Sorry for the reddit link.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/74y983/vegas_proposed_afhac_module_assault_damage_control/
Also note that the proposed stats for the assault DC have only 60-75% of the passive resistances of a regular damage control - 30% hull instead of 40%, 10% armor instead of 15%, 7.5% shield instead of 12.5% (actually equal to a damage control I) - so it’ll be worse than a normal damage control when it’s not active.
So instead of working on rebalance and improvements CCP wastes yet more time on thinking up new modules. Instead of pushing work hard on things the community has been commenting, criticizing and feedbacking about for years, CCP chooses flashy new complications over improvements to the game.
And in addition, they now not only introduce another level of unnecessary complication, they also revert a previously made reasonable decision to turn the pretty much unavoidable DC passive to reduce unnecessary clicks and give passive resists to “not have to fit a DC for some hull resists”. Now they introduce a pretty much unavoidable module because it provides extreme bonuses. What is this charade?
Do you ever not bitch about CCP?
Excellent idea CCP have come up with in my opinion.
Thumbs up!
Lately? Not really. Except for karkur, they don’t really do anything that’s not worth criticizing. They only throw around boastful but empty phrases and don’t follow through.
As said, instead of wasting time on such a module, which objectively goes counter a lot of things they said about DC in the past, they should have focused on all the issues listed in the highest ranking comment in that reddit topic. I can’t remember anyone having asked for or voiced interest in a new damage control module. Can you remember such a person? What I can remember, however, are countless people constantly complaining about uselessness of AF and HAC, about issues with BS, about weapon module issue, people are even eagerly waiting for the coming trainwreck tiericide of the remaining modules and weapons. Not to mention remaining issues with existing structures that ruin gameplay all over EVE, and have I started talking about the map yet? No, because new players get accustomed to a trainwreck of a map and CCP does not put the necessary effort into fixing this trainwreck for good. And none of that are new issues, they are years old issues that CCP is aware off and ignores. CCP could have garnered a lot of positive feedback for finally turning to these issues with full steam ahead and not just “next year”. They also said that last year and the year before last year. Do you see what I mean?
The module sounds vaguely interesting to some extend, but this is nothing CCP should work on at this moment. It solves no issues whatsoever and instead creates new issues. There are so many things that need change and improvement, but you get an Emergency Hull Energizer for sub capital ships instead. You tell me why I should not criticize that development approach.
Wall of Text.
You always bitch about CCP. You have a serious bias against them. There is no hint anywhere, that you are actually capable of giving the things they do at least a second thought. Instead, all i observe from you is endless bitching, no matter what. If there are one or two posts where you aren’t, then i apologize for having missed them, but they drown in comparison.
What the people want is, quite frankly, irrelevant in 90% of all cases, so saying “no one asked for this” is pretty useless. I very well understand that this is just a band-aid, but they know more about how it would influence the AF game than we do. I am very well aware that CCP mostly reacts when ■■■■ gets close to hitting the fan, and they often enough only do band-aids or pretend to listen to the players.
No matter what, though, your rationalization of your constant bitching doesn’t change that you are bitching about CCP, all the time, and you’re either completely unaware of the fact that it only serves you to get all the hate out of yourself, or you deliberately bitch, because that’s all you actually care about.
Why not stop the absolutely useless, self serving bitching, and start doing something productive instead, like taking your bitching into the game, where it actually matters? What you’re doing is the equivalent of writing angry letters to newspapers, hoping they get printed, so everyone knows how angry you are. It’s self serving and accomplishes nothing.
You have enough bitching in you, that you can take it into the game and become a political activist. That’s the one thing CCP always has understood, andit’s the one thing that most people completely ignore, because all they want is having their bitching be heard by everyone.
I feel like this is going to be interesting, this will surely give those ships some more distinction between other hulls!
bzzzzt, wrong.
CCP are working on rebalance and improvements. Which you’d know, if you watched the stream.
What they’re doing is creating a new module for 2 specific hull types, for a specific effect.
This isn’t “change the DC for everyone”, it’s “Give a ship class a new option.” They don’t need to fit these. They could fit the entire passive one.
But you just want to complain.
If this is not a reason to “■■■■■” all the time about the state of things, what is? Getting constantly served with “band-aids” and staved off till next year™ instead of real solutions, what else would you “■■■■■” about? To be quite honest, that people are satisfied with “band-aids” is rather troublesome.
How much more productive can my “bitching” possibly be than constructively criticizing CCP’s work on their very own forums? Where “in the game” does “bitching” about, for instance, things others outlined in that linked reddit topic actually matter? Participating in the CSM? The organization that is more known for its scandals and inefficiency than productivity?
I give you that, though: My bitching is entirely self-serving. I do not want EVE being dismantled and to that end I “■■■■■” about anything that goes into this direction, while at the same time there are so many things to make the game better as a whole.
Furthermore, I give all the things CCP announces that concern my gameplay a lot of second thought. But it always circles back to the negativity because CCP leaves open glaring issues in their developments. And then they maintain and cultivate the issues for an extended period of time until they decide that people had enough fun with their imbalanced, overpowered toys and grab the nerf bat. That resulted in a lot of backlash for the carrier changes, the rorqual changes, the Ishtar changes, the T3D changes. Completely and avoidable backlashes, if you ask me. And guess what the T3C are still OP and even more so than before and they will also need a nerfbat soon. And CCP will listen after people got used to their excellent Cloaky-Nullified Smarty Lokies, their Arty or Missile Loki fleets, their extremely powerful Drone Proteii and so on. You will probably again see only bitching because you are such a sunshine, and you are probably also right in that constructive criticism will not achieve a lot. But then what’s the problem doing it? 
While I understand that you are worried about the constant negativity being thrown at CCP all the time, you are not very coherent in defending them.
@Steve_Ronuken Yes, I see that they work on balancing and changes. That does not change the issue that this module appears to be thrown out on its own without properly supporting platforms. As said before: This module is vaguely interesting. Coupled with actual changes to the ships these modules may or may not be limited to, so that you can actually use these ships even without this module, it would have a much greater positive impact than just this module thrown out on its own. You know, positive synergies. Without the changes, however, it very likely ends up in the same category as Target Breakers because Jackdaws and Lokis still vastly outperform Hawks and Muninns.
…
The presentation literally stated they were going to be making other balance changes to the ships.
Which are going to be released with this module or is this module going to show up on its own first?
It’s part of the same balance pass.
“Fixing” things by adding a new (bandage) module is horse ■■■■. Someone suggested an “assault module” on the old forums and was (imo, rightly) crucified.
Giving AFs mobility parity with the base hulls is a great step, but a resistance module isn’t going to address the other main weakness that AFs have- weakness to every form of ewar- from forced operation within medium/heavy neut range to poor sensor strength and lock range. A single heavy neut will alpha a frigate capacitor on the first cycle, where is the counterplay? An activated module is worthless when you haven’t got the cap to use it, or your rep module for that matter.
I predict the bandage module isn’t going to be useful on AFs due to the pathetic repping power of small modules. Nanofibers or istabs would likely give a(n assault) frigate more survivability than an activated DC would.
A new module doesn’t make fitting issues better, it makes them worse because you have to devote a slot to a mandatory bandage module. AFs have got extremely tight slotting to begin with- worsening this with a new module sounds like a poor solution to me.
On HACs, the proposed module isn’t a horrible idea, largely because medium repping mods actually have a reasonable amount of repair capacity, and HACs aren’t as slot limited as AFs are, or as likely to fall victim to cap warfare. I still think a well thought out role bonus would be a better approach here as well, but it could work since HACs don’t suffer the same drawbacks AFs do.
So about role bonuses, and making AFs desirable hulls.
Why not give AFs strong ewar resistance as a role bonus? This has already been tested (in a limited manner) with T3ds. This way AFs can operate within heavy/medium neut range without being dead in the water, as well as being the go-to ewar screen for fleet use; I feel this is a good fit as an AF has enough dps to put serious pressure on an ewar cruiser without just instapopping it.
Been suggesting this role for years and I’m honestly curious as to why CCP always declines to comment on the idea.
Unless there is something wrong with these then I think saying “There is no counterplay to all these electronic warfare” when there actually are is a bit… You know… Pointless, people just need to, you know, use them or risk suffering consequences. Risk/Reward right? Besides, you’re talking frigate against Battleship, it is more than obvious that will happen because of the sheer potency that a ship much bigger than a frigate can have, what did you expect? You will not even see cruisers with Heavy Neuts.
Try this on a Retribution or a Wolf, or a Zealot or Muninn for instance. Or even on ships with lots of mids like the Cerberus.
You seem to be assuming I’m new here. Cap batteries are great, especially when they are oversized. There is a solid market for faction large cap batteries, the volume sold for mediums, smalls, and micro cap batteries is typically an order of magnitude lower, though.
What I’m saying here is they don’t get used because unless they are oversized, they don’t help much vs neut pressure, and AFs as an entire class are light on mids to begin with, making a cap battery an even less attractive fitting option. I’m aware there are fitting counters, and I really like the eccm script they added to the sebo, and consequently, am more likely to fit a sebo on the offchance I have a spare mid. Derailing the train here, though.
As a frigate pilot, you are expected to tackle anything, including battleships that might have a neut fit in the utility high. I’m not talking about a hypothetical 1v1 between an AF and a BS, I’m talking about being tackle for the gang you are in, and completing the roam rather than reshipping multiple times. Any frigate is relatively cheap, but I’d rather spend more and not have to spend time reshipping, especially when chances of joining back up with your gang are slim.
Medium neuts are pretty much death as well; they just don’t reach as far or drain you in a single cycle like a heavy will.
I’d love to have viable alternatives to fleet interceptors, they don’t even need to be faster than t1 combat frigate hulls and I’ll be happy.
The first AF I flew was a retribution, 11 years ago when it still had one mid slot. I thought AFs were awesome until I trained inties and started flying the malediction and stiletto. I’ve since flown every t2 subcap. AFs have always been the redheaded stepchildren of the bunch. They need something special.
Thats the thing tho, people always choose the “Go-to” modules as mids regardless of the ship, which are definitely almost always:
While I can understand why, that’s pretty much what I mean with the counter-play, you either go with the above 3 things to pretty much have a secure kill and speed Or you can sacrifice one or two to counter the neut and other things. With so many modules it is insanely hard to predict what type of ship you are going up against specially when people get creative, balancing a ship to ‘fight’ everything is naturally bad because then you lack room to even tank your ship. Risk versus Reward, if you like to secure kills with the things above then neuts and ECM are your counter. If people go up against a Battleship and complain they didn’t had the room to fit a cap battery or even a cap booster then that was their choice to go up against a ship above their size.
Besides, I thought this was a talk about Assault Frigates, not Interceptors, are AF even good at doing the tackle role? Someone enlighten me I’m not familiar with the ship roles that well
That’s not right. A tackler is a tackler, no matter the enemy.
But isn’t Tackling the role most done by Interceptors tho?
