| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
634
   |
Posted - 2016.05.22 00:12:56 -
[1] - Quote
One of the largest obstacles to ship balance in EVE has been finding the fine line between minor ship balance and a holistic approach to class power and placement. It's one matter to find a good place for a ship to be reworked into, but how strong or weak it is relative to the multitude of other vessels it has to contend is a damningly difficult problem to tackle, and so quite a few of us (myself included) tend to focus on individual trees instead of the forest, so to speak.
For this thread, we will be looking at a suggestion of how to overhaul the entire electronic warfare ship line, from frigate to battleship, and t1 to t2. The goal of this post is to provide a clear and well-tuned progression of all the ewar ships in the game along similar lines to how CCP has been focusing on ship bonus and role progression as they have rebalanced their ships over the past many years.
As an outline, we will be splitting this thread into three sections that will cover changes to frigates, cruisers, and battleships.
The Frigates section will cover rebalancing the Electronic Attack Ships and Covert Ops Frigates to be the smaller cousins to the Force Recon and Combat Recon cruisers, and what roles and bonuses would be appropriate to reflect that without crowding out or obsoleting other ships affected by them that either perform similar roles or compete with them.
The Cruisers section will discuss the possibility of introducing a new exploration cruiser for each race to continue the line of the scan frigates, and replacing the t2 model and chassis for the Force Recon ships, in a similar fashion to the Command Ship rebalance changing which battlecruisers made the Absolution, Nighthawk, etc. It will also discuss improving the combat viability of Combat Recon ships in exchange for some ewar usability, giving more distinction between the two classes. Updating the Celestis and Blackbird to provide stronger firepower support in a similar fashion to the Arbitrator and Bellicose will also be discussed.
The Battleships section will cover updating the Scorpion Dominix and the Typhoon to fill the role of EWAR support battleships, in the same fashion as Armageddon in having a combat and electronic warfare bonus appropriate for their role. Black Ops battleships will discuss being updated via being split into two roles, naturally progressing from the Force Recon and Combat Recon classes. Current Black ops will gain a covert ops cloak but lose their ability to fit a covert jump portal generator, the role of which will be taken over by new t2 versions of the Abaddon, Hyperion, Maelstrom, and Rokh that will fill a role akin to the Combat Recon ships.
Bonuses and stats for the Electronic Attack Ships and Force Recon ships will remain the same as before. Covert Ops Frigates and Black Ops ships will be restructured heavily. This thread will update continually as i have time to write it over the next few days. |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
634
|
Posted - 2016.05.22 00:13:16 -
[2] - Quote
Reserved for Frigate thread |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
634
|
Posted - 2016.05.22 00:14:08 -
[3] - Quote
Reserved for Cruiser Thread |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
634
|
Posted - 2016.05.22 00:14:56 -
[4] - Quote
Reserved for Battleship thread |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2599
|
Posted - 2016.05.22 00:20:54 -
[5] - Quote
none of these changes are needed. we do not need to make all races have the same ship progression there does not need and should not be a cov ops e-war frig. you do not need a scanning cruiser beyond the soe. the combat recons are already much better at tank and damage than the force. the t1 e-war cruisers do not need better combat potential
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
731
|
Posted - 2016.05.22 22:56:36 -
[6] - Quote
Honestly what I would rather see is two more combat battle ship added for Caldari & Amar and then two E-War focused Battleships for Galletne / Minmatar |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2618
|
Posted - 2016.05.24 06:34:21 -
[7] - Quote
Sean Parisi wrote:Honestly what I would rather see is two more combat battle ship added for Caldari & Amar and then two E-War focused Battleships for Galletne / Minmatar
why?
and
when it comes to e-war only the caldari has one so why have you divided it up like this?
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
634
|
Posted - 2016.05.24 06:42:22 -
[8] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:none of these changes are needed. we do not need to make all races have the same ship progression there does not need and should not be a cov ops e-war frig. you do not need a scanning cruiser beyond the soe. the combat recons are already much better at tank and damage than the force. the t1 e-war cruisers do not need better combat potential
I'm a bit confused at your line of thinking here. "We do not need to make all races have the same ship progression" is a very vague statement, since as far as i can tell it means that you're actively denying how half a decade of ship balancing has focused exclusively on that very thing. Please clarify what you mean by that.
Also, covert ops frigates perform the valuable role of cloaky scouting and data/relic site hacking, of which is done significantly better by the SoE ships. While you can believe that they have their own particular niche with site hacking and scouting/covert cyno dropping, fitting them and EA frigs into a closer role together makes very clear sense relative to how they interact with other ships. The statement that we don't need a cheap t1 exploration cruiser to me is silly, as exploration is a cornerstone of gameplay in eve, and it shouldn't just be limited to the more expensive and advanced vessels. I think t1 exploration cruisers would be welcomed with open arms by the community, as they would see plenty of use.
I'm going to post the frigate thread in a bit here, and hopefully that can clear some things up. Combat ability of the updated covops frigs would be negligable to compensate for their covops cloak, but would have more fitting space than before and focus more on ewar 'support', rather than attack. |
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
634
|
Posted - 2016.05.24 08:00:12 -
[9] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Sean Parisi wrote:Honestly what I would rather see is two more combat battle ship added for Caldari & Amar and then two E-War focused Battleships for Galletne / Minmatar why? and when it comes to e-war only the caldari has one so why have you divided it up like this?
The Armageddon is *technically* an ewar battleship with the neut range bonus, and it was stated long ago during the initial battleship balance pass that ewar battleships were a progression route they were thinking about going, but were unsure as to whether or not to make new battleships or change the old ones. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2618
|
Posted - 2016.05.24 15:31:10 -
[10] - Quote
nuets are not E-war....
but if you want to count them as e-war then ecm and nuets are the only e-war that have battleship mods so it makes seance that they have battleships with bonuses
and for frigates cov ops e-war frigs break blops balance
Citadel worm hole tax
|
|
|
Catherine Laartii
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
Heiian Conglomerate
634
|
Posted - 2016.05.24 19:08:42 -
[11] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
and for frigates cov ops e-war frigs break blops balance
You're being vague again. What exactly are you trying to say? |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2619
|
Posted - 2016.05.24 20:15:08 -
[12] - Quote
that being able to bridge a bunch of frig massed e-war ships is broken. i doubt recons would ever be used in that role again
and why should scanning frigs be removed?
not to mention that sensor bonus is broken
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Sean Parisi
Blackrise Vanguard
732
|
Posted - 2016.05.25 18:20:11 -
[13] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Sean Parisi wrote:Honestly what I would rather see is two more combat battle ship added for Caldari & Amar and then two E-War focused Battleships for Galletne / Minmatar why? and when it comes to e-war only the caldari has one so why have you divided it up like this?
More options are good of they can have purpose. Armageddon is essentially e-war and combat. Gallente could recieve and ewar drone bonus (once they are made useful) or something to do with sensor damps and point range. Minmatar could get target painter again or something more creative. But as someonr who is a big fan of ewar it is something i would love to see in some capacity. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2629
|
Posted - 2016.05.25 18:29:10 -
[14] - Quote
problem is the trade off for ewar is tank only reason it works for caldari is it has to give up its tank for its e-war the other races don't and again there is battleship nuets and battleship ecm so it makes seance ships are made to use them. besides other than damps all forms of e-war are already represented in the battlship line
Citadel worm hole tax
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |