| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Abrazzar
    |
Posted - 2008.03.08 13:13:00 -
[31]
The boring option would be to make them mini marauders. 100% damage bonus, fewer turrets, more utility slots, more cargo. The perfect ship for.... lvl 1 and 2 missions. 
--------
Ideas for:
Mining
Clouds
|
Mymain DreadMoros
|
Posted - 2008.03.08 18:40:00 -
[32]
A good video showing the type of damage that assault ships can take.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYlDLwnwQu4
|
Nidus
Caldari
The JORG Corporation
Terra Incognita.
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 15:55:00 -
[33]
I personally like the thought of a combination of "Mobile squad command: can fit 1 warfare link"* for the long range ships and "Frigate logistics: increase survival rate of frigates with logistics" for the close range AF's.
For the long range ones you could assume that the warfare link bonus is a cap related one rather than efficiency one (so to not take the role of Command Ships), so the long range AF's can take on the roles of "filler" ships for bonuses in large fleets or provide a high mobility warfare link platform for smaller/faster moving gangs.
And a single small remote rep (or so) on a frigate size vessel shouldn't be anywhere near rivaling a logistics cruiser, but the synergy between remote repairs and other small ships initiate speed**/sig defense would be of an great use for most situations.
*: May it be necessary to limit the types of warfare links that can be fit?
**: AF's, speed and defense: Afaik, AF's were given their current mass so that they would not interfere with, or take over the role, of interceptors by becoming a higher resist versions of 'ceptors and that is fully understandable. But for the purpose of their own defense I'd suggest looking at AF's agility and maybe increasing it so that they can maintain a higher orbit speed while keeping their current max speed.
-------------------
(::) - This is a cookie with chocolate chips, and it's mine! If you disagree; these are my teeth ';..;'
(E6750 C2D@2,67GHz, 3gb@667Mhz, 1950Pro 512MB)
|
BlondieBC
Minmatar
Rising Knights
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.03.09 21:17:00 -
[34]
Give 4th bonus, a role bonus, 15% chance per lvl of assualt frigate that ewar module used against fails to function that cycle. Move assualt one of the assault frigate bonuses to frigate bonus if possible. This would make the ship an excellent gate camp runner, and anti-support frigate. The damage they do would be tought on logistics ships, the blackbird, and ewar frigates.
This also give a big bonus to those who are willing to train to level 5 in assualt frigate.
I would consider making the 15% per level also apply to warp bubbles.
|
isdisco3
Veto.
Veto Corp
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 14:50:00 -
[35]
Edited by: isdisco3 on 10/03/2008 14:55:07
Edited by: isdisco3 on 10/03/2008 14:51:29
FOR OP - bonus to web range and capacitor usage per level.
I think 1 of each race's AF's should get a bonus to web capacitor use and web range, just as 1 of each race's inties got a bonus to disruptor range. The bonus to web range should not put them anywhere near on par with the specialized minmatar recons, and should be calibrated to put them a little under a maxed out hyena pilot so as to not make that ship useless.
The problem with AF's is that there's nothing they do that inties or cruisers can't do, better. Cruisers will always do more dps with more tank, and inties have the zoomy fast tackler role down pat. I think AF's should fill a new role - that of anti-drone support.
At present to fight droneswarms, you either have to be in a smartbombing ship or have one of the specialized minmatar web-ships (Rapier, Hugin, Hyena) applying multiple webs to multiple targets and then using their medium-sized (exception on the hyena) turrets to shoot drones with significantly smaller signature radius. I think we should take advantage of the fact that AF's are frigates with small resolution guns, give them a bonus to web range and cap use, and make them anti-drone support ships.
They won't be as fast as inties because they won't need to be, they won't do a ton of dps because they won't need to. They won't be uber tankers, because to be honest tanking a frigate is a bit silly in my opinion. And they won't be DPS machines, because again they're frigates. They'll just web and pop drones.
|
Ellaine TashMurkon
CBC Interstellar
The Unseen Company
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 15:05:00 -
[36]
Web bonus.
AB speed bonus bonus.
Increase sig resolution on lowsec gate sentries.
This makes AF a good gate-side ceptor because it locs fast, moves reasonably fast and can tank those sentries for a moment (unlike inty on MWD)
 |
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 21:52:00 -
[37]
List updated. Good stuff here, keep it coming please.
If a mod/dev sees this, would they mind removing everything between my 1st and 2nd posts so I can extend the list later on?
My research services
Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats |
Kazuo Ishiguro
House of Marbles
Zzz
|
Posted - 2008.03.10 22:02:00 -
[38]
isdisco3: I like the drone killer idea, but it'd need to be restricted in some way so that it only worked vs. drones. There are already other ships that do the same thing as what you've proposed, so this would need to be highly specialised and better than those ships at its job.
Some sort of AoE AF-only module that reduced drone agility within a 15km radius might be interesting.
My research services
Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats |
Tarron Sarek
Gallente
Cadien Cybernetics
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 01:34:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Tarron Sarek on 11/03/2008 01:35:43
Originally by: isdisco3
The problem with AF's is that there's nothing they do that inties or cruisers can't do, better.
You could say basically the same about Heavy Assault Ships and Battlecruisers/Battleships.
The problem with AF's is that they gain only marginally from being T2, but at the same time suffer some real harsh penalties. They are frigates, but they lose speed and gain a lot of mass.
AF's are actually heavier than destroyers and most of them are slower with an AB fitted, than a cruiser with one.
That's just wrong. If the added mass was due to the increased hitpoints and resistances, the same should apply to HAC's, but it doesn't. Most HAC's are even faster than their T1 counterparts.
Both AF's and HAC's are assault versions of Tech1 ships. It would make sense if they followed roughly the same concept.
I don't like the idea of a role bonus or roles as such.
Ships being pressed into one role may lead to EVE becoming kind of a class based system, which, from my point of view, is not desirable, as it conflicts with the game-concept.
___________________________________
- Balance is power, guard it well -
Please stop using the word 'nerf'
Nothing spells 'incompetence' or 'don't take me serious' like those four letters |
Arturus Vex
Macabre Votum
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 04:19:00 -
[40]
new role: BOOOM
Give AFs a mini-DDD
|
|
Mr Mozzie
Evolution
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 05:47:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Tarron Sarek
The problem with AF's is that they gain only marginally from being T2, but at the same time suffer some real harsh penalties. They are frigates, but they lose speed and gain a lot of mass.
AF's are actually heavier than destroyers and most of them are slower with an AB fitted, than a cruiser with one.
That's just wrong. If the added mass was due to the increased hitpoints and resistances, the same should apply to HAC's, but it doesn't. Most HAC's are even faster than their T1 counterparts.
Both AF's and HAC's are assault versions of Tech1 ships. It would make sense if they followed roughly the same concept.
That is a pretty good point. Why should assault frigates be the dump trucks of eve when we have 7000m/s vagabonds blasting around everywhere? Assault frigates could easily be given equal mass (instead of 50% more) to their T1 counterparts (just like the heavy assault ships). They could also benefit from a slight velocity boost so that they can reach say 3-4000m/s with T2 overdrives and mwd. Thus they wouldn't be quite as fast as ceptors, but would have the mobility and speed to be at least semi useful in pvp and be superior in some respects to T1 cruisers.
|
Mithfindel
Argent Group
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 13:26:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Mithfindel on 11/03/2008 13:28:03
A few ideas:
(1)
Another dull version would be to make the Assault Ships just "big frigates": Modify the resources (PG, CPU, cap) so that they can easily fit and use the most powerful equipment available to frigates. Specially if their slots are leaved as-is, their usefulness is quite limited.
(2)
The gunnery-dependent versions might also make interceptor-killers by having a tracking bonus and an optimal bonus, though this leaves very little space for, say, a damage bonus. And also makes them more expensive and slightly more durable destroyers.
(3)
On regards of speed, they could have a base speed (and possibly even further mass) increase, meaning that they gain less from AB/MWD, but are inherently faster. This might require them to be more agile, to offset the bigger mass while maneuvering. If balanced right, this would mean that their speed using the MWD is about the same, but their base speed without would be slightly better. That said, speed is generally the domain of the Interceptor classes - AF:s should in my opinion have rather punching power.
(4)
Flat gang bonus. An Assault Ship, due to its highly-sophisticated C3I systems tuned for small ship combat, gives a small bonus to the gang's Frigate-sized (frigate hulls, destroyer hulls) per level. What I'm thinking of is a bonus similar to those in the Titans, applied only to Frigate and Destroyer hulls. Amarr: 7.5 % to capacitor recharge, Minmatar: Reduction to signature radius, Gallente: Armor HP bonus, Caldari: Shield HP bonus. (These are what we have in the Titans now - the same bonuses are not necessarily good for Frigates. Specially the Gallente and Caldari bonuses might need some better examination.)
(5)
Damage. Make the resistance bonus built in, as in the Heavy Assault Ships. Replace with a damage or rate of fire bonus to make an interesting wolfpack ship, possibly combined with Marauderisation (removing turrets, giving 100 % damage bonus to begin with).
|
Garr Anders
Minmatar
Eve University
Ivy League
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 15:17:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Nidus
Edited by: Nidus on 09/03/2008 16:07:52
I personally like the thought of a combination of "Mobile squad command: can fit 1 warfare link"* for the long range ships and "Frigate logistics: increase survival rate of frigates with logistics" for the close range AF's.
Not to derail the thread to much, but IMHO this should be long to tech II/ tier III type destroyers.
I like the anti Ewar/web resistances/follow into warp ideas.
Upping their defensive capabilities while not using speed/nanoing would differ them from intercepters/nano tacklers and maybe make them worth using over the simple tech I frigs.
-----
Garr Anders
|
Kejoga
|
Posted - 2008.03.11 15:22:00 -
[44]
Edited by: Kejoga on 11/03/2008 15:23:08
Perhaps the way to address Assault Frigates is not in looking for a new role for them, or even changing the base stats of them. Maybe the way to improve them is give more advanced skills to those that fly Assault Frigates.
As a pre-requisite (spelling?), the user must complete Assault Frigates V. If they do, new skills open up
Advanced Assault Frigate Shielding + 4% shields per level
Advanced Assualt Frigate Armor + 4% armor per level
Advanced Assault Frigate Capacity + 4% Capacity per level
Advanced Assault Frigate Capacity Recharge + 4% Capacity Recharge rate
Advanced Assault Frigate Shield Recharge + 4% Shield Recharge Rate
Advanced Assault Frigate Damage - +4% to all damage types per level
Advanced Assault Frigate Speed - +4% to speed of ship
Don't find a new role for them, just make them the "sturgy frigates built for all out combat" they were meant to be. It would take a long time to get through all those skills, and if you focused on Assault Frigates, you would not really have the time to focus on other skill types. But if you did, you would have a nice durable little ship.
|
Avalira
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 04:29:00 -
[45]
How about this idea for boosting AF's?
-------------
|
Kejoga
|
Posted - 2008.03.13 14:14:00 -
[46]
how about all Assault Frigates get a BAROOGA horn? Or maybe that horn that plays "Dixie" like the General Lee from the Dukes of Hazzard
|
Anas Damona
|
Posted - 2008.03.14 05:36:00 -
[47]
How about a role bonus that affects sentry guns and drones? Something like 50% penalty to tracking of hostile 'automated' weapon systems. This would give them better survivability against drone defenses and make them ideal as pirate ships.
|
Javon Bars
FinFleet
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2008.03.18 02:53:00 -
[48]
Based on the hilariously fun day when BoB attacked a cynojammer with assfrigs how about:
The (POS) Assault Frigate
Role Bonus: 99% damage reduction from AoE effects (smartbombs, bombs, DDs)
Role Bonus: 500% damage bonus vs anchored structures (or something like that, exact number would obviously require serious study)
The missing bonus turns into -5% sig radius per level
If two role bonuses are too much, make the missing bonus be something to 100% per skill level and reduce the ship's base sig radius for the same effect.
This would make assfrigs awesome at incapacitating cynojammers and POS modules in general while making them hard to kill by AoE attacks and the reduced sig if paired with an AB would make BSs have trouble hitting them, forcing the defensive forces to use small and medium sized ships to counter them.
Plus they'd be living up to their name, as they'd be doing some hardcore assaulting, the kind that only capital ships can surpass.
|
Segge Bolled
Caldari
Dirty Sexy Pilots
New Age Solutions Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2008.05.08 00:13:00 -
[49]
While I think a stasis webifier resistance bonus could be interesting, I'd actually prefer to see an energy neutraliser/nosferatu resistance (or even an immunity) bonus put in place instead.
While being webbed isn't very much fun for a small ship that usually has the advantages of speed to help it survive, though in my opinion (and experience) having no capacitor left is even worse - especially for an Assault Frigate. For the most part the Assault Frigate would seem to be intended for space battle committed at close quarters and therefore working well under the range of these threats but they simply can't (under the present designs) hope to survive them.
I can see it being an issue for a Interceptor to get webbed down to the point of being unable to coast clear, but I would have thought an Assault Frigate - having as it does a little bit more of a (physical) tank than an Interceptor - should be able to sit there (if it gets caught) and at least last long enough to make good use of those damage bonuses it has while it can.
The other thing I'd like to see is a boost of Assault Frigate maneuverability back towards the T1 Frigate levels. As they stand now, a T1 cruiser with moderate fittings and pilot skills would appear to be a better, more flexible investment for a pilot to make in terms of PvP application because for all their armor resists and weapon bonuses an Assault Frigate is far, far easier for a sub-Capital such as a Battleship or Battlecruiser to knock out quickly when the Assault Frigate stumbles (or is pushed) into neutraliser or nosferatu ranges.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |