Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Yui Nagisa Sora
Odin's Brotherhood
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 18:42:09 -
[1] - Quote
So them HACs and t3 cruisers, compared to battleships they
- faster and more maneuverable
- don't have to worry about tracking
why have battleships when you have another class of smaller ship that beats it in every way? shouldn't it be it tanks more and does more damage but is slower? someone please explain the game mechanic here to me |
Tarko Auduin
Dutch East Querious Company Phoebe Freeport Republic
3
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:02:50 -
[2] - Quote
Nothing catches bombs like a battleship? |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
282
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:09:34 -
[3] - Quote
Most HAC's and T3's will not out-DPS or out Tank properly fit Battleships. No, it doesn't count if you are comparing a Cruiser with an optimal range of 1km vs a BS with ranged guns.. of course those will be off.
But they are for sure far faster (sublight/warp) and benefit from a smaller sig.
But your points aren't lost.. They are WAY too close. BS's in general I think need a buff, and I think more BS's, T2 BS's, would be nice. That or HAC's need a nerf.. |
Remiel Pollard
Shock Treatment Ministries
6521
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:31:33 -
[4] - Quote
I'd love to see a new T2 battleship that follows along the lines of a Battlestar from BSG - kinda like a mini-carrier capable of carrying fighters (but not fighter bombers). Like any other ship that's not a carrier, it would be limited to launching no more than five at a time. No logistics bonuses though, and no weapons bonuses other than those applied to fighters (no bonuses drones or sentries), but definitely some good racial tanking bonuses. Beyond that, I haven't really thought of the particulars. Ever since I started playing this game I think the one thing that's annoyed me the most is that ships below capital-class can't carry manned fighters. A Neb-B frigate from Star Wars is 150m long, a little bigger than a Rifter, and even it can carry two squadrons (24 ships total) of X-wings. The 5,000m3 that a fighter uses in this game is somewhat ridiculous tbh, there's no way a ~20m long/wide ship is gonna take up that much space.
GÇ£Some capsuleers claim that ECM is 'dishonorable' and 'unfair'.
Jam those ones first, and kill them last.GÇ¥
- Jirai 'Fatal' Laitanen, Pithum Nullifier Training Manual c. YC104
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3908
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:40:13 -
[5] - Quote
This thread has been moved to Ships & Modules.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Bastion Arzi
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
202
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:40:32 -
[6] - Quote
Hacs doing more dps than vindicator a eh?
Tanking more than abbadons
Are we playing the same game? |
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent
1126
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:42:11 -
[7] - Quote
Yui Nagisa Sora wrote:So them HACs and t3 cruisers, compared to battleships they
- faster and more maneuverable
- don't have to worry about tracking
why have battleships when you have another class of smaller ship that beats it in every way? shouldn't it be it tanks more and does more damage but is slower? someone please explain the game mechanic here to me
The answer is because when T3s were introduced, someone completely and utterly screwed up the stats on engineering and defensive subsystems so that there was one in each category that is clearly better than all others.
Strat Cruisers have been around longer than Dominion sov and they still have never received so much as a tweak, much less a rebalance pass. Both are on the docket to be rebalanced "Soon(tm)".
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
Tsukino Stareine
Sock Robbers Inc. Low-Class
1031
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:42:11 -
[8] - Quote
HACs and T3s definitely do not do more raw damage than battlships, however they tank similar amounts due to speed, sig and resists |
Deacon Abox
Justified Chaos Spaceship Bebop
466
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 19:49:04 -
[9] - Quote
Sniper Smith wrote:Most HAC's and T3's will not out-DPS or out Tank properly fit Battleships. No, it doesn't count if you are comparing a Cruiser with an optimal range of 1km vs a BS with ranged guns.. of course those will be off.
But they are for sure far faster (sublight/warp) and benefit from a smaller sig.
But your points aren't lost.. They are WAY too close. BS's in general I think need a buff, and I think more BS's, T2 BS's, would be nice. That or HAC's need a nerf.. HACs should not be nerfed. Their hp (along with recons and logi) is almost too little.
However, Yes, BSs need a little more hp. As long as the devs are careful not to create new monsters. Think of a Rattlesnake with more shield hp.
BSs and BCs need a buff in the sense of better mobility subwarp and warp. The agility and speed nerfs to everything larger than a cruiser was overdone. This is really the biggest annoyance, and probably why they suffer in usage.
CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting-áoff button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.
|
Zura Namee
Dixon Cox Butte Preservation Society Black Legion.
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 20:00:08 -
[10] - Quote
Deacon Abox wrote:Sniper Smith wrote:Most HAC's and T3's will not out-DPS or out Tank properly fit Battleships. No, it doesn't count if you are comparing a Cruiser with an optimal range of 1km vs a BS with ranged guns.. of course those will be off.
But they are for sure far faster (sublight/warp) and benefit from a smaller sig.
But your points aren't lost.. They are WAY too close. BS's in general I think need a buff, and I think more BS's, T2 BS's, would be nice. That or HAC's need a nerf.. HACs should not be nerfed. Their hp (along with recons and logi) is almost too little. However, Yes, BSs need a little more hp. As long as the devs are careful not to create new monsters. Think of a Rattlesnake with more shield hp. BSs and BCs need a buff in the sense of better mobility subwarp and warp. The agility and speed nerfs to everything larger than a cruiser was overdone. This is really the biggest annoyance, and probably why they suffer in usage.
It's a combination of being slow and being basically target practice for bombers |
|
Tyanshe
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 20:00:58 -
[11] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:I'd love to see a new T2 battleship that follows along the lines of a Battlestar from BSG - kinda like a mini-carrier capable of carrying fighters (but not fighter bombers). Like any other ship that's not a carrier, it would be limited to launching no more than five at a time. No logistics bonuses though, and no weapons bonuses other than those applied to fighters (no bonuses drones or sentries), but definitely some good racial tanking bonuses. Beyond that, I haven't really thought of the particulars. Ever since I started playing this game I think the one thing that's annoyed me the most is that ships below capital-class can't carry manned fighters. A Neb-B frigate from Star Wars is 150m long, a little bigger than a Rifter, and even it can carry two squadrons (24 ships total) of X-wings. The 5,000m3 that a fighter uses in this game is somewhat ridiculous tbh, there's no way a ~20m long/wide ship is gonna take up that much space.
That is an amazing idea. A BS with fighters would be great. Throw in some Marauder-like skill requirements and it will be justifiable. |
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
1420
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 20:44:23 -
[12] - Quote
One of the things that battleships can generally do better than HACs and T3s is project good damage at ranges of 150km+ while maintaining a solid buffer tank. With the current meta favoring closer-range combat, this well-defined niche for battleships often gets ignored completely, or relegated to cheaper, more mobile ABCs performing hit-and-run raids.
Battleships have always been slow and the speed changes did hurt them, but I still believe that it was the movement away from sustained long-range combat that started the downward trend of battleship use in PvP fleets. So long as fleet fights favor closer range combat or hit-and-run sniping instead of sustained long-range fire, battleships will be at a disadvantage. Not useless mind you, but not as useful as they once were.
My Many Misadventures
Reading Comprehension: so important it deserves it's own skillbook.
I seek to create content, not become content.
|
Frostys Virpio
The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc
1596
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 21:42:36 -
[13] - Quote
Bronson Hughes wrote:One of the things that battleships can generally do better than HACs and T3s is project good damage at ranges of 150km+ while maintaining a solid buffer tank. With the current meta favoring closer-range combat, this well-defined niche for battleships often gets ignored completely, or relegated to cheaper, more mobile ABCs performing hit-and-run raids.
Battleships have always been slow and the speed changes did hurt them, but I still believe that it was the movement away from sustained long-range combat that started the downward trend of battleship use in PvP fleets. So long as fleet fights favor closer range combat or hit-and-run sniping instead of sustained long-range fire, battleships will be at a disadvantage. Not useless mind you, but not as useful as they once were.
Projecting over 150km is kinda overrated when you can be probed and warped to... |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15164
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 22:08:11 -
[14] - Quote
BS dont need a buff, T3 need their nerf.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Jallukola
41
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 22:13:25 -
[15] - Quote
Force Recon Battleships when?
Leo Moracchioli - All About That Bass
Leo Moracchioli - Shake It Off
|
Yui Nagisa Sora
Odin's Brotherhood
0
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 22:18:07 -
[16] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:Hacs doing more dps than vindicator a eh?
Tanking more than abbadons
Are we playing the same game?
sure if you want to talk raw numbers, I'd say we're playing a different game, perhaps you're playing the game on a calculator |
Bastion Arzi
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
202
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 22:43:29 -
[17] - Quote
becuase on a pc a hac with out dps a bs ok |
Jack Miton
Isogen 5
4193
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 23:13:21 -
[18] - Quote
Even assuming your point were all true, which they aren't, T3s are T3, HACs are T2, BSs are T1. Get it now?
If you want to evaluate BSs, you need to compare them to cruisers and BCs. In any case, BSs still have more raw HP and DPS than HACs and also have better range, more fitting room, bigger drone bays ect.
Stuck In Here With Me:-á http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/
Down the Pipe:-á http://downthepipe-wh.com/
|
Jon Joringer
Zero-K
157
|
Posted - 2015.02.24 23:39:55 -
[19] - Quote
Battleships, mostly, just don't fit into the current meta. Too many things have been changed that have left them fairly obsolete in many cases. They're like EVE's antiques. Of course you can still use them for certain things, but odds are, in this day and age of EVE, something smaller does it better. |
Caleb Seremshur
The Atomic Fallout Kids
485
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 00:36:51 -
[20] - Quote
Jon Joringer wrote:Battleships, mostly, just don't fit into the current meta. Too many things have been changed that have left them fairly obsolete in many cases. They're like EVE's antiques. Of course you can still use them for certain things, but odds are, in this day and age of EVE, something smaller does it better.
Well a rattlesnake or slightly blinged TFI is still a very good contender for pve and pvp roles. Mostly people try to evaluate battleships as solo vessels and while.some are built for the task e.g. hyperion others are much better when deployed in fleets like the rokh as they perform a fundamentally different role.
The same could be said for caracal vs moa where one is a dumb but dependable brick that works best with logi the other can be fit for multiple roles and in a pinch works solo or in fleets.
But for battleships specifically yes I think that most of the time people want to use them in a context they're not designed around. A high skilled player.can dish 800-1200 damage with long range weapons and basicly be bricky enough to deter being shot at in return.
The real trick question is the use of a carrier outside of blobs or a dread.
Faction warfare pilot and solo/small gang PVP advocate
|
|
Yui Nagisa Sora
Odin's Brotherhood
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 01:03:45 -
[21] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Even assuming your point were all true, which they aren't, T3s are T3, HACs are T2, BSs are T1. Get it now?
If you want to evaluate BSs, you need to compare them to cruisers and BCs. In any case, BSs still have more raw HP and DPS than HACs and also have better range, more fitting room, bigger drone bays ect.
sooooo you're saying marauders and black ops will beat those? lol |
Ravasta Helugo
Republic University Minmatar Republic
299
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 02:16:37 -
[22] - Quote
Yui Nagisa Sora wrote:Jack Miton wrote:Even assuming your point were all true, which they aren't, T3s are T3, HACs are T2, BSs are T1. Get it now?
If you want to evaluate BSs, you need to compare them to cruisers and BCs. In any case, BSs still have more raw HP and DPS than HACs and also have better range, more fitting room, bigger drone bays ect.
sooooo you're saying marauders and black ops will beat those? lol Never count out the properly fit Golem. Vargur's might eventually get blown up, but if you use that sexy bastion transformation you'll feel like a winner on the inside. |
Serene Repose
2304
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 02:40:05 -
[23] - Quote
We got a lot of folks that "know". BS doesn't just stand for BattleShip.
Treason never prospers. What is the reason?
Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
|
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
286
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 03:48:00 -
[24] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:Even assuming your point were all true, which they aren't, T3s are T3, HACs are T2, BSs are T1. Get it now?
If you want to evaluate BSs, you need to compare them to cruisers and BCs. In any case, BSs still have more raw HP and DPS than HACs and also have better range, more fitting room, bigger drone bays ect.
Your progression is Flawed. T1/2/3 isn't a progression (for ships). T1 is General T2 is Specialized into a Role T3 are supposed to be decent at everything, but best at nothing.
One, I think Bombers/Bombs need to be nerfed somehow, a fleet of them regardless how large shouldn't be able to whelp a BS fleet.. not effectively.. I've personally figured a delay in recloaking + a delay in being able to enter warp would be one way, thus making them targets for the fleet and limiting their chances at getting a second run in.
Or even a new ship/mod, like defender missiles, that would shoot bombs.. Make a ship with an insane lock speed, can only fit said mod.. Only reason to exist would be to defend a fleet from bombs.
Two, I think HAC's are a little OP.. wasn't saying they need a huge nerf, or even that all of them do, but some are clearly op.. And no, not JUST the Ishtar, though that's the obvious one atm.
I wouldn't mind seeing more T2 BS's.. Logi, Commandships, maybe some others.. atm T2 BS's are very role specific, which is fine, but leaves most other roles missing. Marauders are Mission boats, and some small gang PVP + Tourny, but not viable in fleets or larger PVP due to being unable to get reps, move, and cap limited without Logi.. Blackops are weak in tank, meh on DPS, and more expensive, ergo no good reason to use them outside of bridging Covops ships, and providing some support. Still, never gonna see them mixed in with a main fleet.
Hell even a fleet of T2 BS's who's only benefit is improved Resists (but lower base HP) would make them more appealing as they would be easier to Rep. If the price was right of course..
As always, there's no one right answer. And whatever you do, most people are going to be pissed it went too far, not far enough, missed the issue, caused new issues, killed their cat, whatever. |
Tiddle Jr
Galvanized Inc.
70
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 05:04:47 -
[25] - Quote
Most of the discussions about how bad BS's are and how OP HAC's & T3's are yeah most of them turned to pvp side. But lots of people do run pve activities with BS's. Why? Cause it's way to easy to jump into bs vs t2/t3 cruisers. Especially now when t3 add in prices 75-100 m. And t2 are mostly the same costs as bs. If you started not long ago what would be your choice for pve an Apoc or Legion/Zealot? I think the answer is obvious.
Just look at the kb's of null sec blocs what would you see? The answer is obvious. Now check low sec activities and the picture would be a different not as much as you could think but still.
And now guess why we don't have that much bs's shown on zkill or eve-kill.
So the question is - what is wrong with battleships ? I'd say nothing major, some of the are still used as doctrine ships, and some are major choice for pve activities.
What is missing is the next T2 battleship based on tier 3 version of them. And we have more than enough faction bs's don't we? |
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
286
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 05:26:34 -
[26] - Quote
Tiddle Jr wrote:What is missing is the next T2 battleship based on tier 3 version of them. And we have more than enough faction bs's don't we? No, we can never have enough Faction ships. I'm serious. I want more. Lots more. As long as they get balanced right, and keep their price tags, they are great. And I don't just mean warships. Serpentis are drug runners, why not a Serpentis Industrial to have a bonus to moving illicit goods? Interbus Freighter? I'm sure there are lots more we can do.
More T2 BS's I think is a great idea. Not so keen on T3 versions, for now I think the Dessies are a good start.. Maybe BC's next? Or Frigs?
As for the Skills comment, I'm fine with a BS being the easy way into a bigger ship, but really I wouldn't call it better. You need to spend at least as much time on skills to be decent in most BS's as you would to use a HAC well.. Investment into the Guns and Hull alone. Besides, we are mostly talking about buffing BS's, so it doesn't hurt the PVE side any. Though PvE needs it's own overhaul imho.. but that's another topic. |
Tiddle Jr
Galvanized Inc.
70
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 06:39:45 -
[27] - Quote
Faction ships...
Do we need navy/pirate Destroyers? I don't know
Do we need pirate BC's? I don't know
Do we need T2 Talos Naga etc.? I don't know
i could continue but i won't probably all those answers should be yes yes yes, but to achive ship balance in game looks like is harder than to find Mr Higgs and his bozon. |
RavenPaine
RaVeN Alliance
937
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 06:57:43 -
[28] - Quote
In my opinion, BS should be able to kill frigates, or force them to run 99% of the time, if they are fitted right. Power creep has taken over in the smaller hulls. Can't really take it back now, but you could adjust mods that fit on BS. Neuts and Nos already have hull restrictions. Range per size. Make a Super Tracking Computer, fits on BS hulls only. And maybe a BC ranged one as well. It wouldn't give any advantage over other BS, but it would take up a slot. Fitting choices would at least give a pilot the option to fit for frigate warfare. Give Large Smart bombs more range. Give BS scram and webs more range, so that smaller ships HAVE to get inside that range. Risk vs reward needs to be equalized.
|
Yui Nagisa Sora
Odin's Brotherhood
1
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 07:39:59 -
[29] - Quote
RavenPaine wrote: In my opinion, BS should be able to kill frigates, or force them to run 99% of the time, if they are fitted right. Power creep has taken over in the smaller hulls. Can't really take it back now, but you could adjust mods that fit on BS. Neuts and Nos already have hull restrictions. Range per size. Make a Super Tracking Computer, fits on BS hulls only. And maybe a BC ranged one as well. It wouldn't give any advantage over other BS, but it would take up a slot. Fitting choices would at least give a pilot the option to fit for frigate warfare. Give Large Smart bombs more range. Give BS scram and webs more range, so that smaller ships HAVE to get inside that range. Risk vs reward needs to be equalized.
THANK YOU |
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
267
|
Posted - 2015.02.25 07:55:35 -
[30] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:We got a lot of folks that "know". BS doesn't just stand for BattleShip.
This made me smile. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |