| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hoshi
Blackguard Brigade
Phalanx Alliance
   |
Posted - 2007.06.17 13:45:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Crescens
Originally by: Gee Lok
Value of the ship
The market sets the price according to how the consumers value each ship.
Comparing prices
The market values assault ships more highly than T1 cruisers.
The Problem
You are asking for a fix on the grounds that cruisers are better value than assault ships. Thus you want Assault frigates to be buffed.
The Outcome
The demand for assault ships will increase driving up the price.
To people whining that AFs aren't good enough to justify their cost, re-read the above post then re-read it again. AFs base price is 2-3 million, the rest is market forces.
The problem is the same as it was with the cerb pre invention. They are subpar pvp ships but they do make fairly nice pve ships. That's what drives there cost.
----------------------------------------
A Guide to Scan Probing in Revelations |
Lyn Bunnions
|
Posted - 2007.06.17 14:32:00 -
[32]
@Cmdr Sy
My initial intention was to just start the talk off with what I thought the simplest fix was. Also note that I offered a slightly switched version of the resists for the Gallente and Caldari, which left them with pretty optimal numbers for armor and shield respectively.
Caldari 92.5/55/62.5/86.2 and 75/80/70/80
Gallente 80/80/83.7/67.5 and 50/90/85/60
Regarding the worry that Amarr would have more trouble than others in breaking the new tanks, EM wouldn't be anyone's highest base resist and Thermal would be most ships' lowest. Amarr wouldn't be in any bigger trouble than before excluding Caldari AFs which in all honesty are kinda ****** with that EM whole just like Gallente are with their Ex one, hardly fair when some races have optimal "racial" resists.
Mostly your bonus suggestions look good tho, something like that would definitely help AFs as well. Maybe a 7.5% rep amount bonus for the Ishkur, cementing a more tank role to the Enyo's gank.
|
Cmdr Sy
IMPERIAL SENATE
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.06.17 15:02:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Lyn Bunnions
Maybe a 7.5% rep amount bonus for the Ishkur, cementing a more tank role to the Enyo's gank.
I would certainly support that. Essentially the SAR II would be repping for 110 hp rather than 80 hp, which would give it a little extra tanking oomph, but we would have to see what happens with small nos next week to judge whether that would boost it too much. Certainly a tanking Ishkur would be a nice complement to the Enyo becoming an MWD blaster boat with 2-3km/s max speed depending on how far its base speed is boosted.
The real reason to increase base speed though, would be to give AB-fitted active tank setups the extra speed they so badly need right now. Since by definition they are not particularly good tacklers, active tanking doesn't come into play very often. All you've got is hitpoints and better resists than standard. It doesn't take much to break that, and the easy option is usually to give up and buy an inty instead.
Logoffs
|
Grimpak
Gallente
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.17 16:23:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Cmdr Sy
New AF bonuses
Retribution: 5% RoF
Vengeance: 5% all armour resistances
Hawk: 5% missile RoF or 5% missile flight time
Harpy: 5% all shield resistances
Enyo: 5% less penalty to max capacitor (or maybe 5% falloff)
Ishkur: (something other than 10% to drone hitpoints and damage)
Wolf: 7.5% tracking or 5% RoF
Jaguar: 7.5% tracking or 5% RoF
meh
I would prefer something like:
retri: +7,5% tracking (zomg mobile turret platform) together with a boost to grid and converting that useless 5th high slot into a turret slot
vengy: good idea tbh, or maybe the first khanid MKII ship here with them missile bonuses?
enyo: hmm.. 2nd dmg bonus
ishkur: 10% rep bonus ftw
jaguar: +5% RoF tbh
wolf: +5% dmg tbh, but that tracking bonus is cool too.
hawk: either better RoF or better missile speed. this ship is just half step away to become a mini-raven. I would also swap that 5th high slot for another med.
harpy: good one, altho it's a bit hard to give a decent bonus without making it too overpowered.
together with an overall increase in agility and shaving arround 35-40% of their weight and HP increase.
instead of making them faster, why not making them more agile?
-------
Originally by: Tiuwaz
for caldari perception weapons that hit up to 100km are short range weapons 
|
Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
|
Posted - 2007.06.17 17:09:00 -
[35]
RE: A speed increase. My guess is that it's quite intentional that AFs aren't particularly speedy, and I think the motive is to preserve at least one area where T1 frigs are useful. Intys are already faster of course, but increasing AF speed over that of T1 frigs wouldn't help. (And I think Intys should be weaker in tank or offensive power than they are.)
* * *
In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
-Douglas Adams, writing about EVE |
Bentula
|
Posted - 2007.06.17 17:20:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Cmdr Sy
Edited by: Cmdr Sy on 17/06/2007 14:34:42
Base speeds
Punisher: 250 m/s
Retribution: 240 m/s
Vengeance: 230 m/s
Merlin: 230 m/s
Hawk: 225 m/s
Harpy: 235 m/s
Incursus: 300 m/s
Enyo: 240 m/s
Ishkur: 250 m/s
Rifter: 320 m/s
Wolf: 295 m/s
Jaguar: 325 m/s
As you can see, the Caldari and Minmatar have AFs which are roughly as fast as, or faster than, the original T1 frig. The Amarr and Gallente get seriously gimped. To bring them into line with the other AFs, I would suggest increasing Amarr AF base speeds to 250 m/s and Gallente to 300 m/s.
As a AF pilot i can tell you that it wouldnt help much. Afs problem isnt the base speed, my speed when not using mwd or AB is just fine. The problem is the high mass.
Just some example:
Going from thorax to brutix you have a 10.4% mass increase. Or in other words a single rig could make a brutix handle like a cruiser. The difference is low.
Going from incursus to ishkur we look at a difference of 60% in mass. The difference wrecks you for crappy speed.
There is no way you can justify a AF having double the mass of what the frigate sized speed modules are designed to handle(1mn vs. 2000000kg). Most t2 ships actually have the same or less mass than the t1 ships they are derived from.
Tbh if we want to go that heavy tackler route we should give the AFs web immunity, that would kinda fit with the whole heavy tackling role(and i could put a sticker on my AF reading "i break for nobody").
|
Cmdr Sy
IMPERIAL SENATE
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.06.17 20:36:00 -
[37]
Yes, I would settle for greater agility rather than base speed.
I wouldn't want them made faster than their T1 counterparts anyway though, I never implied that. Just equivalent. Amarr and Gallente are getting a really rough deal at the moment with speed, and that needs looking at whether or not some sort of mass reduction is applied.
Vengeance though, I wouldn't like to see turned into a missile boat. The basic concept is fine as it is, it just needs to tank better. That wonderful cap recharge bonus to me says it's supposed to be an active tank. It's OK if it's a bit lacking in firepower, but it lacks the endurance that is supposed to make up for it. The Retribution is supposed to be the gank DPS platform, but in practice it's also a more effective tank than the Vengeance. I think the Amarr AFs would be fine with the same bonuses as the Zealot and Sacrilege. I think that's a reasonable request.
Ishkur doesn't need a whole 10% rep bonus, even the 7.5% characteristic of Gallente may be excessive as things stand. Not sure about giving the Enyo a second damage bonus, I think a MWD cap bonus would be more reasonable, but on the other hand Minmatar aren't balance-breaking with theirs. I prefer to err on the side of caution and don't want to make anything into a top-of-the-class solo pwnmobile. I can just picture the whining if those changes went through like that. The Ishkur especially.
It's a tough thing to balance, but CCP have a better idea of the wider impacts, so it's up to them to judge. I hope they're not going to skim through this thinking it's another nerf whine. 
Logoffs
|
Grimpak
Gallente
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.18 08:29:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Cmdr Sy
Yes, I would settle for greater agility rather than base speed.
I wouldn't want them made faster than their T1 counterparts anyway though, I never implied that. Just equivalent. Amarr and Gallente are getting a really rough deal at the moment with speed, and that needs looking at whether or not some sort of mass reduction is applied.
Vengeance though, I wouldn't like to see turned into a missile boat. The basic concept is fine as it is, it just needs to tank better. That wonderful cap recharge bonus to me says it's supposed to be an active tank. It's OK if it's a bit lacking in firepower, but it lacks the endurance that is supposed to make up for it. The Retribution is supposed to be the gank DPS platform, but in practice it's also a more effective tank than the Vengeance. I think the Amarr AFs would be fine with the same bonuses as the Zealot and Sacrilege. I think that's a reasonable request.
Ishkur doesn't need a whole 10% rep bonus, even the 7.5% characteristic of Gallente may be excessive as things stand. Not sure about giving the Enyo a second damage bonus, I think a MWD cap bonus would be more reasonable, but on the other hand Minmatar aren't balance-breaking with theirs. I prefer to err on the side of caution and don't want to make anything into a top-of-the-class solo pwnmobile. I can just picture the whining if those changes went through like that. The Ishkur especially.
It's a tough thing to balance, but CCP have a better idea of the wider impacts, so it's up to them to judge. I hope they're not going to skim through this thinking it's another nerf whine.
tbh even with the changes I said they would still die miserably to cruisers.
the most important issue with the assault frigs is that they really don't have a defined role.
-------
Originally by: Tiuwaz
for caldari perception weapons that hit up to 100km are short range weapons
|
Psym0n
Roving Guns Inc.
RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.18 09:12:00 -
[39]
They need an additional damage bonuse. Look at Enyo and its Interceptor equivelant
Ceptor - 10% damage per level
Enyo - 5% damage per legel
same with Caldari
Crow - 10% damage per level
Harpy - 5% damage per level.
Give them a 4th bonus of +5% damage per level of AF, and its a good effort.
|
Cpt Branko
Partisan Warfare Ltd.
|
Posted - 2007.06.18 09:26:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Psym0n
They need an additional damage bonuse. Look at Enyo and its Interceptor equivelant
Ceptor - 10% damage per level
Enyo - 5% damage per legel
same with Caldari
Crow - 10% damage per level
Harpy - 5% damage per level.
Give them a 4th bonus of +5% damage per level of AF, and its a good effort.
Ermmm...
Minnie AFs get a 5% damage for their frig skill and 5% damage for their AF skill. In the damage-dealing respect, they're fine.
Making their resists innate (thereby providing room for another frig-skill bonus), and replacing that with an tanking/utility/speed/whatever bonus would help them greatly.
For example, giving the Wolf the 7.5% tracking bonus the Rifter has, or giving it a MWD cap penalty reduction or something would all be nice.
However, AFs could really use a significant mass reduction to make them more maneuverable & faster with a speed boosting module. Many T1 cruisers are faster when using MWD then AFs, and do we need to go on how AF cap isn't too hot anyway, especially after the MWD penalty?
The real dangers for an AF are medium/heavy NOS (and everyone and their mother is packing it, disabling you), web (making you a sitting duck) or just a pack of light drones (just killing you).A combination of two or three of these means you're 100% dead. Oh, yes. Certain AFs which could in theory fight outside medium NOS range, well, have a severe speed problem due to high mass. So we're back to the 'reduce mass' part.
|
Hugh Ruka
Caldari
Free Traders
|
Posted - 2007.06.18 10:44:00 -
[41]
I'd agree with the mass/agility change. At least the Caldari bricks would fly a bit better.
Originally by: JP Beauregard
The experience with Exodus playtesting has scarred me for life. Those were bug-reports, not feature requests, you numbskulls....
|
Acoco Osiris
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2007.06.19 00:42:00 -
[42]
One thing I'm just going to throw in here.
AF's would make excellent solo 0.0 ratters. They've got the beef to take out most 0.0 rats, and they can run away from any player pirates except T1 frigates and inties. MWDs to escape bubbles may be a problem, but I'm sure it could be worked around.
------------------------------
One more soldier off to war...
And one Velator in my hangars. |
Aurael Drakewing
Shadows of the Dead
Aftermath Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.19 01:37:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Crescens
Originally by: Gee Lok
Value of the ship
The market sets the price according to how the consumers value each ship.
Comparing prices
The market values assault ships more highly than T1 cruisers.
The Problem
You are asking for a fix on the grounds that cruisers are better value than assault ships. Thus you want Assault frigates to be buffed.
The Outcome
The demand for assault ships will increase driving up the price.
To people whining that AFs aren't good enough to justify their cost, re-read the above post then re-read it again. AFs base price is 2-3 million, the rest is market forces.
One thing I think on this issue is that AFs still have high prices because they aren't being invented as often as other ships. I don't know about checking the market for such things, but I see fewer AFs than I do just about any other shiptype (aside from Destroyers). Most of the remainder of the T2 market has crashed because of invention...if a product sells well, people will be trying to invent them left, right, and center. If, however, it doesn't sell (like AFs compared to, say, HACs or Recons) it won't be invented as often, so there is almost negligible market impact because the market supply doesn't increase as much.
Think about it this way, with current market prices would you rather buy and fit out an AF, or a Cruiser? They both cost about the same (with the advantage to cruisers after insurance payouts I believe) and the cruiser has better tank/gank while being just as maneuverable if not more so...
|
Comie Dey
|
Posted - 2007.06.19 02:18:00 -
[44]
Im new to the AF thing, tho i LOVE them... what little ive flown of them.
I have a question tho, something ive noticed that makes no sence.
Im caldari so its all i know.
The Hapry and the Hawk have the same bonus that states a bonus to both thermal and kinetic resistance for both the shield and the armor, yet the bonus seems only to apply to the armor and not the shield... am i missing something or is this really a bug/oversight of the devs?
and im unsure on what the role of an AF is... as the T1 frigates do seem to be nothing more than a parting gift of an old age.
|
alexreborn
|
Posted - 2007.06.19 03:08:00 -
[45]
Edited by: alexreborn on 19/06/2007 03:08:14
i definately agree with the OP on raising the resists on the AF's. particularly the EM resists on the caldari/gallente ships.. very big hole indeed.
I would alos like to give a little spiel about AF's.
AF's are not a 1 man pwn mobile. You shoud not be able to PWN a cruiser.. MAybe if youre better skilled, and the cruiser lacks the modules to track u down then sure u win, but if not, then the cruiser has to win hands down.
AFs work in gangs. They are for fast hit and run attacks. You warp to a belt, kill the target and warp out. 3-5 AFs will pwn any cruiser. will take on a BC, and even a BS and win.
|
Alapesha
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 11:47:00 -
[46]
While i agree about the resistances, as i see the assault frigates being the B-Wing of the Eve world (tho it doesnt really feel like it right now) i do wonder if apart from the improved resistances that the OP stated - which makes me think that it would go along way towards solving the current issue, i had an odd thought.
Would an Extra Mid/Low slot, one or the other or maybe both depending, either help or overpower things?
as surely it would allow that little bit extra scope.
Or maybe the AF's get a bonus to reducing the effects of webbers on them as an additional AF skill bonus?
and i agree with the person who stated that they are way to heavy for the small gain.
|
Cedric Diggory
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 11:58:00 -
[47]
Whilst a cruiser costs anywhere between 3 to 8 million isk and an assault frigate anywhere between 8 and 20 million, once fitted (assuming you only put on the best, which for PVP you'd be mad not to) both have an equivelant value.
Seems pretty balanced to me...
|
Cpt Branko
Partisan Warfare Ltd.
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 12:06:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Cedric Diggory
Whilst a cruiser costs anywhere between 3 to 8 million isk and an assault frigate anywhere between 8 and 20 million, once fitted (assuming you only put on the best, which for PVP you'd be mad not to) both have an equivelant value.
Seems pretty balanced to me...
The point is: to match a T2 fitted AF, you need to bring out a T1 fitted cruiser (with some good named modules, like, a good webber), and you're set.
Therefore, for typically better or equivalent performance, T1 cruiser price + cruiser fittings + insurance cost - insurance payout << AF price + AF fittings + insurance cost - insurance payout.
|
Erotic Irony
0bsession
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 12:20:00 -
[49]
Originally by: alexreborn
i definately agree with the OP on raising the resists on the AF's. particularly the EM resists on the caldari/gallente ships.. very big hole indeed.
Your low signature reduces most of the damage you're going to take. Your suggestion that they need to resistance vulnerability is just circuitous and silly. Have you heard of rigs? Shield hardeners? CPU enhancing hardwiring?
Originally by: alex
AF's are not a 1 man pwn mobile. You shoud not be able to PWN a cruiser.. MAybe if youre better skilled, and the cruiser lacks the modules to track u down then sure u win, but if not, then the cruiser has to win hands down.
AFs work in gangs. They are for fast hit and run attacks. You warp to a belt, kill the target and warp out. 3-5 AFs will pwn any cruiser. will take on a BC, and even a BS and win.
To reiterate Ryssa in that other thread, the opportunity cost is simply not in your favor--you are extremely nos vulnerable, at minimum for a speed mod, and worst for an active tank and guns.
AFs work in gangs? The question isn't what does or doesn't, the question is given the alternatives and implicit costs, how can we achive a goal? If you want speed and enormous survivability inspite of the low amount of HPs fly ceptors, or interdictors and you'll shutdown all AFs and some cruisers without too much trouble. Hell, fly cruisers, they insure better, have better slot layourts and have more rig options, and fundamentally, deal better and more varied damage.
Again, 3-5 Afs destroy a bs? Guess what, that's irrelevant, a handful of cruisers and destroyers give you anti-frig options, ewar and damage for a fraction of the cost.
And no, you wont warp into a belt and kill anything, the dps on AFs is terrible, use t2 ammo and you've gimped your cap/navigation so bad your nub lowsec victims will just laugh and eat you alive. Did I mention Afs handle very poorly?
Once the bastard interceptors are revised, perhaps these ships can be revisited.
___
Junkie Beverage: i use your tears to cyno in my laughter
|
Cedric Diggory
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 12:24:00 -
[50]
Quote:
The point is: to match a T2 fitted AF, you need to bring out a T1 fitted cruiser (with some good named modules, like, a good webber), and you're set.
Therefore, for typically better or equivalent performance, T1 cruiser price + cruiser fittings + insurance cost - insurance payout << AF price + AF fittings + insurance cost - insurance payout.
Fixing insurance to match the value of your ship and fittings would surely be a simpler solution?
|
Vasiliyan
The Flying Swan
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 12:42:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Cedric Diggory
Fixing insurance to match the value of your ship and fittings would surely be a simpler solution?
That would screw the game in so many other ways.
AFs are excellent PVE ships for some situations; I don't think they actually need balancing for PvP that much - not every ship needs to have a PvP role.
|
Cpt Branko
Partisan Warfare Ltd.
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 12:56:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Vasiliyan
Originally by: Cedric Diggory
Fixing insurance to match the value of your ship and fittings would surely be a simpler solution?
That would screw the game in so many other ways.
AFs are excellent PVE ships for some situations; I don't think they actually need balancing for PvP that much - not every ship needs to have a PvP role.
I agree that mucking up insurance is bad, but saying that AFs don't need a PvP role is saying Amarr are 100% fine because they can PvE, and not everyone has to have a role in PvP.
Yes, they do need a PvP role, as every combat ship needs. Do you really think it's logical for an "assault ship" to be useless for actually assaulting ships?
|
Cmdr Sy
IMPERIAL SENATE
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 17:34:00 -
[53]
Regarding the cruiser vs AF thing...
T1-fitted T1 cruisers should have no problems killing AFs if fitted as they are supposed to be. The tech level of your guns, drones, nos, tank and warp disruptor doesn't matter, it doesn't matter whether your web is X5 or T2, and it doesn't matter whether your pulse lasers or ACs are frigate or cruiser-sized once the web is applied. At the end of the day, if you have an effective close range PVP setup (typically costing a couple of mil), your chances are better than even.
Speaking of webs, wouldn't it be nice if AFs had the option to deal damage from 15km without utterly gimping it? It's interesting how the Retribution got the optimal range bonus (it can't tackle), while the Vengeance (which can) had it changed to damage because of player whining. This means no pulse, it has to be beams with their rubbish tracking.
Originally by: Vasiliyan
not every ship needs to have a PvP role.
Ha, don't get me started on the Coercer. 
At least the Punisher is a nice toy for playing with newbies.
Logoffs
|
VanNostrum
Cataphract Securities
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 18:47:00 -
[54]
Speaking for retribution, moving the 5th high slot to med would make me a very very happy man 
|
Cmdr Sy
IMPERIAL SENATE
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.06.21 19:01:00 -
[55]
Originally by: VanNostrum
Speaking for retribution, moving the 5th high slot to med would make me a very very happy man
Same here, that one has been getting signed for a couple of years.
Logoffs
|
Gaius Kador
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.06.22 22:52:00 -
[56]
Retribution
4xGatling Pulse / w Scorch - 1xSmall nosfII
Webber
SARII, 400 Tungsten, EANMII, Thermic Plate, Regenerative Membrane
RIGS: 2xTrimarks
I deal, therefore I am.
I sustain, therefore I am.
----------------------------------------------
|
VanNostrum
Cataphract Securities
|
Posted - 2007.06.22 23:44:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Gaius Kador
Retribution
4xGatling Pulse / w Scorch - 1xSmall nosfII
Webber
SARII, 400 Tungsten, EANMII, Thermic Plate, Regenerative Membrane
RIGS: 2xTrimarks
I deal, therefore I am.
I sustain, therefore I am.
i couldnt fit this with maxed out skills
|
Original Species
|
Posted - 2007.06.22 23:55:00 -
[58]
Edited by: Original Species on 22/06/2007 23:54:51
Anything a AF can do, a ceptor can do better...Take my crusader for example..Fast, tanks well, as much dps as a amarr af, and did I mention FAST...
|
Grimpak
Gallente
Trinity Nova
KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.23 00:49:00 -
[59]
Originally by: VanNostrum
Speaking for retribution, moving the 5th high slot to med would make me a very very happy man
while it is a good thing to do, I still prefer to transform the 5th high into a turret slot and adding a grid increase just enough to barely fit 5 beams.
now THAT would be something.
---
truth about EVE: Originally by: Cpt Branko
"Guns are fine, boost players"
|
Gaius Kador
PIE Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.06.23 16:46:00 -
[60]
Originally by: VanNostrum
Originally by: Gaius Kador
Retribution
4xGatling Pulse / w Scorch - 1xSmall nosfII
Webber
SARII, 400 Tungsten, EANMII, Thermic Plate, Regenerative Membrane
RIGS: 2xTrimarks
I deal, therefore I am.
I sustain, therefore I am.
i couldnt fit this with maxed out skills
Where there is a will, there is a way ;)
----------------------------------------------
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |