wrote:To me an AF should be the ultimate hit and run raider. Very fast, can hit hard (high alpha) but low loiter time.
So I agree with the -10% sig radius, maybe even -20%. Also increase base speed by at least 10% or give AB +20% speed boost.
Pinpoint active targeting modules only useable on AF's making them ECM proof, but they need to take up a Medium Slot. Essentially the ultimate target painter. Also makes them awesome single target blasters.
Allow them to use Medium size weapons by giving them the energy reductions like the BC gun platforms get when using large guns.
In your first sentance you are describing skirmish rather than assault. Further increasing the speed over parity with the t1 counterpart is creating another class of interceptors... the very definition of a skirmisher. EWAR resistance shouldn't be a module; for the most part there are already modules that give a certain amount of resistance or cou teract the forms of existing EWAR. As it is, mids are tight on all AFs, this needs to be a role bonus, not some new module. Medium guns? You are proposing interceptors that have medium guns? I have perfect gunnery skills and a 5% tracking implant and still easily overspeed the tracking of my own SMALL turrets when I am flying an inty. Hell, a few of the faster t1 frigates are capable of it. You don't get high damage from medium turrets at or vs high speeds and angular velocities; you get no damage. This is why destroyers have a lot of small turrets rather than a few mediums. A frigate with medium guns would be useless at engaging other frigates, and at enough velocity to avoid getting hit by cruisers, can't hit cruisers itself. ABCs work because the projection range of large turrets greatly reduces the drawback of having slower tracking and larger sig resolution on the turrets, and also because they aren't large turrets mounted on a cruiser hull. Interceptors can't hit that hard, they're for pinning people down. Their DPS is very close to AFs tho.
The Taranis says 'hi!'
A Minmatar warship is like a rusting Beetle with 500 horsepower Cardillac engines in the rear, armour plating bolted to chassis and a M2 Browning stuck on top.
|
Vincent Pelletier
Pelletier Imports and Exports
93
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 05:37:51 -
[54] - Quote
It's encouraging to see that no matter how silly some of CCP's idea might be at times, players have far more badly thought out, super overpowered craptacular "balancing" brain farts. |
Nikea Tiber
Backwater Enterprises RD
38
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 09:38:13 -
[55] - Quote
To every enyo pilot reading this thread:
How would you feel about an enyo with the same base speed and agility as the incursus (or even the tristan, for that matter), a bit more fitting so you could make use of the utility high, and a role bonus that includes ewar resistance (not immunity)?
my other nano is a polycarb
|
Memphis Baas
2140
|
Posted - 2016.10.27 12:08:52 -
[56] - Quote
Vincent Pelletier wrote:It's encouraging to see that no matter how silly some of CCP's idea might be at times, players have far more badly thought out, super overpowered craptacular "balancing" brain farts.
Are we not meeting the quality requirements of General Discussion forum posts?
Have CCP not completely ignored this thread?
|
Brigadine Ferathine
The Valiant Vanguard The Volition Cult
113
|
Posted - 2016.10.28 02:35:10 -
[57] - Quote
Memphis Baas wrote:Vincent Pelletier wrote:It's encouraging to see that no matter how silly some of CCP's idea might be at times, players have far more badly thought out, super overpowered craptacular "balancing" brain farts. Are we not meeting the quality requirements of General Discussion forum posts? Have CCP not completely ignored this thread? Well... I mean they ignore everyone except CSM cronies... |
Elmund Egivand
Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation
1721
|
Posted - 2016.10.28 03:44:19 -
[58] - Quote
Nikea Tiber wrote:To every enyo pilot reading this thread:
How would you feel about an enyo with the same base speed and agility as the incursus (or even the tristan, for that matter), a bit more fitting so you could make use of the utility high, and a role bonus that includes ewar resistance (not immunity)?
I say just do it like what HAC did with T1 cruiser. Bring agility and speed to somewhere in line with T1, just make them tankier and more DPS to make it clear that these guys are specialised for killing stuff. That way people might actually bring them to back up the Interceptors in small gangs for when stuff needs to die. They might actually be able to keep up for once.
A Minmatar warship is like a rusting Beetle with 500 horsepower Cardillac engines in the rear, armour plating bolted to chassis and a M2 Browning stuck on top.
|
Khan Wrenth
Ore Oppression Prevention and Salvation
712
|
Posted - 2016.10.29 13:51:41 -
[59] - Quote
You know, AF give some decent bang for the buck. They're considerably cheaper than T3D and all that, so they're perfectly viable for semi-cheap roams and such. Someone suggested that AFs be given more fitting...if CCP gave AF's, across the board, a hefty increase in fitting power, coupled with some speed (each AF should be between 5-10% faster than their tech 1 counterparts), that might be enough to give them a role of "relatively cheap but still potent general roaming ship".
Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
|
The Golden Serpent
The Abrahadabra Institute
194
|
Posted - 2016.10.29 13:58:50 -
[60] - Quote
I fly the Retribution somewhat. I have Level IV mastery on them, so I keep one to undock in when I fancy it. But after having more experience flying things like faction frigs, T1 destroyers even, and interceptors, I find AF slow, underpowered and clunky compared to a fast Dragoon. They are not what I expected when I started training into them. However, they are beautiful ships and I like to fly them to be different sometimes. But they are just fluff, pretty, mostly useless when compared to other options, and way overpriced.
In most cases a Tormentor can do the same job for much less cost. To fix the problem I would give the Retribution a 10% small energy turret damage bonus, like the confessor. This would make them more desireable, but it would not replace the confessor. I don't know if this would be enough to get people to start flying them, but it would be a start.
Immunity to EWAR would make them indispensable. |
|
Mike Adoulin
Adolescent Radioactive Pirate Hamsters
1903
|
Posted - 2016.10.30 02:57:13 -
[61] - Quote
My opinion?
FWIW I would have them get a -95% role bonus to MWD sig bloom.
And have them ignore the cap penalty for fitting a MWD.
And that's it.
Then see what happens.
Everything in EVE is a trap.
And if it isn't, it's your job to make it a trap...:)
You want to know what immorality in EVE Online looks like? Look no further than Ripard "Jester" Teg.
Chribba is the Chuck Norris of EVE.
|
DSpite Culhach
310
|
Posted - 2016.10.30 07:30:58 -
[62] - Quote
Forgive my ignorance on the topic, but Isn't the gap between T1 and T2 frigs growing a little larger then it should already?
If T2 get a new boost, how many T1's will it take to kill one? We could probably at least then double that number if they are all Alpha players.
Kind of scary.
I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.
|
Tanthos
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
133
|
Posted - 2016.10.30 09:45:08 -
[63] - Quote
Some good suggestions here. I don't see why most can't be implemented separately for each faction.
Minmatar AFs get web immunity. Gallente AFs get weapon disruptor immunity. Caldari AFs get ecm immunity. Amarr AFs get neutralizer immunity. |
Kethen T'val
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
23
|
Posted - 2016.12.21 23:39:24 -
[64] - Quote
Tanthos wrote:Some good suggestions here. I don't see why most can't be implemented separately for each faction.
Minmatar AFs get web immunity. Gallente AFs get weapon disruptor immunity. Caldari AFs get ecm immunity. Amarr AFs get neutralizer immunity.
This is a good idea. Id like to see a small sig drop to this
EDIT: Oh I just mininecroed this. I rock! |
Rain6637
NulzSec
34589
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 01:57:11 -
[65] - Quote
Tanthos wrote:Some good suggestions here. I don't see why most can't be implemented separately for each faction.
Minmatar AFs get web immunity. Gallente AFs get weapon disruptor immunity. Caldari AFs get ecm immunity. Amarr AFs get neutralizer immunity. yeah see amarr ships have these things called diodes and we also don't include the hull itself as our ground so
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Matthias Ancaladron
Wrath of Angels
37
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 12:15:55 -
[66] - Quote
Remove t3 ships.
Problem solved |
Salvos Rhoska
1727
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 13:13:44 -
[67] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Best buff AF can get is for T3D to get nerfed.
This.
The AF situation is indication of the downsides and existence of power-creeping.
Nerfing/naturalising over-performing ships is a more rational choice, than increasing power-creep by buffing AFs, which then cascades down onto other hulls being inadequate in relative comparison.
PvE v PvP
<>
Old School Exploration
<>
CODE Licenses
<>
CODE Special Agent
|
Zimmy Zeta
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
59940
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 17:17:08 -
[68] - Quote
Oh yay, necro thread..I love the smell of dead meat in the morning...
@ topic: I don't think AFs need a role bonus- that would only force them into a distinct, specialized role and I happen to like the fact that they are mostly versatile all rounders. But what needs to be done is take a good long look at each single AF and balance them on a ship by ship base- especially things like speed, PG and CPU should be adjusted for many ships. And when I say "many", I mainly mean the Jaguar. Sure, the eased fitting requirements for small arties helped a bit, and yet still I need perfect fitting skills and 2 fitting mods to fit the weapon system this ship was designed for. Adding insult to injury, here's CCP's official in game description of the Jag:
CCP wrote:The Jaguar is a versatile ship capable of reaching speeds unmatched by any other assault-class vessel. While comparatively weak on the defensive front it sports great flexibility, allowing pilots considerable latitude in configuring their loadouts for whatever circumstances they find themselves in. U WOT M8 ?????
I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it.
Yes, I do feel bad about it.
|
Mr Mieyli
Hedion University Amarr Empire
320
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 17:28:03 -
[69] - Quote
AF needs to do what it's name suggests, it needs to be able to be right in the action. I'd see a rework route as having the AF as the lasting tackle against bigger ships, able to sig-tank with high resists helping mitigate damage. It would be the annoying fly that's impossible to swat without lighter support, holding a point on you. To do this it would probably need to have it's sigradius looked at and perhaps switching the MWD bonus for an AB speed bonus for better sig-tanking and sustain.
The interceptor is the ultra-high speed tackle for when you really want to catch something, the AF will be the frig of choice when you want to have a sturdy point on field for the length of the fight.
A case for more AoE in EvE
|
Lady Ayeipsia
Perkone Caldari State
1278
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 17:31:13 -
[70] - Quote
During my time in Red vs Blue, we had many Frigate only themed weekends. Some allowed only T1. Some allowed pirate and faction but no T2 drugs. Most allowed all.
One thing I saw repeatedly was that in weekends were T2 were not allowed, the pirate frigate reigned supreme. The problem with this was the cost of the pirate frigs. Those who could afford them had a great weekend. Those with less isk could only hope to fly in fleets and pray there was no all pirate frig fleet already out there.
Yet a strange thing happened when we allowed all frigs including T2. The dominance of the pirate frigs diminished. Yes they were still strong but the T2 could balance out against the faction. Yes Assault frigs are harder to skill into but the lower cost opened more doors for most players.
Given all that, the simplest way to fix Assault Frigs is to let T2 frigate into faction warfare Novice plexes. AFs gain a new role, pirate frigates in novice pieces have a counter, and AFs have a new place to play. |
|
W0lf Crendraven
Welfcorp
465
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 17:47:03 -
[71] - Quote
T3ds have nothing to do with AFs, Afs, sucked pre t3ds too. The reason AFs suck is cause they have the mobility of a t1 cruiser with bad performance stats while having no range.
But they are an extremely boring ship class so they are fine being obsolete. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18494
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 17:56:17 -
[72] - Quote
W0lf Crendraven wrote:T3ds have nothing to do with AFs, Afs, sucked pre t3ds too. The reason AFs suck is cause they have the mobility of a t1 cruiser with bad performance stats while having no range.
But they are an extremely boring ship class so they are fine being obsolete.
AF were heavily used before t3d came around, to the point where they were an effective and much loved fleet doctrine. Pre T3D you could find many whine threads from people getting popped by the likes of the ishkur and the vengeance was a well known damage sponge.
T3D have invalidated a lot of ship classes from t1 frigates right up the the stabber. |
W0lf Crendraven
Welfcorp
465
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 18:08:38 -
[73] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:W0lf Crendraven wrote:T3ds have nothing to do with AFs, Afs, sucked pre t3ds too. The reason AFs suck is cause they have the mobility of a t1 cruiser with bad performance stats while having no range.
But they are an extremely boring ship class so they are fine being obsolete. AF were heavily used before t3d came around, to the point where they were an effective and much loved fleet doctrine. Pre T3D you could find many whine threads from people getting popped by the likes of the ishkur and the vengeance was a well known damage sponge. T3D have invalidated a lot of ship classes from t1 frigates right up the the stabber.
Nope, pre t3d people flew dictors or pirate/faction frigates. The AF has been dead before t3ds were even there. Afs dont kite, afs arent fast enough to catch kiters, afs arent strong/small enough to outbrawl other brawlers, in a kiting meta that means no one ever uses the ships.
And t3ds havnt invalidated anything as such, the stabber in particular got a giant buff during svipul online days as it was one of the ships that killed t3ds for free (dual med neut brawling one). |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18494
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 18:23:08 -
[74] - Quote
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Nope, pre t3d people flew dictors or pirate/faction frigates. The AF has been dead before t3ds were even there. Afs dont kite, afs arent fast enough to catch kiters, afs arent strong/small enough to outbrawl other brawlers, in a kiting meta that means no one ever uses the ships.
