What are the plans with the AF rebalance mentioned at FF17?

(Caleb Seremshur) #1

Back in April we heard from CCP that we were getting a balance pass on AF in the future where they would be changed to behave more like marauders. So I was wondering if there was any updates on this? I’m very curious to have a mode-switching frigate and how it would function, I imagine the trade-offs being more like more range/dps and 2nd mode is more tank/less dps.

This is similar but different from marauders who sacrifice all speed for total EWAR immunity and capital levels of tank. A frigate which can get popped in a single salvo from a tornado will NEVER be worth investing too much in especially if it gets dragged to a complete stop. Before even considering things like tracking issues and range issues where small weapons would be outranged meanwhile proper marauder guns have substantially more range and stopping power.

Does anyone know what’s going on here?

(Nicaragua) #3

Glad it wasnt just me

(Blade Darth) #4

We just got t3c’s so (speculation) next could be small fine-tune t3c pass and after that AF’s or a tiercide run and AF’s after that.

And what you described is a t3d. AF’s should differ from them.

(Shailagh Rose) #5

They have been saying they have “plans for an Assault Frigate balance pass” literally since this entire damn tiericide/balance thing started like freaking what, like SIX YEARS. Since Cruicible expansion in 2011!!!

LOL yeah sure we will get that promised AF balance soon…


(Lulu Lunette) #6

Final Fantasy Seventeen would be shortened up more like FFXVII

(Xylem Viliana) #7

I see you too are a [insert relevant identifying word] of culture also.

(Nikea Tiber) #8

AF balance pass is a decade overdue.

AFs need on grid mobility to be on par with their t1 base hulls. This is the core issue, as it heavily effects survivability as a frigate. Inbound DPS reduction through on grid mobility is the survivability mechanic for frigates. Remove the on grid mobility (as it is with AFs), and despite assault resists, and all you are left with is the craptacular tanking power of small modules.

AFs need fitting that surpasses their t1 base hulls.

As a general rule, AFs haven’t got enough mids to function. This is shared between shield and armor AFs; AFs haven’t got the ganking power to be flown without tackle.

AFs need a defining class role. My vote has been for ewar resistance/immunity for a long time now. AFs are extremely vulnerable to all types of ewar; poor sensor strength means vulnerability to ecm, poor lock range means vulnerability to damps. Frigate weapon systems have short range; tracking and missile disruption work very well vs small weapon systems, and due to the short range you must operate within medium + heavy neut range in addition to scram and web ranges. A single cycle of heavy neut will ice any frigates capacitor; usually from outside the frigates engagement range, leaving you in an immobilized frigate within enemy engagement range.

With the above changes AFs could be a good tackle platform in addition to being a logical choice for anti-ewar screening as well as a better core dps ship for frigate gangs.

(Lulu Lunette) #9

T3D’s are the new AF’s. Maybe we’re looking at this wrong. Delete the AF’s. :dancer:

(Nikea Tiber) #10

T3D’s are the new AF’s. Maybe we’re looking at this wrong. Delete the AF’s. :dancer:

No, t3ds are just more capable destroyers. A destroyers role is reducing a frigate to scrap, the thrasher and coercer have been performing this role extremely well; shitting on AFs and inties well before tech 3 was even an idea.

T3ds in no way invalidate AFs; AFs shitty mobility, slot layout, fitting, and engagement profile invalidates them even before other hulls are thrown into the mix.

(JC Mieyli) #11

did we even get the 5.6% hm buff yet lol

(Nikea Tiber) #12

Yeah, like that’s going to fix the damage craplication of heavy missiles. :roll_eyes:

(Caleb Seremshur) #13

I had a guy recently tell me I can’t make a caracal that could kill his garmur (because apparently this keeps happening to him).

So I fitted for application and killed him in 3 volleys.

Don’t fit for max dps on a missile ship, fit for application and abuse that range advantage.

(541 Ratte) #14

It’s pretty simple.

The AF has to be the ship that fixes Eve.

It should be fast, have a fast lock, it should align well, it should have super crazy dps because otherwise why be a pirate, it should speed tank and also rep like with the power of jesus, it should have perma cap regen and be immune to neuts and it should have 17 drones with a 580% bonus to hitpoints, damage, tracking and optimal range.

And a straight up 25% per level bonus to falloff.

Otherwise what is the point?

(Liafcipe9000) #15

by this point you can rest assured CCP do not care about assault frigates, so as harsh as it seems, they might as well remove them and refund the SP.

but assuming they will not remove AFs, we don’t know what will happen, but here’s what NEEDS to happen. let’s start by looking at their situation right now:

the short version: AFs are heavier than their basic counterparts, and suffer from inferior capacitor and fitting resources while possessing more module slots.

So what do we do? it’s obvious. taking /u/kibitt’s proposal to bump up their base speed, that would be step one. I say we need to sort their mass as well, it doesn’t make any sense that AFs of the Minmatar, which are expected to have the lightest mass, actually are the heaviest.

Next up, fitting. it’s an even bigger issue. the entire AF line is messed up in this regard. they definitely need more fititng resources, but it doesn’t stop here.

the final issue with AFs exists inside the AF line. and that’s the bonuses.

has it ever occured to you that shield boosters are mostly a Minmatar thing? then how come the Hawk has that bonus while the Jaguar, which is the Vagabond’s little brother, does not?

and what’s up with the Jaguar’s lackluster DPS? the only other AF that has only 3 weapon slots is the Ishkur, but that one is a drone boat, so effectively it has between 4 and 5 weapon slots.

for my final point, I will simply suggest moving a high slot of the Wolf to the mid.

someone at CCP forgot Ship Balance 101 here: Racial balance. each race has its own methods, but none of them should be objectively superior, and they should not get mixed like this.

Dear CCP, if you care, you will do the following: give AFs more CPU and PG, better cap, faster speed, and move the bonuses around properly. and will you please take the shield booster bonus away from the Hawk and give it to the Jaguar? Jag suffers enough having the lowest DPS. it needs some love.

P.S. i used to fly a Jag a lot a few years ago, just after the AF rebalance of that time. a new complete balance pass would really re-ignite my passion for that little courageous beast.

oh and remember to buy more ship skins!

(JC Mieyli) #16

well the hawk is an awesome af its better than jackdaw imo
jaguar can be passive tanked pretty nicely though

(Saladinae) #17

My fix for AF’s

Blanket 33% hp increase and 33% base speed increase and 33% agility increase for all AF’s

+100% Afterburner bonus (remove MWD sig bonus)
Energy Vamp bonus

-50% EWAR against ship, + 100% sensor strength

Limit dps to 225-275 on all the hulls via bonuses.

+10 PG +25 CPU all hulls


(JC Mieyli) #18

what is fixed exactly
all you do is poke a stick in random areas and say job done
and how exactly do you limit dps
i dont think you understand afs at all

(Saladinae) #19

You limit dps by adjusting bonuses. If they want to push out over 275 dps then they need to severely sacrifice tank. Fixed.

I didn’t poke a stick in random areas. I choose Tier 3 Destroyer Bonuses in their respective modes and gave AF’s some help in those areas, while keeping the ships distinct and filling different roles.

How about you e-mail CCP and tell them they poked sticks in randoms areas on tier 3 destroyers.

Also check my killboard vs yours. My killboard says I’ve been flying AF’s/Dictors for 5 years straight. What does yours say? Right now I can’t justify an AF over a Tier 3 Dessie for any reason … even the costs are similar.

Something tells me you don’t fly AF’s ever, otherwise you’d know why the Energy Vamp bonus is there (neuts are an AF’s worst nightmare and seemed to be fitted to every PvP ship larger than a dessie). Give these hulls a vamp bonus and they become far more viable an able to fill a niche that the t3 dessie cannot.

(JC Mieyli) #20


ccp are already aware of their own balancing methods they dont need me to tell them that

yes but why are we comparing afs to t3 dessies
its a frigate not a destroyer

depends on the af and how is that different to any other frig