|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Power's Urge
Pixels Docks
Fang Alliance
   |
Posted - 2008.06.02 12:41:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: Rodj Blake
but currently have no idea how to change them.
There are hundreds of ideas out there, and a few good ones too; CCP just doesn't bother making up their minds about those. They wouldn't even really need to think; just pick a suggestion and implement it.
|
Power's Urge
Pixels Docks
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.02 16:00:00 -
[2]
Originally by: Varshyll
Just give AF a new e-war weapon which add mass
What would that do that a webber can't ?
Quote:
_AF will have a role.
A bad one, and not very "assault". AFs don't need some esoteric "role" because they do have one; they are to T1 frigs what HACs are to cruisers. Their stats are just not that good in comparison; nobody complains about HACs not having a "role", although all the models are completely different from each other - because they're good at being extreme exponents of certain styles of fighting, while most AFs have serious issues - e.g. the Hawk's damage output, the Wolf/Jag's wrong falloff/range bonuses, the Ishkur vs. the Ishtar's drone bonuses, their handling in general. They just need to be made worthwhile to choose over cruisers in the same way that people choose HACs over BSs.
|
Power's Urge
Pixels Docks
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.02 16:24:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Power''s Urge on 02/06/2008 16:24:46
Originally by: Furb Killer
@power, give it larger range, then it hurts top speed of nanos and their agility, so their orbit speed drops a lot. No large affects on other ships.
I think such a "specialty tackler" role would still be too narrow for eight ships that are completely different from each other (and doesn't seem very feasible to me for, say, an egregious sniper like the Harpy which can engage at ranges of 100km), as it would relegate each ship's special combat style to a secondary feature which wouldn't help the class at all . Those different combat styles should on the contrary be emphasized a lot more and improved upon. AFs don't need a change, they just need to become more viable to use and fun to fly.
|
Power's Urge
Pixels Docks
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.02 20:10:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Derek Sigres
<Truth>
/signed
|
Power's Urge
Pixels Docks
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.02 23:21:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Arkanjuca
Ideas?
 Take a suitable tool (Armageddon comes to mind) and hammer this into the heads of the ship design/balancing team up there on the island of Iceland, as they refuse to see the obvious on their own.
Seems it's mostly the people that actually fly these things that are aware that there's no need for some sophisticated 'role' for a ship class solely intended to be tough little beasts - there's enough other ships out there for all those special tasks.
|
Power's Urge
Pixels Docks
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 14:58:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Delichon
So you see - they want to give AF a role, that is unique. Not filled by HACs/Inties/Recons/T1 frigs/Caps and the like. A unique role.
Which is what AFs really need.
There is no "role" a laser damage dealer, a 100km sniper, a mini drone carrier and a hit-and-run artillery platform can feasibly fulfill with the same quality. Nor is it needed.
|
Power's Urge
Pixels Docks
Fang Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.06.03 20:09:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Delichon
Originally by: Cpt Branko
That's precisely what I don't want, a "Assault Ship" with a role. Unless it's very very wide role.
That's your opinion.
It's the opinion of said 90% of the people that currently fly AFs.
|
|
|
| |
|