but do they brawl with them?

you don't want T1 ships to be made obsolete again by making HAC's straight upgrades.

interesting fit.... but is it worth using over a cyclone dual ASB 1200 plus tank for a 4th of the price?
Which is always an issue if you care about your wallet and your kb...
Also when CS get buffed .. similar price which is more useful to the fleet?

Munin needs more grid/cpu and some may tell me i'm crazy and go screw myself but, the zealot could use a bit more of both also.

You have too much money and or you dont like flying ships that don't suck

It'd be a great idea to have missile ships represented--even using the sort of dual damage bonus a Scythe FI gets, but I think it's too tricky to bake that into a hull that gets 4x damage/application bonuses. I think the stat overload on have 4x missile bonuses and 4x projectile bonuses would be too much visually, too much to balance around, etc. I'm fairly certain that the Claymore changes (making it into a missile boat) is what CCP is going to say is the "interim" missile boat for Minmatar, along with the aforementioned Scythe FI, of course (and likely an updated Huginn I'd wager (Super Bellicose, anyone?).

Besides, the two Minmatar HACs do represent two aspects of Minmatar playstyle: one is a fast, kitey monster (which is absolutely Minmatar), while the other performs well as a high range, high alpha arty monster. Notice, though, that they both are monsters :)

Apparently the applied damage with the buffed medium weapons will be superior to the applied damage from an ABC's large guns vs medium/small targets

Lol and this fit is better then a cyclone?

ASB Vaga > Cynabal.

i completely disagree with this

troll post please ignore him

Are you really asking why Winmatar and Amarr aren't treated the same?

you misspelled 3 erebus and 2 aeons

wow u talk big ps i spent last 2 days in wormholes and guess what?

you're all pussies go buy some supercaps (oh wait u can't cuz you're poor)

HOW MANY TITANS U OWN?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

0

KNOCK KNOCK?

WHO IS THERE?

A POOR

"100% bonus to EW drone effectiveness"?

Prices of HACs begin to soar.

Because the current ASB Vaga is already a very good ship with ASB fit and with that bonus will be a much better Cynabal than Cynabal

Is it possible for muninn to have two DAMAGE bonuses? For example.

Minmatar Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage
7.5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret tracking speed

Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses:
5% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret damage
10% bonus to Medium Projectile Turret optimal range

This will reduce its dps for increased alpha, which would create a nice role for muninn. Some additional PG would be also welcome :P

Rip small gang ahac fleets

how about instead of 5k range bonus, +1 extra Drone controlled per level. on the heavy assault cruiser? :) the Ishtar is a drone boat after all :)

This. Remove the mwd bonus, reduce sig of each HAC by 25%, then add specific role bonuses for each one.

Well Deimos is a BLASTER boat :P

Hawk and hookbill both have 5 mids.

Vaga could easilly drop a low slot since if it is going to brawl it doesn't need 2 of the nerfed tes anymore.

I would even rather it to drop 2 lows and move them to mids.

That post does not state in ANY form that they intend the deimos to have that role. Just points that is CAN with certain specific capabilities.

Incredible how people like to over interpret things.

I disagree the vaga needs to "beat out" the Cynabal at the same role. I'm more interested in variety.

I would be happy if it is no longer fixed into the function of being a kiter.

Implication in this case come smuch more from your mind than anything else.

I coudl state that the reason he decided to use this ship was because the Talos is also gallente. And my assertion would have the same level of assurance or insanity as yours.

if the deimos had a tracking bonus then javelin with 250's and some te's would be nice. that could be the ahac setup for the ship.

this is agreed, another reason why if the nerf T3s after buffing the Hacs, people will just stop flying T3s all together

price differences between ships and classes need to be justified and maybe even greater.

make the gap price gap as well as the power gab between ships justifiable

i remember when a eagle was 70 million isk... is your problem more a supply demand thing rather then a build cost thing?

good way to ofset build cost could be adding moon goo to hauler drops... this could help flood the market and reduce build costs....

250 mm is not 250km duder.

and jav is the close range ammo that looses 75% range but gets a 25% tracking and does more damage then antimater.

Because people want to do weird things after smoking bizarre stuff or drinking even harder stuff.

200K EHP Tengus with 25km range? -what is silly here, the 200K EHP or the inability to adapt?

Do Lokis have 200k EHP and shoot at 100km? no they don't
Can a decently fitted Tengu shoot at same distances with an equivalent tank? -yes it can but :effort:

T3's are not OP, not more op than were Drakes 3 years ago before everyone starts flying them, players uses however bring to the spot light the real issues and causes to effect, the main problem being to make some of them take their blinders off and use a bit their brains instead.

Edit: and these AHAC/SHAC changes while making them better wont make them as specialized ships as they're supposed to, better? yes of course but on their right spot? -no way, more changes are needed.

Very true. If we can't turn to HACs for dps, T3s for dps/tank or Command Ships--well, we certainly can't fly T1 attack cruisers and battleships cause mass problems. Besides, those Moroses would utterly destroy fat-sig BSs.

And it's not like we can just cyno in more support, get podded and fly back, or bridge some backup from the titan. What we have on the field is, for all intents and purposes, it. That's it. That's all she wrote. I was genuinely hoping that CCP would go the route where:

HACs become high dps, low* tank and middle speed
T3s are middle-ground dps, middle tank tank, high speed
CSs are below-T3 dps, high tank, low(er) speed

That way, you can choose if you need really tanky, middle-of-the-road, or high dps. Now, a T3 combines all these roles into high dps, high tank, high speed. Some diversity would be nice (necessary, yes, but my fellow wspace denizens and I would be saddened), and it'd make real choices in ship selection, gameplay type, etc.

*comparatively speaking; something in the 50-60k ehp zone.

Surely you're joking! (Sorry, couldn't resist :P) Proteus can get over 1000 dps (unheated--1130 heated) with 150k ehp and travel at a brisk 1750 m/s oh. This most certainly is high dps, high tank and--ok, I'll give it to you--medium speed.

I think: take these figures and distribute them among the ships that perform similar function (of putting out damage). HACs are a natural fit for the damage, trading damage for tank, CSs should get the tank both to perform as command ships and tanky damage dealers, but of course, giving up damage and being lowest of the three, and T3s, due to their chameleon nature, should come somewhere in the middle of the rest. I mean, I think T3s would have to be looked at, since the high penalty for their superior performance now is losing a skill--actual physical real-world training time--so it does make some sense to have them in their current state. So maybe a heavy nerf would necessitate them losing that feature.

I'm also for the idea of reducing HAC costs a bit.

Funny facts,
The baseprice of HACS was supposed to at > 40m isk but nullsec alliences are like forth world countries and all inhabitants die of starvation on a daily basis...

Well these changes clearly show that t3 is going to be almightily nerfed. If you took T3 out the game most of these hacs would have a role and purpose. Of course they wont take it out of the game, but they will nerf it hard while probably making it more adaptable (i.e. easier to change subs/rigs etc).

Name one T3 that does worse at the HAC role than the current HACs.

Proteus - does amazingly better than a deimos
Legion - does faily similarly to a zealot
Tengu - ...cerberusAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Loki - better vagabond/muninn

T3s are meant to be modular, and not specifically good at anything. They currently work exceptionally better than the T2 counterparts in almost all scenarios. T3s need a nerf back to the original design point of being able to do everything, but not amazingly well.

You are so completely out of touch with the game that I dont even know where to start.


T3's outclass hacs in every single possible way. There is no HAC that does the role of DPS or tank better than a T3 cruiser configured to do the same.

And as for them not being flown often, well...

Aside from the full fleets of t3's that are really common (legions lokis proteus and tengus all have very common large fleet appearances) this BR from yesterday called and said you should probably get a clue:

http://zkillboard.com/related/31002460/201307182200/

EW drones should be removed completely from the game, but I guess that is for another thread.

A t2 fitted hac runs around 250 million, a t2 fitted t3 runs 500 million, if that, more like 275, so its barely twice as much for a platform that outshines the hac in every conceivable way, one might even argue that t3 Cruisers are what HACs should be.

Just because you spend an extra billion on your fit when you can get a really good strong fit from a t3 with just t2 items doesn't mean you get to skew the stay with it. The vanilla fit still outclasses the HAC in every way for barely double the cost, if even double in some cases.

Stop making things up and this will go along a lot better.

Yeah, T3s aren't used much outside of wormhole space, and yet Goons(CFC)/NC./-DD-/Test/SOLAR/PL all currently use (and in some cases have used for several years) a T3 doctrine.

Yea, theres definitely not pure loki fleets, pure tengu fleets, and armor hacs fleets composed almost entirely of legions, and my alliance definitely hasn't had fairly stellar fights and even killed supers in some or all of those, nobody outside of a wormhole ever flies t3 cruisers, and every 0.0 block walking doesn't have a fleet comp thats composed entirely of t3 Cruisers.

What game are you even playing kid?

Because the Vexor is T1 and the Ishtar is T2. Are you insisting that a higher tech ship should be better than a ship a noob can fly??!?

Right....

It's become clear to me that the great ship rebalancing has very little to do with ship balance or more to do with nerfing SP.

T1 ships got significant buffs. T2's get lip service buffs and some nerfs. T3's, getting nerfed. And BS's & BC's get adjusted to effectively force them into more simplified fits.....utility slots get removed or pg gets removed to make utility usage limited at best.


See the pattern?

You know almost everyone fits their vaga's with XLasb's now right?

one bonus to the attack version and one bonus for the combat versions?

Are you really surprised that CCP only thinks of Minmatar when redesigning ships?

Rabble rabble rabble AHAC DOESN'T WORK FOR MY PERSONAL PLAYSTYLE IMMA CRY TILL CCP LISTENS TO ME BITCHING RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE.

He only really said their resilience will be boosted which isn't what most people actually want the most

Actually I like this and was thinking something similar.

Divide the hacs up into two classes Cruiser version inty and Cruiser version assault ship.

Inty Hacs

Cerb
Zealot
Vaga
Deimos <- maybe not sure on this one.

Assault Frig Hacs

Eagle
Muninn
Sac
Vexor <- again, unsure on this one


And give each class bonuses to operate each role.

I think the navy cruisers should generally be higher speed and lower sig.

But really eve is about creative fittings. Most ships shouldn't have set "roles" ccp should give them some reasonable bonuses, slots and stats for the cost and let the players figure out how to use them.

Maybe muninn could be HAM boat split with Arties ..

Zealot is so bad compared to Legion or Oracle that it will still be used only for ahacs pilots that have no money or skills to fly a Legion.

Not at all. With that shieldtank-bonus, you got the choic between large SB+CB (like a shieldlegion), XL-ASB with 180s or the good old fit.
The good old fit is now A LOT better thanks to that mwd-bonus.

Pretty much the same to the muninn. I believe some nanogroupies will go crazy over the 6th lowslot on that one \o/ (at least I do)

I still don't get this, the problem of the Vaga has never been its tank, yeah its **** poor but it wouldnt be an issue if it actually did decent DPS and applied it reasonably well. Its problems are entirely to do with the fact that its DPS and projection are awful.

Regarding T3, I'm sure it has the same problem other MMOs like WoW had.
They bring in ship or whatever that was meant for PvE, something that can be used however in PvP as well. It causes in somewhat balance issues in PvP. Things need to be adjusted (read: nerfed) due to the PvP balance but PvE is the one that actually takes a bigger hit.

Only people that ***** about the boosting T-3's are the ones that do not have access to one plain and simple.... stop it!

dude compare T3's EHP with T1 cruisers and then blankly stare at the main reason ooohh... look it has about three times the amount .. that's not normal ... then look at the dps difference...

That's fine, but then they need to lose their cruiser speed, mass, agility and sig radius.

~Stuff about how T3s are OP~

So you decided to compare a Gallente cruiser with Minmatar T3, and exaggerate the training time by a comfortable 3-4 days? Understandable if you want to push your agenda, but still looks blatantly stupid.

Proteus: 1004dps, 112K EHP, 400mil
Thorax: 40mil

So real cost difference is only 10x, 3-4 days of training and you get twice as much dps and about six times more EHP. And HACs are barely better than T1, but take longer to train than T3.

This increase in performance is completely out of whack when compared with performance increases between other ship classes.

no its not a buff thread its a balance thread... some stuff get a buff others get thier balls cutt of and worn around rises head.

You said Thorax only costs 10mil?

Anyway, EFT land, where the price of that setup is 38.7mil. My Thorax lossmails are closer to 50mil.

Proteus has a flight of Hammers, like Thorax- which incidentally does only 367dps without drones, less than half.

Yes, I obviously agree that this HAC rebalancing effort was terrible and CCP needs to go back to the drawing board, but that doesn't change the fact that T3s are indeed OP- compared to any other ship class in EVE, not just HACs. And these two cannot be looked into in isolation, HACs and T3s in HAC fits share the exact same role.

Unless they are given a distinctly separate role, and T3s adjusted further from that, these two will always compete from the same role and the one with more dps and tank wins. Buffing HACs to compete with current T3s just results in new, massively OP ships.

Oh SHUT UP!




/reset thread.

No. T3s cost should be justified by their modularity and ability to outperform a T1 hull in a particular area when fitted for that role. They absolutely should not outperform a T2 (specialist!) hull when fitted for the same role in which the T2 is specialized... Otherwise the T2 becomes somewhat pointless.

So, none of you eject before your T3 ship goes down?

They would end up tanking better than T3's do now ... OP to say the least

There are no tiers for T3s, there is only one hull per race in the class.

If the Vagabond speed bonus is wrapped up into the hull and replaced with a shield boost bonus it makes the vaga an outlier on base stats with essentially 5 bonuses (the usefulness of those bonuses not withstanding).

HAC's could benefit greatly by a improved afterburner speed bonus.

So CCP Rise, bring us solo back

Exactly my point earlier.

Other than active tanking bonuses, trying to shoehorn a ship into small gang roles just makes it a **** ship, and these things need to have some performance to compete with the T1 cruiers, T3 cruiers, AND all of the battlecruiers.

All but one of which they cost significantly more than.

Could have fooled me. When I lived in low I saw fleets of them from time to time, not to mention there was an unending barrage of them running plexes and such depending on how deep you went....I own 5 T3 hulls for three races(not boosters), and I'm not an annomoly. I'd hardly call T3s uncommon at all, we fly full fleets of them. Almost all major blocks can/do field T3 fleets.


But like I said, HAC is the only T2 cruiser line that doesn't preform its role better than T3s.

They don't really compete with battlecruisers for that matter. They can work, but cost to performance is terrible.

I've also see, Legion fleets, Proteus fleets, various tengu flavors and whatever else.

....and no where did I mention PvE, I really don't care about mission and ratting, there are plenty of perfectly capable ships for both.

I've been out here for a while

I've fought PL in a legion fleet FCs by Elise Randolf
I've seen Null flying a full fleet of Proteus, one of PGLs experiments
I've flown both loki and tengus and -A- and -FA-
I've seen the FW guys flying legion fleets in low sec (and blops dropping them for that matter)
I've seen Liqud running tengu gangs in Molden Heath


No Tengus in null sec? That is the laugh of the week. EVERYONE isn't using them as a primary doctrine, but they are still all over out here.

Don't tell me what I have and haven't seen. if you missed it or just new, that really isn't my issue.

I agree but people are screaming up and down for T3 nerfs because they are rolling all over the HACs roll whatever that is. My entire point was that HACs need to be buffed to the point that they offer SOME advantage in the roll over the T2s.

Because right now HACs are the only ones that don't.

imo, kiters need a burner bonus to speed. burner zealots are hard to hit. they can keep sig radius down and still do descent top speed.

brawlers need to get in close and stop the ships so they can apply damage,
i think the diemost and ishtar need to trade places. the diemost would be better as a kiter.
the ishtar needs to drop drone and run blaster. all of that requires us to be close.


what we need to do is define the role better.
what are they?

if they are heavy assault vessels, they need to assault things heavily. bc dps.

You don't trust the elected officials?!

Going back to that space turd that is the Eagle, knocked down from the sky by the NAGA, I took the liberation of rewriting its backstory and giving it new bonuses to better reflect its new role:



Hull: Moa Class
Role: Heavy Assault Ship

The Eagle is unique among caldari ships that it is eschewing long range fighting for close up brawling. Where more cautions Caldari pilots prefer to range death from afar, the pilots of the Eagle goes face to face with its enemy until one of them is a smoldering wreck.

With a shield that can take a serious pounding and state of the art hybrid guns to dole out hurt the Eagle is anything but a pushover and few who meet one will live to tell the tale.


Caldari Cruiser Skill Bonus:
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage
4% resistances to shield per level

Heavy Assault Ship Skill Bonus:
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff
5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage per level

Role Bonus: 50% reduction of heat damage absorbed by modules


Slot layout: 5H(-1), 6M(+1), 4L; 5 turrets, 1 launchers(-1)
Fittings: 950 PWG(+75), 430 CPU(-8)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2500(+391) / 1250(-16) / 1550(+3)
Capacitor (amount) : 1350(-25)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 210(+46) / .576 / 11720000 / 9.36s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km / 252 / 8
Sensor strength: 18 Gravimetric
Signature radius: 150


Please note that I gave it a dronebay to field 5 light drones and a lot more base speed. I'm not sure how much pwg it need added.The rest I just copy-pasted.

With all skills at level V and no wirings, five Heavy Neutron Blaster II with CN Antimatter and five hobgoblin II, the damage output should be 757 (855 when overheated).


So, thoughts about this?

I got trolled to hell and back for that one, I thought Gallente should get a 5% per level to the resistances of damage control modules.
Edit: effectiveness that is, so at level 5 you would get a 75% hull resistance.

As a matter of fact, I'd like to see them have a 33% AB speed bonus instead of the 50% MWD sig reduction bonus - something I would have preferred for assault frigs in the first place.

Of course after their base speeds have been adjusted to their T1 counterparts.

[edit] Elaboration: Assaulting means getting toe to toe and take something from my understanding. Giving HACs an AB bonus instead of the MWD one would greatly decrease their vulnerabiltiy to scrams, adding opportunities to disengage as compared to battlecruisers, which currently are the HACs downfall.

That unique bonus would also make them stand out from T3 cruisers and build on their only stregth, which is sig tanking.

Would they be powerful?

Yes - but imho they're meant to be.

It would be an especially useful bonus to set them apart from their nemesis, namely Tier 3 BC, as that would make them a perfect counter to them.

Sure needs 5km/s speed 15m sign radius hit with 425mm at 50 km (at least) and able to fit double xl-asb before implants ogb and combat boosters.

Minmatar are the fastest (except stupid Cynabal) do the best dps in fall off and selectable dmg, Vaga problem lies somewhere else: SFI and Stabber good enough to do the same job for cheaper, that's it.

Well at least you are taking that idea and running with it.

You know what armour for space craft really is? It's three or four layers of thin material with gaps between then, the first couple absorb the directed energy, and the last two protect the hull.

I used to test it for NASA.....so yeah twice the armour for a quarter of the mass does make sense.

.....and leave sense out of my eve, we DON'T want real physics around here.

Most nano gangs are cynabals? Wait what?

Sure people use the cyna rather than the vaga atm.. But most proper nano gangs are just tier 3's because they are about six hundred times better (I did the math, don't question!)

the stubborness of people drives me crazy...
if they remain in the exact same role there will always be on better and one worse ship.
so ffs make them just a bit diffrent enough so they fill slightly diffrent roles.

Back on topic , CCP Rise , if find the changes pretty decent , it does not make them OP and they can still be strong with the right people flying them .The more i think about it the more i do not think they need more buffs, the role bonus is pretty strong imo. Just make sure to double check the CPU and powergrid, maybe add a bit to some especially since you dont want to gimp their fit if you fit a mwd , maybe even add a fitting bonus to mwd. GL

As terrible as most of Rise's changes are, they seem so much less terrible when compared to the stuff you guys are coming up with.

I would totally love:

Marauder-Hardpoints, cause my HUD would look near identical to a frig's with 3 guns
(like using 3 highslots for weaponry, acting as 6 turrets, boosted by fitting boni to achieve the same damage as before)

+1. double damage bonus would allow for damage application and easier cap management. /me wants it

I like the idea of 3 guns with a 100% damage role bonus. It would also be nice if all HACs then had 1 (or 2) utility highs, too many of them have been removed lately yes i'm looking at you megathron).

HACs should have 4 guns. and the bonus for brawlers should only effect Close range medium weapons and the the Bonus for Kitting should only effect long range medium weapons

Then do this instead, it would make alot of the ships fitt perfectly

Combat: (These ships will be made from close range brawling and will have higher EHP or resist, however they will be slow and have less utility)
Role Bonus: 60-100% to damage of its races close range medium weapon
the bonus will start a 60% when having Hacs trainned to Lvl I and will been at 100% when trainned to V

this will work alot like how the bonus for cpu for cloaks worked on recons or bonuses for logis.)
main reason for only close range weapons is to avoid them be OP and make more alpha fleets.

Assault: (Ships of this class would also have higher utility and are made for kitting and more support roles)
Role bonus: -60% to -100% Reduction in MWD Sig Radius
(reason for this is becuase even with a -50% bonus its sig will still be huge.)
the bonus will also start at -60% and work its way to -100 when having trainned HACs to lvl V

Surely you're joking

A -50% reduction to MDW on a HAC isnt enough, its still as be as a battleship then

How about special ability for hacs to be a forth rig slot and increased calibration? maybe that could give more flexability and utility?

Unless he got out in hull or something, it's not like he's going to leave. More likely the vaga will jump out, load barrage and start skirmishing at a safer distance until his MJD reloads and then he'll start playing more risky again.

The current MWD sig bonus along with the speed buffs are fine IMO. Long range DPS with less vulnerability to BS guns is a useful role.

Wow. These ships are not brawlers. When you brawl you either go money, (super pimped insert-->T3, Hyperion, Vindi, Navy Mega, Maelstrom, links, pills, etc...) or you go cheap (insert-->Brutix, Vexor, Thorax, Maller, Prophecy, lol links, lol pills, etc.. )
you get the point. This is EVE 2013. Gangs are now considered <50, everyone is baiting, 9 outta 10 you wont be able to disengage. If this is your playstyle your a fool to use HACS. Not the tankiest, not the cheapest. Just because FLEETS use AHACS to great effect doesn't mean they are good. stop it. SPEED.

pff
why not dmg immunity ? cause of dps ships

It's almost a mistake to have this many ships as hac's. we have tanking hac's, there called heavy interdictors.

We have 4 sets of categories.

Heavy interdictors, recon, logistics, hac's. lets remove from the Hac category the ships that overlap with the heavy interdictors. The Deimos would be removed so that if you want to fly a thorax t2 hull , fly a phobos (heavy interdictors), sacrelidge's would go and only the devoter would stay, etc.

Now you can pretty EASILY balance the t2 hac's. (as it drops from a crappy 8 down to an awesome 4.

Use a loki, is a better muninn with higher speed, smaller sig, improved tank, more agility ad a longrangeweb. And 20% more alpha.

You guys seem extremely self serving, the Zealot is already considered the best HAC and you want a drone bay too? OK then I want 50 MB drones on the Eagle since it is bad and also has no drone bay.

people dont seem to cry out "WHAT 3 MEDS FOR THE MALLER/OMEN/NOMEN/NAUGOROR/ZEALOT/ABSOLUTION!!!!!ONEONE!!!ONE!!!" from what i can see.