So the few years where I had to adapt my megathon to fly in harpy fleet while they ripped other, far heavier fleets didn't happen? The dual MASB hawk and god tank vengeance were never complained about in FW? the Enyo didn't hit things like a hand grenade?
W0lf Crendraven wrote: And t3ds havnt invalidated anything as such, the stabber in particular got a giant buff during svipul online days as it was one of the ships that killed t3ds for free (dual med neut brawling one).
Stabber is out classed by the svipul even after the nerf. Hell, thanks to the added e-war resistance the only small ships that could mess with them have been neutered so there is nothing at or below destroyers than can compete now. |
nezroy
Nice Clan
46
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 18:36:46 -
[75] - Quote
Khan Wrenth wrote:New role: heavy tackle.
Immunity to warp scramble MWD shutoff Immunity to stais webifiers
Would rather they just got a ~100% AB speed bonus, like the sansha pirate ship line does. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18494
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 18:40:20 -
[76] - Quote
nezroy wrote:Khan Wrenth wrote:New role: heavy tackle.
Immunity to warp scramble MWD shutoff Immunity to stais webifiers Would rather they just got a ~100% AB speed bonus, like the sansha pirate ship line does.
They were given an AB bonus, it lead to some horribly overpowered setups
|
W0lf Crendraven
Welfcorp
465
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 19:09:27 -
[77] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Nope, pre t3d people flew dictors or pirate/faction frigates. The AF has been dead before t3ds were even there. Afs dont kite, afs arent fast enough to catch kiters, afs arent strong/small enough to outbrawl other brawlers, in a kiting meta that means no one ever uses the ships.
So the few years where I had to adapt my megathon to fly in harpy fleet while they ripped other, far heavier fleets didn't happen? The dual MASB hawk and god tank vengeance were never complained about in FW? the Enyo didn't hit things like a hand grenade? W0lf Crendraven wrote: And t3ds havnt invalidated anything as such, the stabber in particular got a giant buff during svipul online days as it was one of the ships that killed t3ds for free (dual med neut brawling one).
Stabber is out classed by the svipul even after the nerf. Hell, thanks to the added e-war resistance the only small ships that could mess with them have been neutered so there is nothing at or below destroyers than can compete now.
Harpy fleets were a thing yes, but neither the hawk (after the asb nerf), the vengeance nor the enyo were ever considered that great, they did well when the only other thing that could enter a small was a t2 dessie, which pre dictor buffs were horrible. There was a short peroid of time when the AF was good, but then the cruiser buff happened - which took away the ability to easily beat cruisers, hmls got nerfed into the ground which killed the missile matchups (cause people were forced to use assault missiles/rlmls) and other ships were buffed within the small meta. A dictor will eat a AF alive, the comet beats most, as does the slicer and so on.
And lets not forget the double damp lml spam meta that covered a long time pre t3d where afs were totally ****.
Even CDs are massively superior to AFs (well to be fair, they are extremely OP, but solo pvpers dont all have link skills yet). |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18496
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 20:21:58 -
[78] - Quote
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Harpy fleets were a thing yes, but neither the hawk (after the asb nerf), the vengeance nor the enyo were ever considered that great, they did well when the only other thing that could enter a small was a t2 dessie, which pre dictor buffs were horrible. There was a short peroid of time when the AF was good, but then the cruiser buff happened - which took away the ability to easily beat cruisers, hmls got nerfed into the ground which killed the missile matchups (cause people were forced to use assault missiles/rlmls) and other ships were buffed within the small meta. A dictor will eat a AF alive, the comet beats most, as does the slicer and so on.
And lets not forget the double damp lml spam meta that covered a long time pre t3d where afs were totally ****.
Even CDs are massively superior to AFs (well to be fair, they are extremely OP, but solo pvpers dont all have link skills yet).
Highlighted the issue.
the problem isnt AF, its the extremely overpowered t3d they have added. Before these 4 ships were added we enjoyed the most balanced lineup in EVEs history. I loved my vengeance, it was a little sod to kill but t3d came along and simply out tank, out gun, fly faster and shoot at greater range. Much like their cruiser cousins t3d simply invalidate everything around them.
If you really want to see something that has been completely invalidated just look at the T1 destroyers. |
W0lf Crendraven
Welfcorp
465
|
Posted - 2016.12.22 22:44:35 -
[79] - Quote
Have you actually played in fw space recently? T1 dessies beeing invalidated, are you serious? Have you flown AFs in lowsec pre t3ds? They were garbage. |
Mister Burns
Hedion University Amarr Empire
27
|
Posted - 2016.12.23 01:35:00 -
[80] - Quote
Tanthos wrote:Gallente AFs get weapon disruptor immunity.
I'd rather have damp immunity. Weapon disrupt immunity would kind of suck for Ishkur.. |
|
Omar Alharazaad
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
3097
|
Posted - 2016.12.23 01:40:10 -
[81] - Quote
I absolutely love assault frigates. For my non-war related activities in high sec they are well suited to ruining someone else's day.
However, for serious work I just can't usually field one for many of the reasons given earlier in this thread. They're not fast enough for fast tackle, a ceptor does that better. Tanking stuff? I have either a T3, faction or T2 cruiser that I can depend on for that. Damage, same as above. Hell, the only reason I don't exclusively fly a HAM Legion is that it drives like a school bus.
I would like to see them become more useful in other venues, as they are a great deal of fun to fly.
Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18498
|
Posted - 2016.12.23 11:26:17 -
[82] - Quote
W0lf Crendraven wrote:Have you actually played in fw space recently? T1 dessies beeing invalidated, are you serious? They are extremely strong. Have you flown AFs in lowsec pre t3ds? They were garbage.
I flew them in null. |
W0lf Crendraven
Welfcorp
465
|
Posted - 2016.12.24 01:41:56 -
[83] - Quote
Fair enough, AFs survived a bit longer in nullsec because dictors there are total shitfit (cause they carry a bubble and arent flying as t2 dessies) and as all fights happen at gates or stations you can get away from kiters - both of which doesnt happen in lowsec. So if anything starts kiting you you are dead. But its still mostly the faction frigs (why ever fly a enyo over a comet), gds (cause op) and dictors to a lesser degree (they are the shipcall t3ds killed, at leats in lowsec) that dominate the small meta. |
Tyrana McBitch
Pirate Cartel
0
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 03:07:26 -
[84] - Quote
Jaguar, is great. An AB bonus would be nice, but still they are good. Solo or packs or PvE. |
Alaric Faelen
Sabotage Incorporated Executive Outcomes
409
|
Posted - 2016.12.25 19:35:17 -
[85] - Quote
I miss flying assault frigates. I also agree that some kind of EWAR immunity (or at least bonus against) would be a decent addition, perhaps some kind of immunity to neuts.
But the entire role needs to be redefined in my opinion.
A straight upgrade to tank/DPS is a poor 'role' for fleets. It immediately obsoletes anything smaller and infringes on anything larger in class. I'd like to see an entirely new fleet role for the AF to fill.
|
W0lf Crendraven
Welfcorp
465
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 00:03:41 -
[86] - Quote
Alaric Faelen wrote:I miss flying assault frigates. I also agree that some kind of EWAR immunity (or at least bonus against) would be a decent addition, perhaps some kind of immunity to neuts.
But the entire role needs to be redefined in my opinion.
A straight upgrade to tank/DPS is a poor 'role' for fleets. It immediately obsoletes anything smaller and infringes on anything larger in class. I'd like to see an entirely new fleet role for the AF to fill.
Especially because of the constant inflation, a plex used to be 300 million and it was much harder to earn isk, so the difference between 200k and 20million isk for a t1 and t2 frigate actually meant something, nowadays for whatever reason the t2 frigate still is 20 million but isk is so easy to make that there is no real monetary reason to not use t2. |
Aaron
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
436
|
Posted - 2016.12.26 20:24:54 -
[87] - Quote
Myryaminda wrote:Hello Everyone.
I am sure everyone will be feeling that Assault Frigates are not really a ship to train in because it's role has been taken over by the T3 destroyers. As such I think it is time to brainstorm how to make the assault frigate a ship which is a viable option and different from the T3D's.
To calculate why and how it should change we have to look at the T3D's different roles. The AF used to be the small sniper or assault frigate that had a lot of tank. Both roles have been taken over by the T3D.
Although this is ofcourse a shortcut I think giving all AFs the same role bonus as the interceptor (immunity to interdiction spheres) would make it viable to train in it again.
Please let me know what you think of this idea.
T3Ds and AFs are different. The lower sig radius for AFs makes it harder to hit and the role bonus 50% reduction in microwarpdrive signature radius penalty for AFs can assist in keeping sig radius low for when you're fighting a battle cruiser sniper. AFs will always be in a class of their own in my opinion. Nothing needs to change with the AF and it is a good ship to train and pilot.
Train the AF in addition to the T3D.
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
Deckel
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
24
|
Posted - 2017.01.08 06:16:35 -
[88] - Quote
The best suggestion I've heard for the Assault Frigate question was to make them the 'Masters of Overheating'. More powerful and maybe better sustained overheat capacity in which they compete or perhaps outperform their competition for a limited time.
A possible mechanic to accomplish this could be to allow AFs to enter a ship-wide overheat mode which literally burns and damages the hull on the ship. While in this mode all modules will operate in their overheat range, (with perhaps increased Cap and/or shield Regen), however the individual modules can also be overheated normally, thus allowing a 2X overheat bonus. All this means that these ships would have a limited window in which they are able to perform far beyond their standard. It also opens the door for strategic hull repair to refuel their burn/overheating capacity.
Choosing an Overheating option to fix them (even if it's not my suggested one) means the AF keeps a very Assault-like feel where it can be tanky, fast, and damaging, allows them to be used for various generalized purposes, makes them fun and challenging to pilot, and should not significantly overpower larger hulls that could likely provide better sustain, if less periodic burst capability. |
Rain6637
NulzSec
34737
|
Posted - 2017.01.08 06:21:30 -
[89] - Quote
That's basically increasing stats. Wouldn't it be easier to do it the normal way with slightly improved regular stats?
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Deckel
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
24
|
Posted - 2017.01.08 06:58:49 -
[90] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:That's basically increasing stats. Wouldn't it be easier to do it the normal way with slightly improved regular stats?
But if you permanently increase speed, damage, tank or utility you walk a very fine line before you simply overpower the other ships around you and hinder their usefulness. Making it a temporary bonus allows a much broader scope of ability you can endow the ship with. And while the temporary bonus of tank, damage and speed may be impressive, I think the utility module bonuses are really what would define this. Webs, Neuts, Scrams, Disruptors, ECM with a 2X overheat could allow these ships to temporarily act almost like role specific ships. This utility could really allow them to make their mark because you never know what their fitted for, or how they will 'Assault' you |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18531
|
Posted - 2017.01.08 11:16:08 -
[91] - Quote
Problem with giving them an overheat bonus means they effectively get that stat boost for most of their fights. |
Rain6637
NulzSec
34740
|
Posted - 2017.01.08 21:09:34 -
[92] - Quote
okay I see now. a slight heat bonus would be more of a wildcard because you won't know the person's exact fit (and what modules they'll be overheating).
Help, I can't download EVE
President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub
PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
|
Deckel
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2017.01.08 21:55:53 -
[93] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Problem with giving them an overheat bonus means they effectively get that stat boost for most of their fights.
You could add a multiplier effect where the more 2X Overheat module bonuses active the more hull damage gets applied to the ship. This could work by activating the ship overheat mode, then all modules that you set to Overheat the get 2X bonus but for each additional module active the damage doubles. So, 5% for one 10% for two, 20% for 3 etc for every 5 or 10 seconds. This would still keep all overheating dependent upon module heat damage, but allow extra power causing hull damage. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18532
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 13:05:50 -
[94] - Quote
Deckel wrote:baltec1 wrote:Problem with giving them an overheat bonus means they effectively get that stat boost for most of their fights. You could add a multiplier effect where the more 2X Overheat module bonuses active the more hull damage gets applied to the ship. This could work by activating the ship overheat mode, then all modules that you set to Overheat the get 2X bonus but for each additional module active the damage doubles. So, 5% for one 10% for two, 20% for 3 etc for every 5 or 10 seconds. This would still keep all overheating dependent upon module heat damage, but allow extra power causing hull damage.
Creative but I worry about some of the stats that this would result in. |
ivona fly
Black Fox Marauders
34
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 15:48:50 -
[95] - Quote
Give them a mad overheat bonus but has to be applied to one rack only
so they can double overheat Guns/prop/or tank but not at the same time, they could burst overheat out of bubles in null sec etc, or try to slingshot a fast kiter.
so they do about 2.8 to 3.5k with mwd let them overheat to 5.5k for example for short time.
this means they could get a short burst of speed or tank
would be fun. |
Orakkus
m3 Corp Evictus.
301
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 19:42:33 -
[96] - Quote
I think we all are coming back to the same problem in that it seems that no matter what change you make to the AF, there is always something that is available that does it better, or the change starts to invalidate another class of ships.
If you add more speed, well that intrudes onto the Interceptor role.
If you add more tank, well Cruisers are cheaper and still more effective.
If you add more dps, well Cruisers and now T2/T3 destroyers still are more useful and effective.
If you add more utility, then you could be intruding on the EAFs, Logi frigs, or Command destroyers
The only ships that they seem akin to is the Combat Battlecruisers like the Tornado and the Talos. But there again, you are stuck with a cruiser doing it better, cheaper, and with an easier train. None of the other frigate classes have that issue because their usefulness is combined with speed, small sig, and agility. So you will always have a reason to pick an EAF over a Recon, or a Stealth Bomber over a Cruiser, etc. Even within the subclasses there is sufficient reason to choose on type of interceptor over another.
The only options I see are to either a.) make them more difficult to hit (which seems in line with frigate dynamics) or b.) give them the ability to disrupt the battlefield. Either one of the following I think is probably the best bet:
1. Remove the MWD bonus and replace it with the old AB bonus. I think this is one of the better options, as it gives this ship a role as a brawler in close quarters.
2. Remove the MWD bonus and replace it with a bonus to MJD activation and recharge along with a distance penalty. Basically, a Frigate can activate the jump drive instantly, but can only go half as far. Recharge rate will be quicker too, say 30 to 45 seconds.
3. Ability to mount bombs. This has some creative possibilities
4. Ability to mount one Battleship class smartbomb. This would make it a terror against drones and other frigates.. which would be in line with its existence. The downside would be that it could not be used in close proximity to gates.
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
18316
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 20:26:16 -
[97] - Quote
Deckel wrote:The best suggestion I've heard for the Assault Frigate question was to make them the 'Masters of Overheating'. More powerful and maybe better sustained overheat capacity in which they compete or perhaps outperform their competition for a limited time.
A possible mechanic to accomplish this could be to allow AFs to enter a ship-wide overheat mode which literally burns and damages the hull on the ship. While in this mode all modules will operate in their overheat range, (with perhaps increased Cap and/or shield Regen), however the individual modules can also be overheated normally, thus allowing a 2X overheat bonus. All this means that these ships would have a limited window in which they are able to perform far beyond their standard. It also opens the door for strategic hull repair to refuel their burn/overheating capacity.
Choosing an Overheating option to fix them (even if it's not my suggested one) means the AF keeps a very Assault-like feel where it can be tanky, fast, and damaging, allows them to be used for various generalized purposes, makes them fun and challenging to pilot, and should not significantly overpower larger hulls that could likely provide better sustain, if less periodic burst capability.
Overheat bonus is already a feature of T3s.
AFs should have something that's specific to them.
"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."
Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
|
Jenn aSide
Shinigami Miners Test Alliance Please Ignore
15052
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 20:34:24 -
[98] - Quote
Attack BC treatment. ie Let assault Frigs mount Cruiser sized guns.
You're welcome. |
Deckel
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 20:40:29 -
[99] - Quote
Malcanis wrote: Overheat bonus is already a feature of T3s.
AFs should have something that's specific to them.
So then another question is, does the Overheat bonus belong on the T3Ds? Also, while the less heat damage that they have is a heating bonus, it is a bonus to sustain, rather than a bonus to projected Max ability and output. There is room for more than one type of heating bonus in the game. |
Deckel
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2017.01.09 20:49:22 -
[100] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Attack BC treatment. ie Let assault Frigs mount Cruiser sized guns. You're welcome.
Personally I think it would have been better if they had taken Destroyers in this route as it would be more in-line with Attack Battlecruisers. Frigs seem like they are too small for that. Besides if you want large guns and max dps in a frig you go Bomber. And even if you did go this way with oversized guns, it would only be a fitting solution for one of the two Assault frigs for each faction. What do you do with the other one? |
|
Aaron
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
437
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 01:08:52 -
[101] - Quote
Leave the AF alone. it's fine as it is.
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
Nikea Tiber
Backwater Enterprises RD
44
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 02:56:45 -
[102] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:Attack BC treatment. ie Let assault Frigs mount Cruiser sized guns. You're welcome.
Did you even read this thread? Cruiser guns on a frigate hull makes for a useless frigate.
Aaron wrote: Leave the AF alone. It's fine as it is
I've been kicking around new eden for about eleven years now. Assault frigates have always sucked, the lack of mobility vs the t1 combat hulls, fitting issues due to weak cpu and grid, and fitting issues due to lack of mids as an entire ship class. Assault frigates suck, and the proliferation of destroyer hulls just makes it worse. AFs need a fitting boost and a role bonus other than mwd sig reduction.
my other nano is a polycarb
|
Ciba Lexlulu
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
68
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 11:35:08 -
[103] - Quote
CCP should give AF natural +2 warp strength like Venture. I bet we will see increase usage of the class. |
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18533
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 13:42:41 -
[104] - Quote
Nikea Tiber wrote:Assault frigates have always sucked
Not true.
Before T3D landed they were one of the more common ships used. As I keep on saying the issue is not with AF its with T3D. |
Orakkus
m3 Corp Evictus.
301
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 15:49:38 -
[105] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
Not true.
Before T3D landed they were one of the more common ships used. As I keep on saying the issue is not with AF its with T3D.
Even before T3D, their "niche" window was tiny, and there really is no effective way (at this point) to penalize the T3Ds to undo reality.
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18533
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 20:17:49 -
[106] - Quote
Orakkus wrote:baltec1 wrote:
Not true.
Before T3D landed they were one of the more common ships used. As I keep on saying the issue is not with AF its with T3D.
Even before T3D, their "niche" window was tiny, and there really is no effective way (at this point) to penalize the T3Ds to undo reality.
There is a very good way to hit T3D into shape.
Nerf them down to t1 base stats and have their modes bump them up to t2 level and scrap the e-war resistance. They are now what they are supposed to be, adaptable destroyers. |
Orakkus
m3 Corp Evictus.
301
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 20:45:03 -
[107] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:
There is a very good way to hit T3D into shape.
Nerf them down to t1 base stats and have their modes bump them up to t2 level and scrap the e-war resistance. They are now what they are supposed to be, adaptable destroyers.
I still don't think that would separate the two well enough. By making those changes, CCP will be forced to make the ship cheaper to build (or else it is the T3D that becomes "niche-less") If you make it cheaper, then it automatically forces itself into AF territory because of price/capability. You also have to consider that even if there is a tangible difference, the niche the AF resides in would still get reduced in usefulness.
No, I think the AF needs some serious out of the box thinking in regards to its role in combat fleets.
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|
Roger Douglas
Tritanium Industries and Technology Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.01.10 21:28:10 -
[108] - Quote
Shift the AF to be the Frigate version of the Combat Recon.
Allow Covop cloak, some speed bonuses, Non-detection on directional scan has been mentioned here.
I'm not sure I'd want the covert cyno, but it's possible.
No web/scram bonuses on the AF. Leave that for the Cruiser Combat Recon. |
Amanda Creire-Geng
University of Caille Gallente Federation
79
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 07:42:10 -
[109] - Quote
How about this:
- Get rid of the 50% MWD sig radius reduction
- Add a new role bonus: 400% bonus to Afterburner velocity modifier
Assault frigs will now be able to:
- Hit MWD-tier speeds, without any sig penalties, but still considerably slower than ceptors due to their lower base velocity.
- Laugh in the face of warp scrambers!
- When fitted with scram+web, can dictate range on any non-AF ship that comes within scram reach. (MWD ships will get shut down by scram, and AB ships won't be able to keep up with the steroids-AB)
The result is a heavy brawler frigate that's no longer afraid to get close and personal, true to its name of assault frigate. Each race has 2 AFs, so specialize one for point-blank fights, and the other one for fighting at the edge of web range (give it a minor warp scrambler range bonus so it matches the web range). |
Deckel
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 08:25:57 -
[110] - Quote
Amanda Creire-Geng wrote:How about this:
- Get rid of the 50% MWD sig radius reduction
- Add a new role bonus: 400% bonus to Afterburner velocity modifier
Assault frigs will now be able to:
- Hit MWD-tier speeds, without any sig penalties, but still considerably slower than ceptors due to their lower base velocity.
- Laugh in the face of warp scrambers!
- When fitted with scram+web, can dictate range on any non-AF ship that comes within scram reach. (MWD ships will get shut down by scram, and AB ships won't be able to keep up with the steroids-AB)
The result is a heavy brawler frigate that's no longer afraid to get close and personal, true to its name of assault frigate. Each race has 2 AFs, so specialize one for point-blank fights, and the other one for fighting at the edge of web range (give it a minor warp scrambler range bonus so it matches the web range).
I'm afraid you went way too far (it is seriously at the joke level) It is debatable that even 2X AB speeds would be overpowered. Those speeds with no signature bloom basically means zero missile damage. You would need triple webs + paints to apply just about any damage to them.
But yes shifting to an Afterburner bonus has been thoroughly discussed and is high on the list of good ideas. Some say that they used to have this and it was overpowered then, so it won't work, but it is likely that this was due to the Old Meta and since things have since changed it could be viable again. |
|
Amanda Creire-Geng
University of Caille Gallente Federation
79
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 08:58:11 -
[111] - Quote
Deckel wrote:I'm afraid you went way too far (it is seriously at the joke level) It is debatable that even 2X AB speeds would be overpowered. Those speeds with no signature bloom basically means zero missile damage. You would need triple webs + paints to apply just about any damage to them.
But yes shifting to an Afterburner bonus has been thoroughly discussed and is high on the list of good ideas. Some say that they used to have this and it was overpowered then, so it won't work, but it is likely that this was due to the Old Meta and since things have since changed it could be viable again.
I guess my math is wrong, because it looked like an AF would do about 2km/s with good skills, and double-web would bring it down to 320 m/s. T1 Light missiles with Target Nav IV have 238 m/s explosion velocity, so they'd apply two thirds of their damage, or about full damage if using T2 precision. Target painters not needed at all as their explosion velocity is already smaller than AFs' sig radius, if you put a couple levels into the precision skill. I guess it could be a problem if the AF stacks a lot of prop mods?
|
Deckel
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
25
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 09:26:55 -
[112] - Quote
Amanda Creire-Geng wrote: I guess my math is wrong, because it looked like an AF would do about 2km/s with good skills, and double-web would bring it down to 320 m/s. T1 Light missiles with Target Nav IV have 238 m/s explosion velocity, so they'd apply two thirds of their damage, or about full damage if using T2 precision. Target painters not needed at all as their explosion velocity is already smaller than AFs' sig radius, if you put a couple levels into the precision skill. I guess it could be a problem if the AF stacks a lot of prop mods?
Well, the Succubus already can get 100% bonus to Afterburner velocity, which can give it a AB speed around 1900m/s. The problem with giving this to Assault frigates too is that they have the T2 resist profile as well, and they are cheaper than a Succubus, so you have basically just invalidated the usefulness of this ship, along with quite a few others likely. You could still bring it up to a 25% or 50% AB bonus, but who knows where that perfect spot to balance it is. |
Toobo
Project Fruit House Solyaris Chtonium
412
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 09:43:38 -
[113] - Quote
Some may not remember or wasn't around, but there was a period in EVE history where AFs were really popular. I'm not familiar with fleet doctrines so can't comment on that, but back then it was quite common to do a solo roam in an AF and find another solo roaming AF and have a cracking good fight (even outside of FW zones). Low sec pirates often had pimp setups with a-type reppera, etc.
People would remember those dual ASB Harpy, slaved (or perma repping) Vengence, scram kiting Hawk, Ishkur that could fighy so many things etc. AFs were perfectly viable and fun/popular ships to play even with the same stats as now.
Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!
|
baltec1
Bat Country Pandemic Legion
18535
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 16:38:57 -
[114] - Quote
Orakkus wrote:baltec1 wrote:
There is a very good way to hit T3D into shape.
Nerf them down to t1 base stats and have their modes bump them up to t2 level and scrap the e-war resistance. They are now what they are supposed to be, adaptable destroyers.
I still don't think that would separate the two well enough. By making those changes, CCP will be forced to make the ship cheaper to build (or else it is the T3D that becomes "niche-less") If you make it cheaper, then it automatically forces itself into AF territory because of price/capability. You also have to consider that even if there is a tangible difference, the niche the AF resides in would still get reduced in usefulness. No, I think the AF needs some serious out of the box thinking in regards to its role in combat fleets.
AF are more than able to take on t2 destroyers, we are out here killing them in kestrels and herons. AF are still good ships, a destroyer is not going to tank like a destroyer can (well, they are not supposed to) |
Kiddoomer
The Red Sequence
138
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 16:53:17 -
[115] - Quote
Hum, the only thing that would make them unique would be a bonus for something non other ships has something for to me.
The idea of a bonus to smartbomb mentionned earlier in this thread picked me, maybe not a bonus to fit one large smartbomb, but a bonus to a small or maybe medium for damage, with a correct but not excessive bonus to cycle, but not range, the AF being frigate-sized is enough of a mobility advantage already.
This could make the assault frigate a very capable ships against other frigates, plus and foremost, it would make the ship a little terror against any kind of drones.
That way, AF would be a second layer of defense for a battleship fleet, the first being destroyers with defenders missiles for bombs, and then this new against drones that would go under any kind of weapons on the battleships without them needing to put any smartbomb on themselves.
In the name of Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen :
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
|
Aaron
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
437
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 20:26:40 -
[116] - Quote
Nikea Tiber wrote:Jenn aSide wrote:Attack BC treatment. ie Let assault Frigs mount Cruiser sized guns. You're welcome. Did you even read this thread? Cruiser guns on a frigate hull makes for a useless frigate. Aaron wrote: Leave the AF alone. It's fine as it is I've been kicking around new eden for about eleven years now. Assault frigates have always sucked, the lack of mobility vs the t1 combat hulls, fitting issues due to weak cpu and grid, and fitting issues due to lack of mids as an entire ship class. Assault frigates suck, and the proliferation of destroyer hulls just makes it worse. AFs need a fitting boost and a role bonus other than mwd sig reduction.
I've used an AF to destroy a sniper fit tornado, I was able to absorb a few hits while mwd'ing toward him then when I was within 5km I orbited and didnt take single hit while i chewed through his armour and hull. At the time i was fit with an ancilliary armour repair and a standard armour repair.
The key to using an AF is understanding what situations it would be useful in. It's a nice little fleet ship if you know when to use it.
I've also used AF's for gatecrashing, I used to fly around Stain anywhere I wanted when I came across a gate camp the AF had no problem MWD'ing and jumping back through to the gate I just came from and repeating it till I could warp away and cloak. I've also had many 1 vs 1 in AF's and it was always a good fight win or lose.
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
Aaron
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
437
|
Posted - 2017.01.11 20:36:15 -
[117] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Nikea Tiber wrote:Assault frigates have always sucked Not true. Before T3D landed they were one of the more common ships used. As I keep on saying the issue is not with AF its with T3D.
I wouldn't say the issue is with the T3D or AF, the issue is with the people who don't seem to know what situations to use AF's in.
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
Kiddoomer
The Red Sequence
138
|
Posted - 2017.01.12 13:36:33 -
[118] - Quote
Or if nothing noticeable would be needed actually, could it be to much ask to make AF able to use small repairer/boost effectively in pvp ? Because I never figured a way to not get killed quickly in my hawk against faction or pirate frigate if I dont have 2 MASB running with faction cap booster.
In the name of Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen :
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
|
Orakkus
m3 Corp Evictus.
303
|
Posted - 2017.01.12 16:09:34 -
[119] - Quote
Aaron wrote:
I've used an AF to destroy a sniper fit tornado...
I don't think that is a good comparision simply because, in that scenario, a lot of ships including interceptors, T1 Frigs, Destroyers, as well as some cruisers would have been able to use that tactic and get the same result. That situation was just an opportunity that was within the AFs (and many other ship classes) ability to take advantage of. It really doesn't show anything distinctive or unique to the AF.
Right now they don't have a role that something else doesn't do better.
He's not just famous, he's "IN" famous. - Ned Nederlander
|
Glathull
Warlock Assassins
1284
|
Posted - 2017.01.13 04:17:00 -
[120] - Quote
If you look at the history of T3 Cruisers, it's clear that T3 Destroyers are going to stay around and stay OP for a very long time. I agree that Assault Frigs aren't really the problem. There was a while when they were very competitive after they were first rebalanced.
But this is the reality we live in: T3D are here to stay. They are not going to get nerfed down to T1D base stats and simply become versatile destroyers.
So we need to do something.
The ideas I like best so far are some kind of unique invulnerability. I like neut invulnerability the best. It makes the most sense with the concept of an assault role. It helps it get into brawls above its class and stay in it.
I'd also (for the same reasons) like to see smaller sig radius or buffed resists.
I'm intrigued--in spite of the protests from earlier--by the idea of the ABC treatment. Give them a tracking bonus, but keep them slow to mitigate the tracking issues. That + a sig radius improvement or resist buffs should put them in a pretty good position to serve in a medium support role. You know, an assault role. No they won't be 1v1 solo pwnmobiles against other frigates. We've got tons of those already. I'm pretty sick of the speed meta. Not everything has to be that. Give them a slow-ish supporting role in the cruiser meta.
I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon
|
|
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
18324
|
Posted - 2017.01.13 06:01:16 -
[121] - Quote
Aaron wrote:baltec1 wrote:Nikea Tiber wrote:Assault frigates have always sucked Not true. Before T3D landed they were one of the more common ships used. As I keep on saying the issue is not with AF its with T3D. I wouldn't say the issue is with the T3D or AF, the issue is with the people who don't seem to know what situations to use AF's in.
Such as?
"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."
Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
|
Zakks
State Protectorate Caldari State
101
|
Posted - 2017.01.13 08:35:33 -
[122] - Quote
First thing I would do is change the -50% MWD sig bonus to a +25% AB bonus for the whole class.
Then rebalance the stats. Loosely applied (these would be adjusted ofc, but roughly 10pts more each)
Ishkur +10cpu
Enyo +5cpu +5pg
Hawk +20cpu -10pg
Harpy +10cpu
Retribution +10cpu
Vengeance +20cpu -10pg
Jaguar +15cpu -5pg
Wolf +15cpu -5pg
Then look at slot layouts. For example, some of these ships have virtually wasted utility slots due to lack of cpu. Perhaps the Retribution and Jag could give up a utility slot for a mid, or the hawk for a low.
Lastly, a pass through each ship's specific bonuses. An example is the Vengeance with 4/4 missile/turret hardpoints but no bonus to turrets?
As the last of the dozen or so tiericided modules are done these can again be looked over to see that nobody gets out of whack.
My 2-bits, throwing some actual numbers in the fray:) Overall the entire class could use some cpu, some more than others. |
Aaron
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
438
|
Posted - 2017.01.14 04:56:24 -
[123] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Aaron wrote:baltec1 wrote:Nikea Tiber wrote:Assault frigates have always sucked Not true. Before T3D landed they were one of the more common ships used. As I keep on saying the issue is not with AF its with T3D. I wouldn't say the issue is with the T3D or AF, the issue is with the people who don't seem to know what situations to use AF's in. Such as?
Well, I have used a Hawk to take out an Algos. The Algos had t2 gatlings a small neut, a disruptor and a web. I had a medium ASB and a small shield boost.
I picked my fight carefully and was able to win. I'm pretty sure I could take out most T1 destroyers with either a Hawk or vengeance using ancilliary and good tactics.
People are suggesting that AF become immune from Ewar which is silly. What I meant was with my comment is that people should use an AF for similar scenarios to the one i just mentioned. AF's are just amazing for 1vs1 pvp, I like my range of AF's just the way they are.
I've also used a retribution for ratting in npc 0.0 and been able to kill all rats apart from officers, I was able to stay safe from pvp by fitting a cloak and I have survived many surprise gatecamps using gatecrashing in an AF.
AF's have helped me stay under the radar as you can see, It got to the point where very aggressive enemies didn't even bother pursuing me for just a 30mil kill mail.
I am an AF enthusiast.
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
Omar Alharazaad
Devils Rejects 666 The Devil's Warrior Alliance
3199
|
Posted - 2017.01.14 07:33:40 -
[124] - Quote
AF's are useful to me in a niche way. The low sig radius and extra tankiness make them quite useful for killing mission running battleships. Well some of the AF's that is. The gallente ones are particularly capable of cracking 'cap stable' and passive tanks... the vengeance is also handy, but better for battlecruisers than battleships due to it's low DPS. I've seen some folks get results with the Hawk and Harpy before as well, but I generally try to avoid the shield ships. They do fairly well against ships much larger than them, until they get neuted (neutered) out.
Were I to be wanting to engage in regular gang/fleet/solo pvp activities though I would not choose them. They're too slow to keep up with most other frigates. VS a T3D they simply lose, the dessie is faster, has better damage application and tank usually.
Come hell or high water, this sick world will know I was here.
|
Boozbaz
Brutor Clan
29
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 01:45:51 -
[125] - Quote
Why not just give them an extra low or mid slot? |
Aaron
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
438
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 05:53:31 -
[126] - Quote
Boozbaz wrote:Why not just give them an extra low or mid slot?
Why not let CCP balance the ships?
This thread seems similar to the one complaining about freighter bumping, some pilots will never accept the way CCP has designed frieghters to be bumped easily.
Now people are here complaining about AF's having limitations. I say accept the game and the ships as they are.
There have been some good posts where pilots have pushed AF's to the limit and in most cases been successful. We should accept whats in this thread as the limit to what AF's can do.
I think AF's are brilliant as they are and I hope CCP ignores this thread until they are ready to do a ship re-balance.
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
Deckel
Black Thorne Corporation Black Thorne Alliance
29
|
Posted - 2017.01.15 07:57:54 -
[127] - Quote
Aaron wrote:Boozbaz wrote:Why not just give them an extra low or mid slot? Why not let CCP balance the ships? This thread seems similar to the one complaining about freighter bumping, some pilots will never accept the way CCP has designed frieghters to be bumped easily. Now people are here complaining about AF's having limitations. I say accept the game and the ships as they are. There have been some good posts where pilots have pushed AF's to the limit and in most cases been successful. We should accept whats in this thread as the limit to what AF's can do. I think AF's are brilliant as they are and I hope CCP ignores this thread until they are ready to do a ship re-balance.
I'm pretty sure CCP has already admitted that Assault frigates need some attention. (I don't have the specific source but may have been mentioned at Eve Vega) And I'm pretty sure that a large majority of the experienced player base seem to agree that AFs are lacking.
So don't discount suggestions due to one-off stories of their greatness. After all, any ship can find moments of greatness, it does not mean they are good, balanced, or overpowered. That can only be determined though massive trial, error, and isk comparisons.
Eve is an evolving and changing game, and some of those ideas start from here on the forum. The willingness to listen to us and our suggestions is what makes Eve and CCP a great game and game maker. So while you may disagree with the suggestion, don't hate the conversation. Such dialogue is contribution towards progress. |
Aaron
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
438
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 00:18:48 -
[128] - Quote
Deckel wrote:Aaron wrote:Boozbaz wrote:Why not just give them an extra low or mid slot? Why not let CCP balance the ships? This thread seems similar to the one complaining about freighter bumping, some pilots will never accept the way CCP has designed frieghters to be bumped easily. Now people are here complaining about AF's having limitations. I say accept the game and the ships as they are. There have been some good posts where pilots have pushed AF's to the limit and in most cases been successful. We should accept whats in this thread as the limit to what AF's can do. I think AF's are brilliant as they are and I hope CCP ignores this thread until they are ready to do a ship re-balance. I'm pretty sure CCP has already admitted that Assault frigates need some attention. (I don't have the specific source but may have been mentioned at Eve Vega) And I'm pretty sure that a large majority of the experienced player base seem to agree that AFs are lacking. So don't discount suggestions due to one-off stories of their greatness. After all, any ship can find moments of greatness, it does not mean they are good, balanced, or overpowered. That can only be determined though massive trial, error, and isk comparisons. Eve is an evolving and changing game, and some of those ideas start from here on the forum. The willingness to listen to us and our suggestions is what makes Eve and CCP a great game and game maker. So while you may disagree with the suggestion, don't hate the conversation. Such dialogue is contribution towards progress.
I suppose you're right. I guess I have been conversing with too many narrow minded eve players in my time. Feedback is an important process in designing any application or game you've hit the nail on the head.
On some of the posts here I felt that some pilots were doing stuff like trying to take on a battleship that is known to have a neut fit with an AF, and then claiming they know everything there is to know about AF's. I would say it's about perspective. Me and my corp of 4 guys stayed under the radar for over a year in our assault frigs, we avoided blops very easily. People laughed at us for using only AF's to rat belts but we were the ones taking a good 2 billion a week up to jita in loot and we didnt even rat as often as we could have.
Does anyone have any more AF success stories? or am i all alone on this one?
Fear no one, live life, be free, accept the truth, do not judge others, defend yourself, fight hard till the end, meditate on problems and be prosperous. Things to exist by. -- RAIN Arthie
|
Major Trant
Mass Collapse It Must Be Jelly Cause Jam Don't Shake
1570
|
Posted - 2017.01.16 11:30:41 -
[129] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Balance is heavily based on usage statistics, and EVE is about to have a new dynamic in the way of alpha clones. I think we'll see a shift where a ship might be objectively bad but see more use because it's accessible to alpha clones. If there's a serious problem with ships in the frigate to cruiser range, part of the solution might be in magically allowing them for alpha clones. Including assault frigates, for example. That sounds like a good solution to the problem, let Alphas fly all the useless ships. I popped several Alphas recently to get a KM that is worth less than 1M, but with this option I'd get a 30M hull to go with the 200K of sh*t fit. That's gotta make me look a lot more leet and will definitely improve the game.
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 :: [one page] |