Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 30 .. 37 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Duchess Starbuckington
Starbuckington Manor
84
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:04:00 -
[571] - Quote
Ok, so looking over a few pages of this, the a lot of the "against" arguments seem to fall into these main categories: "Omg this will obsolete T1 frigates" T1 frigates were obsolete long before this hit. Their nich+¬ is, was, and will be for the forseeable future as newbie tackle ships.
"Omg this screws over T1 cruisers" What doesn't these days? They need their own buff patch.
"ZOMG I'm not MWDing this so that role bonus is useless" ... So ignore the MWD bonus. Not like you're missing out.
"But these still won't work with my 500man Abaddon blobs!" Suck it up. This isn't a blob buff. |
Laerise
PIE Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:05:00 -
[572] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:I like how some pilots have been linking their r3tarded and terrible set-ups. That they then proverb as being OVERPOWERED. No! You are dumb. Prom is correct in terms of what ships will be able to counter most common dual stasis webifier set-ups. Without being specifically set-up to do so (other than using long range ammunition).
However, there is another extreme I've reference in this thread that eliminates the need to be in warp scrambler range (more like 14 - 15,000m). This set-up uses the Hawks range bonus to its full extent (warp disruptor). Since I know for a fact some in this thread are not referencing this set-up. You should really step back and evaluate what you THINK you know. You should STFU now. This was based off of the last dual stasis webifier set-up I used. Based off the ORIGINAL Hookbill set-up. I then started to focus on using high damage Hookbill set-ups.
Caldari Navy Hookbill Pseudoelectron Containment Field I Small 'Accommodation' Vestment Reconstructer I
Balmer Series Tracking Disruptor I, Tracking Speed Disruption 1MN Afterburner II Faint Warp Disruptor I Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket
Small Bay Loading Accelerator II [empty rig slot] [empty rig slot]
Using dual stasis webifier on a Hawk. Was one of the first things frigate pilots said to me when I was linked the proposed changes (that and the Retribution and Enyo). ( I didn't even know about it for awhile)
Again, these set-ups can be countered by common damage biased frigates with great damage projection. Not something worth using in a outnumbered engagement. Where you need to bring things down quickly. With that being said. With these changes, the Hawk will do alot of damage = ) Something the Hookbill could not do once set-up in the similar way. Go away. Your set-ups are terrible and what you think is overpowered is in your head ( See r3tarded ^)
Anyway, off this silly topic. Still! I'm not a fan of adding more slots to these ships. As I've said in many threads before this and my other issues with these changes. Assault frigates replacing Interceptors etc...
Also, has no one used heavily tanked assault frigates to tackle one or two Hurricanes (@ range or in warp scrambler range) on the TEST SERVER yet?
hawk
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket [Empty High slot]
Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters 1MN Afterburner II X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Faint Warp Disruptor I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator
Pseudoelectron Containment Field I Ballistic Control System II
Small Bay Loading Accelerator I Small Rocket Fuel Cache Partition I
hawk
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket [Empty High slot]
Medium F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction 1MN Afterburner II X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Faint Warp Disruptor I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator
Pseudoelectron Containment Field I Ballistic Control System II
Small Bay Loading Accelerator I Small Rocket Fuel Cache Partition I
hawk
Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket Rocket Launcher II, Caldari Navy Thorn Rocket [Empty High slot]
Balmer Series Tracking Disruptor I 1MN Afterburner II X5 Prototype Engine Enervator Faint Warp Disruptor I X5 Prototype Engine Enervator
Pseudoelectron Containment Field I Ballistic Control System II
Small Bay Loading Accelerator I Small Rocket Fuel Cache Partition I
-proxyyyy
Quote:I like how some pilots have been linking their r3tarded and terrible set-ups.
qed |
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
90
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:23:00 -
[573] - Quote
Laerise wrote:m0cking bird wrote:Notice how SOME completely miss the point. The question is. Would a Interceptor be superior @ tackling a cruiser or battle-cruiser, compared with assault ships after these changes (quick answer is no).
