| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Taerlyn
   |
Posted - 2008.05.25 04:08:00 -
[1]
Since people are starting to bring up topics of additions and fixes, I felt it'd be appropriate to bring up my favorite broken ship class, the Assault Ship (aka the assault frigate).
Lots of people complain about the lack of merit for Assault Ships, with justification. They can be made to kill effectively, of course, but so can any ship; that is not a sign of their worth as a class but of the pilot's particular ingenuity or exceptional skills. They're twice as costly as Cruisers and underperform Cruisers in every respect; they are less armored, poorer armed, and effectively slower. Their only benefit is a bonus in resistances. They can kill tacklers and are sometimes used for this purpose but only because the tacklers have to stay near gimped ships; if the tacklers weren't busy orbiting, even cheap Frigates would easily outrun the Assault Ship's approach. They are pretty much universally ignored while their larger kin, the Heavy Assault Ships, are beloved.
Why not just take a note from the Heavy Assault Ships? The main problem with Assault Ships is that they are horribly slow--not only is their base speed significantly slower than their tech 1 Frigate variants, they're twice as massive, leaving them vastly slower when using afterburners and MWDs. Heavy Assault Ships are the same mass as their tech 1 Cruiser variants and even have faster base speeds. There's something seriously wrong when properly-equipped Heavy Assault Ships can easily outrun their similarly-equipped Frigate-class siblings. If those qualities were merely propogated back to the Assault Ships, such that they'd be just slightly faster than their tech 1 variants, the ships would have a use as more durable and dangerous tacklers in addition to their very, very limited present role (as well as making them much more competent in the limited role). They would still be too slow to speed tank and too slow to chase down opponents kiting at range already like the Interceptor can but would be as capable at the job as Frigates are now, and between their small signature radius and resistant armor, they'd shrug off some medium weapons fire and a fair amount of missile damage and their extra padding of armor and shields would let them tank the rest much better than normal Frigates.
This of course isn't the only way to fix things but it does seem both the simplest and the most in theme with what balancing has already been done relating to Heavy Assault Ships.
|
Joe Starbreaker
|
Posted - 2008.05.25 04:21:00 -
[2]
Yeah, make 'em faster!
I'd also like to see a racing stripe on my Vengeance.
----------------
[insert signature here] |
Gripen
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 01:39:00 -
[3]
No thanks. Assault ship were initially designed as slow and heavy frigates and this is why their dedicated pilots love them. It is general game balance problem when anything going not fast enough becames underused.
|
Taerlyn
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 02:20:00 -
[4]
What's up with Heavy Assault Ships, then? They're actually FASTER than normal Cruisers, in addition to being more heavily armed, armored, and loaded with special abilities. |
Arkios Odymei
Incarnation of Evil
Nocturnal Legion
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 04:03:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Arkios Odymei on 27/05/2008 04:05:09
 Originally by: Gripen
No thanks. Assault ship were initially designed as slow and heavy frigates and this is why their dedicated pilots love them. It is general game balance problem when anything going not fast enough becames underused.
Actualy when AFs were initialy designed, they had a lower sig radius and less mass than their current incarnations(akin to their T1 counterparts). If I remember correctly, It was at the RMR patch where they had their mass and sig radius increased for some reason. Also, I believe that the biggest complaint from their "dedicated pilots" is that they handle and manoeuver like fat pigs, and they they need to feel more like flying a frig than a cruiser. (Sorry to say, but pretty much everything you just posted is wrong)
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Sariyah
HUN Corp.
HUN Reloaded
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 09:22:00 -
[6]
We already have ceptors, thanks.
A role could be nice for AFs, but your suggestions don't seem like a solution to me.
|
Sunja Lu'Aras
Ninmu Seijaku
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 15:25:00 -
[7]
Make them into heavily tanked tackling frigates and their speed and bulkiness is fine.
For speed we got the interceptor, for EWar we got the EAFs, now give us a frigate to tank in :)
Enyo
Quote:
Ideal for use as point ships to draw enemy fire from more vulnerable friendlies.
Vengeance
Quote:
...this relentless slugger is perfect for when you need to get up close and personal.
So at least one of the AFs per race should be turned into the heavy tackler like it is announced.
- Remove racial resists, give all-round resists
- Add tanking bonus (repair/shield boost bonus)
-----------------------------
Situs vilate inis et avernid! |
Gripen
Rage and Terror
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 22:52:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Arkios Odymei
Actualy when AFs were initialy designed, they had a lower sig radius and less mass than their current incarnations(akin to their T1 counterparts). If I remember correctly, It was at the RMR patch where they had their mass and sig radius increased for some reason. Also, I believe that the biggest complaint from their "dedicated pilots" is that they handle and manoeuver like fat pigs, and they they need to feel more like flying a frig than a cruiser. (Sorry to say, but pretty much everything you just posted is wrong)
They always had their current mass, only signature was changed. And I couldn't call people who ask to make AFs lighter as dedicated pilots because how one can claim he enjoys ship class and ask its core design aspect to be changed? It's like saying "I like the dreads but lets remove siege mod and make them 10 times faster".
|
Darina Rea
Naqam
Project Alice.
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 23:33:00 -
[9]
The main problem is that the Assault Frigate, as is, has nothing that makes it have a 'unique' quality.
Other ships can perform all roles the AF can assume, and either be cheaper, better or both at it.
- Tech 1 cruisers out tank it/have a similar tank.
- Tech 1 cruisers have better and in many cases, more sustainable DPS.
- Tech 1 cruisers are cheaper.
- Tech 1 frigates are as good in tackling as AFs.
- Tech 1 frigates are 10 times cheaper if not more.
- Tech 2 interceptors make far superior tacklers.
- Tech 2 interceptors are cheaper. Sometimes by little, sometimes by as much as 50%.
- Tech 2 electronic warfare frigates are far superior in the ewar role (although not cheaper).
- Tech 1 frigates with an ewar bonus are superior.
These are already 9 simple reasons not to pick an AF as ship of your choice. The thing is that AFs, unlike their 'bigger' cousins, seem to be focussed on tanking, rather then putting out major amounts of damage which is what alot of people expect and want them to do.
Another thing is that most people forget that between cruisers and frigates the underused destroyer class still exists aswell. AFs can deal with all frigates, tech 2 or not, destroyers, also tech 2 or not and tech 1 cruisers, if handled correctly, effectively.
_________
Time is on our side. |
Arkios Odymei
Incarnation of Evil
Nocturnal Legion
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 01:20:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Gripen
They always had their current mass, only signature was changed. And I couldn't call people who ask to make AFs lighter as dedicated pilots because how one can claim he enjoys ship class and ask its core design aspect to be changed? It's like saying "I like the dreads but lets remove siege mod and make them 10 times faster".
You could be right about the mass being the same, as Im having trouble remembering that and I dont happen to have any screenshots saved.
And as for your referance to dedicated pilots... Does it make them not "dedicated" if they fly the ship regardless, but still feel that it could use a tweak to make them more competative? If you read through EVERY thread about AFs, you will find that mass is ALWAYS brought up. If you compare the masses of AFs to their T1 hulls, you will find that on average they are almost 60%(!) higher. Now doing the same comparison with "Heavy Assault Ships", you will find that in all cases the HACs masses are the same IF NOT LOWER than their T1 counterparts.
Why? A Frigate cant tank as much raw damage as a cruiser and thus must rely more on speed to survive. The same should be true between HACs and AFs... but as it turns out, Most HACs rely on speed (Nano-fits), while AF's have too much mass to make fitting a MWD or AB work in the same manner. You have to admit that something is wrong when a MWD fit (assault) frigate is outpaced by a MWD fit battleship, and that the warp align times for some cruisers is better than that of the (assault) frigates.
One more thing, Please dont get rediculous here. Comparing changing the mass of AFs to changing dreads is just a silly tactic. Dont stoop so low.
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
Taerlyn
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 01:26:00 -
[11]
Tech 1 frigates are BETTER tackling ships.
Making AFs into heavily-tanked tackling ships was my intended suggestion. The problem is that as slow as AFs currently are, they can't tackle effectively. I'm not suggesting they come close to Interceptors but they should at least be in the region of speed of the friggin frigates they're upgrading. They cost up to FIFTY (50x!) times as much (Enyo vs Incursus) and have no special role OTHER than to be an uber-frigate. Might as well give them roughly the same stats plus buff per their priciness and skill requirements. Leave them as the tanky fighty frigate but at least make them COMPETENT at the things frigates do (tackling things) and that requires being able to outmaneuver cruisers.
Case in point: Enyo. Enyo is theoretically a blaster frigate that can't close range on ANY other class of frigates and can be evaded even by some cruisers. The only reason they ever kill anything is because the enemy either doesn't consider an AF a threat and wanders within web range or the pilot has swapped out for rails because they realize their ship is a slow peice of ****. If it were closer to the speed of non-Interceptor frigates, it would see more use. Hell, if the Enyo were exactly as fast as the Incursus, that'd be a pretty nice little ship.
|
Amarr Holymight
Bat Country
Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 04:26:00 -
[12]
How about renaming them recon frigs and allowing them to use Black op jump bridges?
|
Sworn Absent
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 13:41:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Amarr Holymight
How about renaming them recon frigs and allowing them to use Black op jump bridges?
You could name each racial recon frigate like this:
Cheetah
Helios
Buzzard
Anathema
|
Amarr Holymight
Bat Country
Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 13:44:00 -
[14]
You ever tried attacking someone with a covops you moron?
|
Amarr Holymight
Bat Country
Aegis Militia
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 13:48:00 -
[15]
I suppose I have to explain myself for the unimaginative twits out there. Assault ships allowed to use jump bridges would give younger pilots the chance to take part in Black Ops raiding parties without having to use a covops. Also would give these raiding parties fast tacklers to add to their mix and at same time increase the popularity of Black ops.
|
Moganic
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 14:36:00 -
[16]
The problem with AF now would be the lack of "role" in the current Battlefield, Interceptor : fast and agile tackling ship. Electronic Assault frigate : Cheap and extremely effective bugger (a kitsune can almost replace a Scorpion in some way). When CCP first introduce the Assault frigate with a role of "cruiser hunter", a small ship capable of killin a ship 1 class larger than itself. Right now they cant even kill a T2 frigate most of the time (a kitsune can jam it about 70% of the time using racial jammer), Interceptor can orbit them with high speed outside a webber range. And stealh bomber can kill them within 1-2 rounds of cruise missles.
Why not make them a special role such as counter EWAR ship? For example they can fit ECCM with less CPU needed or increase the ECCM boost strength. This way they atleastt wont became too powerful or too hard to kill with ship larger than them (cruiser class that is). Or simply give them ability like blockade runner, built in warp core stabalizers, or simply without the penalty when fitting a warp core stab. They just became extremely annoying, not extremely deadly. still can be stop with warp bubble or interdictor, or maybe give them the means of warping inside warp disruption bubble.
In both cases, they wont really hurts the game mechanics, they will be dangerous only to frigate size ship or maybe destroyers in small numbers. Just give some certain role to play with, they will be fine. |
Arkanjuca
R.U.S.T.
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 22:40:00 -
[17]
Old navy philosophy... outgun what you cant outrun...
This may bring some light to the issue...
--
Whatever works for you...
|
Acidictadpole
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.05.29 09:43:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Acidictadpole on 29/05/2008 09:47:17
Originally by: Moganic
When CCP first introduce the Assault frigate with a role of "cruiser hunter", a small ship capable of killin a ship 1 class larger than itself.
Why not do that? Make it a small cruiser.
Two ways of accomplishing this:
Fidget with numbers to increase the damage on their guns to make it inline with cruisers. Reduce tracking speed to be inline with cruiser guns also. And increase signature resolution on the guns. Increase resistances and HP to match the EHP of a t1 cruiser. And keep their sig radius the same while reducing mass. (Also, remove the resist bonus from the frig skill and make it inherent, maybe replace it with a % increase to respective tanking mediums?)
Or do the EHP bit, but just reduce the amount of PG required for their guns so they can use medium guns instead of being fidgety with numbers.
|
Scatim Helicon
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.06.07 21:18:00 -
[19]
Edited by: Scatim Helicon on 07/06/2008 21:18:13
Originally by: Amarr Holymight
You ever tried attacking someone with a covops you moron?
You should try it they're pretty good at probing and tackling safespotted battleships
-----------
|
Taradis
The Imperial Assassins
|
Posted - 2008.06.09 10:06:00 -
[20]
I love my Vengence
|
|
|
Donna Maria
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 17:31:00 -
[21]
I think fixing Assault frigs could be done by.
1: Reduce Sig radius. Slightly lower than a Frig but more than an Inty
2: Increase speed. Should have a base speed 20% faster than a regular frigate.
3: Increase Warpspeed of Intercepters and interdictors. This will maintain the Interceptors role. Subwarp speed of interceptors is fast enough, however I think HAF should be able to break 3Kmps without rigs or snakes. Reduce the warp speed of all HAC's and HAF's
4:
Im the girl momma warned you about..
|
Faekurias
Black Legion Command
Red Dawn Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 18:38:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Faekurias on 12/06/2008 18:39:36
AFAIK, the Hawk needs rethinking, it tanks better than its t1 counterpart, but the damage is nominal, the hawks total damage is lower than the Kestrels. WITH the same fittings.
Personally I see something wrong with this. Although it does shoot them a little further. Which frankly, doesn't really matter very much. Would have if the kestrel couldn't shoot out of webber range. But it can. And the range increase doesn't change it and make it "available to avoid" Anything else.
Supreme Legion Commander of the Black Legion Fleet
We're recruiting.
Hitmeup ingame. |
Gimpb
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 19:10:00 -
[23]
AFs are inordinately slow for what they are. Logic would put them somewhere between the speed of HACs and ceptors.
If AFs were actually there they'd be able to play a nice role in the nano game as something that can tackle a HAC without getting insta-popped.
However, I must say that I did kinda like my ishkur for the little while I had it. It might not have been that great at blowing stuff up, but the frig sig radius and sensor res do make it much better than a cruiser at picking fights. If an AF meets a cruiser in passing, it's the AF that gets to chose fight or flight at least.
I guess maybe one train of thought is that they're already very good at tanking things like complexes and such, so maybe they're intended more as a pve ship? |
Ulstan
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 19:26:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Ulstan on 12/06/2008 19:28:11
Quote:
No thanks. Assault ship were initially designed as slow and heavy frigates
Slower and heavier frigates are called destroyers.
A slow and heavy frigate is just gimp.
Fixing AF's could be done by *gasp* actually making them handle like frigates instead of plated destroyers.
The need the mass and speed of their T1 counterparts. This isn't asking for too much, given that heavy assault cruisers are lighter and faster than their counterparts.
They also need their missing 4th bonus.
|
Merroki
|
Posted - 2008.06.12 20:46:00 -
[25]
It seems pretty frivolous to designate certain ships as pve or pvp. Ideally, all ships should be useful in both.
|
Taerlyn
|
Posted - 2008.06.13 02:39:00 -
[26]
I've rethought my original suggestion some. They need fairly similar base speed and mass as their T1 counterparts (not 25% slower and 50+% heavier) AND a fourth skill which always goes to buffing damage. For Ishkur, the typical 10% to drone HP/damage per level. For Enyo, an extra 5% damage to small hybrids per level. And so on. That'd put them into the heavy tank/damage dealing Frigate role. And with the same speed and maneuverability as frigates, they couldn't touch interceptors for their role and would put them more into the 'cruiser-killing frigate' role they were supposedly introduced to. If CCP really wants to keep their speed gimped (although HACs are faster than Cruisers in every way), then at least make them able to MATCH the speed of frigates if both the AF and frigate's full set of lows were devoted to Overdrive IIs.
|
Atomos Darksun
Infortunatus Eventus
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 05:08:00 -
[27]
I really want a 300+ DPS ishkur/enyo.
can i haz it go 7km/s too?????
Originally by: Amoxin
My vent is talking to me in a devil voice...
Atomos' Guide to Forum Flaming |
Arkanjuca
R.U.S.T.
|
Posted - 2008.06.16 22:07:00 -
[28]
My idea of an AF boost:
AF simple boost idea (no alien role)
Its up in features forum, up now i got some good support.
--
AF should be like HACs
|
Zhula Guixgrixks
Increasing Success by Lowering Expectations
|
Posted - 2008.06.27 15:51:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Zhula Guixgrixks on 27/06/2008 15:54:31
AFs clearly failing in anything because they behave like bricks.
Ze mob demands nano AFs. Add low-slots to AFs. Match mass/agility of AFs proportional to HAC:T1 ratios.
Nano-AFs would render interceptors useless ? Turning the tables:
Introduce heavy interceptors (Vagabond with ceptor resistances) and match HACs mass/agility proportional to current AF:T1 ratios.
No, just kidding :) Nanoing AFs will bring more fun.
|
Sverre Haakonson
Gallente
Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.08.01 17:51:00 -
[30]
AFs need no EWAR capabilities. This not the rule of this class. Its better to give them more offensive capabilities like agility and speed.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |