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

Check My IP Information

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 [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 60 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 16 post(s)
Zane Ziebold Mom 'n' Pop Ammo Shoppe R.E.P.O. 17	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:44:00 - [31] - Quote for some parts and for other parts
Alpheias Euphoria Released Verge of Collapse 2253	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:46:00 - [32] - Quote This is probably weird of me to say, but I'll be in my bunk....... Allow me to be frank. You will not like me. You will not like me now, and you will not like men++ a good deal less as we go on.
Marcel Devereux Aideron Robotics 240	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:47:00 - [33] - Quote The Isthar changes are a little lackluster, especially when compared to the VNI. There is nothing heavy nor assaulting about it. Let's start with the bonuses, which is it basically a mini-domi with some added range. It also kept that lame 50m3 drone bay per level. Since this is a T2 ship and it is suppose to specialize over T1 and Faction, how about dropping the 50m3 bonus and swapping it for a "5% bonus to drone velocity and tracking". This would allow it to fully specialize in both short range and long range drone combat. Every other race has one HAC that has a tank bonus. Thank you for not giving the Isthar an active tank bonus (I know I've been trolling you, but please don't troll me back on this one by adding it ;-) .Speaking of tank, how about moving that fifth med slot from the Ishtar to a low slot? For the Deimos, can you roll some of that that MWD bonus up into the ship by increasing the recharge and replace it with something else. It is another archaic bonus that looks out of place. Compare the bonuses to the Muninn: double damage bonus (dmg+rof), optimal range bonus, and tracking bonus. Deimos: double damage bonus, fall-off bonus, MWD bonus. Can you replace the MWD bonus with the tracking bonus that is found on the Thorax?
Capqu Love Squad 131	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:47:00 - [34] - Quote hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts? please fix rise 3/10 see me after class http://pizza.eve-kill.net
Harvey James Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 285	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:50:00 - [35] - Quote DEIMOS - Like the Thorax, Deimos now has 4 mids and gives up the extra high. It also goes faster and aligns faster. Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage 5% increase to MicroWarpdrive capacitor bonus Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret falloff 5% Medium Hybrid Turret damage Slot layout: 6H 4M(+1), 6L; 6 turrets, 0 launchers (-2) Fittings: 1030 PWG(+40), 350 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1350(+190) / 1750(-290) / 2000(-531) Capacitor (amount) : 1400(+25) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 240(+32) / .475(-.055) / 10460000 ( -1mil)/ 7.54s(-.875) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 50 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 270 / 6 Sensor strength: 15 Magnetometric Signature radius: 125 (-35) ISHTAR - We are replacing the medium hybrid damage bonus with a drone bonus and removing one high slot to put its total 1 below the rest of the class, as is standard for drone-focused ships. Role Bonus: 50% reduction in MicroWarpdrive signature radius penalty Gallente Cruiser Bonuses: 10% bonus to drone tracking and optimal range(was 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage) 10% bonus to drone hitpoints and damage Heavy Assault Cruiser Bonuses: 5 km bonus to Scout and Heavy Drone operation range per level 5% drone velocity Slot layout: 4H(-1), 5M, 6L(+1); 4 turrets(+1), 0 launchers Fittings: 700 PWG, 315 CPU ( +35) Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1400(-6) / 1600(-18) / 2300(+191) Capacitor (amount) : 1300(+175) Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 205(-26) / .52 / 11700000 / 8.43s Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 375 (+250) Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 60km / 294 / 7 Sensor strength: 16 Magnetometric Signature radius: 135 (-10) Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
David Kir Tailender 48	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:52:00 - [36] - Quote Capqu wrote: hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts? please fix rise 3/10 see me after class Because they are not straight up improvements of T1 hulls. They are specialized ships. 0,0029834/10, read up some stuff.
Harvey James Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 285	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:53:00 - [37] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Harvey James wrote: these or therefore lack of will have virtually no impact on there usage. I was expecting a more extreme buff perhaps more like the navy attack cruisers ... boy i was WRONG..... 15 slots only its T2 why not the +2 slots that the AF's get over T1 frigs .. where's the advantage over navy here? 50% is too low without reducing there sig radius especially on shield HACS For the 150-200mil price tag these come with making them compete with Navy bc's for tank is stupid.. competing with sniping ABC's is even worse idea. Overall CCP Rise back to the drawing board here Considering that we've been shouting at the top of our lungs for a year that T2 won't get buffed as much as T1 was, I don't know why you're surprised. Well the thought was you would actually make them worth flying over say navy cruisers or ABC's on this evidence ...not really the case .. i at least expected you to give them comparable mobility buff like all cruisers have gotten Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
mynnna GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 1323	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:55:00 - [38] - Quote Omnathious Deninard wrote: Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU The vexor is gun bonused and sort of expected to use them, the ishtar is not. You can fit a 1600mm plate based tank and "basically anything you want" to the vexor already if you don't make much use of the highs, or you can fill your highs with utility modules at the cost of a lighter tank and tighter fitting. It's a fair trade off. Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Capqu Love Squad 131	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:56:00 - [39] - Quote David Kir wrote: Capqu wrote: hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts? please fix rise 3/10 see me after class Because they are not straight up improvements of T1 hulls. They are specialized ships. 0,0029834/10, read up some stuff. if you look at how t2s all started this isn't true, they all (except stealth bombers i think - but they fixed that when they gave them a unique model) had exactly the same bonuses as t1 but with an added t2 bonus and maybe a role bonus because they were improved/specialized versions of the t1 ships, hence why they show up in variations of that t1 http://pizza.eve-kill.net
Kansas Winndu DMoney Corp 2	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:57:00 - [40] - Quote I'm wondering if the Ishtar gonna op. Image a hac with web/scramb, battleship dps, short range gun tracking, long range gun optimal and neuts on high, It can solo or kill off most other ships with little effort.

Claire Raynor NovaGear Limitless Inc. 156	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:57:00 - [41] - Quote RISE!!! I just read the Medium long range guns thread and was soo happy. Then this!! This. . . IS Awesome!!! It's like a WINsplosion on the features and ideas. Too much WIN. I love all the ideas! I like all the ships!
Altrue Exploration Frontier inc 495	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:58:00 - [42] - Quote Interesting changes, but imo even if this change is logical, the ishtar will be too OP now with another drone bonus. G££ <= Me
Woo Glin GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 542	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:59:00 - [43] - Quote These are some interesting changes. The only problem I see is that the loss of utility highs on several of the ships pretty much negates their use in cloaking gangs.
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 1270	Posted - 2013.07.18 11:59:00 - [44] - Quote Marcel Devereux wrote: The Isthar changes are a little lackluster, especially when compared to the VNI. There is nothing heavy nor assaulting about it. I have to agree. CCP Fozzie's Navy Vexor > CCP Rise Ishkur We got an extra turret hard point but no extra fitting, a MWD bonus but then 2 bonuses to ranged combat. Did you run out of ideas for this ship? How about this: Gallente Cruiser 10% Drone damage and HP per level + 50m^3 Drone Bay per level (if you insist on keeping this bonus it should be here) Heavy Assault Ships +10% Drone Tracking and Optimal Range per level +5% Drone MWD velocity per level Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 6716	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:00:00 - [45] - Quote Capqu wrote: David Kir wrote: Capqu wrote: hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts? please fix rise 3/10 see me after class Because they are not straight up improvements of T1 hulls. They are specialized ships. 0,0029834/10, read up some stuff. if you look at how t2s all started this isn't true, they all (except stealth bombers i think - but they fixed that when they gave them a unique model) had exactly the same bonuses as t1 but with an added t2 bonus and maybe a role bonus because they were improved/specialized versions of the t1 ships, hence why they show up in variations of that t1 Forcing the T2 base hull bonuses to be the same as the T1 hulls has never been a hard rule, and it is not something we're going to start enforcing now. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

BadAssMcKill Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 303	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:00:00 - [46] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Harvey James wrote: these or therefore lack of will have virtually no impact on there usage. I was expecting a more extreme buff perhaps more like the navy attack cruisers ... boy i was WRONG..... 15 slots only its T2 why not the +2 slots that the AF's get over T1 frigs .. where's the advantage over navy here? 50% is too low without reducing there sig radius especially on shield HACS For the 150-200mil price tag these come with making them compete with Navy bc's for tank is stupid.. competing with sniping ABC's is even worse idea. Overall CCP Rise back to the drawing board here Considering that we've been shouting at the top of our lungs for a year that T2 won't get buffed as much as T1 was, I don't know why you're surprised. Yeah but when they still feel underwhelming compared to T1/Faction that's a problem no? http://i.imgur.com/6j6cIZE.gif-á

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 6716	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:02:00 - [47] - Quote BadAssMcKill wrote: CCP Fozzie wrote: Harvey James wrote: these or therefore lack of will have virtually no impact on there usage. I was expecting a more extreme buff perhaps more like the navy attack cruisers ... boy i was WRONG..... 15 slots only its T2 why not the +2 slots that the AF's get over T1 frigs .. where's the advantage over navy here? 50% is too low without reducing there sig radius especially on shield HACS For the 150-200mil price tag these come with making them compete with Navy bc's for tank is stupid.. competing with sniping ABC's is even worse idea. Overall CCP Rise back to the drawing board here Considering that we've been shouting at the top of our lungs for a year that T2 won't get buffed as much as T1 was, I don't know why you're surprised. Yeah but when they still feel underwhelming compared to T1/Faction that's a problem no? We can't control how you feel, we can only control how powerful the ships are, and they're quite powerful. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie http://www.twitch.tv/ccp_fozzie/

David Kir Tailender 48	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:02:00 - [48] - Quote Capqu wrote: David Kir wrote: Capqu wrote: hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts? please fix rise 3/10 see me after class Because they are not straight up improvements of T1 hulls. They are specialized ships. 0,0029834/10, read up some stuff. if you look at how t2s all started this isn't true, they all (except stealth bombers i think - but they fixed that when they gave them a unique model) had exactly the same bonuses as t1 but with an added t2 bonus and maybe a role bonus because they were improved/specialized versions of the t1 ships, hence why they show up in variations of that t1 Ok, I'll put it this way. The Sacrilege used to be a short ranged laser boat. Zealot was a sniper. You know what happened? People slapped pulses on the Zealot, and rolled with it. That's why the Sac is now a missile boat. Would you prefer the two ships stepping on each other's toes? What do you want? Two identical armor/laser ships?
Omnathious Deninard Novis Initiis 1270	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:02:00 - [49] - Quote mynnna wrote: Omnathious Deninard wrote: Why is the Ishtar not getting some fitting buff, the vexor has +100 power grid and +15 CPU The vexor is gun bonused and sort of expected to use them, the ishtar is not. You can fit a 1600mm plate based tank and "basically anything you want" to the vexor already if you don't make much use of the highs, or you can fill your highs with utility modules at the cost of a lighter tank and tighter fitting. It's a fair trade off. And what is the reason the navy vexor has the same power grid and +10 CPU over the vexor yet only has 2 unbonused turrets, where as the Ishtar got an extra turret. Ideas for Drone ImprovementTwitter Account-á @Omnathious
Harvey James Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 285	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:03:00 - [50] - Quote CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus? seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ? look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos.... missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship Also more speed on these things please Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.

Harvey James Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 285	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:05:00 - [51] - Quote Also a vaga shield tanking with 4 mids still..... i was expecting another mid here also more cpu might help with cpu hungry ASB's Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
Smoking Blunts ZC Industries Dark Stripes 620	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:05:00 - [52] - Quote with the sac. how about removing the utility high and adding a low slot. OMG when can i get a pic here
Max Ventrue Stimulus Rote Kapelle 1	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:06:00 - [53] - Quote If you want to have the Sac maintain its role as heavy tackle, why not drop the cap recharge bonus for a 5 or 10% web bonus to either range or velocity? All in all +1 for the changes.
David Kir Tailender 48	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:07:00 - [54] - Quote Harvey James wrote: CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus? seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ? look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos.... missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship Also more speed on these things please Speed belongs to the Minmatar rustbins. Want speed? Then the Minmatar should get an appropriate chunk of it.
Capqu Love Squad 131	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:08:00 - [55] - Quote CCP Fozzie wrote: Capqu wrote: David Kir wrote: Capqu wrote: hi, why do some of these t2 ships not have the same base hull bonus as their t1 counterparts? please fix rise 3/10 see me after class Because they are not straight up improvements of T1 hulls. They are specialized ships. 0,0029834/10, read up some stuff. if you look at how t2s all started this isn't true, they all (except stealth bombers i think - but they fixed that when they gave them a unique model) had exactly the same bonuses as t1 but with an added t2 bonus and maybe a role bonus because they were improved/specialized versions of the t1 ships, hence why they show up in variations of that t1 Forcing the T2 base hull bonuses to be the same as the T1 hulls has never been a hard rule, and it is not something we're going to start enforcing now. yuck, muh lore you better give inties some goddamn lockrange to make up for this http://pizza.eve-kill.net
Harvey James Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 285	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:09:00 - [56] - Quote David Kir wrote: Harvey James wrote: CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus? seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ? look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos.... missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship Also more speed on these things please Speed belongs to the Minmatar rustbins. Want speed? Then the Minmatar should get an appropriate chunk of it. They all need more speed the eagle at 175m/s is shockingy slow ... what about people who would like to use a blaster setup instead of Rails? .. some light drones would help too Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
Harvey James Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 285	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:12:00 - [57] - Quote Also is the cost being considered here? any reduction on there cost? you will certainly have too if you want people to use them over navy cruisers which just seem plain better at being cruisers... Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
David Kir Tailender 48	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:13:00 - [58] - Quote Harvey James wrote: David Kir wrote: Harvey James wrote: CCP Rise have you tried to fix the cerberus? seriously does it need to spew missiles out too 200km ? look at the caracal that is the model you need to look at here and also the corax these have nice combos.... missile explosion velocity is perfect for a kitey missile ship Also more speed on these things please Speed belongs to the Minmatar rustbins. Want speed? Then the Minmatar should get an appropriate chunk of it. They all need more speed the eagle at 175m/s is shockingy slow ... what about people who would like to use a blaster setup instead of Rails? .. some light drones would help too It's kind of got an astonishing range bonus, which makes it golden with antimatter, so range control shouldn't be much of an issue. I'd boost its agility, instead: its sniper role would benefit from fast warp in/warp out capacity.
Tsubutai Red Federation RvB - RED Federation 211	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:14:00 - [59] - Quote As written, the cerberus' flight time bonus only applies to heavy and heavy assault missiles but not lights fired from rapid light launchers - is this intentional?
Luscius Uta Unleashed' Fury Forsaken Federation 45	Posted - 2013.07.18 12:15:00 - [60] - Quote Kinda weird to see 50 m^3 drone bay on a Sacrilege, when 25 m^3 should be enough by all senses, but I suppose the ship needed a buff (even though my senses say that giving it a bonus to explosion velocity would be more logical that giving it a unusually large drone bay for a non-Gallente ship). Eagle still has a duplicate optimal range bonus. If 100% bonus to optimal range was so great more people would fly Rail Tengus I suppose. Therefore I would replace the range bonus from HAC skill with a bonus to tracking, damage or maybe even shield hitpoints. Also, I don't think that falloff bonus on Hybrid boats is much useful, no matter if you use Blasters or Rails. So I would remove the falloff bonus from Deimos and replace it with a 7.5% bonus to either tracking or armour repair amount (or maybe even 10% optimal, which I would like to see on a Gallente boat for once). And Ishtar, while being changed for the better, still has the same CPU :(



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 .. 60 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.