EVE Search - T2 BS's

All Channels

Ships and Modules

T2 BS's

» 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 - 0 post(s)
ikillu532	Posted - 2009.04.21 22:01:00 - [1] CCP needs to put out a new t2 bs. Maruaders are the only t2 bs's of tactical use, you don't train black ops unless your training for a black ops ship specifically. I'm not sure what t2 they would put in but I'm sure they could think of one. Or maybe just a beef-up of t1 bs's is in order.
Allahs Warrior Gallente I.M.M	Posted - 2009.04.21 22:13:00 - [2] the system is cynojammed! *** what do we do? Send in bombers and recons But all gates are camped! black ops. oshi- BOOSH Marauders are the ones that suck. Nobody ever uses marauders in 0.0
ikillu532	Posted - 2009.04.21 22:20:00 - [3] I never said black ops suck, I'm just saying damage-wise they can't be up to par with a maruader.
chrisss0r	Posted - 2009.04.21 22:21:00 - [4] dps is the only important thing in eve!
ikillu532	Posted - 2009.04.21 22:29:00 - [5] Does anyone have any 'serious' suggestions to a new t2 bs?
Waxau Mortis Angelus The Church.	Posted - 2009.04.21 22:36:00 - [6] Originally by: ikillu532 Does anyone have any 'serious' suggestions to a new t2 bs? How bout we let CCP fix the ones they released over a year ago first?
Guillame Herschel Gallente Buffalo Soldiers	Posted - 2009.04.21 22:41:00 - [7] Originally by: Allahs Warrior Marauders are the ones that suck. Nobody ever uses marauders in 0.0 I've seen plenty. They make great belt ratters, you know, what non-mining residents of 0.0 do for income... *-- The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then* --**
Kahega Amielden Minmatar Suddenly Ninjas	Posted - 2009.04.21 22:54:00 - [8] Quote: you don't train black ops unless your training for a black ops ship specifically. Fascinating.
Scyala	Posted - 2009.04.21 23:22:00 - [9] Originally by: ikillu532 Does anyone have any 'serious' suggestions to a new t2 bs? Do you? 'I want more' Seems like a poor excuse for a thread. What role do you feel needs to be filled that is not currently?
ikillu532	Posted - 2009.04.21 23:33:00 - [10] Do you? 'I want more' Seems like a poor excuse for a thread. What role do you feel needs to be filled that is not currently? Well I was thinking of a class that was basically interceptor bs's, for tackling and evasion purposes.
Constantine Arcanum IMPERIAL SENATE	Posted - 2009.04.21 23:35:00 - [11] Originally by: ikillu532 Do you? 'I want more' Seems like a poor excuse for a thread. What role do you feel needs to be filled that is not currently? Well I was thinking of a class that was basically interceptor bs's, for tackling and evasion purposes. But for that we have HICS, dictors, and inties.
ikillu532	Posted - 2009.04.21 23:41:00 - [12] The tech 2 resists and bonuses would give it that extra power it needs to outlast HIC's, dictors, and inties. The sheer destruction of large guns and cruise/siege missiles would make a formidable ship that players would strive to train for.
Leon Caedo	Posted - 2009.04.21 23:45:00 - [13] Originally by: ikillu532 The tech 2 resists and bonuses would give it that extra power it needs to outlast HIC's, dictors, and inties. The sheer destruction of large guns and cruise/siege missiles would make a formidable ship that players would strive to train for. ... you mean like what a marauder is? The only reasons it 'sucks' in pvp as far as I can see are its price tag and crappy sensor strength. Its kind of hard to finance pvp using a ship that costs close to 1 bil before mods.
ikillu532	Posted - 2009.04.21 23:48:00 - [14] Never mind, it was a ******ed idea, just fix what we have.
odst Captain15	Posted - 2009.04.22 01:04:00 - [15] we need a more wallet freindly t2 pvp battleship.......
AFTERMARKET	Posted - 2009.04.22 02:00:00 - [16] Originally by: odst Captain15 we need a more wallet freindly t2 pvp battleship....... but then i would miss the t1 battleships
Artemis Rose Sileo In Pacis PuPPet MasTers	Posted - 2009.04.22 02:03:00 - [17] I'd say the Black Ops have more tactical uses than a Marauder. A marauder is generally only used by gatecampers e-peen waving when they've got the situation fully in their control, or by docking range heroes. At least the Black Op does something different than tank 'n gank. *** Currently Playing: Trolls from Outer Space Current Equipment: VISAcard chain mail, +2 Amulet of Epic Whine, Self Banstick +2 WTB: +666 E-peen killboard stats
Scyala	Posted - 2009.04.22 02:13:00 - [18] Originally by: odst Captain15 we need a more wallet freindly t2 pvp battleship....... that's a T1 battleship...
Gabriel Lioncourt	Posted - 2009.04.22 02:30:00 - [19] perhaps a Superheavy Assault Ship is in order here?
Dallenovic Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.22 03:02:00 - [20] This is a fail thread, there is not much room for more t2 battleships. If you go with the super doopa heavy assault ships style it will make things go "breasts" up in the game as this will be the new ship of choice and completely savage all others. Marauders are fun as they have dps, tank but very low sensor strength so using them in pvp is a bit dodgey. Black ops PWN, get a bomber gang with a couple of rapiers and arazu with covert cynos on and your off for a wicked gang that has plenty of DPS and tackle. If u want some super support, bring in the redeemers and widows. Someone had the idea of bs sized logistics which is a great idea, but given the effectiveness of the RR gangs i neve atmthis will only increase there strength. But they could be implemented with soem kind of draw back to make these ships fair. And these would also have to be used a lot as bait... awsome EHPs If you want to have a great battleship and use your high battleship skills then why not grab a faction battleship. Giving battleships extra bonii related to pvp would make them far too overpowered. In all fairness CCP need to look into command ships as these are being less frequently used now in pvp. BC sized assault t2 is imo the highest hull size these ships should go and field command ships are it.
EFT Warrior	Posted - 2009.04.22 03:13:00 - [21] Judging by the release of T3 cruisers, I'd say we don't need much more variety as it were. The only other non-dedicated role I can think of is a Salvaging/Exploration type ship. Now me personally I would've put remote sensor boosters or remote ECCM on the Gallente/Caldari logistics ship instead of energy transfers and tracking links. It seems that may have been the entire point of those modules was to fit it to logistics.
Angelos	Posted - 2009.04.22 03:17:00 - [22] We just need more faction BS's, that's all.
Gabriel Lioncourt	Posted - 2009.04.22 03:45:00 - [23] We need Jove ships
Dallenovic Rionnag Alba Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2009.04.22 03:56:00 - [24] Originally by: Gabriel Lioncourt We need Jove ships WTB Jovian frigate with 99.9% shield resists !!!! 500 dps and 8k/s
Gabriel Lioncourt	Posted - 2009.04.22 04:17:00 - [25] Originally by: Dallenovic Originally by: Gabriel Lioncourt We need Jove ships WTB Jovian frigate with 99.9% shield resists !!!! 500 dps and 8k/s OMFG YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Angelos	Posted - 2009.04.22 04:40:00 - [26] Originally by: Gabriel Lioncourt Originally by: Dallenovic Originally by: Gabriel Lioncourt We need Jove ships WTB Jovian frigate with 99.9% shield resists !!!! 500 dps and 8k/s OMFG YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Saw one for sale yesterday for 1 bil.
Renarla	Posted - 2009.04.22 05:47:00 - [27] I'm no 0.0 dweller, but this is how I see a Black Ops covert jump bridge op trying to get into a cynojammed system going: Scout goes in, gate is camped. If he's lucky he can warp to a SS in his CovOps and drop a Covert Cyno. Black Ops has enough fuel to jump about 5 Stealth Bombers and itself in. Shoot 1 volley at POS or gatecamp Lose about a billion isk?
Sonreir Gallente Band of Builders Inc. Libera Alliance	Posted - 2009.04.22 06:59:00 - [28] An anti-support BS with bonuses to medium turrets/heavy missiles might be fun to fly. For Gallente maybe add a bonus to drone hit points, speed, and damage. Nerf the lock range down to 30km (base) or so and give heavy bonuses to tracking or explosion velocity. Keep drone bandwidth at 25. Also, keep the DPS relatively low so it's not a serious threat to other large ships, but something that outclasses BCs for killing cruisers and below.
Aceru Gallente Apellon	Posted - 2009.04.22 07:20:00 - [29] Originally by: Sonreir An anti-support BS with bonuses to medium turrets/heavy missiles might be fun to fly. For Gallente maybe add a bonus to drone hit points, speed, and damage. Nerf the lock range down to 30km (base) or so and give heavy bonuses to tracking or explosion velocity. Keep drone bandwidth at 25. Also, keep the DPS relatively low so it's not a serious threat to other large ships, but something that outclasses BCs for killing cruisers and below. Someone's going to bash you in a moment for this, so I'll do it in a nice way. HACs. Gtfo. Much love, Aceru. <3
4 LOM United Gamers	Posted - 2009.04.22 07:34:00 - [30] Originally by: Sonreir An anti-support BS with bonuses to medium turrets/heavy missiles might be fun to fly. For Gallente maybe add a bonus to drone hit points, speed, and damage. And we could call it a battlecruiser.... wait no that name is allready taken... Why on earth would anyone run a tech 2 bs (so ~1B isk ship) as an anti-support ship when there are tons of ships that would do the job better for fractions of the isk. I dont think we need any more tech 2 battleships. (only possible one i would support would be logistics, but in that price range just bringa carrier) What i want to see next: are strategic frigates, and i hate to say this but some exploration ships, and maybe some more industrial type ships (combat haulers? use current hulls and show up on scanners like those current hulls but have a vastly reduced caro hold and incrase combata capability). Originally by: Twilight Moon of course you have nice hair. That pod goo, is actually VO5 conditioner.

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.