EVE Search - Zulupark proposed fix to AF.... WTF?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Zulupark proposed fix to AF.... WTF?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Vyktor Abyss The Abyss Corporation Abyss Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 02:50:00 - [31] Edited by: Vyktor Abyss on 11/03/2008 03:00:42 Sorry but I disagree with the OP and to say I like the web immunity idea. I personally quite like the slower feel of AFs. With the great resists and such awesome tanks, cap recharge etc for frigates especially thanks to the smaller sig radius, I think having them a bit slower than other frigates/destroyers is a fair exchange. Webbing immunity will make these ships awesome tacklers in terms of packing more of a punch, and being able to take more pain than the interceptors but keeping them relatively slow retains the role of interceptors as the kings of tackle in most situations. Not to mention the previously underpowered close range weapons fits of the AFs that are sadly nullified (often being out of range) by 1 webifier. Perhaps making them unable to fit webifiers would be a way of "balancing" this wonderful ability, but I guess proper testing has to occur before any serious decisions can be made about the AFs and their future. Edit: Oh, I also wanted but forgot to add that yes it is wrong that HACs are lighter hull bases than the T1 cruiser varients. The HACs should be slower than the T1 cruisers IMHO since they are "heavier" armoured etc. Its a sad state of affairs when HACs are so imbalanced due to nano-ing that nano-HACs seem to be the easy choice of the 'Average' PVPer these days. Yes I know the modules cause the problems too. ABVSS are recruiting...... Veeeeery Slowly!! Hehe!!
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.11 03:02:00 - [32] Originally by: Vyktor Abyss I personally quite like the slower feel of AFs. With the great resists and such awesome tanks, cap recharge etc for frigates especially thanks to the smaller sig radius, I think having them a bit slower than other frigates/destroyers is a fair exchange. LOL @ awesome tanks/cap recharge/etc for frigates ;) Seriously, buy a cruiser sometime and you'll understand what we're trying to tell you. The bloody things are marginally faster then AFs. Which is so balanced given their awesome DPS, tanks over three time the size and so on. AFs first and foremost need to stop handling like flying bricks. Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Grimpak Gallente Trinity Nova Trinity Nova Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 03:09:00 - [33] Originally by: Cpt Branko AFs first and foremost need to stop handling like flying bricks. do that and the web immunity is stupid and unbalanced in the Afrigs. they remain as it is, and the web immunity is the only thing between them and a smoking wreck. --- Trinity Nova Mercenary Services Web Site - Nominated for the 2008 E-ON Magazine Awards
Cpt Branko Surge. Night's Dawn	Posted - 2008.03.11 03:13:00 - [34] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Cpt Branko AFs first and foremost need to stop handling like flying bricks. do that and the web immunity is stupid and unbalanced in the Afrigs. they remain as it is, and the web immunity is the only thing between them and a smoking wreck. Yeah, it would, but the web immunity is just lol. Ah, well. If they put it in, I'll have fun while it lasts Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Liang Nuren Black Sea Industries Insurgency	Posted - 2008.03.11 03:14:00 - [35] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Cpt Branko AFs first and foremost need to stop handling like flying bricks. do that and the web immunity is stupid and unbalanced in the Afrigs. they remain as it is, and the web immunity is the only thing between them and a smoking wreck. Yeah, exactly... except Afrigs should be made much lighter too. Also, I would like a second resist or damage bonus :) I'm thinking: Jaguar Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 5% Small Projectile damage bonus, 5% to Small Projectile rate of fire Assault Ships Skill Bonus: 10% Small Projectile Turret falloff and 5% projectile damage per level. Role bonus: Web immunity And the weight of a Vigil plx. -Liang -- Naturally, I do not in any way speak for my corp or alliance.
Julius Romanus Blood Corsair's Blood Blind	Posted - 2008.03.11 03:17:00 - [36] Originally by: Karyuudo Tydraad Every time I think of a web-immune Vengeance spewing fiery death in a 500m orbit, I can't help but grin. Considering its the same dps as my malediction i'm not overly excited. But yeah af's are going to be funny with web immunity. Not exactly the good kind though.
Phrixus Zephyr D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.11 03:17:00 - [37] The problem is AFs are too slow, so even 50% immunity isn't really enough. Total immunity means you'll have loads of Jag's flying around kicking people in the nuts. Speed increase and 50-75% depending on balance i think.
Vyktor Abyss The Abyss Corporation Abyss Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 03:30:00 - [38] Edited by: Vyktor Abyss on 11/03/2008 03:32:04 Originally by: Cpt Branko Originally by: Vyktor Abyss I personally quite like the slower feel of AFs. With the great resists and such awesome tanks, cap recharge etc for frigates especially thanks to the smaller sig radius, I think having them a bit slower than other frigates/destroyers is a fair exchange. LOL @ awesome tanks/cap recharge/etc for frigates ;) Seriously, buy a cruiser sometime and you'll understand what we're trying to tell you. The bloody things are marginally faster then AFs. Which is so balanced given their awesome DPS, tanks over three time the size and so on. AFs first and foremost need to stop handling like flying bricks. Try using (or remember using if your old enough) that same cruiser to tank a 4/10 complex, or tanking a couple of stealth bombers while closing to range with (Lordy me... I must be CRAZY) - an AB!, but oh wait you conveniently forget the sig radius which is the essence of its great tank. My opinion is that with web immunity most close range fit AFs like the blaster Ishkur or Vengence would kill, or at least give a close fight to most T1 cruisers that don't have smartbombs or neuts fitted, which considering their relative costs and insurance payouts would make AFs much more worthwhile to fly compared to the T1 cruiser considering the extra price/reduced loss payout. Oh and heaven forbid cruisers might actually get creative and have to start fitting neuts and smartbombs to counter something instead of the "one module to rule them all" webifier. ABVSS are recruiting...... Veeeeery Slowly!! Hehe!!
Sothstar	Posted - 2008.03.11 03:46:00 - [39] I like the idea of making the Afterburner a more useful module by giving the AF a bonus to it. Combine that with a web resistance and i think you have a solid ship, it prevents the minmatar AF's from being overly powered with a web resistance as they already travel fast enough, and it then allows short range AF's (Somebody think of us amarr folk =/ ) like the vengeance to be effective, allowing it to deal damage, run an afterburner to reduce damage by a good amount, and then not have to pack the low slots with speed modules, allowing a nice tank to hold for a good amount of time. I would love to see a vengeance with tech 2 pulse lasers orbiting at 7km and blasting for some dps instead of the current state of affairs which is: afterburn within range (cant afford cap loss of mwd) and then go yay now i can do some dps, active modules, hit a nice optimal and then be web and die as fast as a ceptor.
Lrd Byron	Posted - 2008.03.11 05:08:00 - [40] Originally by: Pantaloon McPants AFs need a role atm they are lost. Maybe make them interdictor/ceptor killers, increase there speed/tracking but give them a penalty to tackling, or is that what destroyers are for? If thats the case then maybe they should just be removed from the game? Someone suggested they be made into an anti battleship role and I sort of agree. Destroyers are the anti frigate supposedly and it might be neat to have a david vs goliath kind of thing. Maybe give them a massive boost to DPS with a penalty to the sig resolution/explosion radius?
Endel Minmatar Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2008.03.11 05:46:00 - [41] Please, no web immunity. Make them resistant if you have to mess with webs at all, but not immune. Don't render Minmatar recons useless :(
Orrelious Minmatar The Umbrella Union Fleet	Posted - 2008.03.11 06:10:00 - [42] Linkage If you actually watch the Zulupark interview, he says that the proposed idea is 'resistance to web effects' which does not imply immunity. He also states that they can't do it due to resource constraints and finishes by saying that they have AF's on the backburner because they don't want to change anything until they can test the web resistance idea.
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.03.11 06:34:00 - [43] Edited by: Wrayeth on 11/03/2008 06:34:44 I agree with the "WTF" posters. If this happens, I guess I'll never get to fly a battleship again. After all, a BS won't be able to do jack to that lone assault frig orbiting at 500m and webbing it once the AF kills its drones. It's already hard enough to justify flying a battleship as-is given the current state of EVE (nano gangs, et al.). Dammit, I miss being able to fly my maelstrom, raven, and tempest (not to mention my mach). Ugh. I seriously hope this doesn't happen. Find another role for AF, please. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Liang Nuren Black Sea Industries Insurgency	Posted - 2008.03.11 06:37:00 - [44] Originally by: Orrelious Linkage If you actually watch the Zulupark interview, he says that the proposed idea is 'resistance to web effects' which does not imply immunity. He also states that they can't do it due to resource constraints and finishes by saying that they have AF's on the backburner because they don't want to change anything until they can test the web resistance idea. Yeah, I just actually watched it (got home from work). -Liang -- Naturally, I do not in any way speak for my corp or alliance.
Grimpak Gallente Trinity Nova Trinity Nova Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 06:56:00 - [45] Originally by: Lrd Byron Originally by: Pantaloon McPants AFs need a role atm they are lost. Maybe make them interdictor/ceptor killers, increase there speed/tracking but give them a penalty to tackling, or is that what destroyers are for? If thats the case then maybe they should just be removed from the game? Someone suggested they be made into an anti battleship role and I sort of agree. Destroyers are the anti frigate supposedly and it might be neat to have a david vs goliath kind of thing. Maybe give them a massive boost to DPS with a penalty to the sig resolution/explosion radius? there is at least 1 good solution and 2 ok solutions to counter frigates: the killer interceptors, and the destroyers/bombers/interdictors. we don't need more anti-frigate platforms. what we need is small anti-big ship platforms, and that's the role that Afrigs should have. (or anti-Ewar, imho) --- Trinity Nova Mercenary Services Web Site - Nominated for the 2008 E-ON Magazine Awards
Wrayeth Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2008.03.11 07:07:00 - [46] Originally by: Grimpak what we need is small anti-big ship platforms, and that's the role that Afrigs should have. I disagree. Smaller ships already have the ability to screw over larger ships - just look at nano HACs and the long-range tackling interceptors (the ones that can tackle from beyond neutralizer range). Quote: (or anti-Ewar, imho) This, I could get behind. It even makes sense, as E-war ships have little tank to speak of, so even a TQ version assault frig could do one in assuming it didn't get jammed to hell. Add in a high sensor strength, lock range, and scan resolution and you've got your anti-E-warfare frigate. -Wrayeth n00b Extraordinaire "Look, pa! I just contributed absolutely nothing to this thread!"
Polonium 210	Posted - 2008.03.11 07:17:00 - [47] Edited by: Polonium 210 on 11/03/2008 07:17:18 Highher sensor strenght, on par with covop frigates; 20-30% to speed; 100% to cap recharge; and bonus to ECM burst strength;)
Zey Nadar Gallente Heavily Utilized Mechanic Mayhem	Posted - 2008.03.11 08:15:00 - [48] Im just a noob who learned to fly assault ships not long ago, but I dont want web immunity to happen. This is because conceptually Id rather fly a battleship than have even more anti-BS stuff introduced into the game. Unfortunately developers in any game never seem to mirror my hopes. There must be some other way to improve assault frigs.
techzer0 IDLE GUNS	Posted - 2008.03.11 08:24:00 - [49] Originally by: Wrayeth Quote: (or anti-Ewar, imho) This, I could get behind. It even makes sense, as E-war ships have little tank to speak of, so even a TQ version assault frig could do one in assuming it didn't get jammed to hell. Add in a high sensor strength, lock range, and scan resolution and you've got your anti-E-warfare frigate. This I like. Not being able to be webbed would make me exploit the blaster harpy and other ships so much that I would feel bad. ------------ Originally by: CCP Mitnal It's great being a puppetmaster
Deva Blackfire D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2008.03.11 08:34:00 - [50] Web immunity is BAD idea. Its almost like bringing stababond back (tho you cant web it). Think abt gistii jaguar: 3km/s (with snakes a lot more) and only counter is curse... that is unless jag doesnt decide to burn back to gate which you cant stop anyways (no web?).
Lubomir Penev interimo	Posted - 2008.03.11 08:44:00 - [51] Originally by: Vyktor Abyss Edited by: Vyktor Abyss on 11/03/2008 03:00:42 Sorry but I disagree with the OP and to say I like the web immunity idea. Web range is neut range. Even if you are immune to the first the second one will render you unfunctional. A medium neut will insta zap the cap of an AF and if AF start to be unkillable by bigger ships you can bet they'll be carried even more. -- Heat, easy to burn your mods by mistake, hard to get it to work when you need it the most. Well designed interface CCP!
Ealthor Amarr Veyr	Posted - 2008.03.11 08:59:00 - [52] He did say web resistance, not web immunity. I honestly can't see a 50% reduction in the effectiveness of applied webs (with AF 5) being game breaking; besides, they don't have the ability to implement it yet.

CCP Zulupark	Posted - 2008.03.11 09:27:00 - [53] Oh hi guys! What's going on in this thread? Anyway, I just wanted to clear a few things up: 1. This is purely a speculative idea we had, and one of a few to "fix" Assault Ships 2. I said web resistance, not immunity 2a. That could mean 10% resistance per skill level 2b. That could mean flat role bonus to all AF's Mostly though it means that it's a speculative idea and nowhere near implemented. You may continue speculations now

Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2008.03.11 09:37:00 - [54] Also, if you have any new ideas for possible AF roles, post them in this thread. My research services Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats
Silas Beit Joyriders INTERDICTION	Posted - 2008.03.11 09:38:00 - [55] Originally by: CCP Zulupark Oh hi guys! What's going on in this thread? Anyway, I just wanted to clear a few things up: 1. This is purely a speculative idea we had, and one of a few to "fix" Assault Ships 2. I said web resistance, not immunity 2a. That could mean 10% resistance per skill level 2b. That could mean flat role bonus to all AF's Mostly though it means that it's a speculative idea and nowhere near implemented. You may continue speculations now speculations make for good discussions! http://www.save-evetv.com/ - http://spydrwear.spreadshirt.net
SoftRevolution	Posted - 2008.03.11 09:38:00 - [56] That idea actually from community members in the development forum originally. Um. How likely would anyone be to fit their AF with the ranges versions of the weapons at the expense of damage? Doesn't seem wildly plausible. EVE RELATED CONTENT
Lubomir Penev interimo	Posted - 2008.03.11 09:38:00 - [57] Originally by: CCP Zulupark Oh hi guys! What's going on in this thread? Anyway, I just wanted to clear a few things up: 1. This is purely a speculative idea we had, and one of a few to "fix" Assault Ships 2. I said web resistance, not immunity 2a. That could mean 10% resistance per skill level 2b. That could mean flat role bonus to all AF's Mostly though it means that it's a speculative idea and nowhere near implemented. You may continue speculations now We got hold of him, don't let him go! OK this is less frightening with numbers thrown in, now would you care to address my second point being that current AF bonus seems to dedicate them to operate out of webrange? So, wouldn't it be better to give them a bonus useful outside of webrange? And what about giving them the mean to stay out of web range, aka more speed? Or do you plan a complete overhaul of AFs and not weaking them into usefulness? -- Heat, easy to burn your mods by mistake, hard to get it to work when you need it the most. Well designed interface CCP!
Azirapheal Amarr The Bastards	Posted - 2008.03.11 09:39:00 - [58] i like the fact that my 100km pod whipping harpy gets ignored on ops :)
Arana Tellen Gallente The Blackguard Wolves Black Star Alliance	Posted - 2008.03.11 10:03:00 - [59] Edited by: Arana Tellen on 11/03/2008 10:04:45 Originally by: CCP Zulupark Oh hi guys! What's going on in this thread? Anyway, I just wanted to clear a few things up: 1. This is purely a speculative idea we had, and one of a few to "fix" Assault Ships 2. I said web resistance, not immunity 2a. That could mean 10% resistance per skill level 2b. That could mean flat role bonus to all AF's Mostly though it means that it's a speculative idea and nowhere near implemented. You may continue speculations now Make it an AF bonus and move one of the others to the frigate resistance bit, make the resistances built in AND give it a role bonus. Web bonus is good enough you will WANT AF V, make the role bonus something decent because even with 50% resistance half of a poor velocity is a very poor velocity, maybe give them frigate like mass too so they can go a bit faster or an afterburner role bonus. Giving it a web resistance means it really needs to be able to survive a single web, at max skills 2 should be survivable JUST and 3 should always mean death really. --------------------------------- Oh noes! Originally by: CCP Greyscale moderated - mother abuse - Mitnal
Alex Harumichi Gallente Gradient Electus Matari	Posted - 2008.03.11 10:13:00 - [60] Edited by: Alex Harumichi on 11/03/2008 10:17:16 Disagree with the OP, web immunity sounds like a great idea. They are still slow, fat bricks (for a frigate), but now they would be pretty much impossible to totally slow down. Different paradigm from inties, and different paradigms are good. Could very well work. Me likes. Added: since it's almost certainly not going to be a total immunity, something like slight mass reduction plus maybe 10% web effect reduction per AF level would do the trick. Make AFs a small bit faster, and let them still keep up some speed while webbed.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: 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.