EVE Search - Sticky:[Hyperion] Heavy Assault Cruiser tweaks

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Hyperion] Heavy Assault Cruiser tweaks

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3738	Posted - 2014.07.30 01:20:00 - [1] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: After digging into this we were both happy and a bit surprised to find that there weren't a lot of clear changes needed. Battleships especially seem to be in a pretty solid place. And by "solid" you mean essentially relegated to missions, incursions and null-sec fleets...? Battleships need a serious buff to overall hitpoints to even begin to offset the various nerfs - in particular, the huge hit to warp speed. You can solo in a strategic cruiser or command ship - but it's basically suicide to venture outside of high-sec in a battleship. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3738	Posted - 2014.07.30 01:32:00 - [2] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: no no .. solid as in a rock at the bottom of a lake. No one sees them .. unless you happen to trip on one. Pretty much. At a bare minimum battleships need to see a 1.5-2x increase in hit points and scanning resolution so that they're not completely useless without an accompanying fleet. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3738	Posted - 2014.07.30 10:22:00 - [3] - Quote Battlecruisers and battleships (minus a few noted exceptions) need a serious overhaul with respect to hitpoints/EHP. Battlecruisers (minus command ships) could easily see a +50% hitpoint bump. +100% for battleships (minus Marauders). If these are the "new" ships for Hyperion, I can't wait... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3740	Posted - 2014.07.31 00:36:00 - [4] - Quote Kagura Nikon wrote: Thsoe buffs withotu touchign the T2 woudl make their EHP toooo different. I would prefer a 25% for BC, 50% for battleships and an increase of some 20% on dps for battleships (that are NOT drone based, because those are already amazingly powerful). I'm totally cool with that. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3740	Posted - 2014.07.31 00:59:00 - [5] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Impressively scattered discussion so far. I can respond to a few things directly: "Battleships are not in a good place, you crazy Rise" - an important distinction here is that I meant battleships are in a relatively good place WITHIN the class. Whether or not they are healthy relative to other classes is more complicated, but if there's issues there (because of bombers for instance) we would more likely want to deal with that problem from the other direction (by making changes to bombers for instance) rather than changing every BS to compensate. Between Duckslayer's insults he mentioned MWD cap use on BS being a problem which I agree with and I may try to get a change for that in shortly. It's not really more complicated - battleships are borderline useless outside of PvE (regardless of whether battleships are fine "WITHIN" the class). It's not just bombers - you'd also have to adjust strategic and command cruisers as well. They need more EHP at a bare minimum: 0% for attack battlecruisers, 25% for combat battlecruisers, 0% for Maruaders and BlackOps and 50% for all T1, Faction and Pirate battleships. It wouldn't hurt to bump the scan resolution on the entire class as well. Just because they may look good "on paper" doesn't mean they have a practical application outside of high-sec or null fleets. If one really wants to start thinking outside the box: GÇó Battlecruisers should get a -1 warp core bonus; battleships -2 GÇó Battlecruisers should get a -10% defense against neuts; battleships -20% GÇó Battlecruisers should get a -25% reduction against webs; battleships -50% Again, attack battlecruisers, Marauders and BlackOps excluded from the list. None of these changes would make battleships "op" - but it would extend their survivability such that people might actually start soloing and using them in small gangs again. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3740	Posted - 2014.07.31 03:46:00 - [6] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: We expect that some of you will feel this is far too gentle on the Ishtar, and we understand that (it's what we heard from the CSM as well), but we get releases very often now and we're happy to be conservative here, rather than nuke it out of the game, and just make more changes if they're needed in the following release. When you guys start consistently hitting your release dates with the promised features I'll place a bit more stock in your estimates. As it now stands you're 0/2; the industry update was omitted entirely from Kronos and there was effectively nothing other than the deferred industry update in Crius. The numerous post-Crius patches and extended downtimes to essentially fix the numerous issues and problems introduced with Crius doesn't bode well for Hyperion - which is shaping up to be Kronos "light" at this point. You guys are still operating under the premise that you have a lot of time to address these rebalance issues. You don't - you're on borrowed time. Unless you start taking some risks and introduce some new content, EVE is going to creep past the point of no return with respect to subscriber losses. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3740	Posted - 2014.07.31 03:56:00 - [7] - Quote Corben Arctus wrote: Like some people here already mentioned, please take another good look at the Minmatar HACs. The Vagabond is kinda meh nowadays, bordering on irrelevant. The Muninn is pretty much completely irrelevant where I live. It's a ship that can only be used if you have a group of 20 people flying it, alpha'ing smaller stuff. I don't fly either, but enough have commented that they're both the equivalent of "suck lite" - so yeah, why not. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3741	Posted - 2014.08.01 00:18:00 - [8] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: sigh, I'll bite I suppose. New content like what, Arthur? PvE needs a substantial overhaul. Something more dynamic than endlessly running missions towards more goal-orientated tasks, such as escorting NPC convoys, racking up xx number of rat kills (with a tier-based reward system) and allowing other players to join or oppose said adventures. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3741	Posted - 2014.08.01 03:46:00 - [9] - Quote It's been mentioned before and is worth mentioning again: remove sentry drones from all classes but battleships and higher. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3742	Posted - 2014.08.03 20:42:00 - [10] - Quote These proposals plain, well - suck. It's already August 3, and with Hyperon slated for an August 26 release it means that these have already been more-or-less fixed in stone. We'll see the traditional 1 week of "fluff" attention to this thread while the changes are prepared for SiSi, to be finalized by mid-August after a few scant days of testing and further casual disregard of player feedback. Hyperion = over-hyped at this point. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3744	Posted - 2014.08.07 05:41:00 - [11] - Quote I'm not sure why these threads even exist anymoreGÇª GÇó Players have been pointing out shortcomings for the past yearGÇª (ignored) GÇó Changes have already been run by the CSM months agoGÇª (CSM feedback marginalized) GÇó All "[insert patch here]" feature threads are basically set in-stone anyway I think I'd rather go the 6 weeks without any announcements whatsoever and then I can at least feign surprise at the massive letdown the latest patch delivers on. It's really a killjoy to know each expansion is going to massively suck a month before it's releasedGÇª Hyperion - now with less suck! I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3746	Posted - 2014.08.10 04:08:00 - [12] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Personally, I think sentries are an acceptable weapon system. For a battleship. And battlecruiser. But nothing above or below. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3748	Posted - 2014.08.10 16:36:00 - [13] - Quote Xequecal wrote: At this point they should just allow T2 ammo to be used in T1 guns. Deadspace (if they existed) and Officer, sure. But not T1 or Faction. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3748	Posted - 2014.08.10 18:34:00 - [14] - Quote Battlecruisers (with the exception of Attack Battlecruiers) and some of the Command Cruisers could use another pass (Caldari, Minmatar and Gallente should get a variant with +50% shield/armor, respectively). All T1 and Faction Battleships need another pass, as well as a few tweaks to T2 Marauders, T2 Blackops and two of the Pirate Battleships (Barghest and Nestor). I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3748	Posted - 2014.08.10 18:49:00 - [15] - Quote Harvey James wrote: Attack bc's .. should be moved too T2 .. then 4 of the combat bc's can become what attack bc's should be .. kind of like the navy bc's mobility but slightly better but with medium weapons and good tank That's an interesting idea. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Erebus Solia 3748	Posted - 2014.08.10 19:43:00 - [16] - Quote TrouserDeagle wrote: pretty much everything needs another pass. That's a fair point. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Halas Hooligans 3752	Posted - 2014.08.11 17:13:00 - [17] - Quote cool4nd wrote: How about 7/5/7 with 7 guns? How about separate threads for Battlecruiser and Battleship passes? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Halas Hooligans 3752	Posted - 2014.08.11 17:19:00 - [18] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: This obsessive need to deal with rebalances in a class-by-class basis is weird and doesn't really help the game. Individual ships that need nerfs or buffs need to be identified, and the correct changes should be applied with every content / rebalance patch. Hey, don't look at me... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Halas Hooligans 3752	Posted - 2014.08.11 17:25:00 - [19] - Quote Hakaari Inkuran wrote: How does that help the game to have turns at rebalances? I agree. And honestly, there aren't entirely that many ships that need a major overhaul - just a few tweaks. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken Halas Hooligans 3752	Posted - 2014.08.11 17:45:00 - [20] - Quote Harvey James wrote: Recons and T3's need a lot of work I should have prefaced that with a disclaimer of ships that have already received a balance pass. Recons, T3s and Black Ops (to name a few) have yet to see any kind of serious overhaul - so yes, I agree. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Arthur Aihaken Halas Hooligans 3766	Posted - 2014.08.18 23:59:00 - [21] - Quote August 26th isn't going to come soon enough... I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken X A X 3799	Posted - 2014.09.13 10:16:00 - [22] - Quote Sentry drones need to be hit with the whiffle bat in the worst possible way. I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

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.