| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate
BattleStar Alliance
17
   |
Posted - 2012.04.09 13:44:00 -
[1] - Quote
It worked out for AFs could it work for HACs?
Their sig still goes above L-guns' resolution though - 125*3.5=437.5.
Could anyone give mechanics wise explanation? |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
985
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 13:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
Kaikka Carel wrote:It worked out for AFs could it work for HACs?
Their sig still goes above L-guns' resolution though - 125*3.5=437.5.
Could anyone give mechanics wise explanation?
Wise, is not a word of Eve Universe. Weasel is. |
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
176
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 14:34:00 -
[3] - Quote
HACs are fine. The problem is that battlecruisers are bullshit and, if I remember CCP Ytterbium's post correctly, due for changes.
The reason AFs got a MWD sig bloom bonus is because without it, kite-fit AFs and heavy tackle AFs get their faces raped off by any cruiser-class ship with any amount of range. |
Uppsy Daisy
24th Imperial Crusade
Amarr Empire
105
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 16:05:00 -
[4] - Quote
Not a terrible idea in my opinion.
Would give HACS a bit more of a unique niche without necessarily overpowering them, provided it came with other tweaks. |
Bouh Revetoile
The Rough Riders
Ares Protectiva
10
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 16:30:00 -
[5] - Quote
If you need to give a MWD bonus to every class of ship below BC, I think the good solution is somewhere else... |
Liang Nuren
Parsec Flux
1495
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 16:33:00 -
[6] - Quote
Kahega Amielden wrote:HACs are fine. The problem is that battlecruisers are bullshit and, if I remember CCP Ytterbium's post correctly, due for changes.
The reason AFs got a MWD sig bloom bonus is because without it, kite-fit AFs and heavy tackle AFs get their faces raped off by any cruiser-class ship with any amount of range.
No they didn't.
-Liang
Normally on 5:00 -> 9-10:00 Eve (Aus TZ?)
Blog: http://liangnuren.wordpress.com
PVP Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/LiangNuren/videos
Twitter: http://twitter.com/LiangNuren
|
Muad 'dib
The Imperial Fedaykin
242
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 16:35:00 -
[7] - Quote
A good idea, HACs do need a little love and giving them a bloom reduction would not change their effectiveness in close range or ab circumstances.
However ask yourself how effective the mwd bloom reduction was for AFs?
I dont think anyone really noticed.
http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/4375/mynewsig2.jpg |
JoeTwo PointOh
Percussive Diplomacy
PERCUSSIVE PIZZA TIME DIPLOMACY
14
|
Posted - 2012.04.09 22:16:00 -
[8] - Quote
Muad 'dib wrote:A good idea, HACs do need a little love and giving them a bloom reduction would not change their effectiveness in close range or ab circumstances.
However ask yourself how effective the mwd bloom reduction was for AFs?
I dont think anyone really noticed.
I personally differ regarding the AF bloom reduction. I feel this has given AFs a tremendous, and much needed boost. Since the change, I've rarely seen AB fitted AFs used, and have personally seen quite a few very interesting and effective setups that wouldn't have been possible or as effective before.
Not sure how it would transfer over to HACs considering their initial sig size, but it seems they need a little something, somewhere to help them out. |
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate
BattleStar Alliance
17
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 03:20:00 -
[9] - Quote
My guess is that some HACs don't have a proper speciallization. Deimos, Zealot, Sacrilege have nothing special over BCs except for their cruiser format and T2 ressists. That is why ppl try to fit them as brawlers where they inevitably encounter BCs which are better and more affordable disposable.
In this regard the only redeeming quality is T2 ressists which could ensure ships survivability under logi support.
That is why I think that HACs need something special, some kind of Role Bonus which would stress out their intended role without making them OP.
I'm not sure if MWD sig bonus is the way to go that's why I asked your opinion.
In theory combined with their stronger capacitors it could allow them to fight with a better maneuvrability with more cycles of MWD instead of "burn till you're in optimal" or engage quickly with less risk. |
Argaral
The Riot Formation
Get Off My Lawn
48
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 03:28:00 -
[10] - Quote
I believe it's too general a fix. While it will vastly aid some ships(Sac), others will benefit far too much from it(Vaga). CCP imo should revisit them individually rather then as a whole. |
FT Diomedes
Factio Paucorum
38
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 04:19:00 -
[11] - Quote
I don't feel like this is a narrowly tailored enough fix. On the whole, it just doesn't seem right to me. It doesn't seem to address the fundamental problem with HACs right now, which is simply cost effectiveness vs. BCs.
On the other hand, it could be a fix for SOME of the HACs. Certainly the Deimos, Sacrilege, and Vagabond could all benefit from it to an extraordinary degree. The Eagle could arguably benefit from it as well, in a Beagle fit. If permamicrowarpdriving Drakes blobs can do a good job, theoretically a Cerberus fleet that was more mobile, had missiles arrive on target faster, had better resists, and smaller sig radius could do better (but at what price difference, I wonder).
Whatever, you can theory craft it all you want, but it just doesn't seem right to me. |
Baneken
Hyvat Pahat ja Eric
The Polaris Syndicate
99
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 06:59:00 -
[12] - Quote
Only HAC that would need an MWD sig reduction would be diemost. |
Crellion
Parental Control
13
|
Posted - 2012.04.10 08:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
You know it might work if you gave them different mwd bonus for each hac... like so:
Ishtar + Sac = mwd speed bonus
Deimos + Zealot = mwd cap reduction / usage bonus
Eagle + Munin = mwd fitting powergrid bonus
Carberus = mwd sig bonus
Vaga = mwd ... visual effects bonus  |
Cfiloruz Xilocient
Not Quite So Sinister
Shadow Empire.
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 07:34:00 -
[14] - Quote
nyan nyan cat engine trails? |
Darthewok
Perkone
Caldari State
54
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 07:47:00 -
[15] - Quote
DEV Ytterbium should declare which is the next class that will be looked at and when the rebalancing is coming out.
This is so we don't keep on getting irrelevant posts every day on classes which will not be looked at for a long time.
No need to commit to some kind of detailed schedule exactly when each class will be fixed. Just post when the next 1-2 classes will be fixed so people can direct their analysis to that class.
Or we will keep getting every day excited posts to fix BS, fix BCs, fix recons, fix Gallente, fix X, fix Y
CAVEAT RICHARDUS VOLVERE - YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0 |
Nalha Saldana
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
214
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 10:31:00 -
[16] - Quote
Kaikka Carel wrote:Their sig still goes above L-guns' resolution though - 125*3.5=437.5.
This doesnt matter, you need to compare speed:size ratio, a mwd bonus makes them speed tank almost as good as a AB fit.
AB 125 m / 583 m/s = ~0,21
Bonused MWD 437,5 m / 1457 m/s = ~0,3
Unbonused MWD 750 m / 1457 m/s = ~0,51
This value shows how easy it is to track your ship at max angular velocity, this shows that a mwd bonus is a great way to get a fast ship with decent speed tanking and is exactly what this ship type is supposed to do compared to BCs. |
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
187
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 17:18:00 -
[17] - Quote
The above implies you're getting your full velocity. That is very, very hard when running a MWD |
Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
187
|
Posted - 2012.04.12 17:23:00 -
[18] - Quote
The above implies you're getting your full velocity. That is very, very hard when running a MWD |
Nalha Saldana
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
215
|
Posted - 2012.04.13 13:53:00 -
[19] - Quote
Kahega Amielden wrote:The above implies you're getting your full velocity. That is very, very hard when running a MWD
Im more thinking about fleet fights where you are following a anchor, orbiting is kinda stupid in anything bigger then a frigate. In any other case the speed:size ratio will play in and will work fine.
The speed can enable you to really fly the ships as you would want to, either close range, sniping or skirmish just like the hulls were designed to do without getting destroyed for having those MWDs. |
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate
BattleStar Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2012.04.14 02:01:00 -
[20] - Quote
Argaral wrote:I believe it's too general a fix. While it will vastly aid some ships(Sac), others will benefit far too much from it(Vaga). CCP imo should revisit them individually rather then as a whole.
Oh well isn't Vaga obsoleted by Cynabal at current meta? Such bonus could give an edge. |
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate
46
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 14:48:00 -
[21] - Quote
bump
Can I do it on this forum? |
Aesheera
Malum Crusis
31
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 15:03:00 -
[22] - Quote
Kaikka Carel wrote:bump
Can I do it on this forum?
You just did, didn't you? 
Signing in to agree though, HACs can use a little revamp.
Malum Crusis is recruiting!
FREE Merc work offered*
Details available via EVEmail or ingame convo. |
Dato Koppla
Perkone
Caldari State
19
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 15:16:00 -
[23] - Quote
Needs abit of thought because as said before it would kinda break the vaga. |
Metal Icarus
xHELLonEARTHx
Rookie Empire
147
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 16:27:00 -
[24] - Quote
Dato Koppla wrote:Needs abit of thought because as said before it would kinda break the vaga.
Yep, I agree with this. A MWD sig bonus would make the Vaga OP as hell. Going 3k m/s with only a sig of about 200? Good luck hitting that.
As for the eagle would either need a big boost to med rails or more damage bonus. Like a double damage bonus or something. Anyways, something to make the eagle useful! it sucks as a sniper when u compare it to the naga. No point in using the eagle, no point at all. same with the cerberus. A missle sniper with no tank? Drake plsthx.
caldari HAC's need a better role that isn't currently dominated by their BC's. |
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate
46
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 16:43:00 -
[25] - Quote
@Metal Icarus Give it a double bonus and ppl will fit it with blasters. |
Metal Icarus
xHELLonEARTHx
Rookie Empire
147
|
Posted - 2012.05.09 17:13:00 -
[26] - Quote
Kaikka Carel wrote:@Metal Icarus Give it a double bonus and ppl will fit it with blasters.
And maybe then it would be a respectable HAC. |
Ava Starfire
Skadi's Call
Defiant Legacy
247
|
Posted - 2012.05.10 14:58:00 -
[27] - Quote
JoeTwo PointOh wrote:Muad 'dib wrote:A good idea, HACs do need a little love and giving them a bloom reduction would not change their effectiveness in close range or ab circumstances.
However ask yourself how effective the mwd bloom reduction was for AFs?
I dont think anyone really noticed. I personally differ regarding the AF bloom reduction. I feel this has given AFs a tremendous, and much needed boost. Since the change, I've rarely seen AB fitted AFs used, and have personally seen quite a few very interesting and effective setups that wouldn't have been possible or as effective before. Not sure how it would transfer over to HACs considering their initial sig size, but it seems they need a little something, somewhere to help them out.
I see a lot of AFs. Generally when I explode them.
90%+ still run ABs. |
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate
Wormholes Holders
55
|
Posted - 2012.06.12 05:40:00 -
[28] - Quote
^ Are those 1v1 frigate brawlers? If yes then it's obvious why they use AB. For a gang an AF would better work as a tackler where you need MWD. |
Unimaginative Guy
Dutch Squad
Chained Reactions
15
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 01:39:00 -
[29] - Quote
Just give HACs more fitting |
Kaikka Carel
White syndicate
Wormholes Holders
56
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 07:16:00 -
[30] - Quote
Metal Icarus wrote:Kaikka Carel wrote:@Metal Icarus Give it a double bonus and ppl will fit it with blasters. And maybe then it would be a respectable HAC.
Trampling on the corpse of Deimos.
As for the Vaga it is actually 140m with LSE II and 490 after MWD. Gives 0.197 STS ratio at All V and max speed while Vagnabal has 0.38 but due to the better inertia the difference isn't going to be that strong assuming both ships are orbiting at long point range. Cynabal also retains its additional med slot and superior dronebay on top of that. |
Heun zero
Reliant Tactical Operations
61
|
Posted - 2012.06.15 09:47:00 -
[31] - Quote
Darthewok wrote:DEV Ytterbium should declare which is the next class that will be looked at and when the rebalancing is coming out.
This is so we don't keep on getting irrelevant posts every day on classes which will not be looked at for a long time.
No need to commit to some kind of detailed schedule exactly when each class will be fixed. Just post when the next 1-2 classes will be fixed so people can direct their analysis to that class.
Or we will keep getting every day excited posts to fix BS, fix BCs, fix recons, fix Gallente, fix X, fix Y
CCP Ytterbium wrote:So, when all of this is going out you ask? These changes will be out by the time the winter expansion hit, which will leave us in a very good shape to start overhauling tech 1 cruisers and battlecruisers next year, possibly earlier if things go well.
As an additional note and a follow-up from our previous balancing Dev Blog, we believe it is good for you to know we will not be changing the Destroyer / Battlecruiser skills for the winter expansion GÇô such changes are to come only after these two ship classes have been properly rebalanced.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |