Cannot wait for this to come out soon!
Yes, but they can be countered. You cannot counter instant application artillery volleying things off grid. Which was the problem with the Muninn, hence it being reworked.
Missile counters are not new, we did firewalls back in 2012 and iâm sure it existed before then. People know how to do it and its been done before.
Define LR on a Missile HAC with no range bonuses. Because even a HML Muninn with no range mods is 62.9km. The old Arty Muninn could shoot reliably past 100km. Sounds like HML Muninn is better balanced with the ranges CCP is looking for. Not to mention the targeting range has been brought down, so even if you wanted to try to snipe with the Muninn, you need a missile range mod and a targeting range mod which will be losses in tank or dps.
Volley will always be a thing in this and THB Most competitive PVP games. Nuking an opponent before they have time to react is just good tactics, and if thatâs why your trying to remove from the game then have fun destroying EVE. If its not the Muninn then it will be another ship and then we will have to nerf that and the next and continue down the line until ships deal so little damage that it REQUIRES a fleet for ships to kill one another. No matter how much you reduce the damage adding people will always result in doctrines which can instant volley ships off the field.
1 Like
The thing you arenât understanding here is that the Muninn and specifically 720âs make the ease of access to highly competitive volley doctrines extremely high.
At best, a HML doctrine for missile Muninn is going to have a volley of 2500-2700 using fury missiles, but youâll have application issues and range issues. So if you want range, you use faction missiles, which have a volley of 2250-2400.
Whereas a 720 Muninn using standard faction ammo has a volley of 3120-3200 that applies instantly and since the Muninn has a tracking bonus, as long as your target isnât sitting on top of you, you are hitting them.
You cannot realistically TD an entire fleet of Muninns. You can realistically firewall missiles. Even if your firewall is 50% effective, you are halving the incoming volleys. They also wonât be hitting instantly like artillery or gun based doctrines, they will filing in which means its wonât be a sudden massive hit, but a build-up of hits, which logi can react and potentially save the ship.
Eagles could replace Muninns, but they have significantly lower alpha and they are damage locked. So you can just counter-fit with Thermal/Kin hardeners. Eagles also arenât cap stable (have to use a cap booster) and are significantly slower.
720 Muninns had everything and there were no direct counters. Instead of doing another 5% reduction like CCP has been doing the past 5 years, its been reworked because its clear to anyone with critical thinking, that a ship that can easily fit 720âs should not exist in the cruiser line-up. And instead of making two vagabonds, the projectile role has been shifted to the vagabond and the Muninn reworked.
1 Like
Still just seems like a smack in the face and easy way out of an actually effective rework/ balance.
Everyone keeps bringing up the volley amount and high tracking as the real issues.
Why not just target those issues instead of a complete 360? Iâm not just trying to complain because I donât like changes to my favorite ship I donât think I have ever even flow the Muninn. I just prefer adding variety rather than shoe horning things. I know you are a very experienced null player I just cant see this as the best and only way to fix the Muninn.
Lower number of turrets, reduce damage bonus, change damage bonuses to something unique to this ship, reload time bonus or something perhaps, overload damage reduction who knows. Just anything other than a complete 360. Lets change the Abaddon to shield tank next.
1 Like
They did, by making the vagabond the primary projectile ship. Which doesnât have a tracking bonus and has actual fitting sacrifices to fit 720âs, unlike the Muninn which fits everything with just using a low for a PDU (which also increases tank and cap efficiency).
Lets say we kept the Muninn projectile for the sake of the argument. So we want to remove the tracking bonus, lower the fitting, nerf the tank and change the optimal bonus to falloff. Cool, youâve just made the vagabond, but in a different hull.
Instead of CCP having to rework two ships from the ground up, CCP has buffed 1 ship ever so slightly (the vagabond) and reworked the other into a new format (the Muninn).
As some others have said, this wonât affect the engagement range of ishtars, the thing controlling that is the drone control range, which can easily be pushed past 120km. The drone control range should really be decreased along with the targeting range to ensure Ishtars have a similar range profile to the rest of the HACs after these changes.
Fit the ship with Caldari Shield Extenders and Caldari Shield Power Relay. Jump into a Pulsar. Look at the Regen Rate.
Without the Pulsar its pretty crazy as is. It was something that concerned me about the balance of the Navy Cyclone.
We have been playing with some rather crazy fits for events including one that had polarized weapons. We found we could passive regen at rates that normally wouldnât be possible.
Outside of PulsarâŚas I said. Caldari ships have more depth to their shields. But Minmatar Shields are just right that their full recharge rate is faster and lower if you tinker with it. Try it out, its a rather interesting thing. Add Shield Purgers to the Rig Slots. There is also an implant set that also increases this rate of regen even further. 1K to 3K depending on situation and set up. Luckily for now we donât have alot of Abyssal materials outside of Shield Extenders.
Pulsars really help regen rates for Minmatar Ships and CaldariâŚbut Minmatar ships seem to benefit more. Add Shield Command and it gets even wonker.
Solo Plays.
So a very different perspective altogether. Apparently you havenât kept up with the news right? With the Project Synergy tests?
My guy, ainât no one gonna be deploying âishtar ballsâ and trying to shootie people with sentry drones.
We get it, you hate the ish.
Please stop waffleposting with you and your alts LOL.
1 Like
Why go to that extreme though? Yes if you give the Muninn the same bonus types as the Vagabond optimal vs falloff and removing the tracking speed bonus your essentially creating the Vagabond in a different hull. So donât do that. Just lower them. Bring the optimal down bring the damage down and lower the tracking. You say they have been doing this for the past few years obviously it has not been enough.
OrâŚyou could just fly a Broadsword instead since you seem to care more about having guns on a Rupture hull than with HACs being changed.
Love to see the changes to HACâs, they should be brawling ships IMO, especially given they have the ADC. However, the Ishtar is by far going to be the longest range hac, by easily double. Sentry drone range + the Drone control range bonus on the hull means they can shoot stupidly far away, as long as they have someone in fleet to use as a drone bunny. Would be cool to see them get a bonus for being close range and lose the drone control range bonus, though preferably without making them even better at afking anoms and things.
1 Like
@Stitch_Kaneland I have yet to see your argument pertaining to the synergy of certain implants and boosters with the Muninn and its equipment nor its skill affects.
I made sure when I started testing ships to start by getting the turret support skills to V. But also I am currently finishing up the missile support skills.
These are skills that further bonus the damage, tracking, range of turrets. [falloff and optimal] The main argument here should be the discussion between what types of items are affecting the muninn more than others.
I am not hearing a single peep out of the guys over abyssal equipment which further skews the muninn stats further! And this is another area I think CCP needs to reign in. Everyone is griping about âflat Muninnâ in nullsec space. I own a Muninn I have done posts on some absolutely wonky fits for the ship and what you can do with it. Nullsec blobbers have kind of made the Muninn unable to shine in other materials like combat sites, abyss, or even in high level missions. Because its the ride of F1 Monkey Syndrome.
@Xzanos I could live with a Muninn being 2 Turret -4/5 Missile [But the nullsec Purists will never let that happen. Because they hate mixed weapon systems because that makes hard countering nearly impossible.] I could live with a 4 Turret - 2 Launcher Muninn. And I agree that there are better options to the problem than just going nerf hammer.
@CCP_Aurora
I would argue since the new navy cruisers now mean there is three hulls. Maybe there should be a concerted effort to make a third hull of HAC? Its probably one of the better way to break up the skills and bonuses and do something unique among three hulls versus trying to always tweak only two hulls of a class. It means that you can make a mixed hull and then have straight/majority turret-missile hulls. Each with their own unique properties or surprises. Each empire should have 3 HAC hulls.
The problem with the HAC Meta is the fact that its only a duopoly only two selections. And this is why the Muninn was selected because its weapons donât take capâŚmore for MWD/Tank/Local Rep. âAlphaâ strike was very high for what it is. [Although players in game swear up and down by dps.] And range for targeting was okay. Although I always laugh at nullsec doctrine fits because they are no where close to the full power of a Muninn. And the resist profile and EHP were almost perfectly balanced. And a bit freakishly high for what it should be.
Its not the hull thats broken its the players and their strategies. Now we could possibly work on ways to make mass deployment of a ship more problematic. Personally AOE weaponry seems to be my first choice, but the ship has been built in mass for some time so its kind of a moot point. [I hope you make the hull cost for allegiance skins for it highâŚjust to eat up some of the ship stocks. 
]
But to me the blob fighting in nullsec is basically the same as linear warfare. CCP needs to change some of the fighting mechanics in space so blob fighting isnât just two lines of ships lining up like in 1700s European warfare and plinking at each other. Yawn, boring. I want raids, I want sabotage, I want blitzkrieg, I want ambushes, do we have that in EVE Online? Not reallyâŚyou can argue almost everything is there. But you guys are 100km off each other instead of fully taking advantage of a 10K km grid that is possible. Linear fighting, when space is 3D [three dimensional] although we have to be fair CCP really hasnât allowed us to dedicate exact amounts of capacitor to warp to. And can we get the manual throttle worked on? I despise trying to tune my ship speed on a very tiny line. Yes and speeds do affect how effective a ship is.
1 Like
This reads as someone who at most participated in fleet fights but never had to command them. Most of the strategy occurs off of fleet comms and performed by experienced players, anchor pilots, scouts, etc. When herding the cats of most EVE players (the F1 warriors as it were) all they need to do is follow orders, the FC and their âstaffâ perform tasks to get the fleet where it needs to be and figures out the how. Raids, sabotage, blitzs, etc DO happen and DO affect the outcome, but Joe Shmoe fleet member isnât going to hear about it except maybe after the fact.
Because there is no point in engaging you because 99.9% of your posts are about niche conditions which are in no way realistic of how things work in game. Like, one of your posts was about a torpedo muninn. I think anyone here, even a 6 month old new player can realize you have no idea what youâre talking about. Its a waste of time to discuss things with you because you seem to be hyper focused on combining stats to the extreme with no regard to the rest of the ship.
If you have a problem with the Muninnâs bonuses, look at the Sac. It has exactly the same missile turret layout and bonuses, why are you not complaining about it? I swear, you just see a new ship, fill its lows with damage mods and then complain about it.
Iâm not here to delve into the depths of what is the equivalent of a newbro posting about how fast he can make a slasher with a 50mn MWD and how that is broken.
2 Likes
Because that is what it needs to be properly balanced.
You need to consider dev time into the factor. CCP very rarely rebalances ships, so if we want rebalances that are effective, we want the devs to have to spend as little time as possible making the changes without unnecessary time rebuilding two ships, when they can just do a minor stat tweak to one ship and a rework to the other ship that actually needs it. This means they can spend more time on other ships that need a more thorough rework.
The values you used as an example are so low, there isnât even a point to having them anymore. You need to change more than just the range bonuses and the tracking bonuses. You need to change the EHP, the grid, the cap regen, the targeting range. All of these things which are all conveniently already done with the vagabond. Nothing the devs need to change.
At this point your argument doesnât really even sound like its focused on HAC balance, its just focused on âI want the Muninn hull to be projectilesâ. I dunno what else to tell you, if thats what you want, fly the Broadsword like @Malak_Starfire mentioned, which also happens to be far more balanced than the Muninn with 720âs (because surprise, it doesnât have an optimal or tracking bonus, its slower and is less cap efficient).
that isnt new or limited to things with plate mass reduction, the flycatcher can get the same speeds with 200k+ ehp
If the NeX gets the plate reduction you might be able to get that ship to fit BS level [large] Abyssal Armor Plates which will probably put its tank into BC level territory. If not low level Battleship EHP.
It already could, the difference is now it doesnt lose a tonne of speed for it, syndicate 1600mm plates are ideal for it, you can get an 80k+ ehp buffer while rocking 4k/s with links
cruisers being able to get large ehp pools isnt new, nor is it broken
Thatâs what makes them op, rapid lights already do perfect application to frigs no reason to do it from 100kms they need to be at some risk of being tackled themselves for the balance to be good I like these changes and nerfs to ranges.
Now if only Jackdawâs light missiles ranges where reduced a bit (Missile speed), nothing more oppressive than flying tackle into a jackdaw fleet.
@CCP_Aurora
Are there any updates or good changes to the Corax? The Corax has been under performing and is always maxed out on power-grid and CPU for a good fit, plus itâs quite slow for a destroyer in my opinion. Increase in CPU, power-grid and damage affect would give it much needed attention. Thanks