| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Red Countess
   |
Posted - 2010.11.29 17:42:00 -
[1]
After playing with sentinel for a while I consider that EA frigs could get a buff since they dont have there place in fleets and some of them arent even used.
Issues:
-Only 2 out of 4 EA frigs are being used, those are Kitsune and Sentinel while Keres/Hyena are alike endangered species(I only saw hyena once in low sec, keres never).
-EA frigs usually dont have much place in fleet, when they are in fleet they are made into primary target almost always and instantly destroyed. I know sentinel is powerhouse in 1on1 frig/destroyer fights, I beaten almost every frig outthere with it, and I am aware that kitsune's jams are nasty thing to deal with but with how squishy they are why wouldnt one simply take Blackbird/Falcon/Curse/neut-domi in fleet or some other ship that can fill same/similar role and have more survivability.
-They feel so damn slow to play, and MWD isnt really option for them (imo) since they "die" easily as it is. Catching up with targets or running away can be a bit annoying especially since this is supposed to be frigate.
Solution (that I would like to see):
If I recall correctly there was some talk about giving AB speed bonus to assault frigates some time ago... since AF already have 2 things going for them, that is tank and spank I can see why this didn't manifest but EA frigates on other hand could use AB speed bonus with out getting overpowered and perhaps it would give them needed position in the fleets.
-Give AB speed bonus to EA frigs, lets say that standard speed with AB II would be between 1500-2000 MS with out any other rigs/gear that increase speed.
-Rework hyenas bonus to fit the new buff, or just rework it:p
-Possibly make EA frigs a bit more maneuverable so that it fits there new role of squishy/speedy/EA ships that stay on edges of battle. They do feel very bulky for there size.
P.S. I dont know mechanics of eve that well, perhaps due to way numbers work 1500m/s could be to fast in terms of speed tanking if we consider that there sig radius will remain the same. I gave it as general idea, CCP is one that can balance this if they like (or even see;) this idea. I have loads of footage in which I spank different frigs/t2frigs/t2destroyers with sentinel and might make a movie if people dont think that I am experienced with this ship.
|
TimMc
Brutal Deliverance
Extreme Prejudice.
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 17:51:00 -
[2]
Problem with the ewar frigs is they die incredibly easy, as if recon ships didn't die quick enough in gangs.
As someone with Gallente and Minmatar Frigate 5, I want a buff. 
Also I would prefer them have focused bonuses, so hyena only for webs and keres only for damps (interceptors can preform tackling much better).
Maybe web strength bonus on hyena, damp range and hybrid damage bonus on keres?
|
5th Star
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 18:09:00 -
[3]
Edited by: 5th Star on 29/11/2010 18:11:46
Edited by: 5th Star on 29/11/2010 18:09:27
 Originally by: TimMc
Problem with the ewar frigs is they die incredibly easy, as if recon ships didn't die quick enough in gangs.
As someone with Gallente and Minmatar Frigate 5, I want a buff.
Also I would prefer them have focused bonuses, so hyena only for webs and keres only for damps (interceptors can preform tackling much better).
Maybe web strength bonus on hyena, damp range and hybrid damage bonus on keres?
Yes I agree with you.
As far as hyena/keres bonuses go I would like to see ...
Hyena: - minus x% CPU need for webifier per lvl.
- slightly better cap recharge
that way ship can have good fit with 2 webs on it.
Keres - No clue... maybe with speed bonus this frig would get what it needs to be nasty.
It would be nice if all EA frig players that see this topic and want changes suggest there own things, since we all have experience with different ships.
P.S this is red countess but for some reason forum switched to new character.
|
DeftCrow Redriver
Gallente
Best Path Inc.
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 18:20:00 -
[4]
Edited by: DeftCrow Redriver on 29/11/2010 18:21:50
I personally think that Target Painters desperately need a buff.
Adding another funcionality will be nice, such as the ability to redirect guided missiles (Light / Heavy / Cruise / Citadel Cruise) that are in mid-air and have no active targets(i.e target blown up by previous volly). It will be extra nasty if it can fool both friendly and hostile missiles into turning back and blowing up the very ships they were launched from.
Each missile will make a roll when their target gets blown up before they can reach it, and only if there are active target painters on the field. The ship with the most target painter intensity(signature bloom) will become the next target for stray missiles. The probability that each missile follows the next painted target will be based on the intensity of the painter, with a formula of something like [0.5 * intensity * (target base signature / explosion radius)^0.5].
Given that most guided missiles have a lot of flight time to spare even after reaching their targets, the leftover firepower may have an impact on the results of combat if there are enough Drakes / Nighthawks / Ravens / Target Painting ships. Hyenas will become ideal as mobile human guidance systems. There may be competition between target painters to get the most target painter intensity so that they protect their fleet mates and destroy enemy missile boats. The act of guiding missiles will feel somewhat similar to guiding BGM-71 TOW missiles and provide a distinct hands-on experience in combat.
Of course, CCP may not like it because the proposed change not only increases the server load on calculating the flight path of those stray missiles, but also adds more load because the server has to do some more things;
1. Check if there are active target painters on the field. This has to be done on every individual missile, since there is no way of knowing when the target will blow up.
2. If there are active target painters on the field, run a probability check for each individual missile.
That's at least three additional checks/calculations per missile, so given the number of Drakes currently active... I already see CCP Veritas banging his head after reading this.
Therefore, implementing this proposal may not be possible until CCP overcomes current limitations on the server code. I hope to see this implemented in the (perhaps distant) future though.
Edit: Grammar.
|
Jenny Jihad
Minmatar Republic Military Skool
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 18:29:00 -
[5]
Signed. I'd love to fly EAF but it's hard to justify using it over almost anything else definetly would love a buff. I would fly one I just need an excuse to.
|
Andrea Griffin
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 18:35:00 -
[6]
CCP has already stated that EAFs will be getting looked at soon. I CBA to find the thread at the moment, but it's somewhere in the Singularity forum.
Fix Rockets in '08 '09 2010 2011 2012?! |
Andrea Griffin
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 18:41:00 -
[7]
Okay, it turns out that I CAN BA to find it.
Chronotis Says:
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Originally by: Apollo Gabriel
Caveat: I have not read all 12 pages of this thread.
CCP: thank you for working on Rockets and the Hawk.
Could you please add two more bonuses to the Assault Frigates, as all T2 ships have.
Best,
Apollo
EAF & AF are next up on our list for a future release, and that will probably also include renaming assault ships to frigates, been bugging us for a while that they were called ships for some reason.
Fix Rockets in '08 '09 2010 2011 2012?! |
Red Countess
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 18:42:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Red Countess on 29/11/2010 18:42:45
NVM I see your 2nd post now, thanks.
|
Andrea Griffin
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 18:52:00 -
[9]
Not a problem. However, this does't mean "please stop discussing the issue." It's just a heads up. In fact, it should be discussed more if at all possible - we know that CCP is going to toss in a change to EAFs at some point, so maybe we can get them to make the changes we want. : >
Fix Rockets in '08 '09 2010 2011 2012?! |
Red Countess
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 18:55:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Andrea Griffin
Not a problem. However, this does't mean "please stop discussing the issue." It's just a heads up. In fact, it should be discussed more if at all possible - we know that CCP is going to toss in a change to EAFs at some point, so maybe we can get them to make the changes we want. : >
ay ay:) I wasnt aware of that statement since I just activated this account after not playing eve for a bit.... still trying to get game to instal...grr damn bugs.
|
|
|
Zarnak Wulf
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 20:15:00 -
[11]
I hope they do get buffed as indicated. Some of the more obvious problems:
Their signature radii are huge. Ridiculous in fact. The Kitsune has a sig radius of 58m for example.
Kitsune - It's targeting range is shorter then that of the griffin - it's t1 counterpart. If it could have the same lock range it would be able to jam w/ three ECM out to 120km+. At that range it wouldn't really need an AB bonus - a little more EHP, not a lot, and a much smaller sig radius and the Kitsune would have a niche in any fleet. It would actually be stronger then the rook or falcon from 70km+.
Hyena - It has an obsolete bonus of "reduce sig radius by x% for every level." This is similar to what the interceptors had before the nano nerf. (The interceptors had theirs changed to the current "less MWD sig penalty" b/c it no longer worked btw...) The hyena has quite a few problems. In order to use it's bonuses completely you need a MWD, target painter anda web or a web x 2, point in the mids. No room for a tank. It's signature radius is too big - even at level 5 you still have to contend w/ a 43m sig radius. It's webs at 20km and 60% strength usually can't stop a frigate before it gets within 9km and scrambles you. It has no EHP or gank to speak of so you die shortly thereafter.
Solutions suggested are: Reduce sig radius, extend webs by an ungreed upon amount, change sig reduction bonus to a milder form of MWD sig penalty reduction bonus. More EHP.
OR
Reduce sig penalty, increase strenth of webs instead of target painter bonus. More EHP. Trade a low for a mid.
OR
a combination of those plus more gank.
Sentinel: Less of a signature radius seems to be the consensus.
Keres: Less of a signature radius. Give it the same range as the arazu/ lachesis. Stronger bonus on sensor dampners. (which the arazu/ lachesis need as well) You're trading EHP for an increased sensor resolution and smaller signature radius. Sounds fair to me.
|
Andrea Griffin
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 20:40:00 -
[12]
Actually, I just remembered that this thread exists in the Ideas section of the forums and contains some great posts. Might want to keep things there so that it's all consolidated.
Fix Rockets in '08 '09 2010 2011 2012?! |
Anyura
|
Posted - 2010.11.29 21:02:00 -
[13]
I had an idea with regards to Target Painters the other day. Why not modify them so that they affect rate of fire of all weapon systems in addition to their existing feature? Wouldn't do much against smaller ships but against BC upwards with an already slow rate of fire, a RoF-jammer could make a real difference in fleet fights and POS sieges.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |