EVE Search - Fixing Assault Frigates: +20% max cap per AF level

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Fixing Assault Frigates: +20% max cap per AF level

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Flitterby	Posted - 2010.04.29 23:07:00 - [1] Assault Frigates are seen as weak, largely because they're lacking a fourth bonus that other T2 ships enjoy. I believe that giving all Assault Frigs a bonus of +20% max capacitor capacity per AF level would be a good way to boost the ship class. Reasoning: 1. Improves resistance to neuts, which are the bane of all frigates. 2. Doesn't step on toes of inties by being a direct speed boost. Sure you could perma-run a MWD, but you'd still have huge signature. 3. Versatile. You could fit a neut rather than a nos in the utility high for taking out frigs (even without boosted tracking). Active tank. More ewar. Increased versatility is good because it reduces predictability of fits. 4. Big boost to Amarr AF (due to laser cap use), which are currently seen as the weakest. Small boost to Ishkur, Jag, and Wolf, which are currently seen as the strongest. 5. Makes a reason to get AF V. Everyone likes Recon V because it gives a huge boost, so model AF in the same way. 6. Would allow long warps even with MWD fitted!
Rakshan Gallente Navy of Xoc Wildly Inappropriate.	Posted - 2010.04.29 23:19:00 - [2] ew..and..ew... imo AF's need an afterburner speed bonus. MWD is useless and will get you killed more often than saving you. and even IF you did increase your cap...improving resistance to neuts? right. you will still be drained dry in a max of 2 cycles so that bonus makes no sense. AF's are already versatile an AB bonus would just make them more viable for small gang stuff..as is right now i would rather fly a T1 frig because its cheap as hell and with the AB bonus you would still have incentive to get AF V. more so than a cap bonus. warps would never be an issue if you fit an AB like a sane person. Life is Pain.....Get over it!!!!
Lance Fighter Amarr	Posted - 2010.04.29 23:26:00 - [3] 20% less grid/cpu cost for fitting medium turrets per level? Originally by: CCP Shadow Have you ever wished you could have prevented a train wreck before it actually happened? I need to stop this one before the craziness begins.
Duchess Starbuckington	Posted - 2010.04.29 23:39:00 - [4] Originally by: Rakshan ew..and..ew... imo AF's need an afterburner speed bonus. MWD is useless and will get you killed more often than saving you. and even IF you did increase your cap...improving resistance to neuts? right. you will still be drained dry in a max of 2 cycles so that bonus makes no sense. AF's are already versatile an AB bonus would just make them more viable for small gang stuff..as is right now i would rather fly a T1 frig because its cheap as hell and with the AB bonus you would still have incentive to get AF V. more so than a cap bonus. warps would never be an issue if you fit an AB like a sane person. You do realise they tried an AB bonus? All that happened was it made the Iskkur and Jaguar hideously OP and left the rest still "meh". It caused way more problems than it solved. _________________________________ Originally by: Dodgy Past Can't see the Caldari approving of free love though.
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2010.04.30 01:05:00 - [5] Doubling the cap will still leave AF susceptible to medium and heavy nuets. It doesn't fix things. A nuet resistance or immunity would be worth talking about. Increase capacitor by 25% so you can fit a MWD AND an active tank if so desired. My two cents.
SFX Bladerunner Minmatar The Hurt Locker Sandbox Bullies	Posted - 2010.04.30 01:12:00 - [6] Edited by: SFX Bladerunner on 30/04/2010 01:13:04 Originally by: Zarnak Wulf Doubling the cap will still leave AF susceptible to medium and heavy nuets. It doesn't fix things. A nuet resistance or immunity would be worth talking about. Increase capacitor by 25% so you can fit a MWD AND an active tank if so desired. My two cents. introducing a new fixed bonus will make AFs in line with other shiptypes: 99.99% reduction in CPU and powergrid usage of doomsday devices. /thread __________________________________________________ History is much like an endless waltz, the three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever..
NoNah	Posted - 2010.04.30 01:22:00 - [7] Originally by: SFX Bladerunner Edited by: SFX Bladerunner on 30/04/2010 01:13:04 Originally by: Zarnak Wulf Doubling the cap will still leave AF susceptible to medium and heavy nuets. It doesn't fix things. A nuet resistance or immunity would be worth talking about. Increase capacitor by 25% so you can fit a MWD AND an active tank if so desired. My two cents. introducing a new fixed bonus will make AFs in line with other shiptypes: 99.99% reduction in CPU and powergrid usage of doomsday devices. /thread Nice save with the edit. ;) Parrots, commence! Postcount: 507523
Flitterby	Posted - 2010.04.30 01:31:00 - [8] Seriously though, I think more cap (and therefore, cap regen) would give AF quite a bit of versatility. If +20%/level isn't enough, then make it +50% or whatever. Give them infinite cap! (Probably not.) The point is, it would be unique, help them resist neuts (unlike all other frigates), and use all sorts of interesting active modules.
Lego Maniac Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force	Posted - 2010.04.30 02:23:00 - [9] Originally by: Flitterby 4. Big boost to Amarr AF (due to laser cap use) you realize out of the two Amarr assault frigs, only one uses lasers right? you're asking for a boost to one ship, and it won't even be significant if you are hit with a heavy neut IMO you can't fix all AFs with a blanket boost like the one you're suggesting, each one needs different things the enyo: needs to have its optimal bonus swapped for a falloff bonus (which is actually inherent to the incursus hull), but this has more to do with fixing blasters overall the ishkur: the bonuses are more or less fine and serve it pretty well, but personally I'd like to see it swapping the hybrid bonuses so that it is more drone oriented; i.e. instead of an optimal bonus have 10% drone damage and hitpoints per AF skill level (this might be too much, maybe 5%?), instead of the frig skill giving 5% damage bonus per level, change it to 5mbit/sec to bandwidth so that it can field a full flight of mediums, and increase the bay bonus to 10m3 per level the retribution: PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD MOVE THE NON-TURRET UTILITY HIGH DOWN TO MID!! this addresses the change OP had in mind since it allows for a cap injector in addition to a propulsion mod, or any combination of whatever two mids are desired if you eschew an injector the vengeance: fix lolkets (I'm not holding my breath) - this would make the vengeance a viable, active tanked soloer in its own right as suggested by its AF skill bonuses the hawk: a shield boosted frigate sized missile sniper? no, no... change the boost amount to a 5% launcher ROF bonus (it makes sense that since the harpy is pint-sized eagle, the hawk should be a mini cerb), and fix lolkets the harpy: I honestly don't know about this one, its role is pretty well defined but I just don't see people flying this; fix blasters and I bet its role will be expanded the jaguar and wolf: just simply need to trade their optimal and falloff bonuses so that their roles will be more well defined as an AC ship and artillery ship, instead of the current situation in which both do the same thing __________________________________________________________ ˄ ____________ ˄
Lt Angus Caldari the united Negative Ten.	Posted - 2010.04.30 04:09:00 - [10] +20% enemy locktime per level please resize your signature to the maximum allowed file size of 24000 bytes. Navigator Shhhh, Im hunting Badgers

SFX Bladerunner Minmatar The Hurt Locker Sandbox Bullies	Posted - 2010.04.30 04:37:00 - [11] Originally by: NoNah Originally by: SFX Bladerunner Edited by: SFX Bladerunner on 30/04/2010 01:13:04 Originally by: Zarnak Wulf Doubling the cap will still leave AF susceptible to medium and heavy nuets. It doesn't fix things. A nuet resistance or immunity would be worth talking about. Increase capacitor by 25% so you can fit a MWD AND an active tank if so desired. My two cents. introducing a new fixed bonus will make AFs in line with other shiptypes: 99.99% reduction in CPU and powergrid usage of doomsday devices. /thread Nice save with the edit. ;) Thank you. Right after editing however I wondered wether an AF could hold enough fuel needed for a doomsday device. Then I wondered whether or not doomsdays actually use fuel. Then I decided I didn't care and went off to do something else __________________________________________________ History is much like an endless waltz, the three beats of war, peace and revolution continue on forever..
Zeba Minmatar Honourable East India Trading Company	Posted - 2010.04.30 05:03:00 - [12] Just what my jag needs. Moar cap. Originally by: CCP Zymurgist Get off the forums and go kill someone! Originally by: Amarr Supremacist Yeah, it(Jaguar) almost has cruiser level tank and gank!
Ashira Twilight	Posted - 2010.04.30 05:35:00 - [13] "Just" give them jumpdrives. I bet they'd be used a bit more, and nobody would complain about their combat effectiveness(except the hawk and the amarr AFs which would still be crap).
RasaelWolf Caldari Easy Co. Important Internet Spaceship League	Posted - 2010.04.30 07:54:00 - [14] Edited by: RasaelWolf on 30/04/2010 07:54:11 Originally by: Lego Maniac Originally by: Flitterby 4. Big boost to Amarr AF (due to laser cap use) you realize out of the two Amarr assault frigs, only one uses lasers right? you're asking for a boost to one ship, and it won't even be significant if you are hit with a heavy neut IMO you can't fix all AFs with a blanket boost like the one you're suggesting, each one needs different things the ishkur: the bonuses are more or less fine and serve it pretty well, but personally I'd like to see it swapping the hybrid bonuses so that it is more drone oriented; i.e. instead of an optimal bonus have 10% drone damage and hitpoints per AF skill level (this might be too much, maybe 5%?), instead of the frig skill giving 5% damage bonus per level, change it to 5mbit/sec to bandwidth so that it can field a full flight of mediums, and increase the bay bonus to 10m3 per level Swap the drone bay bonus to even moar blaster damage, and give it a dronebay of 50m3 from the start ^^ ---------------------------------------- "The more we learn, the less we care" ----------------------------------------
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2010.04.30 08:53:00 - [15] Originally by: Lego Maniac IMO you can't fix all AFs with a blanket boost like the one you're suggesting, each one needs different things Yeah. Any blanket change just makes the good AFs better without fixing the bad ones, further emphasising the intra-class imbalance.
FlameGlow Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2010.04.30 08:59:00 - [16] give them old bomber bonuses of fitting big guns with bonus to hit small targets and regular cloak with no recalibration Originally by: CCP Manifest Imploding servers are not a part of our business model.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.04.30 09:00:00 - [17] Originally by: Gypsio III Yeah. Any blanket change just makes the good AFs better without fixing the bad ones, further emphasising the intra-class imbalance. Quite right. I would advise the OP to read the relevant threads in Assembly Hall and F&I forum to get an idea of what might be required to make AFs valuable and to see the arguments for/against practically all possible permutations.
olzi Caldari Space Perverts and Forum Warriors United	Posted - 2010.04.30 09:05:00 - [18] How about instead of a direct capacitor boost, you give them a dedicated cargo bay for small capacitor booster charges. Maybe even throw in a cap booster efficiency bonus per assault ship level. This way you still have to fit a cap booster, so it's not as drastic of a boost.
Admiral Pelleon White Shadow Imperium Z.E.R.G	Posted - 2010.04.30 09:13:00 - [19] Horrible. ________
Nora Rage Heroes. Talos Coalition	Posted - 2010.04.30 10:49:00 - [20] Hows about an EHP boost from the 9k-11k range to more approaching the 20k range? Leave em AB slow and with 150-250dps but able to withstand more punishment so they are more useful in the heavy tackler role. Also they would see more solo use as a decent fit should give a T1 cruiser a run for its money.

Battlingbean Heaven's Gate	Posted - 2010.04.30 10:52:00 - [21] Originally by: Lego Maniac the harpy: I honestly don't know about this one, its role is pretty well defined but I just don't see people flying this; fix blasters and I bet its role will be expanded I'd like to see the harpy get 5% shield resists. Would be in line with Caldari hybrid line up.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.04.30 10:57:00 - [22] Originally by: Nora Rage Hows about an EHP boost from the 9k-11k range to more approaching the 20k range? Leave em AB slow and with 150-250dps but able to withstand more punishment so they are more useful in the heavy tackler role. Also they would see more solo use as a decent fit should give a T1 cruiser a run for its money. You would have to go through them one by one to balance them or the Jaguar will be the only one flown due to a truly massive passive shield tank. Might as well spend the time needed cooking up individual tweaks so that they all have a place. The uniform bonus is almost impossible to do without messing the class up even more than it is except if the bonus is completely unrelated to combat performance (in which case you maintain current status quo).
Arec Bardwin	Posted - 2010.04.30 11:52:00 - [23] How about 10% reduced effectiveness of enemy webs/level?
Deva Blackfire Shut Up And Play WE FORM VOLTRON	Posted - 2010.04.30 12:08:00 - [24] Originally by: Arec Bardwin How about 10% reduced effectiveness of enemy webs/level? How about you read this line and understand it: Quote: The uniform bonus is almost impossible to do without messing the class up even more than it is except if the bonus is completely unrelated to combat performance (in which case you maintain current status quo).
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2010.04.30 12:10:00 - [25] Originally by: Arec Bardwin How about 10% reduced effectiveness of enemy webs/level? Which part of the following is giving you difficulty? Originally by: Hirana Yoshida Originally by: Gypsio III Originally by: Lego Maniac IMO you can't fix all AFs with a blanket boost like the one you're suggesting, each one needs different things Yeah. Any blanket change just makes the good AFs better without fixing the bad ones, further emphasising the intra-class imbalance. Quite right. I would advise the OP to read the relevant threads in Assembly Hall and F&I forum to get an idea of what might be required to make AFs valuable and to see the arguments for/against practically all possible permutations.
Aliraxi Gallente Cow Boys From HeII The Volition Cult	Posted - 2010.04.30 12:30:00 - [26] Originally by: Battlingbean Originally by: Lego Maniac the harpy: I honestly don't know about this one, its role is pretty well defined but I just don't see people flying this; fix blasters and I bet its role will be expanded I'd like to see the harpy get 5% shield resists. Would be in line with Caldari hybrid line up. Mah Harpy needz moar tank +1.
Valea Silpha Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.04.30 12:49:00 - [27] I like the idea of dumping some more EHP on them. Least then you could actually use them like small fast HACs instead of being like the parents-basement dwelling 20something unshaven big brother to frigates fourteen year old. If CCP would EVER bother giving us a frigate sized logistics platform (I'm looking at you t3 frigs) then we'd really be on to something. For what its worth... I think AFs should get both a blanket bonus change and then specific tweaks. Strip out the non-functioning resist bonus, change it to a functioning HP per level bonus. Naturally you'd have to tweak the jag to make it less passive tanky, but that shouldn't be too hard. Ideally you just drop the grid a bit, so that a new jag with say a hardener or two has the same HP as a medium extender one had before. So the jag stays the same and everything else gets closer to its survivability. Next, fix rockets. Cuz its not funny when fitting ACs to your retribution gives better range and damage. Enyo gets the deimos paint job (red is so last year). Retribution EITHER gets its utility high changed to a mid OR it gets another turret. I don't mind if its gang only, but it should be the best frigate damage dealer out there if it is. Either way it should loose its laser cap bonus and changed to a straight cap bonus so you can active tank or MWD if you like. Finally, the wolf and jag trade bonuses and that should do it. Not perfect, but finally I'd look at some other AFs tbh.
VanNostrum	Posted - 2010.04.30 13:36:00 - [28] Originally by: Valea Silpha Finally, the wolf and jag trade bonuses and that should do it. hmmm, No.
Ophelia Ursus	Posted - 2010.04.30 13:38:00 - [29] To fix AFs: 1) Increase their speed and agility to match that of their T1 counterparts. As it stands, an Enyo with an mwd and a 200mm plate does 2.1 km/s before heat and aligns in 7.2 s; this compares horribly to the Incursus with the same plate (2.7 km/s, 5.3s align). 2) Add individual 4th bonuses and tweak the fitting room on the various ships. The aim here should be to slightly boost the good ones (which are, in the broader context of the game, no more than OK-ish), to significantly boost the mediocre ones, and to massively boost (or completely re-work) the Hawk and the Retribution because, well, lawl. My preferred adjustments: Harpy: Small increase in PG (maybe +5 or so). Fourth bonus should be 5% shield resists/level. Hawk: Damage bonus turned into the Kessie's 10%/level for kinetic missiles, 5%/level for other missiles. Shield boost bonus turned into 5% shield resists/level. Big increase in PG (+15-20 units) and CPU (+30-40 units). Fourth bonus should be the Nighthawks 5%/level bonus to explosion velocity. Enyo: Drop the utility high for a midslot, give it a second 5%/level damage bonus, give its capacitor a little buff. It's actually surprisingly non-terrible on paper in its current incarnation, if you can overlook the lack of a web. Ishkur: Don't know. Very hard to come up with a fourth bonus that would be useful but not lol-OP. Mayyyyyyyybe give it 5%/level to drone damage/HP but remove one high slot/turret, but I'm not sure. Wolf: Give it a tracking bonus, a lot more CPU, and drop the utility high for a mid. Jag: Give it a tracking bonus. The end. The optimal bonus is kind of useless, but some people do use it, and eh, this ship's probably the best of the bunch already. Vengeance: Swap its damage bonus for that of the Inquisitor (10%/level to EM missiles, 5%/level to everything else). Make its fourth bonus 5%/level extra explosion velocity or a second damage bonus. Retribution: Drop one high to a mid, maybe cut one low for a third mid as well. If it goes 4/3/4, drop the optimal bonus for a second 5%/level damage bonus; if it only gets two mids, keep the optimal bonus. Either way, 5% armor resists/level as the fourth bonus. 3) Ceterum censeo, Dramiel esse delendam
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2010.04.30 13:53:00 - [30] Edited by: Zarnak Wulf on 30/04/2010 13:53:25 Originally by: Ophelia Ursus Wolf: Give it a tracking bonus, a lot more CPU, and drop the utility high for a mid. Jag: Give it a tracking bonus. The end. The optimal bonus is kind of useless, but some people do use it, and eh, this ship's probably the best of the bunch already. A faster, more agile Wolf w/ a tracking bonus would be fine as is. I like the small nuet I can put on the ship too. If you made these changes to AFs then I would recommend adding T2 resists to interceptors. The combat inties at least would appreciate that. Finally, blanket bonuses to T2 frigates is nothing new. Interceptors? Covert Ops? Stealth bombers? They all have them. The trick is to find the right one.

Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.04.30 14:21:00 - [31] Originally by: Ophelia Ursus snip This actually sounds very good. It would make combat interceptors rather sad however, but they still get to be faster (and they weren't winning vs AFs,er, Jaguar up close anyway). They're already getting a defacto price reduction in Tyrannis, which covers the price aspect of their suckage. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2010.04.30 14:30:00 - [32] When will people realize that no one single bonus to cover all AFs will sovle the problem?? Each and every one of them needs to have a spesific bonus tailord for that ship and its role. Be it tank, speed of weapon spesific, it matters not. Its not going to be one easy fix, that should been baltently obvious with the AB changes CCP tried on Sisi. What CCP needs to do, is sit dowm take a long hard look at AFs, then tehy need to work on them individually, tehn balance it up towrads each other. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Valea Silpha Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.04.30 14:38:00 - [33] Edited by: Valea Silpha on 30/04/2010 14:38:08 Originally by: VanNostrum Originally by: Valea Silpha Finally, the wolf and jag trade bonuses and that should do it. hmmm, No. Care to expand on that or just gunna be a **? It makes a lot of sense to give the jag falloff, and wolf optimal. In fact its been suggested more times than I can care to count, and it would make both ships better. Would the vaga be any good without its falloff bonus ? How about the muninn with no optimal bonus ? As it stands the jag NEVER uses its optimal bonus because it gives you less than 1km extra ac range. Yes the wolf does use the falloff bonus, but its the obvious choice for an arty platform, more turrets, more lows, and so if it DID have an optimal bonus it would get used. Would take arty range to ~40km. So yeah... why shouldn't the jag get falloff and the wolf get optimal ? Or are you as I first intimated, a ** ?
Marko Riva Adamant Inc.	Posted - 2010.04.30 15:07:00 - [34] Edited by: Marko Riva on 30/04/2010 15:14:45 Turn them into "short range bombers"? Tracking penalty but an increased damagemod. More dps but can't take on small stuff. And then balance them based on that role? ----------- I think, therefore I'm single. Want to learn combat/PVP? Alliance creation service
Ophelia Ursus	Posted - 2010.04.30 15:17:00 - [35] Originally by: Zarnak Wulf Edited by: Zarnak Wulf on 30/04/2010 13:53:25 Originally by: Ophelia Ursus Wolf: Give it a tracking bonus, a lot more CPU, and drop the utility high for a mid. Jag: Give it a tracking bonus. The end. The optimal bonus is kind of useless, but some people do use it, and eh, this ship's probably the best of the bunch already. A faster, more agile Wolf w/ a tracking bonus would be fine as is. I like the small nuet I can put on the ship too. If you made these changes to AFs then I would recommend adding T2 resists to interceptors. The combat inties at least would appreciate that. Finally, blanket bonuses to T2 frigates is nothing new. Interceptors? Covert Ops? Stealth bombers? They all have them. The trick is to find the right one. Well, the way I see it, both neuts and nos can be very nice on a Wolf in certain contexts, but a cap booster is arguably more useful than a nos if you're in danger of capping out, and a web is probably more useful than a neut when fighting other frigates when paired with the falloff bonus. Agree with you about blanket bonuses, and I did very much like the old AB speed bonus (it may not have done much for the worse AFs, but the jag would have been awesome), but that ship has apparently sailed.
Sidus Isaacs Gallente	Posted - 2010.04.30 15:48:00 - [36] Originally by: Valea Silpha Edited by: Valea Silpha on 30/04/2010 14:50:54 Originally by: VanNostrum Originally by: Valea Silpha Finally, the wolf and jag trade bonuses and that should do it. hmmm, No. Care to expand on that or just gunna be a **? It makes a lot of sense to give the jag falloff, and wolf optimal. In fact its been suggested more times than I can care to count, and it would make both ships better. Would the vaga be any good without its falloff bonus ? How about the muninn with no optimal bonus ? As it stands the jag NEVER uses its optimal bonus because it gives you less than 1km extra ac range. Yes the wolf does use the falloff bonus, but its the obvious choice for an arty platform, more turrets, more lows, and so if it DID have an optimal bonus it would get used. Would take arty range to ~40km. So yeah... why shouldn't the jag get falloff and the wolf get optimal ? Or are you as I first intimated, a ? Originally by:** Sidus Isaacs When will people realize that no one single bonus to cover all AFs will sovle the problem?? Each and every one of them needs to have a spesific bonus tailord for that ship and its role. Be it tank, speed of weapon spesific, it matters not. Its not going to be one easy fix, that should been baltently obvious with the AB changes CCP tried on Sisi. What CCP needs to do, is sit dowm take a long hard look at AFs, then tehy need to work on them individually, tehn balance it up towrads each other. I don't think it needs a whole lot of abstract thought... they just need to look at the HAC equivalent ships and give the AFs bonuses along those lines... The good AFs are already that. Mini vaga, mini ishtar. The rocket AFs aren't actually that bad, its just that rockets are god awful. If you ignore their DPS, then they are just fine at being a mini sac and a mini cerb. So that covers four out of eight. The enyo might have problems being a mini diemost, but then again it might do better because it could far easier beat out tracking. The harpy is actually almost ok as it is now, but could do with a little something to get blaster range out past 10km. And that just leaves the retribution, and like I said before, it should either be a damage machine or get another mid. The mid is obvious while the damage thing because... you need to justify the lack of utility somehow. And tbh, I think thats all that would need changing. Harpy is a rail boat ;). It really sucks as an up close blaster boat imo, more so since far cheaper options do it just as well or better. So making its blaster range go up is a bad idea, give it something that would make a rail harpy more happy, like a resistance bonus or more damage, then we are talking. Actually, a resitance bonus on it would be rather good, both for close balster fighitng, and rails. You have taken too light a look on the AFs, and your comaprisons are not that good. They don't need weeks upon weeks of stydy, of course, but they need some serious thought, not just flimsical bonuses based off their "HAC counterparts". They just need decent bonuses fitting for each of them. And some fo tehm need a serious look into grid and cpu as well. Hawk for instance is pure trash, even if rockets and SMLs was decent. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://desusig.crumplecorn.com/sigs.html
Ghoest	Posted - 2010.04.30 16:04:00 - [37] There is a serious problem with AF effectiveness/usefulness. This isnt the answer. Wherever you went - Here you are.
Veronica Damask	Posted - 2010.04.30 16:05:00 - [38] Hahaha I know. Give them fitting bonus for medium sized weapons and 100% damage bonus
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.04.30 17:25:00 - [39] Originally by: Valea Silpha Edited by: Valea Silpha on 30/04/2010 14:50:54 Originally by: VanNostrum Originally by: Valea Silpha Finally, the wolf and jag trade bonuses and that should do it. hmmm, No. Care to expand on that or just gunna be a **? It makes a lot of sense to give the jag falloff, and wolf optimal. In fact its been suggested more times than I can care to count, and it would make both ships better. Would the vaga be any good without its falloff bonus ? How about the muninn with no optimal bonus ? As it stands the jag NEVER uses its optimal bonus because it gives you less than 1km extra ac range. Yes the wolf does use the falloff bonus, but its the obvious choice for an arty platform, more turrets, more lows, and so if it DID have an optimal bonus it would get used. Would take arty range to ~40km. So yeah... why shouldn't the jag get falloff and the wolf get optimal ? Or are you as I first intimated, a ? honestly, wolf should get both optimal + falloff bonuses, tied to the AF skill, while getting a double damage bonus tied to the frigate skill (10%/lvl like the 'ranis) (and some more cpu while you're at it). the jag, a falloff bonus instead optimal? sure, why not? --- Quote:** The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Neesa Corrinne Stimulus Rote Kapelle	Posted - 2010.04.30 21:07:00 - [40] I don't understand why people can't see that the main problem with the bad AF's is completely due to two things. Slot layout and weapon systems that need to be buffed. Rockets, Blasters and Mid slots will have to be fixed regardless of what the fourth bonus is!! If Rockets, Blasters and the slot layouts were reworked, and then all AF's were given a 5% per level Afterburner speed bonus, then very few of them would suck for PVP. The AB bonus is only a bad idea right now because things aren't balanced for them yet. Fix Rockets. Fix Blasters. Move Utility High Slot on Vengeance to Mid Slot. Swap Falloff and Optimal bonus on Jag and Wolf. Make whatever other individual ship changes CCP is gonna make. Last, Give all AF's a 5% per level Afterburner speed bonus. After these changes are made, the overall bonus doesn't look so bad.

AvaAlt	Posted - 2010.05.01 03:24:00 - [41] Make em cost about 1/3 what they do currently...then their price will be in line with their usefulness.
VanNostrum	Posted - 2010.05.01 07:15:00 - [42] Originally by: Valea Silpha Edited by: Valea Silpha on 30/04/2010 14:50:54 Originally by: VanNostrum Originally by: Valea Silpha Finally, the wolf and jag trade bonuses and that should do it. hmmm, No. Care to expand on that or just gunna be a **? It makes a lot of sense to give the jag falloff, and wolf optimal. In fact its been suggested more times than I can care to count, and it would make both ships better. Would the vaga be any good without its falloff bonus ? How about the muninn with no optimal bonus ? And who would fly wolf if Jag got it all? YOU Are the **! Leave my wolf alone you dumbass!
1600 RT	Posted - 2010.05.01 12:13:00 - [43] Originally by: Neesa Corrinne I don't understand why people can't see that the main problem with the bad AF's is completely due to two things. Slot layout and weapon systems that need to be buffed. Rockets, Blasters and Mid slots will have to be fixed regardless of what the fourth bonus is!! If Rockets, Blasters and the slot layouts were reworked, and then all AF's were given a 5% per level Afterburner speed bonus, then very few of them would suck for PVP. The AB bonus is only a bad idea right now because things aren't balanced for them yet. Fix Rockets. Fix Blasters. Move Utility High Slot on Vengeance to Mid Slot. Swap Falloff and Optimal bonus on Jag and Wolf. Make whatever other individual ship changes CCP is gonna make. Last, Give all AF's a 5% per level Afterburner speed bonus. After these changes are made, the overall bonus doesn't look so bad. small blaster are ok. rockets need love ok but need to pay attention because the vengeance could become really OP. i dont know why you want a high of the vengeance moved to a mid, probably you mean the retribution.
elorran Minmatar Department of Defence	Posted - 2010.05.01 12:29:00 - [44] When AF's first got introduced they were the first ships to make use of the racial tanking method we see as a standard on all t2 and t3 ships today. Given that they now lack their 4th bonus what about going back to the original concept of a tanking bonus. But instead of making it resistance against the empire factions enemies, make it a plug for the hole in the tank based on so much resistance per level. Example, minmatar get em and thermal to tank against amarr racial damage. Add a plug for explosive and kinetic damage treating them as secondary damage types so at level 5 they'd be on par with the thermal resistance bonus (em is primary for minmatar tanking remember). Some of the overall health of the AF's might need a slight tweak but it would give them a nice rounded out bonus set and increase the general purpose use a bit more. - - elorran is part time theoretical theorist, dedicated practitioner of Ti Kwan Leep, and an avid connoisseur of fine whines
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2010.05.02 00:28:00 - [45] Assault frigates as a class are frustrating. I'll use the Minmatar as an example and won't touch upon the other races. The rifter has 10 slots. It's a 4-3-3 setup. Both the wolf and the jaguar have 11 slots. That's right, they got a massive one slot improvement over their T1 version! The Jaguar improved upon the original. 4-4-3. The wolf is a wierd 5-2-4 where they stripped away a mid and threw it into either a high or a low. Had the wolf been a 5-3-3 it would be alot more sexy with interesting tactical options. As mentioned above the increased mass of AF makes them very odd as well. We can debate until blue in the face what the best solution for the assault frigates is. The real question is: What does CCP envision their role as? Did they really want a sniper/close range version just like HACs? If not, do we really need two in each class? Hell, give each two - whoah- two slots and be done with it. I'd take a 5-4-3 jag-wolf with falloff, double dmg, and tracking bonuses. Yes Please!
Number 17 Caldari COLD-Wing	Posted - 2010.05.02 12:39:00 - [46] how about giving the secondary AF (hawk, Vengeance, etc) the following bonus: 99% reduction in the CPU need of Warfare Link modules. Hell yea, mini command ships FTW !!!!
Grimpak Gallente Noir. Noir. Mercenary Group	Posted - 2010.05.02 13:15:00 - [47] Originally by: Zarnak Wulf If not, do we really need two in each class? Hell, give each two - whoah- two slots and be done with it. I'd take a 5-4-3 jag-wolf with falloff, double dmg, and tracking bonuses. Yes Please! nah jag gets the optimal bonus swapped for a falloff one, a 5% tracking bonus on the frigate skill, and a 4th low. as for the wolf, move the AF skill dmg bonus for the frigate, making it dual damage on the frigate skill, and put a falloff AND optimal range skill on the AF, and to top it out, a 5th low --- Quote: The more I know about humans, the more I love animals. ain't that right.
Helmh0ltz Blue is the New Red	Posted - 2010.05.02 16:07:00 - [48] Edited by: Helmh0ltz on 02/05/2010 16:18:44 Wow, this would help my AB MSE Jaguar so much. I mean with the heavy cap usage of autocannons this would totally be a major incentive to get AF V. I can't think of a reason why this sweeping bonus wouldn't be perfectly balanced and help all AFs equally. Not only that but doubling my cap would totally help with those heavy battleship neuts Yeah! Edited for real answer: Imo, either you tweak all the AFs and give them individual 4th bonuses, much like Ophelia's suggestions, (best case scenario) or you give them a powerful sweeping bonus and tweak their individual stats/bonuses (better than nothing scenario). And by powerful sweeping bonus I mean something like immunity to neuts. (Which I know has already been brought up discussed ad nauseum and I completely agree that this isn't the answer, it's just an example) Really what AFs need is speed to match their t1 counterparts, increased EHP, tweaked bonuses, and a fourth bonus specific to each individual AF's playstyle. IMO. ====== Your signature is freakishly huge for this forum. Please resize according to the forum rules, thanks. Shadow.
baltec1 Antares Shipyards Aeternus.	Posted - 2010.05.02 16:20:00 - [49] I'll take a second mid on the retribution and a fix for rockets please.
Myrkala Minmatar Interstellar Empire	Posted - 2010.05.02 18:01:00 - [50] Jaguar: 4-4-3 Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 5% Small Projectile damage bonus Assault Ships Skill Bonus: 10% Small Projectile Turret Falloff per level and 5% projectile damage per level. Wolf: 5-2-4 (or 4-3-4) Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 5% Small Projectile damage bonus Assault Ships Skill Bonus: 10% Small Projectile Turret optimal range and 5% projectile damage per level. +PG to fit 5-(4)x280mm Arties and a non-lol fit. +10 CPU +5-15 PG Retribution: 4-2-5 Amarr Frigate Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to armor hitpoints per level Assault Ships Bonus: 10% Bonus to Small Energy Turret optimal range and 5% bonus to Small Energy Turret damage per level Vengeance: 4-3-4 Amarr Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Rocket Damage per level Assault Ships Bonus: 5% bonus to Armor Resistances, 5% Bonus to Capacitor Recharge rate per level PS. Fix rockets explosion velocity, and speed. Hawk: 4-5-2 Caldari Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Missile Kinetic Damage Assault Ships Bonus: 10% bonus to explosion velocity of missiles, 7,5% bonus to shield boost per level. +60 CPU +2.5 PG Others shouldn't be too hard to balance to this. - Thanks CCP, I knew you had it in you! <3 Long live Naglfar!

K'racker Minmatar Brutor tribe	Posted - 2010.05.03 05:52:00 - [51] role bonus: immune to warp scrambler shutdown of mwd. combine with some tweaking of grid and cpu to prevent being too much overpowered on some of the af's. you get much more speed, and the af's would be dangerous vs. certain ships and fits. this is along the line of what ccp tried out on sisi, and found to be op. but the cap use, fitting req., and sig bloom of mwd would make them vulnerable to other situations as well.
Noran Ferah Red Sky Morning	Posted - 2010.05.03 11:25:00 - [52] Introduce T3 AF
1600 RT	Posted - 2010.05.03 11:31:00 - [53] main problem with AF is people keep failfit them with AB
Veliria	Posted - 2010.05.03 12:21:00 - [54] Edited by: Veliria on 03/05/2010 12:22:27 I don't see much point in making the 4th bonus anything short of either a massive gank bonus. Frigs will always be exactly that, frigates. Small, fast and agile little craft that are primarily used for fighting other frigates, destroyers and as combat support in a fleet. For fighting frigs/dessies/cruisers, regular frigates and cruisers have a tendency to take over the role of the Assault Frigate. You need something small and fast to tackle that enemy frig/dessie, you take a frig yourself. Need to vaporize that cruiser before it can lock back, you take a bunch of gank fitted Thoraxes or Ruptures. Heavily Tanking a frigate is rather pointless because of the target selection. You could buff the AFs enough to tank a few cruisers when coupled with transversal but it wouldn't be able to kill much of anything. Against frigates and destroyers a tank isn't needed, gank is. As such giving the Assault Frigate a damage bonus would give it something of a new unique role, as very fast and agile glass cannons, although not as glassy as a frigate. I'm talking full cruiser DPS maybe even a little more. To avoid having that **** frigates, one could mess around with signature radius/tracking and such so that against frigates and destroyers the Assault Frigate would remain balanced. A group of Assault Frigates could then melt a single cruiser very fast, and they should, consider the price of said group vs that cruiser. They'd still be vulnerable to neuting, drones and a competent opponent, but atleast they'd have a more interesting purpose. One option would be to make the 4th bonus a role bonus, something like....this? 95% reduction to powergrid needs of Medium Hybrid, Laser and Projectile and of Heavy and Heavy Assault Launchers. 50% reduction to signature radius of all Medium Turrets and Missiles.
Meditril	Posted - 2010.05.03 14:24:00 - [55] Please don't touch slot layout of Wolf! It is very good as it is. If you really want to improve Assault Frigs just give them more Grid (+50%), CPU (+50%) and maybe also more Agility. It is a shame that every T1 Frig is more agile than their T2 counterparts and that you even on those specialized ships run in Grid/CPU limitations.
Lord Ryan Imperial Syndicate Forces Systematic-Chaos	Posted - 2010.05.03 15:29:00 - [56] Originally by: Ashira Twilight "Just" give them jumpdrives. I bet they'd be used a bit more, and nobody would complain about their combat effectiveness(except the hawk and the amarr AFs which would still be crap). ^this^ Originally by: AvaAlt Make em cost about 1/3 what they do currently...then their price will be in line with their usefulness. ^and this^ I am not Emperor Ryan's Alt! I am a person, damn you!
novalogic	Posted - 2010.06.11 12:33:00 - [57] when are we getting the assault frigate fix? we have been waiting a year since we were told changes where coming in a patch shortly after the first of last years expansions. would it be possible to stop introducing semi broken content to the game and as many other players have suggested and fix whats broken? assault frigs, rockets and hybrids,require attention as the 1year plus threads make obvious. any reply from ccp on this subject would be a great help
AterraX Caldari	Posted - 2010.06.11 13:59:00 - [58] Originally by: Myrkala Hawk: 4-5-2 Caldari Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Missile Kinetic Damage Assault Ships Bonus: 10% bonus to explosion velocity of missiles, 7,5% bonus to shield boost per level. +60 CPU +2.5 PG Dump the shieldboost bonus and add the bonus that the Merlin already have: 5% shield resist per level...I never understood why the Merlin have this, but the Hawk (based on a Merlin hull) dosn't? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________ Fact of EVE forums: They will always come an anounomys alt-toon and question someones character...
Ghaylenty	Posted - 2010.06.11 14:35:00 - [59] Originally by: AterraX Originally by: Myrkala Hawk: 4-5-2 Caldari Frigate Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Missile Kinetic Damage Assault Ships Bonus: 10% bonus to explosion velocity of missiles, 7,5% bonus to shield boost per level. +60 CPU +2.5 PG Dump the shieldboost bonus and add the bonus that the Merlin already have: 5% shield resist per level...I never understood why the Merlin have this, but the Hawk (based on a Merlin hull) dosn't? the same reason there is no t2 drake. t2 resists and resist bonuses do not a balanced ship make.
Lugalzagezi666	Posted - 2010.06.11 14:35:00 - [60] We really dont need any af except jag. Just give it tracking bonus, falloff bonus, 4th low and make it 50% cheaper. Maybe add some drones and some speed if you want. Delete all other afs from game.

Ahz	Posted - 2010.06.11 14:36:00 - [61] Allow AFs to use the Black Ops covert jump portal (along with stealth bombers, e-war frigates, etc...). Seriously, I think the covert jump portal should allow all frigate-class hulls. Would instantly give the AF a new role in small, fast moving gangs. If being able to move a dozen AFs quickly across several jumps in 0.0 doesn't make people use them then nothing will. My two cents...
Urn Keller	Posted - 2010.06.11 15:03:00 - [62] How about 600 calibration and 3 rig slots if we're going to be all wishful thinking overpowered?
Dirlewanger	Posted - 2010.06.11 16:47:00 - [63] AFs are a joke as they are. 1 - Change name from assault ships to assault FRIGATES goddamit!! 2 - Fix them individually. I agree - blanket bonus does NOT work. Mid and high slots, the bonii. All suggestions tend towards the same items, and they are GOOD. 3 - among the changes: make them faster like frigates. 4 - fix rockets already! They're a sad joke. Give them roles. Choose: 1 - 4th bonus 16% decrease of energy NOSFed - neuted. Thats 80% at V people. They can neut your ass, but takes longer and their cap pays. 2 - Ability to jump with covops gangs. 3 - Immunity to web 4 - AB bonus 15% per level 5 - Immunity to area-effect bubbles. 6 - Can ignore 1 single point of warp disruption. What does this give? The jump with covops is plain fun without in any way unbalancing combat. Nosf-neut bonus and web bonus allows them to get in close. But actually you need them BOTH or you're in trouble anyway. AB bonus is meh. Immunity to area-effect AND 1 point makes them into very nasty hit and run platforms. Thus, "assault ships". You need either 2 tacklers or a knife-fighter with a scrambler. If you want to get cute, make them immune to disruptors but NOT scramblers; make them unable to fit a disruptor (their immunity messes up the point) forcing them to go for scramblers as well. What would this result in? Small groups of AFs could successfully raid larger fleets, dart in, shoot, **** off, targetting support vessels or going wolf-pack at a target. Yeah, I know, kinda mad :)
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.06.11 19:41:00 - [64] Lulz. Just make them as fast as frigates, fix inter-class issues and add appropriate 4th bonus*, fix fittings all the way so they can fit T2 and stuff, and no role bonus is required, and both lol AB and MWD fits are fine. Look at the Jag, the damn thing is practically worth flying even though it's still a bit on the expensive side for a frigate. With a bit more speed/agility (mass closer to Rifter hull), and tracking bonus, it would be bloody awesome. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2010.06.12 00:35:00 - [65] Originally by: Cpt Branko Lulz. Just make them as fast as frigates, fix inter-class issues and add appropriate 4th bonus*, fix fittings all the way so they can fit T2 and stuff, and no role bonus is required, and both lol AB and MWD fits are fine. Look at the Jag, the damn thing is practically worth flying even though it's still a bit on the expensive side for a frigate. With a bit more speed/agility (mass closer to Rifter hull), and tracking bonus, it would be bloody awesome. My wolf can beat up your Jaguar.
Pr1ncess Alia Caldari Perkone	Posted - 2010.06.12 00:45:00 - [66] Things we will have LONG before CCP fixes AFs -walking in stations + twitter enabled storefronts -Tech 5 Cruisers -playable Jove characters/missions "A game that is significantly nonlinear is sometimes described as being open-ended or a sandbox, and is characterized by there being no "right way" of playing the game."
Azbuga Amarr ZLY-DOTYK	Posted - 2010.06.12 08:53:00 - [67] yyyymm... I fly assault frigates all the time and dont have idea why people complain about them :) almost all bonus things you asking make them capable to solo kill cruisers... Not too much? then we should ask for buff cruisers to kill bc's alone:)
VanNostrum	Posted - 2010.06.12 08:57:00 - [68] Make them 30-40% of their current prices Fix rockets there
Proxyyyy Caldari The Tuskers The Tusker Bastards	Posted - 2010.06.12 10:12:00 - [69] No! Also vengeance!!!! Also neuts dont kill frigs, drones do \0/ (Nerf drone hp and drone bays). I would like to change the subject and focus on some real issues. Are'nt Eaf underpowered a bit? Also lazors use so much cap cauz theyz pretty... Discuss... Worst thread ever!
Eri'kana Motugi	Posted - 2010.06.13 05:27:00 - [70] Originally by: Azbuga yyyymm... I fly assault frigates all the time and dont have idea why people complain about them :) almost all bonus things you asking make them capable to solo kill cruisers... Not too much? then we should ask for buff cruisers to kill bc's alone:) Tech 2 cruisers do this easily, and then some. Which is exactly the point, we want a tech 2 frigate that can handle a tech 1 cruiser.

Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.06.13 05:39:00 - [71] Originally by: Eri'kana Motugi Originally by: Azbuga yyyymm... I fly assault frigates all the time and dont have idea why people complain about them :) almost all bonus things you asking make them capable to solo kill cruisers... Not too much? then we should ask for buff cruisers to kill bc's alone:) Tech 2 cruisers do this easily if the BC pilot is a complete and utter moron. Assault frigates do that to cruisers as well given the same conditions. FYP.
Cpt Branko Retired Pirate Club	Posted - 2010.06.13 09:48:00 - [72] Edited by: Cpt Branko on 13/06/2010 09:49:23 Originally by: Omara Otawan Originally by: Eri'kana Motugi Originally by: Azbuga yyyymm... I fly assault frigates all the time and dont have idea why people complain about them :) almost all bonus things you asking make them capable to solo kill cruisers... Not too much? then we should ask for buff cruisers to kill bc's alone:) Tech 2 cruisers do this easily if the BC pilot is a complete and utter moron. Assault frigates do that to cruisers as well given the same conditions. FYP. This, AFs actually do follow the typical T1/T2 progression. A AF which could kill a Rupture reliably with a good pilot would also kill most HACs, BCs, CS and BS. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Noisrevbus Caldari Breams Gone Wild	Posted - 2010.06.13 10:21:00 - [73] I used to be a strong protagonist of the AB bonus. The past year though i've begun to be more and more in favour of just bumping them one size up the size ladder. Frigates have Interceptors and EAS as Tech II options. Destroyers would have Interdictors and "AF" (AD). The concept just make much more sense on those hulls. They are still reasonably fast, with more grid and slots to effectively utilize the tank and damage bonuses. A double slotted rack of bonused small guns could be pretty nice. It would also adress outside balance issues in the game. Such as how AF have problems competing with Tech I Cruisers, or how the Vagabond and certain Faction Cruisers have an array of targets with no intermediates inbetween. You will essentially give all races some sort of "Mini vaga", and given the popularity of the Vaga, SFI and Cynabal it could be quite interesting. Those ships would still rip the new Destroyers apart, but they would not pop as easily as frigates while sporting intercepting speed and they would likewise open up options to both fly anti-frigate roles and fill potential spots in prospective nano gangs. 2-3km/s MWD speed, 8 high slots (6-8 weapon slots) small modules, 250-500 MWD sig, HAC resists, a couple of additional slots over tech I Destroyers and the fitting options to size up a medium module buffer.
Dodgy Past Amarr Debitum Naturae BricK sQuAD.	Posted - 2010.06.13 12:35:00 - [74] Originally by: Ghaylenty the same reason there is no t2 drake. t2 resists and resist bonuses do not a balanced ship make. But the vengeance and sac do. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- you seem determined to turn it into ******* Hollyoaks for neckbeards.
Zarnak Wulf	Posted - 2010.06.13 13:38:00 - [75] If rockets were fixed and the AF got their missing frigate bonuses that ship class would be good to go, sans retribution. They would in that case completely obsolete destroyers. I could fly a artillery thrasher with 3.3k EHP that does a 1740 alpha and has a 75m signature radius. Or I could fly a artillery jaguar that has 6.8k EHP, a 34m signature radius, that does over a 1k alpha. The tracking on both ships would be equal. I would gladly go with the jaguar. Destroyers aren't used in fleets or even PvP the way they were originally envisioned. Toss them out. Or remake them. Arguing that "buffing AF" hurts lol destroyers is just a really weak argument though.
Laur Khal	Posted - 2010.07.04 00:59:00 - [76] Originally by: Eri'kana Motugi Originally by: Azbuga yyyymm... I fly assault frigates all the time and dont have idea why people complain about them :) almost all bonus things you asking make them capable to solo kill cruisers... Not too much? then we should ask for buff cruisers to kill bc's alone:) Tech 2 cruisers do this easily, and then some. Which is exactly the point, we want a tech 2 frigate that can handle a tech 1 cruiser. Not to mention AFs cost around 5 times the cost of t1 cruisers -- by that measure alone AFs should be able to kill cruisers at least 50% of the time.
Laur Khal	Posted - 2010.07.04 01:05:00 - [77] Edited by: Laur Khal on 04/07/2010 01:05:46 Originally by: Noisrevbus I used to be a strong protagonist of the AB bonus. The past year though i've begun to be more and more in favour of just bumping them one size up the size ladder. Frigates have Interceptors and EAS as Tech II options. Destroyers would have Interdictors and "AF" (AD). The concept just make much more sense on those hulls. They are still reasonably fast, with more grid and slots to effectively utilize the tank and damage bonuses. A double slotted rack of bonused small guns could be pretty nice. It would also adress outside balance issues in the game. Such as how AF have problems competing with Tech I Cruisers, or how the Vagabond and certain Faction Cruisers have an array of targets with no intermediates inbetween. You will essentially give all races some sort of "Mini vaga", and given the popularity of the Vaga, SFI and Cynabal it could be quite interesting. Those ships would still rip the new Destroyers apart, but they would not pop as easily as frigates while sporting intercepting speed and they would likewise open up options to both fly anti-frigate roles and fill potential spots in prospective nano gangs. 2-3km/s MWD speed, 8 high slots (6-8 weapon slots) small modules, 250-500 MWD sig, HAC resists, a couple of additional slots over tech I Destroyers and the fitting options to size up a medium module buffer. For my 0.02ISK, I'd suggest the same -- beef AFs up to destroyer hull stats, adding an extra 1-2 module slots per ship, add a 4th bonus per ship, and leaving the price where it is. Frigate hull never seemed quite right for an "assault ship". The (partial) resistance bonus against cap warfare is a good one also.
Madner Kami Gallente Durendal Ascending Gentlemen's Interstellar Nightclub	Posted - 2010.07.04 09:08:00 - [78] Originally by: Laur Khal [...] beef AFs up to destroyer hull stats [...] Wait, did you want to improve AFs or make them worse?
knickersoffalot	Posted - 2010.07.04 10:53:00 - [79] Originally by: 1600 RT main problem with AF is people keep failfit them with AB narrow minded fool
Andreya Red Federation	Posted - 2010.07.08 17:01:00 - [80] 4th bonus 20% increase to FIGHTERs damage assigned to the AF per level. doesnt break the game. gives them a DAMN COOL role in the game. or at least give it to 1 of each race, obviously not the ishkur cause it uses its own drones, and not the harpy cause the harpy can snipe as a role. This would be awesome in a massive fleet, seeing AFs on the battlefield, swarmed with fighter escorts, with the fleet trying to keep them alive etc. nothing but fun to be had. _________________________________________________________ Only once you've lost everything, are you free to do anything. Your signature exceeds the maximum allowed filesize of 24000 bytes -Navigator ([email protected])

baltec1 Antares Shipyards Circle-Of-Two	Posted - 2010.07.08 17:18:00 - [81] Fix rockets and you fix the vengence. Add a mid to the retribution and I will forever be flying it.


Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.