EVE Search - are battlecruisers crusiers or battleships?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE New Citizens Q&A

are battlecruisers crusiers or battleships?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mocam	Posted - 2009.12.16 00:27:00 - [1] Odd question but I ran across a mission where the agent stated that I could use up to a battleship but it wouldn't let me use my BC for the mission (HAC, SC -- sure but not a BC). As such it got me thinking a bit about things like afterburners and the like. If a BC is considered a cruiser then cruiser sized modules should be loaded but if it's considered a BS then it'd be designed for BS class modules. I know you can load a frigate class AB on a larger ship and they work (tried it), though not to full effect, so I figured I'd ask about this.
SupaKudoRio	Posted - 2009.12.16 00:35:00 - [2] BCs are their own class, though they use cruiser size modules (and can use some of the same stuff as BS, minus weapons, for specialized tasks. e.g. a 100MN afterburner to go at MWD-like speed without MWD restrictions, though that ruins their agility). I think a dev may have just forgotten to add battlecruisers to the list of allowed ships. On another note, how do you like your pods in the morning?
Estel Arador Minmatar Estel Arador Corp Services	Posted - 2009.12.16 00:35:00 - [3] Battlecruisers are "medium", you could think of them as large cruisers. Afterburners and MicroWarpDrives take the mass of the ship into account with their speed bonus (the bonus listed in the item description is the maximum bonus). Heavy ships will not get as big a speed boost as less heavy ships. I'm not sure if the mass of BCs is high enough to affect the speed bonus though. The mission description should mention exactly which ships are allowed (you can see that by clicking on "ship restrictions" in the mission details - if "ship restrictions" is not shown you can use any ship). Free jumpclone service: Thread\|Shares available!
Ruziel Minmatar Twilight Military Industrial Complex	Posted - 2009.12.16 00:47:00 - [4] Originally by: Estel Arador The mission description should mention exactly which ships are allowed (you can see that by clicking on "ship restrictions" in the mission details - if "ship restrictions" is not shown you can use any ship). I wouldn't put full credence in the ship restriction list. For several L4 missions, I have noticed that plain Battleships are not included in the list, where Marauders, Black Ops and Elite Battleships are included. Battleships were, however, allowed past the gate.
Baka Lakadaka Gallente Agony Unleashed Agony Empire	Posted - 2009.12.16 01:18:00 - [5] There are two "in-between" ship classes in Eve. The Destroyer is an in-between class, that is effectively a large frigate. It uses frigate sized weapons, modules and rigs. The Battle-cruiser is the other one, it's effectively a large cruiser. It uses cruiser sized weapons, modules and rigs. The main advantage of these classes is that they are not race specific. If you can fly all of that race's cruisers, you can fly the battle-cruisers, provided you have the generic battle-cruiser skill to the right level. The bonuses for Battle-cruisers are for medium sized modules as well. You should, in general, always try to work your bonuses. ______________________ Agony Unleashed Home of the PvP University.
Luciboss Point of No Return	Posted - 2009.12.16 02:52:00 - [6] Originally by: Ruziel I wouldn't put full credence in the ship restriction list. For several L4 missions, I have noticed that plain Battleships are not included in the list, where Marauders, Black Ops and Elite Battleships are included. Battleships were, however, allowed past the gate. The list will not include the ship you are currently in. Read the full text before the list for confirmation that your battleship is allowed in.
D melanogaster Minmatar The Fruit Flys	Posted - 2009.12.16 02:55:00 - [7] usually it says something like "you can use your drake class battlecruiser or any other ships on this list." then it doesn't include the ship you are flying. If it says "normal ship restrictions" then you can bring any class in afaik
Ruziel Minmatar Twilight Military Industrial Complex	Posted - 2009.12.16 05:59:00 - [8] You know, I just noticed that while on one of my alts. That'll teach me not to read the whole thing.
pussnheels	Posted - 2009.12.16 08:49:00 - [9] Historicly Battlecruisers are Battleships size and the same size of guns but sacrficing huge amount of armor in favor for speed. In EvE isee them more as heavy cruisers then battlecruisers. Would be great to see real battlecruisers aswell in EVE Battleshipsize and battleship size weapons but with the speed and armor /shielding of a cruiser, doubt it would ever happen tho only know realized this wasn't the topic , too late
Mocam	Posted - 2009.12.16 09:33:00 - [10] Edited by: Mocam on 16/12/2009 09:33:28 Thanks for all the replies on the question. The text said up to battleships but checking the restrictions, battlecruisers weren't listed and it said "you cannot take..." in the text. My primary concern was with modules for the ship so I decided to check out fittings on a vexor cruiser to see what happens. 1mm AB came in at 117%. (frigate class) 10mm AB cam in at 222%. (cruiser class) 100mm AB came in at 409%. (battleship class) Yeah I dumped the fraction portions but checking them out like that kind of surprised me a bit but also made me figure it really doesn't matter. Put the friggn unit in the ship and live with the bonuses you get -- if you can squeeze in a bigger unit, you'll get more bang for your buck but you'll also have less stuff you can put into it so it doesn't break anything in any way I could see. (I disabled my guns to load the battleship class AB -- pig of a power source needed for that class ship...) So my concern about the "module for ship class:..." is a fairly null issue if that's more a recommendation than some kind of actual "ship" limitation. Again, thanks for the comments.

Toshiro GreyHawk	Posted - 2009.12.16 12:49:00 - [11] Edited by: Toshiro GreyHawk on 16/12/2009 12:54:42 Originally by: pussnheels Historicly Battlecruisers are Battleships size and the same size of guns but sacrficing huge amount of armor in favor for speed. In EvE isee them more as heavy cruisers then battlecruisers. ... Yes. Which leads to some initial confusion for those of us with a back ground in Naval Wargaming ... As to the OP's comment on fitting over sized modules - that is actually very common. It is common place, for example, to see Cruisers with 1600mm Armor or Large Shield Extenders. Some over sized modules just lend themselves more to certain classes than others. Putting Medium Shield Extenders on Frigates is something you usually don't see. Mostly the frigate just doesn't have the power grid for it. If you want to experiment with just what you could fit, there are modules which increase the Power Grid and CPU. One of the things that restricts the usage of over sized modules for such as Weapons is the appropriateness of these weapons to the targets to be engaged. Historically, while it was possible for a destroyer to get so close that battleships had trouble hitting it because they couldn't depress their guns enough, "getting under the guns" of the larger ship, this was actually extremely rare in practice and mostly occurred during night engagements. Other than that - Battleships didn't have to much trouble hitting destroyers. The biggest problem there was the travel time for the shell, which in EVE is instantaneous. Turret Tracking Speed - is an EVE game mechanic with NO real application in reality. Space ships especially can roll their hulls so - the idea that a ship could orbit them faster than they could roll, except for extremely different ship sizes - is absurd. Thus, in EVE, if you did put over sized guns on a ship, what would happen (because of the turret speed game mechanic) would be that it would have a lot of trouble hitting the types of targets the hull was intended to be able to tank - and have no ability to tank the type of guns (other than possibly a speed tank) of the ships it's guns could easily hit. Now - while historically - Battle Cruisers had no trouble engaging smaller ships - they did repeatedly run into trouble when used against ships with the same class guns they carried. There is a long list of Battle Cruisers being destroyed while engaging other Battle Cruisers or Battleships. The problem there - was with the concept behind the historic Battle Cruisers not being followed in practice. They were DESIGNED to be used strategically, able to "Run Away From Anything They Couldn't Destroy and Destroy Anything They Couldn't Run Away From". Thus - in a commerce raiding mode - they worked ... so long as they did what they were designed to do. The trouble was ... they LOOKED like Battleships - and so they tended to be included in the line of battle ... to ill effect. Hood vs. Bismarck Scharnhorst vs. Duke of York Kirishima vs. Washington The Battle Cruiser lost badly in each instance ... this is not to mention the 3 British Battle Cruisers, Invincible, Indefatigable and Queen Mary which blew up during the Battle of Jutland. Now - the historic ships that would most closely resemble an EVE Battle Cruiser someone put some big guns on - would be the German Pocket Battleships of WWII. Here, you had Cruiser sized hulls mounting two, triple 11" gun turrets. These ships, Lutzow, Scheer and Graf Spee along with the Battle Cruisers Scharnhorst and Gneisenau, (all using the same guns) when used as commerce raiders - were fairly successful in the early days of WWII before commerce raiding by surface ships was done in by long range search aircraft. The thing is, because of the concept of warp drives, micro warp drives and warp scramblers ... there isn't that much resemblance between historic naval tactics and those in EVE. Orbiting vs. Kiting Faction Schools
Akita T Caldari Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2009.12.16 13:45:00 - [12] Edited by: Akita T on 16/12/2009 13:46:54 One more thing to consider when using oversized afterburners/MWDs : you get an INSANELY BIG mass addition. Your agility gets cut down roughly to 1/4->1/6 of your previous agility. So, yes, while you do have a much higher top speed, reaching that top speed will take much longer... if you can even sustain the needed capacitor consumption in the first place. Oh, and forget about orbiting, you won't be reaching anything even close to your top speed at all, straight line or bust. _ We are recruiting \| Beginner's ISK making guide \| Manufacturer's helper
Zartanic Red Federation	Posted - 2009.12.16 14:06:00 - [13] Edited by: Zartanic on 16/12/2009 14:07:23 In real life you also had pocket battleships. These were between battleships and battle cruisers. They had a similar concept to battle cruisers, faster and lighter, but bigger guns. The Germans had these in WW2 to get round the weight restrictions of ships they could build while trying to maintain battleship class.
Chinese Jew Amarr Hedion University	Posted - 2009.12.16 17:33:00 - [14] i think the bc / bs relationship in eve and in real life are pretty much similar. you either sacrifice firepower for tank or vice versa. speed however is where things differ. the best bs in real life were even faster than cruisers of the same era while in eve the bigger you get, the slower your ship goes. also HACS = Heavy Cruisers
Toshiro GreyHawk	Posted - 2009.12.17 00:12:00 - [15] Originally by: Chinese Jew i think the bc / bs relationship in eve and in real life are pretty much similar. you either sacrifice firepower for tank or vice versa. speed however is where things differ. the best bs in real life were even faster than cruisers of the same era while in eve the bigger you get, the slower your ship goes. also HACS = Heavy Cruisers Real life BC's used BS guns. BC's in EVE use Cruiser Guns. As to speed, the WWII Cruisers could go faster than the WWII Battleships for the most part. Here though you have a problem with the fact that you had a lot of WWII Battleships that fought in WWI as well. Then you had a number that were built between the wars. So it really depends on which WWII Battleships you are talking about. The newer ones were a lot faster than the older ones - even though these old ones were often considered "fast" Battleships in their day. The slower Battleships could do in the vicinity of 20-23 knots. The faster ones 28-33 knots. Newer Cruisers and Destroyers could do up around 40 knots - though they rarely did so. As to HACS being the equivalent of Heavy Cruisers ... they just didn't have a T2 category of ships in WWII ... so trying to make a comparison there ... just breaks down. Now of course ... when you get to the Missile Boats of Modern navies ... there just aren't any consistent classes. The US Navy for example uses the Spruance Class Destroyers and the Aegis Class Missile Cruisers. These ships have THE EXACT SAME HULL and mostly the same super structure. Here, the US Navy classifies ships by their job rather than by their size. Destroyers are primarily Anti Submarine Ships whereas Cruisers are primarily Anti Aircraft Ships. Of course the USN did something similar in WWII. It had a whole series of 10,000 ton ships which varied mostly in their armament. They were all the same size but had different weapons. Some had nine 8" Guns, some 12-15 6" guns and some 24 5" guns. The 8" guns ships were categorized as Heavy, the 6" Light and the 5" as Anti Aircraft - but they were all pretty much the same size. Other nations didn't do that at all. Their Heavies typically had 8" guns and their Lights 6" guns but the Heavies were much bigger than the Lights and the Lights had far fewer guns than an American ship. For example, the Exeter had six 8" guns while the Ajax had eight 6" guns. Japanes Light Cruisers were used as Destroyer Flotilla Leaders and not that much bigger than the destroyers they led. Orbiting vs. Kiting Faction Schools
Chinese Jew Amarr Hedion University	Posted - 2009.12.17 19:11:00 - [16] Originally by: Toshiro GreyHawk Edited by: Toshiro GreyHawk on 17/12/2009 00:31:49 Real life BC's used BS guns. BC's in EVE use Cruiser Guns. As to speed, the WWII Cruisers and Destroyers could go faster than the WWII Battleships for the most part, depending on the sea state. In heavy seas - the bigger ships could cope better and were faster while the lighter ships had trouble ... and in a typhoon ... might sink. In light seas - the destroyers and cruisers could make use of the lightness of their hulls and were able to out run the battle ships. Of course another consideration was fuel. Destroyers ... not being that big ... just couldn't carry that much fuel and if they ran around at flank speed a lot would burn it all up. They could be refueled, however, at least in the US Navy - from a larger ship such as a Battleship or an Aircraft Carrier if there wasn't ready access to a tanker - but then you had to do that which was not a trivial maneuver. Here though you have a problem with the fact that you had a lot of WWII Battleships that fought in WWI as well. Then you had a number that were built between the wars. So it really depends on which WWII Battleships you are talking about. The newer ones were a lot faster than the older ones - even though these old ones were often considered "fast" Battleships in their day. The slower Battleships could do in the vicinity of 20-23 knots. The faster ones 28-33 knots. Newer Cruisers and Destroyers could do up around 40 knots - though they rarely did so. As to HACS being the equivalent of Heavy Cruisers ... they just didn't have a T2 category of ships in WWII ... so trying to make a comparison there ... just breaks down. Now of course ... when you get to the Missile Boats of Modern navies ... there just aren't any consistent classes. The US Navy for example uses the Spruance Class Destroyers and the Aegis Class Missile Cruisers. These ships have THE EXACT SAME HULL and mostly the same super structure. Here, the US Navy classifies ships by their job rather than by their size. Destroyers are primarily Anti Submarine Ships whereas Cruisers are primarily Anti Aircraft Ships. Of course the USN did something similar in WWII. It had a whole series of 10,000 ton ships which varied mostly in their armament. They were all the same size but had different weapons. Some had nine 8" Guns, some 12-15 6" guns and some 16 5" guns. The 8" guns ships were categorized as Heavy, the 6" Light and the 5" as Anti Aircraft - but they were all pretty much the same size. Other nations didn't do that at all. Their Heavies typically had 8" guns and their Lights 6" guns but the Heavies were much bigger than the Lights and the Lights had far fewer guns than an American ship. For example, the Exeter had six 8" guns while the Ajax had eight 6" guns. Japanes Light Cruisers were used as Destroyer Flotilla Leaders and not that much bigger than the destroyers they led. wow explosion of geekness there. read my original post and your last post, i dont see a connection at all (did i explicitily mention guns?). and your comment about the hac = heavy cruiser thing just shouts stupidity (T2 in RL my a$$). the comments are really getting far away from the OP's Topic, fueled by "i know more internetz than you" quotations/novellas by internet warriors. anyway im pretty sure the op already got his answer in this thread or atleast in game. gluck to the op and fly safe /done with the thread
Intense Thinker Minmatar	Posted - 2009.12.18 04:04:00 - [17] Edited by: Intense Thinker on 18/12/2009 04:03:39 To answer your question let me ask you another one... what's the second word in battlecruiser? Originally by: a51 duke1406 The girls just dont understand that sunday is pvp night, not cuddle on the couch watching tv night.
James Tritanius	Posted - 2009.12.18 06:12:00 - [18] Originally by: Intense Thinker Edited by: Intense Thinker on 18/12/2009 04:03:39 To answer your question let me ask you another one... what's the second word in battlecruiser? Fail. Obviously you aren't thinking intensely enough...
Imperator Jora'h	Posted - 2009.12.18 16:11:00 - [19] In real life navies the line between battlecruisers and battleships is a blurry one at best. The HMS Hood, while technically a battlecruiser, had a protection scheme roughly equivalent to the Queen Elizabeth Class battleships. As for the speed (noted earlier) battleships were very fast. Yes, a destroyer under ideal conditions could go faster for a short sprint (and then not by a whole lot) but doing so was insanely costly in terms of fuel for the destroyer. Add in they were more susceptible to bad seas slowing them down. Their normal (read efficient) cruising speed was a lot slower than a battleship. -------------------------------------------------- "Of course," said my grandfather, pulling a gun from his belt as he stepped from the Time Machine, "there's no paradox if I shoot you!"
F'nog Amarr Viziam	Posted - 2009.12.19 07:41:00 - [20] @Toshiro When BCs were originally envisioned, the devs wanted them to be just like real BCs, but that quickly changed and they were turned into bigger, badder cruisers. Interestingly, during beta testing for them, they had insane amounts of PG. I outfitted one on Sisi with the most PG-intensive mods at the time and still had thousands of PG left over; sort of like CPU on an Indy. It was kind of neat, but not enough to fit more than one or two BS-class weapons. So the devs toned them down before it went live with Exodus so that now they're just badass cruisers with limitations. Therefore Intense Thinker is actually correct in the optimal word being "cruiser". Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari F'nog for Amarr Emperor. Nuff said

Toshiro GreyHawk	Posted - 2009.12.19 12:19:00 - [21] Originally by: Chinese Jew Originally by: Toshiro GreyHawk Edited by: Toshiro GreyHawk on 17/12/2009 00:31:49 Stuff I said. wow explosion of geekness there. read my original post and your last post, i dont see a connection at all (did i explicitily mention guns?). and your comment about the hac = heavy cruiser thing just shouts stupidity (T2 in RL my a$$). the comments are really getting far away from the OP's Topic, fueled by "i know more internetz than you" quotations/novellas by internet warriors. anyway im pretty sure the op already got his answer in this thread or atleast in game. ... Wow - some people really don't like being shown that they are wrong ... but that doesn't stop them from being wrong some more (except about the geek thing ... that parts true). As to getting away from the OP's topic - the title of this thread is "are battlecruisers crusiers or battleships?" and all the discussion related to the differences, historically and in the game are relevant. shrug Originally by: Imperator Jora'h In real life navies the line between battlecruisers and battleships is a blurry one at best. The HMS Hood, while technically a battlecruiser, had a protection scheme roughly equivalent to the Queen Elizabeth Class battleships. As for the speed (noted earlier) battleships were very fast. Yes, a destroyer under ideal conditions could go faster for a short sprint (and then not by a whole lot) but doing so was insanely costly in terms of fuel for the destroyer. Add in they were more susceptible to bad seas slowing them down. Their normal (read efficient) cruising speed was a lot slower than a battleship. Yeah, that's pretty much true for like Hood (later design) and the Kongo's (updated between the wars) but they still came to grief as mentioned (though the Bismarck really did get lucky with Hood). Of course Kirishima gave South Dakota a pasting after a mistake in damage control shut the power off ... but once Washington unloaded on her she as just ripped apart. The irony there - is that, even though the USN won the battle - it ended with the Japanese Destroyers chasing the US Battleships as they withdrew, our own destroyers having been lost and Admiral Lee not wishing to trade damage with destroyers. With South Dakota's power restored the battleships here were fast enough to be able to break off the action and not get hit by any Long Lances ... had these ships been Maryland's ... they'd not have been able to do that. As to cruising speeds, yeah, the Iowa class especially were pretty fast but ... (looking under range) they're listed at the same slow cruising speed as the Fletcher's but the destroyers fast cruising speed is a little higher. As I said, "... it really depends on which WWII Battleships you are talking about ..." the Queen Elizabeth Class, for example, being the very ships I had in mind when I talked about "old ones ... considered 'fast' Battleships in their day" were 24 knot ships. Originally by: F'nog @Toshiro When BCs were originally envisioned, the devs wanted them to be just like real BCs, but that quickly changed and they were turned into bigger, badder cruisers. Interestingly, during beta testing for them, they had insane amounts of PG. I outfitted one on Sisi with the most PG-intensive mods at the time and still had thousands of PG left over; sort of like CPU on an Indy. It was kind of neat, but not enough to fit more than one or two BS-class weapons. So the devs toned them down before it went live with Exodus so that now they're just badass cruisers with limitations. Therefore Intense Thinker is actually correct in the optimal word being "cruiser". Thanks. That's interesting. I'll bet they were really fast back then too. As I understand it you could have like multiple MWD's Orbiting vs. Kiting Faction Schools


Pages: [1] :: 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.