Overall velocity is not the issue @ the moment. Tank is. Which is why the stiletto is favoured over all tackling interceptors. What use is a Ares going 4,000m/sec. If he cannot tackle a single shield-Hurricane or 2, without being shredded instantly. Anyone can go and test tanked assault frigates for the role of fleet tackle and they will fine they're better than Interceptors are with these changes.
Fun thing about a TEST server. You go there to TEST!
-proxyyyy For once I have to agree with Prom - quit playing EFT-online m0cking bird. Interceptors will still (at least in lowsec) be the mainstay tacklers the fc asks for after this change. In most gang fights the big ships are too busy killing dps ships to take care of ceptors - and ceptors are able to just burn away from anti support in the blink of a moment. AF's however are stuck, in a gangfight, and are more easily picked off by anti support. Edit: The thing you forgot that's the most important about tackling ceptors is their lock speed and long disruptor range. These two advantages put them so far ahead of af's (which mostly use scrams and webs anyways) that your argument becomes kind of invalid.
qed... |
Alex Medvedov
Gunpoint Diplomacy
10
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:36:00 -
[574] - Quote
[m0cking bird wrote:I like how some pilots have been linking their r3tarded and terrible set-ups. That they then proverb as being OVERPOWERED. No! You are dumb. Prom is correct in terms of what ships will be able to counter most common dual stasis webifier set-ups. Without being specifically set-up to do so (other than using long range ammunition).
Could you please enlighten us which AF has its damage projection so good that can deal with said double web Hawk setup with ease, Einstein? |
Rastaa Fari
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:42:00 -
[575] - Quote
Another AF V crew checking in..
MWD is still difficult to fit on a normal AF setup, and I dont want to do it anyway. I would say 95% of my time flying an AF was with an afterburner setup, and I have lived in all security levels of space. I would definitely favor some kind of large bonus to mass reduction, or agility. Ewar resistance also sounds like a very fun idea. Making AFs be interceptors and interceptors be light interceptors is just not creative.
And on a personal note, to all of the people that say afterburner setups are inferior; fill a garbage bag with gasoline and drown yourselves please. |
Korg Tronix
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
38
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:44:00 -
[576] - Quote
Alex Medvedov wrote:[ m0cking bird wrote:I like how some pilots have been linking their r3tarded and terrible set-ups. That they then proverb as being OVERPOWERED. No! You are dumb. Prom is correct in terms of what ships will be able to counter most common dual stasis webifier set-ups. Without being specifically set-up to do so (other than using long range ammunition).
Could you please enlighten us which AF has its damage projection so good that can deal with said double web Hawk setup with ease, Einstein?
I think a double web hawk has that projection :P Evil: If I were creating the world I wouldn't mess about with butterflies and daffodils. I would have started with lasers, eight o'clock, Day One! [zaps one of his minions accidentally, minion screams] Evil: Sorry. -á |
Takeshi Yamato
eXceed Inc. No Holes Barred
119
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:49:00 -
[577] - Quote
Alex Medvedov wrote:[ m0cking bird wrote:I like how some pilots have been linking their r3tarded and terrible set-ups. That they then proverb as being OVERPOWERED. No! You are dumb. Prom is correct in terms of what ships will be able to counter most common dual stasis webifier set-ups. Without being specifically set-up to do so (other than using long range ammunition).
Could you please enlighten us which AF has its damage projection so good that can deal with said double web Hawk setup with ease, Einstein?
Any Retribution setup does. Hawk can disengage tough.
Rail setups do also but I'm sure who wins the dps/tank war. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
573
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 21:50:00 -
[578] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote: Also, has no one used heavily tanked assault frigates to tackle one or two Hurricanes (@ range or in warp scrambler range) on the TEST SERVER yet?
A heavily tanked assault frigate has no trouble tackling, tanking, and quite likely even killing any battlecruiser you care to name even currently on TQ. Assault frigates are not terribly gimped ships and the changes on the test server are far reaching indeed. I think everyone should step back and consider that AFs are getting: - Extra fittings - Extra slot - Extra HP - 4th bonus - Role bonus
This is a lot of changes for one class of ship that actually performs reasonably well already. The end result is that all AFs are getting a significant survivability boost when kiting and when on "approach" (don't approach). Then they are getting a 4th bonus which makes most certainly shores up any problems the ships might already have - such as tracking for the Jag and DPS for the Hawk. And finally they are getting an entire extra slot worth of mobility, utility, DPS, or Tank.
Taking a moment to discuss the role bonus: I think its a nice to have, but I think perhaps the fact that this bonus keeps propagating to frigates everywhere should be a clue we need to change the MWD sig bloom penalty on frigate MWDs instead of assigning these bonuses around like candy. However it turns out though, these AFs are going to be small fast targets that are hard to hit and have ridiculously huge tanks when you manage to do so. Their ability to tackle is going to be literally second to none.
These changes are far reaching enough that I am very concerned about game balance. I implore the CCP game devs to axe the extra slot and move slots around on the ships that require it.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
90
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:01:00 -
[579] - Quote
Alex Medvedov wrote:[ m0cking bird wrote:I like how some pilots have been linking their r3tarded and terrible set-ups. That they then proverb as being OVERPOWERED. No! You are dumb. Prom is correct in terms of what ships will be able to counter most common dual stasis webifier set-ups. Without being specifically set-up to do so (other than using long range ammunition).
Could you please enlighten us which AF has its damage projection so good that can deal with said double web Hawk setup with ease, Einstein?
Well, provided that a Hawk is not using a tracking disruptor: rail-Ishkur, rail-Enyo, Retribution, Vengeance (javelin), Hawk, rail-Harpy (which also does dual stasis webifier). Not including other frigates that can also do the same.
Against a Tracking disrupting Hawk. Any rail assault frigate with Spike ammunition (which can definitely track a frigate @ that range). Assault frigates that use missiles and drones.
Sad that you even ask...
-proxyyyy |
Zarnak Wulf
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
205
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:03:00 -
[580] - Quote
WTB AF that can survive a dual nuet Hurricane on TQ. With new mid slots and cap boosters maybe... Anyways, I've waited for years for AF to get buffed. Get back in the Orca Liang. |
|
placeholder Zateki
Faction House Industries
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:06:00 -
[581] - Quote
Duchess Starbuckington wrote:
"ZOMG I'm not MWDing this so that role bonus is useless" ... So ignore the MWD bonus. Not like you're missing out.
So, Your argument against people saying the bonus isn't needed, is to tell them to ignore it.
Seems to me that you are arguing for the same thing then. (If we are saying it isn't necessary, and you are telling us it can comfortably be ignored, then it isn't important enough to justify its existence)
The more I look at these changes, the more it seems that the extra slots and other changes were just a way to placate the player base and force the MWD bonus through.
AFs are already very fine ships to those who know how to fly them, calling all of them crap kind of alienates the pilots who log in and fly them every day, and as has already been stated (by prometheus himself) the majority of those pilots do not live in null. Thus, if we want true feedback on these changes we cannot look to null sec pilots as the best source.
There is a time for compromise, and a time to flatly reject the steaming pile of **** served to you and request another dish. I sincerely feel that these changes represent a case of the latter. |
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
90
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:14:00 -
[582] - Quote
Yeah that is what I've noticed. Even if you approach a Hurricane and are already locked from 50,000m. Heavily tanked assault frigates are able to survive the approach just fine. I suggest pilots attempt to also orbit a Hurricane with a heavly tanked assault frigate @ 24 or 28,000m (heat), with a warp disruptor. On average, most assault frigates are able to do this for 1min, 30 seconds. Do the same with any interceptor and compare.
Use Cynabal, Vagabond, Hurricane, Drake and Ruptures. Go beyond that and compare interceptors and assault frigates against 2 of these ships.
The fact they're more of them are able to do this with these changes is great! However, Interceptors (which is my point)... |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
573
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:15:00 -
[583] - Quote
Zarnak Wulf wrote:WTB AF that can survive a dual nuet Hurricane on TQ. With new mid slots and cap boosters maybe... Anyways, I've waited for years for AF to get buffed. Get back in the Orca Liang.
Two things: - http://vimeo.com/34665420 -- I'll get more videos up tonight I guess, including 1v1 harpy vs dual neut rupture and 1v1 harpy vs dual neut cyclone. I'll also get harpy vs Myrm and Harpy Taranis vs 2x Jag and many others. Its just not hard. :) - The 4th bonus is a boost. The entire package is an OVERBOOST.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Zarnak Wulf
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
205
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:29:00 -
[584] - Quote
You won't get a consensus. Any thread on AFs- some will say no change needed; ignoring ships like the Retribution and Enyo. Others will advocate a fourth bonus that shifts like the wind. Or a role bonus. Or a logistics role FFS. I'd honestly be happy with a 5-3-3 Enyo with the increased damage bonus. Or the wolf and jag with a tracking bonus. But start a thread asking for just that and the same faces will appear shouting OP! |
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
90
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:37:00 -
[585] - Quote
So enough, about the issues I have with these changes. Here are some fun things my bros and I have been fooling around with. Pilots could see serious roaming gangs of armour or shield assault frigates, with 20 - 30,000 effective hit-points and 200 - 250 damage per second.
For example: Retribution, rail-Enyo, rail-Ishkur and Keres, with Oneiros (gang-links). Range, damage projection, high velocity and great damage mitigation. This does not scale too much, but it should be great in squads of 10 or less.
-proxyyyy |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
573
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 22:38:00 -
[586] - Quote
I'm not arguing about all the possible bonuses that could be, Zarnak. I'm arguing that the package as presented is extreme overkill and will be detrimental to game balance as a whole. At the absolute minimum, the extra slot needs to go.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
330
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:09:00 -
[587] - Quote
this is just my opinion, but i find Liang and Mocking are generally detached from reality. i know i pvp more than both of them put together, and half the time i dont understand what theyre saying. in fact, i think theyre one another's alts.
AF's will not replace inties is any way, shape or form. inties:
-superior scan res -superior speed -superior agility, and therefore superior acceleration and juking -extended warp disruption bonus
conclusion: tackling role. oh, whats that? inities were ALWAYS the best tacklers, and will continue to be so?
|
Anja Talis
Mimidae Risk Solutions
11
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:14:00 -
[588] - Quote
Alex Medvedov wrote: Could you please enlighten us which AF has its damage projection so good that can deal with said double web Hawk setup with ease, Einstein?
Based on Prom just ripping me a very large painful one, 3 times in a row, the Ishkur. |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
573
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:23:00 -
[589] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:this is just my opinion, but i find Liang and Mocking are generally detached from reality. i know i pvp more than both of them put together, and half the time i dont understand what theyre saying. in fact, i think theyre one another's alts. AF's will not replace inties is any way, shape or form. inties: -superior scan res -superior speed -superior agility, and therefore superior acceleration and juking -extended warp disruption bonus conclusion: tackling role. oh, whats that? inities were ALWAYS the best tacklers, and will continue to be so?
There are 92 words in this post. They say a picture is worth a thousand words... and how much more is a video worth? Your opinion is useless without something to back it up.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
90
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:26:00 -
[590] - Quote
Naomi Knight is one of my characters = ) |
|
Zarnak Wulf
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
205
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:41:00 -
[591] - Quote
m0cking bird wrote:Naomi Knight is one of my characters = )
|
Prometheus Exenthal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.01.11 23:54:00 -
[592] - Quote
Okay lots of chatter to catch up on...
@Anja
Quote:We may find mediocre pilots hitting far above their weight in the buffed ship? I'm certainly having some success in the Harpys and Hawk which I probably/possibly don't deserve When it comes to frigate 1v1s or similar, that may very well be the case. Ship types and fits play a huge role. However when it comes to larger fights or targets player skills will still be needed and you can't win a fight just by hitting F1-5
@Suleiman The BattleHelios you speak of was developed by my ex-corp of 2+years. So yes, I know just how devastating the ship can be. The thing is, those have a TINY engagement list, and like the Hawk, are swatted out without too much trouble.
Removing the mid slot would limit the Hawk to only engaging frigates. Your tank wouldn't be stable enough to handle larger targets, and you wouldn't have any range control if you decided to tank (like it is on TQ).
@Alex Everything you said about the AFs would be true if they were simply limited to killing other frigates. Once you step up to Cruisers those truths fade away, some more than others. I'm not gonna go over the advantages of the slots for each ship, since I think myself or someone has said it before If you really want to know what I think the slots do for each ship, fire me an eve mail
@Vimsy AFs don't really need a propulsion mod to stay under the guns of larger targets. Some work better than others in this respect, but the ships that don't have other strengths that outweigh.
@Cosmic There's no argument, right now on TQ there is absolutely no need to fly an Enyo over an Ishkur. At all. Heck, up until the Crucible patch the Ishkur was even faster than the Enyo even though it had a web to start with. The Ishkur still remains a strong ship because of it's damage application. YES you can kill the drones (they're a bit tougher now), but you can't devalue its ability to choose its damage type. You would never bring an Enyo to fight something like a Harpy because the Ishkur has far better odds in damage application as well as fleet utility.
And by relation of the topic, the Enyo/Wolf matchup is pretty damn close. Unless said fight begins from scram range, the fight is usually in the Wolfs favour.
@Zircon In regard to #2, if a nano cruiser is dropped on by any quick high dps ship, AF or otherwise, it's going to die in short order. You've just described something that happens on a day to day basis that wouldn't change with this boost.
As for point #3, I was referring to nanocanes. I felt that if I had omitted them someone would of corrected me A gang of AFs, no matter how much better they become after this boost, is always going to be less threatening than a gang of cruisers or battlecruisers. The reason being is that they are still frigates and they can still die to the same things. That permanent reduction of threat is a big big deal.
For #4, I have no idea what they would do to the lower tier cruisers. For the most part, I think they have poor fitting which prevents them from doing anything worthwhile. Their actual abilities, layouts, and bonuses aren't too terrible for the most part.
@Liang So bad You're someone who doesn't pvp very often, let alone mass frigates, and let alone test them. Your comments are based solely on what you think they can do, not what they can actually do. Go and try them out and realize how hilarious everything you just said is.
And in regard to your video; You didn't actually showcase anything that AFs do better than any other ship. All you did was bait people into a fight, then drop the hard hitters on them at which point they typically stopped shooting at the frigates And nice work using an Arbitrator vs some turret ships. I'm sure he was hitting them just fine without that, right
@placeholder Don't be so foolish, plenty of pilots don't use their ships full bonus layout. Hell, the entire Vexor/Ishtar have a medium hybrid damage bonus that I bet very few people actually use outside of their niche of ganking or plexing. Just because a ship gets a bonus doesn't mean you need to use it and the fact that it's there doesn't mean it isn't useful for something.
You're telling me that combat inties with only ABs are useful outside of Empire, and that the sig bonus on that ship is stupid. You're also telling me that the bubbling abilities of the Interdictor classes make those ships useless in Empire You're also telling me that BlOps are useless in Empire because there are no cynojammed systems for them to breach.
CSM Alternate & PVP Samurai www.promsrage.com |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
573
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 00:28:00 -
[593] - Quote
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:@LiangSo bad You're someone who doesn't pvp very often, let alone mass frigates, and let alone test them. Your comments are based solely on what you think they can do, not what they can actually do. Go and try them out and realize how hilarious everything you just said is. And in regard to your video; You didn't actually showcase anything that AFs do better than any other ship. All you did was bait people into a fight, then drop the hard hitters on them at which point they typically stopped shooting at the frigates And nice work using an Arbitrator vs some turret ships. I'm sure he was hitting them just fine without that, right
Amazing. PVPing from 8-9pm until 3-4am almost every day is "not PVPing very often". Even more amusing is your horrific lack of attention to detail. In the first fight of that video I tanked both the Myrmidon AND the Harbinger almost by myself. Furthermore, the killmails for both of those will reveal that I did in fact do something that other ships wouldn't be so great at. In thee second fight I warped into an armor dual neut cane and escaped.
But as I said - I'm more than capable of posting lots and lots and lots of fraps footage of me in a Harpy doing things that most of you EFT warrirors claim is "impossible". Its very simple: the 4th bonus is a welcome addition. The role bonus is a bit iffy but I wouldn't argue over it. The extra slot? Way over the top.
And ultimate I feel that much of the testing that happens on sisi is wildly inaccurate when applied to TQ. The combat that happens in either place is dramatically different and values different metrics. I am PVPing on TQ and doing very very well.
-Liang Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Prometheus Exenthal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 00:38:00 -
[594] - Quote
For one, the Harbinger didn't start shooting at you until you were in close orbit under his guns. He's not going to hit you there at all, even if lasers didn't already have horrible tracking.
I hate to break it to you, but escaping a dual neut cane has more to do with said cane being bad, rather than some expert piloting by you.
And as I've said repeatedly, prove that the extra slot makes said ships overpowered. Except for the Harpy, they don't tank significantly more than they already can (less than TQ in the Hawks case, actually). And except for the currently low damage rocket ships, they aren't dealing significantly higher damage without some sacrifice. CSM Alternate & PVP Samurai www.promsrage.com |
Liang Nuren
Heretic Army Heretic Nation
573
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 00:47:00 -
[595] - Quote
By the time the Harbinger could even target me, I was well under his guns. Furthermore, he was not only running a neut and web, but also was running FMP instead of HPL. Furthermore, no matter what I bring as fraps evidence you are going to say that the people I fought "sucked". A classic No True Scottsman and/or Shifting Goalposts, really.
Ultimately what this comes down to is that I fly assault frigs on TQ every day and thus I'm in a pretty reasonable position to see how they fit into the overall ecosystem. All the sisi testing in the world isn't going to tell people who have never PVPed on TQ how they will perform on TQ.
My position is very clear: the ships need some help. They don't need recreated to be godlike power houses of doom.
-Liang
Ed: Also, you think that another ares would have been better in the Harby fight? Our only other damage dealer besides my Harpy was the Ishtar - and I'll give you two guesses who did more damage in that fight. Protip: it wasn't the Ishtar. As to calling it a "gank video" - hardly. In all of those fights we engaged what should have been easy wins for the other guys. Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?) Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
90
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 00:56:00 -
[596] - Quote
All frigates have high scan resolution, superior speed, and superior agility, with great acceleration as a By-product. Compared to all other class of ships. With-in their class it's not a big deal.
Currently, even if a Interceptor pilot were approaching a battle-cruiser or cruiser @ a angle. A battle-cruiser Set-up with 2 tracking enhancers and using pulse lasers or auto-cannons. That Interceptor Pilot would not be able to induce enough transversal to the point where the Interceptor would not take significant damage. When in a sustained orbit (20,000m or more). You still cannot not maintain enough transversal against a moving target. To the point where you are not taking any damage. Provided the Target is using modules above. Mind you, most Interceptors are paper thin.
The new assault frigates would be able to do the same (@ 15 - 17,000m). However, with significantly more ability to soak incoming damage. With the Option to just go into warp scrambler range and disable the targets propulsion module (micro warp drive). Could possibly just destroy the target alone. In situations where you are engaging multiple targets. A assault frigate becomes alot more survivable. Any frigate can tackle a single ship for their fleet to gank. In situations where there are multiple ships able to project damage. Interceptors get FLY SWATTED (Instant).
Assault frigates will outperform Interceptors because they're more survivable @ Interceptor engagement ranges. The extra range provided by some Interceptors are not very useful. Unless the target cannot project damage @ that range. then most any frigate with a warp disruptor will do. The closer you're to a target. The more you induce transversal. Moving away from a general shield-Hurricane set-up. Would just help that pilot track a Interceptor better.
Not hard to understand. You're giving assault frigates Interceptor like bonuses. With the effective hit-points of a cruiser.
Who wouldn't want to fly a DEIMOS or Vagabond, with the signature and velocity of a frigate. Still being able to have the effective hit-points of a cruiser. Not to mention a nice Interceptor like bonus to reduce signature radius of micro-warp drive. Cool, now a logistic ship will be able to lock these new interceptors. Instead of them just exploding to a swift breeze (Dramatic lol).
-proxyyyy |
m0cking bird
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
90
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 01:14:00 -
[597] - Quote
With these proposed changes. Most assault frigates will be able to Tank significantly more than They're able to now...
Wolf (buffer increased from under 10k - 15k) Enyo (buffer increased from under 10k - 15k) Insane active tank Ishkur (buffer increased from under 10k - 15k) Insane active tank, while having significantly damage and projected damage. Hawk (Insane active tank or very large buffer tank). Harpy (buffer increased from under 10k - 15 or more)
The ones below are already able to
Vengeance (buffer & active) over 15k ehp Jaguar (buffer) 15k ehp Hawk (active)
These changes really just enable most all of the other assault frigates able to tank ALOT better. Retribution is the odd man out, but it can tank p well now v0v.
-proxyyyy |
Hungry Eyes
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
333
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 01:44:00 -
[598] - Quote
AF's are a go. they've already posted them as a ready feature on the Crucible 1.1 page.
Overall, I have to say, I like the work Tallest is doing. I just hope he buffs medium rails soon, fixes a few ship bonuses, and Gall should be good to go. |
Prometheus Exenthal
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
77
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 01:51:00 -
[599] - Quote
@Liang Medium lasers have awful tracking. Period. You were well under his tracking to start, and you didn't have any worthwhile pressure on your tank as a result. This is why the neut on said Harb didn't have much effect when put against your trouble-free boosting injector AF.
And yes, those people *should* have been able to win with what they had. Thank you for pointing out that they were bad. The video didn't portray you guys for being expert pilots as much as it showed how bad they were. There was no stress to indicate that it was a "really close fight", which is why it's called a gank.
I say an Ares would have been more effective because lets be honest here, that Harbingers don't exactly have the biggest active tanks. It doesn't matter how much that Ishtar actually did in relation to you because that Harbinger was never going to catch that Ishtar. All he had to do was drop drones and remain pointed, he would die. The AF wasn't exactly the linchpin of your engagement.
And yes, thank you for explaining to the class exactly what about these changes makes the AFs such unrelenting forces that need to be nerfed again before hitting TQ. Some of you keep saying this but haven't actually put forth anything that isn't already possible on TQ. A few AFs that manage to land on a larger hull will kill it? No, you don't say!
@proxyyyy lmao, what? NONE of the ships tanks increase that much over their current TQ counterparts. NONE of the ships can actively tank more (except Ishkur/Harpy) than they can on TQ already. The Hawk actually has a smaller active tank than on TQ (5% bonus, not 7.5% as stated in the OP).
Stop being so foolish.
An AF can not effectively replace an Interceptors role. Can it do it if you gimp your fit for it? Sure. Is it better than an Interceptor? Not even close.
The only turret based ship BC that really hurts tackle at range is the nano-cane. That's it. No Harbinger that fits two tracking enhancers and FMPLs is something that's useful for anything other than swatting tackle or taking pot shots at people.
AFs cannot field & maintain a reasonable tank while MWDing and producing a long range point. It simply doesn't work as the ships are still too slow, too weak, too cap deficient (even with injector), and too vulnerable to actually be considered as something that could overtake Interceptors.
In fact, the Jaguar (which is most likely to fill this spot), will take 5x more damage, than an Interceptor, from a run of the mill Harbinger with scorch. That doesn't even factor in drones. Lets not even begin to discuss the speed advantage for fast tacklers and the ability to tackle outside of large neut range.
By your reasoning, Faction & Pirate frigates are better tacklers than Inteceptors are. They nearly have the AF tanks, but are waaay faster and more agile. Only the Dramiel & Firetail really come close
As for a larger engagement, yes, they will both likely be swatted. That's what CCP introduced Interdictors. Thanks for coming out though. CSM Alternate & PVP Samurai www.promsrage.com |
Zircon Dasher
Zirconia Trade Group
59
|
Posted - 2012.01.12 02:18:00 -
[600] - Quote
Hungry Eyes wrote:AF's are a go. they've already posted them as a ready feature on the Crucible 1.1 page.
Overall, I have to say, I like the work Tallest is doing. I just hope he buffs medium rails soon, fixes a few ship bonuses, and Gall should be good to go.
WOOT WOOT!
Party is over folks. Everyone move along.
Nothing to see here.
Move along.
EDIT:
This thread got an avg. of ~85.5 posts per day (though 5 pages were just in the past 24hrs).
Fun facts are fun. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 [20] 30 .. 37 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |