Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Zedia Zhane
The Lagrangian Mechanics Nine Worlds
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 17:13:00 -
[1] - Quote
According to a recent dev blog CCP is trying to introduce a new class of Batlecruiser that uses Large weapons and "will be capable of similar damage output as a battleship". (url is http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3001 - forum can't parse the BBCode for a link.)
This is a stupid, horribly unbalanced idea.
Battlecruiser tank is already sufficient for over 95% of the activity in Eve. Battleships are slower and much more expensive. The main reason anyone flies a battleship is for more DPS at longer range.
Making a BC with BS DPS and BS Range, combined with BC maneuverability and BC cost will make Battleships completely and utterly obsolete.
It has been said that "the main purpose of the CSM is shooting down bad ideas before they make it into the game." This is a horrible idea that needs severe modification before it should even be considered for the game.
In principle, I am in favor of a BC-class ship with Large weapons. It would make for a new option in terms of ship choice and tactics. And it would be a useful stepping stone, in terms of training, between current battlecruisers and battleships, as it would take BC pilot skills with Large weapons skills. However, BS weapons already have a huge range advantage over cruiser weapons. So to be balanced, such a ship would need to do less damage than a current Battlecruiser.
This means something like 4 weapons hardpoints, with 3-4 fewer overall slots than a current BC. Also, powergrid and CPU need to be considered very carefully. The extra powergrid and CPU for fitting Large guns can easily be converted into insane tank by using it for things like triple 1600 plates. So the Large weapons should be fittable by a ship bonus discounting their fitting requirements rather than by increasing CPU / powergrid of the base ship.
CSM, please shoot down this idea until CCP comes back with something where they've given at least 5 minutes of thought to game balance. |
Drake Draconis
Shadow Cadre Shadow Confederation
54
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 17:31:00 -
[2] - Quote
Honestly....as scary as it looks...I'm interested in seeing what it will do to the use of the Battleship overall.
If anything if it fails or gets overpowered..they'll just nerf the crap out of it later. |
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow The Revenant Order
72
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 17:50:00 -
[3] - Quote
The Tier 3's interest me, just in the sense that while they have the ability to fit large (battleship-class) weaponry, they also will not be able to tank like a battleship, and will have to rely on more maneuverability.
So you have a couple options:
- Fit Large weapons, and half*** tank - Fit Medium weapons, and massive tank
Either show potential to either be an incredible strategic tool, or an overpowered piece of **** that needs to be nerfed severely.
Only time will tell. "War is not measured in terms of who wins or loses, who is right or wrong.-á It is measured in terms of who survives." |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
121
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 21:57:00 -
[4] - Quote
Gentlemen... it is largely speculated that Tier 3 battlecruisers will receive BONUSES that reduce the CPU/PG requirements to fit battleships sized weapons (similar to the way Stealth Bombers get reduction bonuses). The idea behind them is that they will "pack a punch" but won't be able to fit anywhere close to a battleship-class (or even a high-end battlecruiser-class) tank. "Just because I seem like an idiot, doesn't mean I am one." ~Unknown |
Flyinghotpocket
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 22:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
Zedia Zhane wrote:According to a recent dev blog CCP is trying to introduce a new class of Batlecruiser that uses Large weapons and "will be capable of similar damage output as a battleship". (url is http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3001 - forum can't parse the BBCode for a link.) This is a stupid, horribly unbalanced idea. Battlecruiser tank is already sufficient for over 95% of the activity in Eve. Battleships are slower and much more expensive. The main reason anyone flies a battleship is for more DPS at longer range. Making a BC with BS DPS and BS Range, combined with BC maneuverability and BC cost will make Battleships completely and utterly obsolete. It has been said that "the main purpose of the CSM is shooting down bad ideas before they make it into the game." This is a horrible idea that needs severe modification before it should even be considered for the game. In principle, I am in favor of a BC-class ship with Large weapons. It would make for a new option in terms of ship choice and tactics. And it would be a useful stepping stone, in terms of training, between current battlecruisers and battleships, as it would take BC pilot skills with Large weapons skills. However, BS weapons already have a huge range advantage over cruiser weapons. So to be balanced, such a ship would need to do less damage than a current Battlecruiser.This means something like 4 weapons hardpoints, with 3-4 fewer overall slots than a current BC. Also, powergrid and CPU need to be considered very carefully. The extra powergrid and CPU for fitting Large guns can easily be converted into insane tank by using it for things like triple 1600 plates. So the Large weapons should be fittable by a ship bonus discounting their fitting requirements rather than by increasing CPU / powergrid of the base ship. CSM, please shoot down this idea until CCP comes back with something where they've given at least 5 minutes of thought to game balance.
agreed the last thing this game needs is another bc hull much less another t3. fix the broke stuff first!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Janaren Usaema
Incongruent Circular Permutations
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 22:43:00 -
[6] - Quote
Quote: Making a BC with BS DPS and BS Range, combined with BC maneuverability and BC cost will make Battleships completely and utterly obsolete.
BC cost?
As much as I enjoy wild knee-jerk speculation, they're ******* T3 - how cheap do you think these things are going to be? Not only that but they're obviously designed as glass cannons, making them an even larger target than they would be on price alone. Until we see what the hulls can do on singularity this is a complete non-issue as we simply do not know what the ships are capable of. |
SMT008
Les chevaliers de l'ordre Goonswarm Federation
140
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 22:50:00 -
[7] - Quote
Buff battleships. Battlecruisers are currently really close to battleships in terms of damage. Which isn't how things are supposed to work.
The problem is, battleships have troubles applying their damages to smaller ships (Basicly, everything is smaller than a battleship), and when they manage to really apply their damage, they don't do much more than battlecruisers. And it's pretty sad.
Try yourself, almost every battlecruiser can achieve 700 DPS (The Brutix can go over 1k but hey, blasters). Battleships can reach 1k, some of them can reach more than 1k (Blaster battleships, maybe the Raven). Battlecruisers will apply 90% of their DPS, Battleships will apply, say, 70% or their DPS.
If I keep the numbers from the previous paragraph, that gives you 630 DPS for a random battlecruiser (Hurricane, Harbinger, Brutix, the Drake being an exception, or maybe not, didn't try the HAM fit yet), and 700 DPS for a random battleship. Those are ingame, real DPS against a decent target, not a structure or a ship that is sitting still.
All that with a tracking problem, more tank, less maneuverability, more skills needed for large weaponry and 3 times the price. The few added DPS doesn't make up for all that. The added range however is great, but still. Pretty much the only thing that's great about large weaponry (Aside with alphastrike for arties).
|
Duchess Starbuckington
Starbuckington Manor
9
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 23:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alternatively: nerf Tier 2 BCs. There - you've now indirectly buffed both battleships and tech 1 cruisers. |
Danika Princip
Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team
56
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 00:12:00 -
[9] - Quote
Janaren Usaema wrote: , they're ******* T3
No, they aren't.
They're TIER 3 tech 1 BCs, the same way a maelstrom is a TIER 3 TECH 1 BS.
And we don't have a clue what they'll be like, so let's not scream for nerfs yet? :V |
Komodo Askold
Rare Earth Elements LLC Order of the Void
10
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 00:21:00 -
[10] - Quote
That doesn't look nice... I think that if they want to make T3 BCs, they should improve BSs in general, as they're too close to BCs right now... |
|
Smiling Menace
Star Nebulae Holdings Inc.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 00:25:00 -
[11] - Quote
SMT008 wrote:Buff battleships. Battlecruisers are currently really close to battleships in terms of damage. Which isn't how things are supposed to work.
The problem is, battleships have troubles applying their damages to smaller ships (Basicly, everything is smaller than a battleship), and when they manage to really apply their damage, they don't do much more than battlecruisers. And it's pretty sad.
Try yourself, almost every battlecruiser can achieve 700 DPS (The Brutix can go over 1k but hey, blasters). Battleships can reach 1k, some of them can reach more than 1k (Blaster battleships, maybe the Raven). Battlecruisers will apply 90% of their DPS, Battleships will apply, say, 70% or their DPS.
If I keep the numbers from the previous paragraph, that gives you 630 DPS for a random battlecruiser (Hurricane, Harbinger, Brutix, the Drake being an exception, or maybe not, didn't try the HAM fit yet), and 700 DPS for a random battleship. Those are ingame, real DPS against a decent target, not a structure or a ship that is sitting still.
All that with a tracking problem, more tank, less maneuverability, more skills needed for large weaponry and 3 times the price. The few added DPS doesn't make up for all that. The added range however is great, but still. Pretty much the only thing that's great about large weaponry (Aside with alphastrike for arties).
Battle cruisers as far as I am aware were supposed to be less capably tanked battle ships with similar damage output. BC's make up for this in speed and agility though. This new tier 3 BC is just an extension of this although magnified.
Ship for ship, even the new tier 3's will die in a fire to a BS so why do BS's need buffing? |
Rawbone
S3MINAL FLUID Below Me.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 04:03:00 -
[12] - Quote
I might once have agreed with this proposal but for the fact that Alpha Tempests kick the snot out of BC fleets. One may argue that for this to be viable that the Battleship must be in a large fleet, but that's the nature of that particular beast. The battleship isn't a small gang roamer, it's the backbone of fleet combat. I don't think they need buffing for a role they already fill nicely. |
Rico Minali
Sons Of 0din Fatal Ascension
92
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 12:58:00 -
[13] - Quote
I am very interested to see exactly what these machines do to the face of the battlefield. Will they be able to fit 7 or 8 of the largest BS guns? probably not. Will they tank like an Abbadon? No way. Will 10 of these things be able to outfight half a dozen BSs? I guess it depends on what fits are used and so on.
I dont think they will unbalance play, or make BSs redundant. I think it will just make for a changing and more dynamic battlefield, exactly what we need. |
Jerick Ludhowe
Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising.
4
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 16:28:00 -
[14] - Quote
Zedia Zhane wrote:According to a recent dev blog CCP is trying to introduce a new class of Batlecruiser that uses Large weapons and "will be capable of similar damage output as a battleship". (url is http://www.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=3001 - forum can't parse the BBCode for a link.) This is a stupid, horribly unbalanced idea. Battlecruiser tank is already sufficient for over 95% of the activity in Eve. Battleships are slower and much more expensive. The main reason anyone flies a battleship is for more DPS at longer range. Making a BC with BS DPS and BS Range, combined with BC maneuverability and BC cost will make Battleships completely and utterly obsolete. It has been said that "the main purpose of the CSM is shooting down bad ideas before they make it into the game." This is a horrible idea that needs severe modification before it should even be considered for the game. In principle, I am in favor of a BC-class ship with Large weapons. It would make for a new option in terms of ship choice and tactics. And it would be a useful stepping stone, in terms of training, between current battlecruisers and battleships, as it would take BC pilot skills with Large weapons skills. However, BS weapons already have a huge range advantage over cruiser weapons. So to be balanced, such a ship would need to do less damage than a current Battlecruiser.This means something like 4 weapons hardpoints, with 3-4 fewer overall slots than a current BC. Also, powergrid and CPU need to be considered very carefully. The extra powergrid and CPU for fitting Large guns can easily be converted into insane tank by using it for things like triple 1600 plates. So the Large weapons should be fittable by a ship bonus discounting their fitting requirements rather than by increasing CPU / powergrid of the base ship. CSM, please shoot down this idea until CCP comes back with something where they've given at least 5 minutes of thought to game balance.
Thank god you don't work for CCP...
If you had your way these things would be 100% worthless...
As a whole people are freaking out way too much about these ships... They will not be doing 1200dps like many BS are capable of, and they will not be tanking 1000+ dps like many BS are capable of... Chances are they will be a faster BS with 1 or 2 less guns, 1/2 the cap, 1/2 the nuet range, a smaller drone bay and about 1/2 the hp. I don't see these new ships greatly exceeding the DPS of the current BCs, instead they will be trading the tracking and cap consumption of the medium guns for the range and alpha of the larges... Expect 6 guns with a single dmg bonus.
|
Jack Carrigan
Order of the Shadow The Revenant Order
82
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 17:04:00 -
[15] - Quote
They're just mad little carebears. They're mad because they didn't get a shiny new toy before the PvPers.
Well here's the harsh reality:
EVE IS A PVP GAME
EVERYTHING YOU DO IN EVE IS PVP
Combat: PvP Market: PvP Contracts: PvP Scams: PvP PI: PvP (either by marketting or using it to fuel a POS) Trading: PvP Mining: PvP (competition for belts, marketting, marketting of manufactured goods)
Single shard universe folks. "War is not measured in terms of who wins or loses, who is right or wrong.-á It is measured in terms of who survives." |
Angry Onions
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
110
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 21:53:00 -
[16] - Quote
Lets clear up some things about le new battlecruisers shall we?
1) While they will have the damage out put similar to a battleship, they won't have a tank anywhere close to it. 2) They are a TIER 3 ship, not a tech 3 ship. What this means is that they will be more expensive than the other two existing battle cruisers and will hopefully perform better. They will still be able to be one upped by HAC's or Strategic Cruisers (assuming both pilots aren't stupid). 3) These new battle cruisers will be very effective against battleships and other battle cruisers, but the effectiveness against other ships of smaller size will be less due the slow tracking speed of battleship guns and the increased speed/maneuverability of the battle cruiser. 4) It will still have the tanking ability of a battle cruiser so it won't be a very hard nut to crack. 5) They are fulfilling a specific role in the standard fleet that has been missing.
TL;DR = STOP BITCHING ABOUT NEW SHIPS THAT ARE ACTUALLY A GOOD IDEA! E .-+ ` ' / -+. F Your Carebear tears fuel us |
Endovior
Brothers At Arms Intrepid Crossing
11
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 23:03:00 -
[17] - Quote
Hmm... BC with large guns: slower and less accurate then HAC or T3... yeah, an engagement between the two will go badly for the Tornado pilots, I think. Sounds about right. |
Simon Victor
Axiom Holdings Axiom Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.23 23:37:00 -
[18] - Quote
Janaren Usaema wrote:Quote: Making a BC with BS DPS and BS Range, combined with BC maneuverability and BC cost will make Battleships completely and utterly obsolete.
BC cost? As much as I enjoy wild knee-jerk speculation, they're ******* T3 - how cheap do you think these things are going to be? Not only that but they're obviously designed as glass cannons, making them an even larger target than they would be on price alone. Until we see what the hulls can do on singularity this is a complete non-issue as we simply do not know what the ships are capable of.
Agreed! This thread is totally jumping the gun. They haven't even been tested and we're already tearing down CCP's ideas (our ideas). I love this community, but we're a bunch of pre-mature whiners. The friend zone is the equivalent of a job interview where they think you're great, but they still hire the moron that does a terrible job. |
Epiphaniess
Verboten Technologies
406
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 02:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
I am not to worried about these new BCs yet, since we have not seen them in game.
But the sad truth is, that Battleships are not the DPS powerhouses and valuable fleet asset they use to be.
The role BS use to play has been eroded over time. The large tank, big guns lots of DPS battleship but being slow and cumbersome is not as desirable as it use to be in small fleets.
Nor do they have a place in large fleets BS use to be used to overwhelm enemies fleets with there shear shock and awe power and ability to soak up damage. Other ships have started to infringe on their roles as well as capital ships being so common now, they sort of take the place that BS use to.
BS ships just have not scaled well with changes, that have happened over time.
Maybe they need a looking at to find a new place in fleets, in the game.
Maybe having large tanks, lots of DPS if you can hit it. And being about as slow and agile as a brick in molasses is not working out so well for them. |
Spr09
Purdue Engineering and Technology Talocan United
5
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 03:01:00 -
[20] - Quote
these ships are going to be pvp ships, but we need a thread (maybe use this one) to say what we dont want this ship to be. i dont want a small ship that takes longer to lock killing me with large guns before i can even lock it! if this ship is going to be balanced i think it can't have tracking bonuses, a fast lock time, or enough medium slots to sebo the thing up to 2000. these things are pretty much going to be paper-thin gun boats, so they shouldn't have more than 3 small or mid slots. |
|
Angry Onions
Martyr's Vengence Test Alliance Please Ignore
111
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 03:11:00 -
[21] - Quote
Spr09 wrote:these ships are going to be pvp ships, but we need a thread (maybe use this one) to say what we dont want this ship to be. i dont want a small ship that takes longer to lock killing me with large guns before i can even lock it! if this ship is going to be balanced i think it can't have tracking bonuses, a fast lock time, or enough medium slots to sebo the thing up to 2000. these things are pretty much going to be paper-thin gun boats, so they shouldn't have more than 3 small or mid slots.
They're not frigates or dessies, if that happened, it would completely invalidate their usefulness. They're all ready going to be paper thin as it , giving them such a stupid low amount of slots is practically making the ship useless. They will be hopefully designed to hit hard and fast and by limiting them to such low amount of mid slots, you reduce them to literally guns attached to engines with NO useful purpose besides fire crackers. Lrn2pvp E .-+ ` ' / -+. F Your Carebear tears fuel us |
Smiling Menace
Star Nebulae Holdings Inc.
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 03:13:00 -
[22] - Quote
Spr09 wrote:these ships are going to be pvp ships, but we need a thread (maybe use this one) to say what we dont want this ship to be. i dont want a small ship that takes longer to lock killing me with large guns before i can even lock it! if this ship is going to be balanced i think it can't have tracking bonuses, a fast lock time, or enough medium slots to sebo the thing up to 2000. these things are pretty much going to be paper-thin gun boats, so they shouldn't have more than 3 small or mid slots.
Would suck to be Caldari again with this proposal and to a lesser extent, Minmatar.
The BC's we have now are pretty good (unless you are Gallente in which case, winter is almost here!) and they do pack a mighty punch (Arty Canes spring to mind) but they still die very easily to BS fleets.
BS's are still used extensively in null sec to combat faster, nimbler BC's so I really don't think BS's need a buff. They still fill their role well (unless you are Gallente in which case, winter is almost here!).
I think with this one we will need to wait and see. Can't really make any sort of informed opinions without knowing the specs of the new tier 3 BC's. |
Mal Darkrunner
Zero Tau Research Institute
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 17:08:00 -
[23] - Quote
I'm looking forward to these new Tier-3 battlecruisers, however I do believe they need to have their own role, and should not simply be "a better hurricane" or "a more agile battleship". Having said that, so long as their strengths are balanced by suitable weaknesses, and so long as they do not overshadow battleships or their Tier-2 cousins, they should be an interesting addition to the line-up. I'll reserve judgement till I've seen some more details about their stats and performance. |
pooper stain
Adventurers Matari Visionary Coalition
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 18:24:00 -
[24] - Quote
Angry Onions wrote: They're not frigates or dessies, if that happened, it would completely invalidate their usefulness. They're all ready going to be paper thin as it , giving them such a stupid low amount of slots is practically making the ship useless. They will be hopefully designed to hit hard and fast and by limiting them to such low amount of mid slots, you reduce them to literally guns attached to engines with NO useful purpose besides fire crackers. Lrn2pvp
I disagree Angry, these ships need to have there low, mids limited. You give them too many mids and lows they will replace the canes, drakes, etc ..
I Think they need a 5/4/3 for min/caldari and 5/3/4 for amarr/gal That way they will be "glass cannons" for sure. |
Vertisce Soritenshi
SHADOW WARD Tragedy.
112
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 20:50:00 -
[25] - Quote
I am fairly positive these will end up being pure DPS boats. Likely they might work for PvE a little and they will end up being Capital busters. Small enough that supercaps have a hard time hitting them but big enough guns to do the damage to take out a capital ship. Support our boobies!-áLINKY! |
JitaJane
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 04:06:00 -
[26] - Quote
I think you hit the nail on the head with paper DPS. Time was all I wanted in Eve was a 'Cane with 8 turret slots. I coveted this. The thing is it makes the BS somewhat more pointless. But if they are going to give a CPU/PG reduction for large turrets then those turrets will have all of the shortcomings that they have on a BS. Just without a BS frame supporting them. Which may be satisfying to EFT warriors but results in a BS with worse tracking and likely (have'nt seen the slots for them yet) worse tank than a TeirII BC. To mine innocent eyes that looks like a gang role-filler. Which would add flavor without removing balance Mmmm. the only fault in that plan is it relies on the forethought of CCP..... |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |