| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
xProGenitoRx
Amarr
    |
Posted - 2009.10.12 15:47:00 -
[541]
[sarcasm]What about those who own a titan and want to fly it solo?
You scan someone down at a plex without jumpgates. You want to take a titan in, without the speed, sensor resolution, good tracking, 100km scram ofcourse your target's just going to run off.
Also if you're flying Leviathan you dont have enough medslots for proper tank plus td, trackcomp, tracklink, ecm, eccm, remote eccm, tp, sd, sb, remote sb, passivetargeter, warpdis, warpscram, cargo and ship scanner (to make a strategy against this very ship) and analyzer with codebreacker (if it is profession site).
CCP showld fix it![/sarcasm]
|
Nabiah
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 15:52:00 -
[542]
Originally by: xProGenitoRx
[sarcasm]What about those who own a titan and want to fly it solo?
You scan someone down at a plex without jumpgates. You want to take a titan in, without the speed, sensor resolution, good tracking, 100km scram ofcourse your target's just going to run off.
Also if you're flying Leviathan you dont have enough medslots for proper tank plus td, trackcomp, tracklink, ecm, eccm, remote eccm, tp, sd, sb, remote sb, passivetargeter, warpdis, warpscram, cargo and ship scanner (to make a strategy against this very ship) and analyzer with codebreacker (if it is profession site).
CCP showld fix it![/sarcasm]
= WINS! =
.
|
Caldor Mansi
|
Posted - 2009.10.12 17:39:00 -
[543]
Originally by: Andrea Griffin
Originally by: Caldor Mansi
[...] what about those who own a Retribution and want to fly it solo?
[...]The problem is on your end, ship is 'fine'.
I'm fine with the Restribution having only a single mid slot as well, but I really would appreciate a hefty damage bonus so that it can compete with some of the other AFs in that area. If the Retribution is going to be capable of nothing but Gank and Tank, it should excel. Alternately, a small drone bay would go a long, long way towards making me want to fly it for more than speed-running low-level missions for standings.
Retribution is already inferior to other AF. It can tanks quite load of damage and still keep superior range damage at the same time.
|
yani dumyat
Minmatar
Black Storm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.10.13 11:36:00 -
[544]
Edited by: yani dumyat on 13/10/2009 11:39:31
Originally by: Gypsio III
But this AF boost is a bit, well, blunt. It helps the good AFs like Jag and Ishkur too much, while not really helping the crappy ones. Also, when will we hear about the rocket fix?
^^^ In one short statement Gypsio has summed up the problem very nicely.
Please give the hawk an extra mid slot because having one less mid/low slot than every other tackle AF cripples it. (It's got 4 launcher hard points but it still does less damage than any other tackle AF gets using 3 turret hard points so the net effect is the hawk has one less slot than all other AF's)
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
we are aware of related issues such as rocket performance
You can add light missiles to that list too because the hawk / crow etc already have problems if an AB frigate simply travels in a straight line at full speed, any AB boost will require an explosion velocity/radius boost for light missiles (and fix precision missiles please).
Many thanks for looking into AF's and the speed boost is nice but please can we have some more nuanced solutions.
_________________________________________________
Lifeboat ----> + Human |
Yankunytjatjara
|
Posted - 2009.10.14 12:51:00 -
[545]
Originally by: Gypsio III
when will we hear about the rocket fix?
|
N Solarz
Caldari
The Executives
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 21:28:00 -
[546]
why do i have a feeling that af changes have been bumped back till after dominion?
|
EFT Worrier
|
Posted - 2009.10.17 23:12:00 -
[547]
I like the concept of the changes a lot, it's just the actual magnitude of the bonus that may need tweaking.
IMO the material cost of AFs does not justify their performance right now, and signature tanking with an AB only has big issues with any cruiser hull carrying a MWD, which in 0.0, is all of them.
The counter to AB AF now is drones and neuts, and will continue to be so after these changes, no issue there. Considering ABs cost 4-5 times the cost of a T1 cruiser, they ought to be very competitive against them.
|
Kepakh
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 01:18:00 -
[548]
Originally by: EFT Worrier
Edited by: EFT Worrier on 17/10/2009 23:25:39
I like the concept of the changes a lot, it's just the actual magnitude of the bonus that may need tweaking.
IMO the material cost of AFs does not justify their performance right now, and signature tanking with an AB only has big issues with any cruiser hull carrying a MWD, which in 0.0, is all of them.
The counter to AB AF now is drones and neuts, and will continue to be so after these changes, no issue there. Considering ABs cost 4-5 times the cost of a T1 cruiser, they ought to be very competitive against them.
The counter is not to let the AF get close. Neuts, light drones and ECM are weapons of last resort.
AF are dangerous at close range, if they can make it that close. That is what makes them 'balanced'.
With AB bonus you remove the counters with no drawback, making the ships more powerful than they should.
Pretty much all (battle)cruiser sized vessels except dedicated droneboats will be defenseless against them.
|
Roger Douglas
Infinite Improbability Inc
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2009.10.18 03:19:00 -
[549]
curse? rapier or huggy? plus TD's?
Anything using precision light or heavy missles. Cerb maybe?
High tracking blaster boat, or auto boat for that matter? Brutix would work nice.
true, any neut ship.
So, pretty much anything that worked versus nano will work versus an AF. The problem with nano was that while you could defend and drive off, it was tough to kill. Had a little engagement the otherday with a old school nano curse that could be driven off, but not killed. He could not play close with a neut domi, and i couldn't bring a sniper BS to smoke him at range, but he did take a coupla t1 cruisers a retribution (lol), and nearly a scorp down while we played with him for over an hour.
So if an AF pilot will be able to do that after the AB boost, it may be overpowered. Otherwise, go fly a curse. I love the ishkur, and frankly having other tacklers than the predictable inty/dictor would be very nice in fleets.
|
BATMorpheous
Caldari
Paradigm Council
Sylph Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 22:17:00 -
[550]
there's been some very good points brought up in this whole thread 15% bonus to ab per lvl seems a bit much imo, maybe more like 10% or something like that.
assault frigs are nr impossible to kill as they are now the bonus is like buffing an already shiny trophy. unless ov course ur gonna supply a new way to counter assault frigs like someone mentioned earlier bigger ships should have retrospective bonuses to the smaller sized guns i.e....
bs - bonus to cruise/torps and heavy missles
bc - bonus to heavy,heavy assault and light missiles
cruiser - bonus to heavy , heavy assault , rockets
(and yes im a puritan caldari :P)
something like that only seems like a more realistic bonus to these ships it would give a more diverse fittings array for every ship and these assault frig pilots would have a challenge rather than an easy kill they risk the fact the ship they are attacking may actually be fit to tackle af's
thx morph
p.s. if you were the one that suggested these bonus's in the first place kudos to you seems like a good plan :)
|
|
Renarla
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 23:49:00 -
[551]
Give all the AFs 50% role bonus to their respective weapon types. Problem solved.
However, on another note, I now have one of those annoying sigs. |
Jason Sarek
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 23:53:00 -
[552]
Imho the afterburner bonus is an arbitrary and dangerous band-aid solution.
It might solve one 'problem' but I'm pretty sure it will create a couple of new ones at the same time, exactly because it's not embedded into a sophisticated concept.
It's like a single solder point, which will break eventually.
|
Letifer Deus
The Dark Horses
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 00:35:00 -
[553]
Edited by: Letifer Deus on 20/10/2009 00:36:11
Originally by: BATMorpheous
assault frigs are nr impossible to kill
Wat?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Brought to you by the letter ARRR!" |
Grimpak
Gallente
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 13:13:00 -
[554]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
stuff.
meh... while I do agree that a 4/2/5 change would be better than, let's say, 5/2/4 (like many people wanted some time ago), I still am partial to the 5/1/5 with 5 turrets, and the fittings to accommodate it that is.
slam a tracking bonus to it and retri is rather fixed now
but this was me 1-2 years ago when I cared about it and made extensive postings about it.
what did I got in return? "promises" of CCP saying "we'll look into it, but not now", and then they come with a half-assed way to try to fix it.
in all honesty, I stopped caring.
---
Quote:
The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.
ain't that right. |
Doddy
The Executives
IT Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 13:08:00 -
[555]
The concept of the change is good, the size of the bonus is excessive. As for people saying they will be unkillable have they heard of webs or light drones? Sure 1v1 they will be able to kill passive tanked hacs that are bigger than them but so can intys with MWD serves people right for passive tanking. Vagas can kill passive tanked bs that are bigger than them wheres the problem? In engagements bigger than 1v1 or several afs vs 1 there is bound to be more than 1 web and more than a tankable amount of light drones so the afs are countered pretty emphatically.
Basically with this change afs will be able to solo lone enemies not fitted to fight them and in gangs gank small groups of enemies not fitted to fight them. Isn't this exactly what afs are meant to do? Isn't this what all roaming gangs in eve try to do?
The real problem i see is afs with long range weapons buzzing around outside web range, but then the dps is going to be pretty low and one freindly ceptor/hyena/minty recon/curse turning up will probably chase them off/kill them.
|
HeliosGal
|
Posted - 2009.10.21 13:16:00 -
[556]
if this change went thro as is then small gangs would just have pilgrim, curse, arazu escorts to offset and jam the frigs and then throw i na ceptor or two to catch the frigs a 7.5% bonus to the cr@ppy frigates ( ie retribution with only one mid slot would be a good start the more balanced ones could get a 2.5% af speed bonus)
|
Nabiah
|
Posted - 2009.10.23 12:24:00 -
[557]
looks like AF are going to remain untouched. Did i get it right ?
|
Nabiah
|
Posted - 2009.10.23 12:37:00 -
[558]
Originally by: N Solarz
why do i have a feeling that af changes have been bumped back till after dominion?
this me fear is right
|
yani dumyat
Minmatar
Black Storm Cartel
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 11:16:00 -
[559]
Originally by: Nabiah
Originally by: N Solarz
why do i have a feeling that af changes have been bumped back till after dominion?
this me fear is right
In many ways i hope so, there's a thread full of people here saying that AF's need a much more in depth change than slapping an AB boost on so if we have to wait for a future patch then so be it.
A little clarification from the devs would be nice though 
_________________________________________________
Lifeboat ----> + Human |
Yankunytjatjara
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 11:57:00 -
[560]
Would be nice to get a dev note about it rather than just having to guess by the thread being unstickied though -.-'
Originally by: Yodohime Kibagami
Or the rockets for the Vengeance so people dont have to fit it with heretical weapons.
Not that it's the only amarr ship that has to use better heretical weapons, the so much cried upon ACs - puni, maller, prophecy...
|
|
Kitsu Shadow
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 15:29:00 -
[561]
It seems as though the majority of players opposed to the AF AB boost dont have a reliable means of engaging and destroying AFs. Which is making them more opposed to the boost that will make them even more difficult to kill. However, contrary to what many players have been complaining about. They are currently fairly easy to engage. Webs and or neuts stop them dead which makes them very easy ti kill. Almost every ship that can't shoot an AF with guns has a drone bay which means web plus drones = a dead AF or web plus guns = a dead AF. So to make the AF more potent it needs to address its speed issue. Which brings us to the realization that an AFs speed is its tank. (If u didnt already know). U dont see armor tankers or shield tankers getting their tanks compromised as easily as applying one mod (stasis web) does to AFs. Can u imagine if one medium energy neutralizer could completely negate an active shield tank or active armor tank. One stasis web shouldn't be able to negate an AFs tank.
At this point some might make the argument that the AF is a small ship therefore more vulnerable to e-war like neuts and webs. However, you can make the coutner argument that many many T2 ships have effective tactics to counter their weaknesses. For example the curse. It can nuet targets that have it scrammed or webbed to escape. The rook or falcon have the ability to effectivly escape almost any engagement. The vaga is incredibly difficult to catch unless u carefully plan warp ins or the pilot makes a mistake or u have a Rapier. The rapier is hard to catch due to the web bonus. Command ships have tanks so powerful that it negates many many weaknesses. It requires multiple ships of equal hull class or larger to kill one. So why shouldn't the AF have an AB bonus to be able to cope with its strongest weakness, stasis webifiers. You can still pretty much neut them dry and have them floating in space with effectively no tank. So its not like ur negating all their weaknesses by giving them an AB boost.
My final argument is the frigate hulls strongest asset. The frigate hull wasn't built to have a hilaciously strong tank to survive engagments. Or neut targets dry to run away. Or providing any other EWar that lets them escape. Their biggest asset to themselves is their speed. So aside to their personal bonuses they all should be able to go fast. Which they currently can not do effectively. The standard PvP Jaguar fit gets only appx 1109 with lvl 4 nav skills across the board. How is that fast enough to tank anything after being webbed??? and thats the fastest AF in the game. Obviously ccp realized the need for the AFs to go faster so as to perform their roles as fast hunter-killers.
|
steveid
Helljumpers
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 15:34:00 -
[562]
the difficulty with this is its again making faction frigates and interceptors lacking in an even playing field. Pre hitpoint buff ceptors could kill cruisers some af's with skill and ofc other ceptors and frigates. Now its a struggle to kill any cruiser and af's are damn difficult (and on sisi even harder).
The af changes and buff to faction frigates are making my interceptors sad.
If you read this then you have to lick my balls. |
Kitsu Shadow
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 15:42:00 -
[563]
Ur extending the role of the Inty outside its intended range. The ceptors role obviously is to point a target long enough for its fleet to arrive and get new points, scrams, and webs on the target. Any solo pvp that occurs between an inty and another frigate is extending the ceptors role outside its intended purpose. Which btw it does very very effectively. It only takes a matter of 30-50 secs for a ceptor pilots fleet to jump in to a system and warp to the ceptor b4 the ceptor has to disengage. If the ceptor performs its duties correctly then its not getting its bonuses debuffed. A ceptor wasnt made to kill an AF so y should it be able to currently. CCP is addressing weaknesses like these with the AF.
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 19:38:00 -
[564]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 25/10/2009 19:41:43
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 25/10/2009 19:40:40
Originally by: Kitsu Shadow
The standard PvP Jaguar fit gets only appx 1109 with lvl 4 nav skills across the board. How is that fast enough to tank anything after being webbed???
Train some skills. My Jaguar goes considerably faster on a AB, which suggests that you're doing something wrong. Ships ARE balanced around the all L5 template, and there is no "begginer T2 ship" class.
Anyway, that's preety damn fast to tank everything after you've been webbed bar something with frig guns. In a close orbit. Sure, getting to close orbit bar landing at 0 is going to be tricky; but the AF should not be a automagic killmail delivery system either.
Furthermore, the whole "web counter" business is silly. The AB counters the web and the web counters the AB. A single web does bugger all to a AF right now, since no medium gun will ever track it in close orbit.
Anyway, you said a lot of various BS in your thread.
Sure, recons are awesome, because of the EW, and Curse/Rook are particularly awesome, mostly because of their very debilitating EW.
However, let's look at some other T2 ships and their roles. HACs are roughly on par with the shipclass half size up (BCs), while possessing superior speed and mobility, and less EHP. To offset this, the more useful ones are typically ones which do things beyond the abilities of BCs (sniper HACs and Vagabond, basically).
So, they have merit and use (bar a few sad examples like the Diemost) without obsoleting other ships. Nobody is going to turn their BS in because HACs obsolete them, because they don't, and HAC pilots know they're in the position that, if the other, larger, ship is counterfit, they're in a world of hurt.
But they get a load of useful stuff in return, things like agility, speed, tackle ability and so on.
CS? Heh. I don't get where you get the "monster tank". Field CS have all very meh tanks if they go down the active tanking route, with the only serious one being the Sleipnir with XL booster - which makes the ship horrendously cap sensitive. They definitely won't sit around and permatank each other like you suggest 
Fleet CS, sure, they have solid tanks (read: Damnation has great EHP). However, they're gang only ships really, and serve to run warfare links. Any other use of Fleet CS is basically EFT whoring. Fleet CS, while being great at what they do, serve only to run warfare links.
Sure, AF role is a bit of a problem: the pure tackle role is covered by interceptors. Heavy tackle role they can do (even now, preety damn well) quite well even though they're preety expensive to risk like that (which is a legitimate complaint; 50% more build requirements over ceptors does not make sense), but most people would rather want them to be some sort of a automatic killmail delivery system. And that just can't work.
Their lack of agility for that tackle role is also a valid complaint; many of them behave like cruisers rather then frigates. Lack of AB speed is NOT a valid complaint if you want to do heavy tackle. Tacklers use a MWD or go home. You can fit dual prop so you have both speed to lay tackle with and tank to avoid damage.
If you want to tell me that their role is damage, well, currently it is not because most of them do crap damage. If someone wanted to make them do the damage role, then they'd need a lot more of it. But again, not combined with invulnerability.
I suspect your quest for "them being hunter killers" is a quest for "I want them to deliver me a killmail". Which cannot fly. Every other ship - and really, every generalist combat ship in EVE is a hunter killer - has to work and risk for its kills.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint |
Kitsu Shadow
Caldari
Twisted Legion
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 20:22:00 -
[565]
Originally by: Cpt Branko
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 25/10/2009 19:41:43
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 25/10/2009 19:40:40
Originally by: Kitsu Shadow
The standard PvP Jaguar fit gets only appx 1109 with lvl 4 nav skills across the board. How is that fast enough to tank anything after being webbed???
Train some skills. My Jaguar goes considerably faster on a AB, which suggests that you're doing something wrong. Ships ARE balanced around the all L5 template, and there is no "begginer T2 ship" class.
If you want to tell me that their role is damage, well, currently it is not because most of them do crap damage. If someone wanted to make them do the damage role, then they'd need a lot more of it. But again, not combined with invulnerability.
I suspect your quest for "them being hunter killers" is a quest for "I want them to deliver me a killmail". Which cannot fly. Every other ship - and really, every generalist combat ship in EVE is a hunter killer - has to work and risk for its kills.
You probably aren't using the standard Overdrive II, gyrostab II, Damage control II configuration. That is the standard Jaguar Low SLot config, i dont need u to tell me otherwise as a Frigate specialist i would know Nav IV plus Acceleration Control IV is 1109m/s with T2 AB.
Beyond that, the role of an AF is a hunter killer. Obviously not solo although they can deal considerable damage alone. A Jag can get 170 DPS with decent skills. Put Three Jaguars together and now ur dealing 510 DPS. Thats just three low DPS dealing AFs Most of the AFs can push 200+ DPS. U can't tell me their DPS is a hindrance to fulfilling their role. Its their lack of speed which makes them ineffective. Which you so clearly point out. A slow frigate is a worthless frigate for reasons suggested in my original post on Page 19. If you use the AF in a five man gang you can kill many BS any BC and some HACs. Like I said earlier their DPS is not an issue. Its their speed, hence the necessity of the AB buff. You list all the downsides to the AF yet oppose the AB buff? If your going to oppose the AB buff perhaps u should restructure ur argument above to represent that opinion. As it stands you are only supporting the AB Buff.
On a side note their agility is plenty. If u want to tell me to train skills train evasive man V urself if ur agility concerns u so much b/c as it stands the AFs even overheated have no problem holding an orbit at the optimal range of their weapons.
 |
waruiushiro
Rifters
|
Posted - 2009.10.25 22:35:00 -
[566]
This boost is just insane. Hirana mentioned the Firetail, I've flown that around quite a bit with an AB and it's loloverpowered at times unless heavily, heavily webbed.
I love ABs (well used to) but this is just going to be ridiculous. AFs will be unkillable, period. It'll take more effort to catch and kill a Jaguar than it does a Vagabond or Rapier.
ABs could maybe do with a boost, but an across the board boost and even then just a tiny amount. There's a thin line for sig tanking between properly balanced and nigh invulnerable.
|
Cpt Branko
The Scope
|
Posted - 2009.10.26 01:03:00 -
[567]
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 26/10/2009 01:06:08
Edited by: Cpt Branko on 26/10/2009 01:03:30
Ok, mr. Nav IV frigate specialist.
Originally by: Kitsu Shadow
Beyond that, the role of an AF is a hunter killer. Obviously not solo although they can deal considerable damage alone. A Jag can get 170 DPS with decent skills. Put Three Jaguars together and now ur dealing 510 DPS. Thats just three low DPS dealing AFs Most of the AFs can push 200+ DPS. U can't tell me their DPS is a hindrance to fulfilling their role.
It bloody well is. 170 DPS is peanuts, as is 200. Most T1 cruisers are in the 500 DPS ballpark. For this reason, the only role a AF in a mixed gang is going to perform is heavy tackle. Else you're better off bringing *anything* else.
The idea of tanking in PVP is generally silly, unless you want a solo machine.
Originally by: Kitsu Shadow
Its their lack of speed which makes them ineffective. Which you so clearly point out. A slow frigate is a worthless frigate for reasons suggested in my original post on Page 19. If you use the AF in a five man gang you can kill many BS any BC and some HACs. Like I said earlier their DPS is not an issue. Its their speed, hence the necessity of the AB buff. You list all the downsides to the AF yet oppose the AB buff? If your going to oppose the AB buff perhaps u should restructure ur argument above to represent that opinion. As it stands you are only supporting the AB Buff.
Lol.
Yeah, alright. If you operate in a 5-man frigate gang you'll kill BC/BS/HAC. You will do so now. Easily (provided you are properly fit and don't do stupid things). Provided it's not someone in a really tanked ship in which case you'll have to wait for 5 minutes for your killmail, and anything can happen in five minutes.
The fitting options now are:
- Do I fit AB only, and have a solid (basically negating 1 web) speed tank up close, but have problems getting up close unless the target is already tackled?
- Do I fit MWD only, but then have a much weaker (but still really troubling medium guns and invulnerable to large) speed tank up close?
- Do I fit dual prop, at large fitting cost, but get both?
Get this: a AB is a tanking module, first and foremost. It reduces the effective tracking of your hostiles. Much like a TD does, except it doesn't work only vs one specific hostile. What it is not is a range control/tackle module, unless you're tackling a BS or something (which you can indeed do on a AB).
MWD is the range control/tackle module. It however doesn't do anything for your tank, and in fact on heavy ships which recieve a fairly smaller bonus then the 500% sig increase actually hurts it. But it gets you at your chosen range very fast.
You can also fit both, and have both the ability to get somewhere quickly and the significant boost to tanking the AB gives you up close, but it comes with penalties. Which is only sensible; we do not need a all in one module without any downsides, nor do we need a dumbing down of fitting choices.
If CCP, for instance, reduced their mass all around, that would have been a much better move; some more AB speed (but not the imbalanced lol speeds of the AB buff), noticeably more MWD speed, and better agility all around (where non-Jaguar/Caldari AFs suck btw).
It still wouldn't solve a lot of fundamental issues with the class, but they'd fly more like frigates which is altogether a good thing. But the AB boost is aimed at making it a 'solopwnmobile' with a awesome sig/speed tank and ability to tackle at the same time, further imbalances the already horridly imbalanced shipclass (where most of the AFs suck horribly, and you have a few good ones), and your gang utility still sucks outside of being heavy tackle or being in frig only gang, because tanking is not a (generic, bait excepted) role in gangs.
Sig removed, inappropriate link. If you would like further details please mail mods@ccpgames.com ~Saint |
Kitsu Shadow
Caldari
Twisted Legion
|
Posted - 2009.10.26 02:15:00 -
[568]
Edited by: Kitsu Shadow on 26/10/2009 02:17:40
Originally by: Kitsu Shadow
Beyond that, the role of an AF is a hunter killer. Obviously not solo although they can deal considerable damage alone. A Jag can get 170 DPS with decent skills. Put Three Jaguars together and now ur dealing 510 DPS. Thats just three low DPS dealing AFs Most of the AFs can push 200+ DPS. U can't tell me their DPS is a hindrance to fulfilling their role.
It bloody well is. 170 DPS is peanuts, as is 200. Most T1 cruisers are in the 500 DPS ballpark. For this reason, the only role a AF in a mixed gang is going to perform is heavy tackle.
200 DPS out of a Frigate is first of all not peanuts. If u look at your effective mobility reduction one gang of AFs can do the same thing a gang of cruisers could only w/out getting killed. If the AFs role was to provide heavy tackle it would be getting tackle related bonuses. OH WAIT! I think thats called an Interceptor. Maybe if you look past what the ship can currently do and c what it was designed for. You dont give a heavy tackle frigate one mid slot ie retribution or the wolf 5 high slots and 2 meds.
Originally by: Kitsu Shadow
Its their lack of speed which makes them ineffective. Which you so clearly point out. A slow frigate is a worthless frigate for reasons suggested in my original post on Page 19. If you use the AF in a five man gang you can kill many BS any BC and some HACs. Like I said earlier their DPS is not an issue. Its their speed, hence the necessity of the AB buff. You list all the downsides to the AF yet oppose the AB buff? If your going to oppose the AB buff perhaps u should restructure ur argument above to represent that opinion. As it stands you are only supporting the AB Buff.
The fitting options now are:
- Do I fit AB only, and have a solid (basically negating 1 web) speed tank up close, but have problems getting up close unless the target is already tackled?
- Do I fit MWD only, but then have a much weaker (but still really troubling medium guns and invulnerable to large) speed tank up close?
- Do I fit dual prop, at large fitting cost, but get both?
An AB is a tanking module, first and foremost. It reduces the effective tracking of your hostiles. Much like a TD does, except it doesn't work only vs one specific hostile. What it is not is a range control/tackle module, Another reason for the AB buff
MWD is the range control/tackle module. It however doesn't do anything for your tank, and in fact on heavy ships which receive a fairly smaller bonus then the 500% sig increase actually hurts it. But it gets you at your chosen range very fast. The MWD is also suicide b/c of the sig radius -bonus. Any light drone will eat you for dinner.
You can also fit both, and have both the ability to get somewhere quickly and the significant boost to tanking the AB gives you up close, but it comes with penalties. Which is only sensible; we do not need a all in one module without any downsides, nor do we need a dumbing down of fitting choices.
LOL if you fit both, completly kiss the legitimacy of your fit goodbye. The only time you ever fit dual prop is on a travel interceptor thats making long runs through null sec.
Again your post listed the current issues AF pilots have in fitting / piloting their ships. AFs have a dilemma when it comes to being effectively mobile. Reducing their mass will not help as it will gimp the armor lvls on the Armor Tank AFs. Dual prop is out of the question b/c it does not negate webbing at close range. The only viable solution to make them go faster is just that, give them a bonus to go faster.
You continue to list the AFs weaknesses and hence support the necessity for an AB bonus. Perhaps a role bonus is in order. Interceptors get a bonus that reduces the Sig radius negative effect. Perhaps AFs should get a role bonus that reduces the mass bonus attributed to the AB while providing a Speed Bonus as well to reduce the effect of Stasis Webs.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2009.10.26 08:59:00 -
[569]
Most properly fitted and flown AF can kill any and all cruiser and above targets as it is now, unless the target ship expects it and fits accordingly.
Originally by: Kitsu Shadow
LOL if you fit both, completly kiss the legitimacy of your fit goodbye. The only time you ever fit dual prop is on a travel interceptor thats making long runs through null sec.
You are actually criticising something you have obviously never tried, quite some balls on you.
Vengeance, Jaguar and Ishkur ALL make exceptional scramblers using dual-prop, a single overheated MWD burst is enough to catch most anything even Vagabonds if done correctly. They still go 4-500m/s when webbed on AB, no medium gun has a hope in hell of hitting that inside 2-3km.
Originally by: Kitsu Shadow
Again your post listed the current issues AF pilots have in fitting / piloting their ships. AFs have a dilemma when it comes to being effectively mobile. Reducing their mass will not help as it will gimp the armor lvls on the Armor Tank AFs. Dual prop is out of the question b/c it does not negate webbing at close range. The only viable solution to make them go faster is just that, give them a bonus to go faster.
First of all, mass ratings have NOTHING to do with armour amount, don't know where you got that silly idea.
Secondly, dual-prop is only "out" in your world, probably due to the narrow 0.0 "optimal fitting" mind set. As I said above, a single MWD burst is more than enough to catch most things and once a hostile MWD is killed your AB ensures you a 2+:1 speed ratio against it - and that ratio is when webbed mind you.
As for speed, Cpt. Branko's suggestion to decrease mass does so much more than just add speed. It gives better agility for lower smoother orbits, it gives better acceleration, it gives better speeds regardless of prop-mod used and lastly it differentiates the assaults from their T1 brethren.
Lastly, a solution like the proposed AB buff will only serve to magnify the power of a couple of AF's while the rest will still have to use MWD to do their jobs efficiently making it a very poor option.
All this has been discussed to death throughout this thread and CCP apparently decided to test some of our claims and found them to be true enough to make them evaluate other options.
For reference:
Frigates got a large (25% I think it was) mass reduction in Quantum Rise resulting in roughly 50% speed increases across all hulls when using any form of propulsion.
Very few actually noticed because T1 frigates were practically useless before, but together with lower speeds of larger hulls, new scramblers and the web decrease it made a huge impact on frigate viability.
|
Kitsu Shadow
Caldari
Twisted Legion
|
Posted - 2009.10.26 10:19:00 -
[570]
"Most properly fitted and flown AF can kill any and all cruiser and above targets as it is now, unless the target ship expects it and fits accordingly."
Obviously
"You are actually criticising something you have obviously never tried, quite some balls on you."
Correction, i have tried dual prop on countless occasions. The issue with dual prop is the limited powergrid that you have remaining after fitting an AB and MWD. Even with complex ABs and MWDs its very limited. Also many fits, such as the Jaguar and Wolf can't fit dual prop. The Jag loses its Invul T2, Named Medium Shield Extender, AB, and Scram setup and the Wolf only has two med slots which go to AB + Scram.
"Vengeance, Jaguar and Ishkur ALL make exceptional scramblers using dual-prop, a single overheated MWD burst is enough to catch most anything even Vagabonds if done correctly. They still go 4-500m/s when webbed on AB, no medium gun has a hope in hell of hitting that inside 2-3km."
Vengance is a weak alternative to the Retri, Jag can comprise its fit, the ishkur is the only exception due to its awesome 3, 3, 4 config. Course no med gun will hit however drones will hit a webbed AF hard enough to force it to disengage.
"First of all, mass ratings have NOTHING to do with armour amount, don't know where you got that silly idea."
Mass and Armor amounts are directly related. If CCP magically reduces the already low mass of an AF to an amount that necessary to double their speed their mass would have to be reduced by 50%. I don't think thats a valid option in CCPs mind. However, if you read my post in full you would have read the mention of a role bonus to AFs that reduces the mass increase bonus of the AB. That would seem more like a valid option to reduce mass.
"Secondly, dual-prop is only "out" in your world, probably due to the narrow 0.0 "optimal fitting" mind set."
U need to stop assuming my thoughts. That doesn't allow for very constructive discussion. Dual prop is not viable on these ships. Jaguar, Wolf, Enyo, Retri, due to slot config or standard fitting configs and limits the fits on the Harpy and Hawk. The vengance isn't a valid PvP option unless ur only chasing other frigs. That basically leaves the Ishkur making it OP if dual prop becomes the norm.
"As for speed, Cpt. Branko's suggestion to decrease mass does so much more than just add speed. It gives better agility for lower smoother orbits, it gives better acceleration, it gives better speeds regardless of prop-mod used and lastly it differentiates the assaults from their T1 brethren."
I've responded to this three times now. Honestly read my post b4 suggesting something i already suggested. FOR THE RECORD. A ROLE BONUS TO THE ASSAULT SHIP SKILL THAT REDUCES THE MASS INCREASE BONUS OF THE AFTERBURNER IS, IMO, THE MOST VALID OPTION. REDUCING THE MASS BONUS WILL ALLOW THE AF TO GO FASTER AND BE MORE AGILE. BASICALLY, IF CCP REMOVED THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS CAUSED BY USING AN AFTERBURNER THEN THE AF WILL HAVE ITS SPEED BOOST WITHOUT DIRECTLY PROVIDING A SPEED BONUS AND IT WILL KEEP THE MASS LOW ENOUGH TO MAKE THE AF MORE AGILE. ALLOWING IT TO MANTAIN STANDARD MANUEVERABILITY. That seems to solve the majority of complaints i've read from users in this thread.
Lastly, a solution like the proposed AB buff will only serve to magnify the power of a couple of AF's while the rest will still have to use MWD to do their jobs efficiently making it a very poor option.
What do u mean by this comment? The AB bonus will carry over all the AFs, if one AF is inatly better than another this bonus isn't going to change that.
For reference:
Frigates got a large (25% I think it was) mass reduction in Quantum Rise resulting in roughly 50% speed increases across all hulls when using any form of propulsion.
Very few actually noticed because T1 frigates were practically useless before, but together with lower speeds of larger hulls, new scramblers and the web decrease it made a huge impact on frigate viability.
Cont. Post 2
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |