EVE Search - Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Odyssey 1.1] Heavy Assault Cruisers

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4058	Posted - 2013.07.18 15:52:00 - [1] - Quote All HACs should come with a special ship maintenance bay that holds only the associated AF. So when you die, you are launched out in the AF to immediately seek revenge. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4059	Posted - 2013.07.18 15:58:00 - [2] - Quote I would like it if the Sacrilege was a bit more faster and it traded that incredibly fat ass for something more sporty. If it is supposed to be a brawler then it needs the means to get on top of a target to effectively use those HAMs. I would also rather see the new bonus of HML scrapped in favor of HAM flight time or something. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4061	Posted - 2013.07.18 16:11:00 - [3] - Quote For the love of all that is holy. You need to seriously rethink the Deimos. It already struggles to have any tank to get close to apply the blaster DPS and you nerf the tank significantly. I could be wrong, but if my memory serves me correctly any other HAC that wants to fit the highest DPS close range weapon system it has bonuses for, MWD and a large plate/extender - does not have to add 3 modules/rigs for the power grid. Most don't have to add any. So please consider unnerfing the EHP you did, look at exchanging the MWD bonus for another +5% to medium hybrid damage/rof and make sure it has the power grid to fit a tank to enable it to get on top of a target and enough power grid to fit the guns needed to apply the DPS when it gets there. Please, please, please I can't say please enough. Think of all the dangers a blaster Deimos has to endure that most other HACs do not. The Deimos when doing what it was meant to do, be a close range brawler, is subjected to neuts, scrams and webs. If that is its area of operation it should be able to take some punishment there. Maybe changing the MWD bonus to -20% to incoming neutralizer effectiveness would be welcome. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4071	Posted - 2013.07.18 19:58:00 - [4] - Quote What are the reasons to choose one of these new HACs over an aBC? .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4081	Posted - 2013.07.19 01:36:00 - [5] - Quote "Guys a Deimos just landed on grid with me, orders?" -Average BC Pilot "Really? Well just tackle it and we will be there in a few minutes." -Friends Docked Up Several Jumps Away "OK, he is tackled. Got a scram, web and even a neut on him. My tank is doing ok considering he is using blasters." -Average BC Pilot "Nice. We are undocking and should be there..." -Friends Docked Up Several Jumps Away "AHAHAHA!!! Holy ** I was trying to pull damage so you guys could kill mail * on it, but he dipped into armor and just exploded. Strange. He even had a damage control fit too." -Average BC Pilot "Poor son of a ***. Well launch your salvage drones and salvage the wreck. About all the Diemost is good for anyways." -Friends Docked Up Several Jumps Away "No kidding. Wait, aBC on scan now. Should I..." -Average BC Pilot "WARP OUT! I repeat warp out!!!... Do you copy?!" -Friends Docked Up Several Jumps Away .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4086	Posted - 2013.07.19 04:39:00 - [6] - Quote elitatwo wrote: Omnathious Deninard wrote: So did a rough check with the MWD bonus. Ship one was a MWD Talos with Void Neutron blasters, it would have a 50% hit chance at Optimal + Falloff going 1529 M/s against a MWD Deimos going 1841 M/s using Null, which had a 80% hit chance. With changing the MWD bonus to a 100% Increase to AB velocity bonus, the Talos could not hit the Deimos, the Deimos had a 80% hit chance while going 1120 m/s Edit: A check using a Brutix and a Brutix navy issue, both were able to hit the AB enhanced Diemos. The Brutix had a 22% hit chance using Null @ 15km going 1231 M/s, the brutix navy issue had a 32% hit chance @ 15km going 1570 M/s ...and suddenly a Huggin decloaks and you are going nowhere... A Huggin decloaks you say? .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4094	Posted - 2013.07.19 16:00:00 - [7] - Quote I still think a fleet of aBC will dumpster the **** out of a fleet of the current and even newly proposed HACs. For a fraction of the cost too. CCP Rise - If the MWD bloob sig role bonus is necessary enough to warrent then perhaps you should just reduce the sig of the HACs base down from the start. Then you can look into giving each HAC unique role bonuses that can open the door to make them not just 'better' T1 cruisers, but good at doing 'something'. Something that an aBC can't do and a T1 cruiser can't do. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4103	Posted - 2013.07.19 16:46:00 - [8] - Quote "If I'm supposed to be a close range brawler, why do I have a bonus for a long range weapon?" - Sacrilege .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4103	Posted - 2013.07.19 16:50:00 - [9] - Quote "If I'm supposed to be a rail gun kitting ship, why would someone fly me instead of the Eagle?" - Deimos .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4103	Posted - 2013.07.19 16:52:00 - [10] - Quote "If I'm supposed to be a drone specialized ship, why don't I have CPU for drone upgrade modules?" - Ishtar .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4110	Posted - 2013.07.19 18:13:00 - [11] - Quote Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage. Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4118	Posted - 2013.07.19 18:51:00 - [12] - Quote MeBiatch wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage. Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense. cool now i will take my hac and run lev v mission. I suggest you check with those who have tried doing that with a BS first and see how they faired. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4121	Posted - 2013.07.19 19:39:00 - [13] - Quote I'm also for the idea of reducing HAC costs a bit. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4128	Posted - 2013.07.19 20:45:00 - [14] - Quote nikar galvren wrote: Ben Yahtzee Croshaw wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage. Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense. Easily the best idea by far. Continuing to run with the idea of roles, why not have the 'combat/tank' hulls have the Target Spectrum Breaker role, and the 'attack/DPS' hulls have a role bonus to fit MJD? This allows combat hulls to engage multiple targets, and attack roles to Hit&Run effectively. EDIT: minor typo Definitely. I think the role bonus is the key to unlocking a role for HACs that is not easily done by another ship class. If the reduction of MWD is so important than just reduce the sig of all the HACs to compensate. Or give HACs two role bonuses if they are worried about AB HACs becoming too OP. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4128	Posted - 2013.07.19 21:46:00 - [15] - Quote Harvey James wrote: Cearain wrote: Ben Yahtzee Croshaw wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Role Bonus: Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker. -90% to fitting and capacitor usage. Now the HAC has a purpose that T1 cruisers, faction cruisers and aBCs can't do nearly as well. Engage the blob and perform decently at it. Now moving those utility high slots to a medium makes even more sense. Easily the best idea by far. I'm personally not a fan of this idea. i also think its a waste of a bonus It is a hundred times better use of a role bonus compared to a mjd bonus. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4130	Posted - 2013.07.19 23:01:00 - [16] - Quote Prometheus Exenthal wrote: Also, serious question time. If they ACTUALLY decided to give the Deimos 4 mids (cringe), what would be the downside to exchanging the (now useless) 5% mwd cap bonus for a 75% reduction in cap battery fitting bonus? That would mean a large T2 battery would take 25cpu & 69pg instead of 100/275, and a medium would be 19/19. Keep in mind, batteries also have a neut reduction bonus (12.5% on large). This would be the functional equivalent to a nos, but with a large reserve in cap. People who want to shield tank can shield tank. People who want to inject can inject. And people who like flying the way I do (brawling w/ nos), can continue doing so. Seems like a fair deal IMO. Because they should just reduce the module fitting needs across the board so they are viable for a lot of ships instead of just one. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4131	Posted - 2013.07.19 23:36:00 - [17] - Quote Crazy KSK wrote: Prometheus Exenthal wrote: raawe wrote: Rise, whatever you do with sacriledge, make sure to add 1 more low slot. It's supposed to be brawler and it cant fit tank and spank properly to use bonuses. It does this just fine. The HAM boost from a few months back means you can actually use Rage ammo. The Sac is well into the 600dps range now (before heat), even if you just have a single BCU. The Sac changes are the best of the lot, and it doesn't need to be adjusted further. just out of curiosity would you not use at least use halve the drone bay for some ecm drones? also maybe far into 500 1bcu + rage + 5xhammer II =569 1bcu + rage + 5xhob II =509 EW drones should be removed completely from the game, but I guess that is for another thread. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4144	Posted - 2013.07.23 19:56:00 - [18] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Hey again So we had the tournament this weekend and then I was out of the office yesterday. I'm getting started on this topic again today, but as evidenced by this enormous thread, there's plenty to do. I think we will have another CSM review step before getting the new version (which isn't even finished yet) back to you guys. If things go well, I'll have a new pass for you guys by the end of this week, if things go slow it would probably be start of next week. Thanks for all the feedback and ideas. A lot of you have different ideas about these ships, but hopefully we can distill some good stuff and do a revision that you're all excited about. Just be careful of the CSM members who have their own personal agenda in mind instead of the player base. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4145	Posted - 2013.07.23 20:33:00 - [19] - Quote HULL TANKING Just tossing that out there... .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4146	Posted - 2013.07.23 21:13:00 - [20] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: HULL TANKING Just tossing that out there... 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. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4148	Posted - 2013.07.24 03:39:00 - [21] - Quote Grath Telkin wrote: Still a little shocking that you haven't even talked about lowering the HAC build cost to make it a more competitive choice with the other options around its weight class. I honestly hope you're considering that or else all 70 pages of this will end up being for nothing as people keep ignoring HACs for the ships that give a similar performance for a fraction of the cost (something that you the balance team caused). Balancing these ships based on a 100m hull would be a lot better than trying to balance a 200m hull. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4152	Posted - 2013.07.25 20:00:00 - [22] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Another small update just so you guys don't get mad and think I've abandoned you! Entering final review steps internally and with CSM before getting latest iteration of this stuff posted here for you guys. Early next week at the latest I'd say. o/ Can you at least tell us if these latest pass puts HACs into a role that is not completely overshadowed by other ship? .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4153	Posted - 2013.07.26 19:10:00 - [23] - Quote Brawler HAC should get bonus to fitting MJD and kitting HAC bonus to fitting TSB. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4154	Posted - 2013.07.26 20:17:00 - [24] - Quote Sacrilege Role Bonus: Immune to Stasis Webbifiers Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Zealot Role Bonus: Immune to Target Painters Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Cerberus Role Bonus: Immune to Remote Sensor Dampeners Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Eagle Role Bonus: Immune to Warp Scramblers (this does NOT include warp disruptors) Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Deimos Role Bonus: Immune to ECM Jammers Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Ishtar Role Bonus: Immune to ECM Jammers Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Muninn Role Bonus: Immune to Tracking Disruptors Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Vagabond Role Bonus: Immune to Energy Neutralizer and Nosfuratu Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Lower the build cost so they don't cost any more than 100m ISK. Now each race has a HAC for guerrilla style hit and run tactics and a HAC that excels at fighting outnumber without overpowering solo and small gang warfare. Keep in mind the MJD and TSB do have penalties while being used. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4154	Posted - 2013.07.26 21:20:00 - [25] - Quote Gizznitt Malikite wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Sacrilege Role Bonus: Immune to Stasis Webbifiers Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Zealot Role Bonus: Immune to Target Painters Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Cerberus Role Bonus: Immune to Remote Sensor Dampeners Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Eagle Role Bonus: Immune to Warp Scramblers (this does NOT include warp disruptors) Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Deimos Role Bonus: Immune to ECM Jammers Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Ishtar Role Bonus: Immune to ECM Jammers Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Muninn Role Bonus: Immune to Tracking Disruptors Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Vagabond Role Bonus: Immune to Energy Neutralizer and Nosfuratu Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Lower the build cost so they don't cost any more than 100m ISK. Now each race has a HAC for guerrilla style hit and run tactics and a HAC that excels at fighting outnumber without overpowering solo and small gang warfare. Keep in mind the MJD and TSB do have penalties while being used. The above would be overpowered.... Free MJD's fit to the mids, that don't even require cap to activiate? And to top it off: Eagles that can MWD with impunity, and can MJD out of any situation, because they are immune to scrams? Part of your ideas are kind of interesting... but they are also overpowered! Eagle does NOT have MJD bonus. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4155	Posted - 2013.07.26 23:18:00 - [26] - Quote DeadDuck wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Sacrilege Role Bonus: Immune to Stasis Webbifiers Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Zealot Role Bonus: Immune to Target Painters Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Cerberus Role Bonus: Immune to Remote Sensor Dampeners Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Eagle Role Bonus: Immune to Warp Scramblers (this does NOT include warp disruptors) Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Deimos Role Bonus: Immune to ECM Jammers Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Ishtar Role Bonus: Immune to ECM Jammers Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Muninn Role Bonus: Immune to Tracking Disruptors Can fit Target Spectrum Breaker and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Vagabond Role Bonus: Immune to Energy Neutralizer and Nosfuratu Can fit Micro Jump Drive and -100% to fitting and capacitor need Lower the build cost so they don't cost any more than 100m ISK. Now each race has a HAC for guerrilla style hit and run tactics and a HAC that excels at fighting outnumber without overpowering solo and small gang warfare. Keep in mind the MJD and TSB do have penalties while being used. Target lock breaker is only good for fleet fights. Almost useless for small gang warfare, where these ships will be (hopefully) widelly used. Why are having Gallentean ships immunity to the same EW and the other for different kinds of EW ? TBH I sense here an attempt to favour some of the Hacs instead of others... AF gets a role bonus to MWD but that does not mean it HAS to fit one. While the bonus helps it in large scale fights, fitting an AB for small scale is common. All of Caldaris EW bonuses focus on one type of EW, had it been two different ones you would have seen one on the Deimos and the other on the Ishtar. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4155	Posted - 2013.07.27 00:07:00 - [27] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Marlona Sky wrote: Brawler HAC should get bonus to fitting MJD... Let's save a special MJD bonus for black ops and marauders. They already can use them. .
Marlona Sky D00M. Northern Coalition. 4155	Posted - 2013.07.27 00:23:00 - [28] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Marlona Sky, I can appreciate where you are coming from trying to give the MJD and TSB a unique role that makes them usable in more than a couple situations, but I don't think this is the right area. Why not? .

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,22s, ref 20250912/0212
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

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.