EVE Search - Why canÆt we have decent battleships?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Why canÆt we have decent battleships?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Fujiko MaXjolt Caldari Templar Republic Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.05 23:20:00 - [31] Originally by: 5pinDizzy Also. CCP where's my mobile POS fortress that shoots dozens of super tracking dreadnought lasers? In my pants. True story
Arkhan Bayne	Posted - 2009.04.05 23:21:00 - [32] Originally by: Hat Lion Originally by: Miajoh Edited by: Miajoh on 05/04/2009 18:57:31 I want mining lasers on my freighter! I want ion siege blasters on my Obelisk so I can help with sieges in the only cap I can fly. CCP gief! Dear all suicide-gank fleets: "Surprise!" i think a kind of armed cargo ship would be quite cool - sacrificing cargo space for an offensive capability. i mean, practically it probably wouldn't work in eve, but i just think cargo ships would move in convoy, and, in areas where piracy was well known, armed escorts or decoy ships would be present hiding rather large guns or torpedos to give a nasty shock to any would-be pirates/enemy attackers. I mean, real nautical cargo vessels have been equipped like this in the past, so it makes sense from that point of view, even if it were restricted to NPC cargo vessels.
5pinDizzy	Posted - 2009.04.05 23:25:00 - [33] Originally by: OffBeaT Originally by: Tahlma Originally by: Ja'kar trolls trolls trolls and trolls - no wonder eve is so crap with so many wannbies I hate forum trolls too sir. I hate the stupid one liners too sir. I hate opening a thread and seeing an endless procession of nonsense too sir. But what I hate most is people who post things so stupid that it brings the trolls out in droves. Seriously WTF were you thinking with this thread? Did you intend to ring the troll diner bell? man! shut the **** up! That told him! Now maybe we can get back to our serious discussions about our battleships, well anyway like the op said; You can't have the game like it is where you can't kill something that's smaller then you ffs, it's unrealistic. My battleship has lasers for gods sake, did CCP even watch Star Wars? Notice how even the Super Star Destroyer only really got blown up because it crashed into the deathstar (much bigger). The Deathstar was so big it was invincible, that's why the Rebel Alliance had to cheat by going inside with developer mode and changing its description and attributes. if you disagree with me then you should probably post a response and stop reading my signature.
Derus Grobb Selectus Pravus Lupus	Posted - 2009.04.05 23:36:00 - [34] Originally by: Arkhan Bayne i think a kind of armed cargo ship would be quite cool - sacrificing cargo space for an offensive capability. Like a cruiser or a battleship or frigate or something? ---
Slave 2739FKZ	Posted - 2009.04.06 01:09:00 - [35] Go buy yourself a dreadnaught about it.
Haradgrim Tyrell Corp INTERDICTION	Posted - 2009.04.06 01:16:00 - [36] Originally by: Furb Killer Originally by: Wu Jiaqiu Originally by: Ja'kar Why can't we have different roles of ships like anti- cruiser anti-dread and a battleship that can cloaked and warp but be so crap at pvp? Am I missing something when cruisers are so powerful and frigates can hold down dread, but battleship just seem weak BECAUSE OF FALCON This man is correct Indeed -- Originally by: CCP Oveur Just donæt forget the reach-around.
Agent Known Apotheosis of Virtue	Posted - 2009.04.06 01:24:00 - [37] Originally by: Arkhan Bayne Originally by: Hat Lion Originally by: Miajoh Edited by: Miajoh on 05/04/2009 18:57:31 I want mining lasers on my freighter! I want ion siege blasters on my Obelisk so I can help with sieges in the only cap I can fly. CCP gief! Dear all suicide-gank fleets: "Surprise!" i think a kind of armed cargo ship would be quite cool - sacrificing cargo space for an offensive capability. i mean, practically it probably wouldn't work in eve, but i just think cargo ships would move in convoy, and, in areas where piracy was well known, armed escorts or decoy ships would be present hiding rather large guns or torpedos to give a nasty shock to any would-be pirates/enemy attackers. I mean, real nautical cargo vessels have been equipped like this in the past, so it makes sense from that point of view, even if it were restricted to NPC cargo vessels. Fear the Battle Badger. FEAR IT!
Another Forum'Alt Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2009.04.06 01:28:00 - [38] Guide to forum posting
Yelan Zhou Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2009.04.06 02:07:00 - [39] I wanted to say something but I forgot.
Shereza	Posted - 2009.04.06 03:00:00 - [40] I have to pee. ____________________ Minmatar in Fantasy or Duct Tape Goes Medieval.
Another Forum'Alt Gallente Center for Advanced Studies	Posted - 2009.04.06 03:01:00 - [41] I accidentally this thread. Guide to forum posting
Dirk Magnum Royal Hiigaran Navy SCUM.	Posted - 2009.04.06 03:30:00 - [42] CCP should just turn over all game design decisions to me. I'll leave no feature un-nerfed. Okay I typed that first bit and walked away from the computer for a few minutes and now I forget what I was trying to get at with this post. Well the first two sentences still apply, at any rate.
Johann Callasan Caldari	Posted - 2009.04.06 04:17:00 - [43] Originally by: Ja'kar Why can't we have different roles of ships like anti- cruiser anti-dread Want anti-cruiser? Fit heavies on a Raven and watch 'em melt. Or use medium drones on a Dominix. Or use medium rails on a ROkh for good anti-frigate sniping fun. Or even large on a Rokh with a couple of tracking enhancers, and medium drones for when they get too close. Alternatively, fit a webber and use the large on 'em. Four large should one-shot a cruiser with Antimatter loaded... Creativity can go far in EvE, after all.. though I wouldn't use any of the above in anything other than a fleet fit. Now, for your anti-dread BS...that I can't say. Quote: and a battleship that can cloaked and warp but be so crap at pvp? Look up Black Ops ships sometime....it's a eye-opener. Quote: Am I missing something when cruisers are so powerful and frigates can hold down dread, but battleship just seem weak Yes you are, see above for some pointers. A good-skills battleship should be able to own cruisers easily unless swarmed - NOTHING can stand being swarmed by enough ships.
Johann Callasan Caldari	Posted - 2009.04.06 04:20:00 - [44] Originally by: Arkhan Bayne Originally by: Hat Lion Originally by: Miajoh Edited by: Miajoh on 05/04/2009 18:57:31 I want mining lasers on my freighter! I want ion siege blasters on my Obelisk so I can help with sieges in the only cap I can fly. CCP gief! Dear all suicide-gank fleets: "Surprise!" i think a kind of armed cargo ship would be quite cool - sacrificing cargo space for an offensive capability. i mean, practically it probably wouldn't work in eve, but i just think cargo ships would move in convoy, and, in areas where piracy was well known, armed escorts or decoy ships would be present hiding rather large guns or torpedos to give a nasty shock to any would-be pirates/enemy attackers. I mean, real nautical cargo vessels have been equipped like this in the past, so it makes sense from that point of view, even if it were restricted to NPC cargo vessels. Ya, ships have been fitted like that in the past - mostly freighters that had medium deck guns (4-inch and similar) installed. They were called "Q-ships" and in reality didn't fare all that well - they still had ALL the disadvantages of a freighhter, they just had some pewpew on 'em...and deck guns are only useful if the submarine surfaces. Believe me, it's been requested - the "Battle Badger" is a running joke around here, after all.
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.04.06 05:03:00 - [45] Originally by: Ja'kar Why can't we have different roles of ships like anti- cruiser anti-dread and a battleship that can cloaked and warp but be so crap at pvp? Am I missing something when cruisers are so powerful and frigates can hold down dread, but battleship just seem weak Battleships are fine. You're complaining because your big ship wont necessarily kill small ships. Big tank and big gank doesn't mean that you just target -> F1 - F8. It means that, IF YOU CAN SUCCESSFULLY MINIMIZE YOUR DISADVANTAGES (slow tracking, slow speed, etc) then you'll beat any other subcap in the game.
Agent Known Apotheosis of Virtue	Posted - 2009.04.06 05:38:00 - [46] WHY CAN'T WE HAVE NICE THINGS? inb4falcon Anything can be anti-something if fit properly...except of course the obvious (Rookie ship vs. frigate = )
Spurty Caldari Amok. Minor Threat.	Posted - 2009.04.06 05:59:00 - [47] Originally by: Another Forum'Alt best image evah Originally by: Butter Dog I think you'll find that 10 seconds > 1 month
Hiroshima Jita	Posted - 2009.04.06 06:06:00 - [48] The forums are about entertainment. Good, well thought out arguments can be entertaining, but smacktalk is too. And smacktalk is more about style. And scoring points. So to go to the meta conversation. Man makes stupid post-> people troll the thread because since theres not much room for intelligent conversation, that only leaves the other option. But taking the op seriously. Battleships are always better than cruisers. If you fit nuets, scram and web theres no way a cruiser can win. Battleships have more dps, more tank, more cap. They even are better at utility things like rr than a corresponding logistics because they can do substantial rr and retain that tank and dps. But they have less speed and LESS AGILITY. EvE is all about te blob. If you leave something out there for an indefinite period of time people will blob it. If you stumble around eventually you will hit a blob. Slow battleships are easy to blob. That means you need a little bit more skill to pilot one. And for solo work you might want to be in something smaller thats better at avoiding the blob.
Djana Libra Caldari Federation of Freedom Fighters Aggression.	Posted - 2009.04.06 06:34:00 - [49] Can I have a BS that can fit a Doomsday Device, TechII Lag Generator, Jump Portal Generator, also it has to be able to control 50 fighters and have 20 gunslots TYVM <SIG> I bought the wife a toy Deimos to have fun with while i play eve! </SIG>
Poz McAIDS	Posted - 2009.04.06 08:20:00 - [50] IMHO the OP is correct. Battleships suck for PVP. PVE they are great, marauders are superb, Navy issue ships perform well, and faction BS are good too. But in PVP they either cost far too much to justify deploying, like marauders or faction ships and you'll be primary straightaway. Solo they are slow and cumbersome, very easy to tackle, and easy to kill. No-one solos in BS. They take the longest to lock any target, why do the biggest ships have the worst locking times, that doesn't make much sense? The guns have the worst tracking, I mean that at least is justifiable. Slow to warp, yet take the longest times to train, cost the most, and are pretty redundant in PVP and gang warfare.
The Ratface Hunters Imperiale PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.06 08:47:00 - [51] Originally by: Poz McAIDS stuff -are pretty redundant in PVP and gang warfare. I can't figure out if theres some sarcasm involved here or not
123GuessWho	Posted - 2009.04.06 08:49:00 - [52] Originally by: Poz McAIDS Battleships suck for solo PVP Fixed it for ya. BS' are dirt cheap if you insure them. Take a look at a 0.0 battlefield, theres always a ****load of BS' on it.
Tippia Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2009.04.06 08:56:00 - [53] Originally by: Poz McAIDS Solo they are slow and cumbersome, very easy to tackle, and easy to kill. No-one solos in BS. Originally by: Poz McAIDS Solo they are slow and cumbersome Originally by: Poz McAIDS Solo Found your problem. <snotty-mode=off> Ok, so battleships are apparently not for solo PvP. So what? Why is that a problem? What is the role you see them in that would make them viable solo, but not make them overpowered? ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Poz McAIDS	Posted - 2009.04.06 13:45:00 - [54] the solo role of a BS is mission running :), and who cares if that becomes more powerful? I've always felt a degree of resentment toward T2 cruisers and how the apparently outpower, or are at least more suitable than BS for small gang warfare, and especially solo low sec flying. This resentment is because I have 2 race BS at 5 and marauders at 4... yet I dont have cruiser at 5 :) Maybe I've trained the wrong stuff, or maybe, the most expensive and longest skill time stuff should be a better ship. It seems disproportionate that a shorter and less expensive skill plan should result in a better pvp ship.
AkRoYeR Amarr	Posted - 2009.04.06 14:37:00 - [55] Originally by: Miajoh Edited by: Miajoh on 05/04/2009 18:57:31 I want mining lasers on my freighter! Iternought FTW!
Tippia Raddick Explorations BlackWater.	Posted - 2009.04.06 15:09:00 - [56] Originally by: Poz McAIDS Maybe I've trained the wrong stuff, or maybe, the most expensive and longest skill time stuff should be a better ship. It seems disproportionate that a shorter and less expensive skill plan should result in a better pvp ship. No, it's just I think you fall into the trap of thinking "more = better" (or, technically, longer = better). That said, though, you might want to look into how much time is required to get into a battleship and make it combat-worthy, compared to one of the T2 cruisers… At any rate, battleships have one key role: force projection. With their large weapons, and large amounts of large weapons, and ability to fit large amounts of weapon boosting modules to those large amounts of large weapons (etc ad nauseam), they perform that role admirably. This does not mean that they are omnipotent — they will need help to bring all that firepower to bear, and that's a good thing. If they get that help, things go squish; if they don't, they go squish. If they were able to perform like that on their own, there would be no use or need for anything else and suddenly, the 29 ship classes in EVE would be reduced to at most 5-6 who'd still be useful. That's why they can't become more powerful and that's why you should care. Improving them would mean everyone would fly one, and you'd still not feel like your battleship had any oomph because you'd be just like everyone else. Very little squish would be had in either direction. Battleships are better PvP ships… in their particular role — same as HICs, same as HACs, same as CSs, same as Interceptors, same as Dreadnoughts, same as Carriers, same as (again etc ad nauseam). Sure, there are some classes that don't have much place in PvP for various reason (marauders, transports, barges), but they have other roles at which they excel. Yes, they may be lacking in small gang warfare and solo lowsec flying, but that's for a couple of very simple reason: solo, they will by very definition lack the help they need to fully make use of their firepower. In small groups, they will lack the speed and agility to keep up with the gang (cf. in larger fleets, battleships are the gang, and the support centers around them — in smaller fleets, battleships are the slowmofos dragging behind and holding everyone up). In essence, you're expecting them to be useful in a role for which they're not designed — no different than if you brought a frigate to a POS bash or used a dread as your main tackler. ——— “If you're not willing to fight for what you have in =v=… you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.” — Karath Piki
Ris Dnalor Minmatar Sebiestor tribe	Posted - 2009.04.07 05:30:00 - [57] It's because battleships in 2003 were incredibly powerful wtfpwnmobiles that were wonderful solo ships for pvp. So wonderful that they were balanced into oblivion. Mind you, I think the worse lock time is ******ed in concept, as the battleship would have much more room for more sophisticated and just plain more sensor arrays for to acquire lock faster and track objects more accurately. However, this goes against what CCP has setup in terms of balance to make the smaller ships worth flying. They've made all these shiny models, and they would be upset if everyone just flew a battleship, you know. Personally I think CCP should make rigs be different sizes for different ships (like they've been discussing recently) and I think when they do that they could make rigs for battleships that would help them take on special roles for anti-frig and anti-cruiser warfare. Perhaps 1 rig would decrease lock time by 50% but would also reduce weapon range (& drone control range) by half and reduces shields, armor, and hull to 50% of original Or another rig that would increase tracking by 50% but lowers rate-of-fire (incl. drones) to half and reduces damage by 50%. just thoughts. just thoughts.
temponita	Posted - 2009.04.07 05:51:00 - [58] Originally by: Ris Dnalor It's because battleships in 2003 were incredibly powerful wtfpwnmobiles that were wonderful solo ships for pvp. So wonderful that they were balanced into oblivion. Mind you, I think the worse lock time is ******ed in concept, as the battleship would have much more room for more sophisticated and just plain more sensor arrays for to acquire lock faster and track objects more accurately. This comment brought a tear to my eye(sniff)! There are far to many stranger than fiction cases of this throughout the game tbh. And CCP lacked the balls to stand their ground against the hoard of subscription threatening winers who claimed they couldn't play the game because of this and that(translated; crying no fair). Yes... to all you whiners out there, battleships are deadlier than cruiser, and cruisers are faster than battleships and so on and so forth! But... since CCP chose not to stand for the logical approach, they got caught-up in a winefest of "I can't do what I want with this and that scenario's" until things are where they are now. A gameplay saturated with exceptions rather than logical function. This is what happens when the God's cater to both good and evil in a world. IMO. they should have made crime(piracy) an option that would of gone against the greater good rather than play the devils advocate and nerf the game into oblivion. Bu hey... that's just me

CCP Applebabe	Posted - 2009.04.07 06:43:00 - [59] This thread has been driven too far away from the topic. Locked. Applebabe Community Representative CCP Hf, EVE Online Contact us


Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.