Originally by: Ranvaldy

---

No

---

Originally by: Templar Dane

---

While part of me misses the days of 90% webs allowing battleships to solo...I can't say that it was a bad direction for the game. I like the variety of ship classes floating around. Cruisers and frigates being able to operate in web range of a battleship makes the game more fun.

Totally agree on the cap parts.

---

Originally by: Dabljuh

---

Here's a suggestion: There should be battleship-sized weapons modules designed to kill cruisers and frigates efficiently. Like the Assault Launcher, a cruiser sized module that is designed to kill anti-frigate missiles.

Precision Cruises don't cut it, there's no BS turrets to that end, and drones are highly situational / unreliable.

---

Originally by: Greymoon Avatar

---

The Battleship is fine as it is.
The easy solution to those troublesome ECM boats out there is to mount 1-2 Sensor Backup Arrays of a type that is different from your ships racial type. ECM jockeys instinctively jam you based on the racial type your flying, they will try to jam you out, be unsuccessful, and then start having to guess what will work after the shock, surprise, and disbelief wears off. This buys you precious seconds to primary him.

Tactics change over time, people find ways to counter what currently works, and they change again. The Battleship is much more flexible than anything smaller. More slots means more options.

---

Originally by: Greymoon Avatar

---

The Battleship is fine as it is.
The easy solution to those troublesome ECM boats out there is to mount 1-2 Sensor Backup Arrays of a type that is different from your ships racial type. ECM jockeys instinctively jam you based on the racial type your flying, they will try to jam you out, be unsuccessful, and then start having to guess what will work after the shock, surprise, and disbelief wears off. This buys you precious seconds to primary him.

Tactics change over time, people find ways to counter what currently works, and they change again. The Battleship is much more flexible than anything smaller. More slots means more options.

---

Originally by: Greymoon Avatar

---

mount 1-2 Sensor Backup Arrays of a type that is different from your ships racial type

---

Originally by: CCP Incognito

---

PS the "time to P*nis" is the shortest time recorded in human history. :)

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

So you are suggesting that pilots put a ... for example... magnomtric backup array on a gravemetric ship!?

Okay.... thanks for the input. Not sure why you want to do that but interesting theory.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

At the same time lets nerf the logi ships a little bit. Two logis should not be able to tank a ship from 10 people.

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.

---

Originally by: Anubis Xian

---

I too am a BS aficionado. My take on the best way to fix BSes is multifaceted:

First, give them all 3 more slots. Yes even if it means a 6 midslot geddon.

Second, buff scan resolution base values by 100%.

Third, increase drone bay sizes by 100%, but not the drone bandwidth.

Finally, let them fit a modular Jump Drive that has a range similar to BO range. But let it lock on to a star in addition to a cyno.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Capital ships.... seriously this is completely out of control! I am in a corp of 20 people. We all have Mom's and some of us even have titans. It is too easy to build these things and they are too cheap for their abilities.
Solution - Make them more expensive! Fighters / Fighter bombers should not be able to hit sub caps period! A mom should not be a solo pwn mobile like it is! DD - Make sig based... again too many titans are dropped on lone Battleship becasue it insta pops them and is so cheap to fire the device that it isnt even a factor concidered in firing the divice.

---

Originally by: Omara Otawan

---

Originally by: Anubis Xian

---

I too am a BS aficionado. My take on the best way to fix BSes is multifaceted:

First, give them all 3 more slots. Yes even if it means a 6 midslot geddon.

Second, buff scan resolution base values by 100%.

Third, increase drone bay sizes by 100%, but not the drone bandwidth.

Finally, let them fit a modular Jump Drive that has a range similar to BO range. But let it lock on to a star in addition to a cyno.

---

Sounds like a great idea, they should also be able to fit covert ops cloaks, and be immune to ewar apart from focused points or bubbles.

Oh, and let them deploy fighter bombers as well, lets say 5 FBs so it isnt overpowered.

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.

---

Originally by: Greymoon Avatar

---

Well, when that Blackbird tries to ECM your Gravemetric ship and FAILS, because you can still target him using magnometrics, then it becomes his bad day. The only way to jam such a ship is to use both a grav and a mag ECM, or risk a multispectral at gimped odds.

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

- BCs are much more mobile than BS's - which enormously helps both offense and defense
- BCs lock much faster than BS's.
- Cap/Supercap proliferation make it stupid to field a BS fleet.
- Cap/Supercap proliferation make it generally redundant to field a BS because they do more damage and have much larger tanks. They're also significantly more mobile than a BS.

Basically it boils down to mobility. Battleships don't have it, and they don't bring much more to the table than the things that do have it.

-Liang

---

Originally by: Ulstan

---

Also, I find it odd that BS lock things so slowly...it makes perfect sense and is balanced for ships smaller than they are, but a BS has far more room for advanced electronics than a tiny frigate does: It should be locking equally sig sized ships (so, shield extended BC, BS) very fast indeed.

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Ephemeron is somewhat right about the nano nerf. It did eliminate funny set-ups for battleships that were fun to fly and unique.

Also Ephy.... remember I didnt why about the nano nerf. I was its biggest exploiter! My nano CNR would have ****d your nano mach 8) lol!

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

2) proliferation of caps and supercap. There are so many of them it's ridiculous. And every noob in a farmer Raven can fit a cyno and be safe knowing that when he lights up, his friendly titan bridge or carrier fleet will immediately appear from 15 jumps away.

If you just try roaming in battleship now, you'll get hot dropped within 2 hours for certain. Even if you fly some expensive t2 or t3 ship, they'll hotdrop you just cause they got nothing better to do.

And CCP in the infinite stupidity never thought of adding some kind of mobile cyno jammer to counter such easy and lame tactic.

---

Originally by: Czar Marcus

---

ECM - It sucks in small gangs/solo, but that's never going to change. Being jammed has always and will always suck.
Solution : - Fit Countermeasures and cross your fingers or use ECM drones and hope you jam them.

Tracking issues - Vs what? Other battleships? Nope. Battlecruisers? Nope. Cruisers? Not really, but these ships weren't designed for that anyways. Frigates? Sure, but battleships weren't designed for that and you do have a drone bay for a reason.....Cruise missile DPS is fine. It's designed for long range damage. Torps are designed for short range. It's the same as the difference between heavy and assaults. Assaults do high dps, but are short range. You can hit with cruise and torps. If you're fighting stuff that's flying faster than you're missiles then sick your drones on them or suck it up. Nobody ever said eve was fair or that there was one ship to rule them all.


What? Both shield tanking and armor tanking are fine for fleets. Both are effective. AB Armor HAC fleets are incredibly effective too.

Probing? What? Really?


At this point I'm going to stop replying to your points and just let you know what the rest of the community is thinking.

This is one/all of 4 problems:

A) Your FC's suck and can't manage their fleets
B) You suck and don't understand that EVE isn't WoW and not everything is going to be balanced all the time for your particular needs
C) If you all have Moms and Titans then why are you complaining? They are immune to ECM anyways. Go fighter bomb/DD stuff.
D) All of the above

Honestly, I'm going to go with my gut instinct and say it's D. If you really have SOOOOO many titans, moms, carriers, star destroyers, and everything else in the world then you wouldn't be as upset as you are.

My old corps flew battleship fleets all of the time and were incredibly successful. Sometimes you win and sometimes you explode.

Welcome to Eve.

---

Originally by: CCP Shadow

---

*snip* Castration successful. Shadow.

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

Hmmm... I have to agree. Here's some thoughts (a few more than I originally estimated!):
- BCs deliver near BS performance at a fraction of the price (BS modules cost more than Cr modules)
- BCs deliver near BS performance at a fraction of the SP
- BCs are much more mobile than BS's - which enormously helps both offense and defense
- BCs lock much faster than BS's.
- Cap/Supercap proliferation make it stupid to field a BS fleet.
- Cap/Supercap proliferation make it generally redundant to field a BS because they do more damage and have much larger tanks. They're also significantly more mobile than a BS.

Basically it boils down to mobility. Battleships don't have it, and they don't bring much more to the table than the things that do have it.

-Liang

---

Originally by: Amantus

---

Real men don't need to get into blaster range.

---

Originally by: Zantris

---

The weeding out of the BS in small gangs is for the better. It promotes a much better ship diversity. If you want to track smaller ships, fit smaller weapons.

Battleships should be a major part of fleet Ops, and the effectiveness and overabundance of capitals are the major reason they are having problems. I certainly don't think buffing armor tanking in fleets is a responsible decision, considering its only one ship that actually warrants shield tanking fleets... otherwise armor tanking is far preferred.

---

Originally by: klyeme

---

Moms should need to buy missiles and load them into their fighter bombers (each bomber can hold about an hour of constant fire of missiles).

---

Originally by: cordy

---

Respect to IAC .Your one of the few people who truly deserve to own and live in the space you are in.

---

Originally by: Czar Marcus

---

ECM - It sucks in small gangs/solo, but that's never going to change. Being jammed has always and will always suck.
Solution : - Fit Countermeasures and cross your fingers or use ECM drones and hope you jam them.

Tracking issues - Vs what? Other battleships? Nope. Battlecruisers? Nope. Cruisers? Not really, but these ships weren't designed for that anyways. Frigates? Sure, but battleships weren't designed for that and you do have a drone bay for a reason.....Cruise missile DPS is fine. It's designed for long range damage. Torps are designed for short range. It's the same as the difference between heavy and assaults. Assaults do high dps, but are short range. You can hit with cruise and torps. If you're fighting stuff that's flying faster than you're missiles then sick your drones on them or suck it up. Nobody ever said eve was fair or that there was one ship to rule them all.


What? Both shield tanking and armor tanking are fine for fleets. Both are effective. AB Armor HAC fleets are incredibly effective too.

Probing? What? Really?


At this point I'm going to stop replying to your points and just let you know what the rest of the community is thinking.

This is one/all of 4 problems:

A) Your FC's suck and can't manage their fleets
B) You suck and don't understand that EVE isn't WoW and not everything is going to be balanced all the time for your particular needs
C) If you all have Moms and Titans then why are you complaining? They are immune to ECM anyways. Go fighter bomb/DD stuff.
D) All of the above

Honestly, I'm going to go with my gut instinct and say it's D. If you really have SOOOOO many titans, moms, carriers, star destroyers, and everything else in the world then you wouldn't be as upset as you are.

My old corps flew battleship fleets all of the time and were incredibly successful. Sometimes you win and sometimes you explode.

Welcome to Eve.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

stuff

---

Originally by: Czar Marcus

---

A) Your FC's suck and can't manage their fleets
B) You suck and don't understand that EVE isn't WoW and not everything is going to be balanced all the time for your particular needs
C) If you all have Moms and Titans then why are you complaining? They are immune to ECM anyways. Go fighter bomb/DD stuff.
D) All of the above

Welcome to Eve.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Small Gang / SOLO
A webbed / scrammed / painted should be hit by a Battleship.... Not for full damage mind you, but a Battleship should not miss a webbed / scrammed target either.

---

Quote:

---

Eliminate res based locking and make a baseline lock of a few seconds reguardless the ship... or just boost battleship locking time. Lets face it, if you roleplay you know the battleship has the most syphistacated* (spelling 8)) electronic sysytems around! They would be able to do just as well if not better than any other ship in the fleet.

---

Quote:

---

Problem - Shield tanking > Armor tanking. However most ships period armor tank. Thus making a shield tanked "drake" fleet with scimis more efeective than armor fleets.
Solution - Make armor RR rep at the beginning of the cycle like shield ones. No reason they have to be different.

---

Quote:

---

At the same time lets nerf the logi ships a little bit. Two logis should not be able to tank a ship from 10 people.

---

Quote:

---

We all have Mom's and some of us even have titans.

---

Originally by: Greymoon Avatar

---

Originally by: Dabljuh

---

Here's a suggestion: There should be battleship-sized weapons modules designed to kill cruisers and frigates efficiently. Like the Assault Launcher, a cruiser sized module that is designed to kill anti-frigate missiles.

Precision Cruises don't cut it, there's no BS turrets to that end, and drones are highly situational / unreliable.

---

How about a Target Painter?

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Ephemeron is somewhat right about the nano nerf. It did eliminate funny set-ups for battleships that were fun to fly and unique.

Also Ephy.... remember I didnt why about the nano nerf. I was its biggest exploiter! My nano CNR would have ****d your nano mach 8) lol!

---

Doubt it, as my nano Machs were built to sustain tank at least 700 dps and there was room for 1 heavy neut. Unless you tricked our your CNR specifically for dealing with nano machs, it'd be dead for sure

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

It has been a sad fact these last few months that a Battleship is practicly laughed at these days. Why? What has happened to them? Well there are several reasons for this both in small gangs / solo, and in large fleets.


Small Gang / SOLO

As a guy who once solo'ed entirely in Battleships, I can safely say that it is now virtually impossible to do so.

Problem - Tracking Issues... Lets face it. A battleship has a VERY hard time tracking ships that are even webbed and scrammed! You litterally cannot hit them. Not to mention the torp range on caldari is too short but does minimal damage since it is sig radius based. And yes cruise missile dps sux!
Solution - Boost tracking and missile stats to better have a chance to hit a tackled target. Yes they shouldnt be able to hit a non tackled target, but a webbed / scrammed / painted should be hit by a Battleship.... Not for full damage mind you, but a Battleship should not miss a webbed / scrammed target either.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Locking time. Takes for ever to lock a ship unless you specifically use spots needed for other modules to lock faster.

Solution - Eliminate res based locking and make a baseline lock of a few seconds reguardless the ship... or just boost battleship locking time. Lets face it, if you roleplay you know the battleship has the most syphistacated* (spelling 8)) electronic sysytems around! They would be able to do just as well if not better than any other ship in the fleet.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Fleets

Problem - Shield tanking > Armor tanking. However most ships period armor tank. Thus making a shield tanked "drake" fleet with scimis more efeective than armor fleets.
Solution - Make armor RR rep at the beginning of the cycle like shield ones. No reason they have to be different. At the same time lets nerf the logi ships a little bit. Two logis should not be able to tank a ship from 10 people.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Capital ships.... seriously this is completely out of control! I am in a corp of 20 people. We all have Mom's and some of us even have titans. It is too easy to build these things and they are too cheap for their abilities.
Solution - Make them more expensive! Fighters / Fighter bombers should not be able to hit sub caps period! A mom should not be a solo pwn mobile like it is! DD - Make sig based... again too many titans are dropped on lone Battleship becasue it insta pops them and is so cheap to fire the device that it isnt even a factor concidered in firing the divice.

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

-snip-
Basically it boils down to mobility. Battleships don't have it, and they don't bring much more to the table than the things that do have it.

-Liang

---

Originally by: Enduros

---

Say an MWDing BS could catch up to a MWDing cruiser or BC.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Probing. Yes Battleships are the longest hitting sub cap ships in the game. However a prober can literally probe down a Battleship and be on top of it before it can get out of warp and turn around to warp out. Thus bringing the rest of the fleet ontop of the snipers.
Solution - Nerf the living crap out of probing. It is very overpowered. Make the time it takes to scan longer. Make it so that people have to work to get a position on snipers and thus a sniping BS fleet would be viable again.

---

Originally by: Greymoon Avatar

---

The Battleship is fine as it is.
The easy solution to those troublesome ECM boats out there is to mount 1-2 Sensor Backup Arrays of a type that is different from your ships racial type. ECM jockeys instinctively jam you based on the racial type your flying, they will try to jam you out, be unsuccessful, and then start having to guess what will work after the shock, surprise, and disbelief wears off. This buys you precious seconds to primary him.

Tactics change over time, people find ways to counter what currently works, and they change again. The Battleship is much more flexible than anything smaller. More slots means more options.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Locking time. Takes for ever to lock a ship unless you specifically use spots needed for other modules to lock faster.

Solution - Eliminate res based locking and make a baseline lock of a few seconds reguardless the ship... or just boost battleship locking time. Lets face it, if you roleplay you know the battleship has the most syphistacated* (spelling 8)) electronic sysytems around! They would be able to do just as well if not better than any other ship in the fleet.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Shield tanking > Armor tanking. However most ships period armor tank. Thus making a shield tanked "drake" fleet with scimis more efeective than armor fleets.
Solution - Make armor RR rep at the beginning of the cycle like shield ones. No reason they have to be different. At the same time lets nerf the logi ships a little bit. Two logis should not be able to tank a ship from 10 people.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Probing. Yes Battleships are the longest hitting sub cap ships in the game. However a prober can literally probe down a Battleship and be on top of it before it can get out of warp and turn around to warp out. Thus bringing the rest of the fleet ontop of the snipers.
Solution - Nerf the living crap out of probing. It is very overpowered. Make the time it takes to scan longer. Make it so that people have to work to get a position on snipers and thus a sniping BS fleet would be viable again.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Capital ships.... seriously this is completely out of control! I am in a corp of 20 people. We all have Mom's and some of us even have titans. It is too easy to build these things and they are too cheap for their abilities.
Solution - Make them more expensive! Fighters / Fighter bombers should not be able to hit sub caps period! A mom should not be a solo pwn mobile like it is! DD - Make sig based... again too many titans are dropped on lone Battleship becasue it insta pops them and is so cheap to fire the device that it isnt even a factor concidered in firing the divice.

---

Originally by: Tryaz

---

I'm sorry but this entire thread is ridiculous and if CCP give any of these suggestions serious consideration I'll be disappointed in them.

Among the most ridiculous whines and sugggestions:

Battleships to track frigates without support - have you lost your mind? Of course a ship that size should not be able to track a frigate! Everything has to have a place and if a frigate can't navigate safely around a BS then what's the point in them.... Also, what's to stop you supporting your BS with a ship operating tracking links?

Battleships to fit CovOps Cloaks. The clue is in the name genius: there is absolutely NOTHING covert about a hulking great battleship! So you can't warp cloaked, deal with it.

I could go on for a long time but I'd just get boring. To sum up I have nothing but contempt for the original post on this thread.
Why do you expect to be able to operate a BS or many BS' without any support at all? How arrogant are you?

Stop crying over the weaknesses in the BS and augment your fleet to plug those holes: and if you can't do this then you don't deserve to win any fights.

WISE UP

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Please dont confuse my tracking issue ideas with hitting frigs. Lets begin with being able to hit tackled BC's and Cruisers first.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Tracking Issues... Lets face it. A battleship has a VERY hard time tracking ships that are even webbed and scrammed! You litterally cannot hit them.

Solution - Boost tracking and missile stats to better have a chance to hit a tackled target. Yes they shouldnt be able to hit a non tackled target, but a webbed / scrammed / painted should be hit by a Battleship.... Not for full damage mind you, but a Battleship should not miss a webbed / scrammed target either.

Problem - Capital ships.... seriously this is completely out of control! I am in a corp of 20 people. We all have Mom's and some of us even have titans. It is too easy to build these things and they are too cheap for their abilities.

Solution - Make them more expensive! Fighters / Fighter bombers should not be able to hit sub caps period! A mom should not be a solo pwn mobile like it is! DD - Make sig based... again too many titans are dropped on lone Battleship becasue it insta pops them and is so cheap to fire the device that it isnt even a factor concidered in firing the divice.

---

Originally by: Umega

---

Battleships are fine. They fill a role.. thick-skinned, lotta guns.. and they fill that role very well. Those two principles combined are going to naturally equate to slow fat ass targets. Working as intended. So what if they require some support ships in certain scenarios?

---

Originally by: Umega

---

I think the pilots that fail at using them are what needs a fix rather than BSs themselves. People locked in 2-4 year old cookie fits, not willing to adapt. Not willing to understand the changes around them, and some of them have nothing to do with game mechanics that cause the biggest influence!

---

Originally by: Umega

---

Solo PvP in a BS is just being ignorant to the fact that there are more people in the game now, more experinced people knowledgable on game mechanics, and that null and to a much larger degree, lowsec.. is a whole lot more organized than years past. This is a very important aspect.

---

Originally by: Umega

---

Whats going to happen when you make them faster, track better.. then people are going to ***** about how useless BCs and some cruisers are. And the cycle continues until the most dreaded outcome possible...

Vanilla.

---

Originally by: Umega

---

Battleships are fine. Use them differently if the old ways don't work, adapt or die as people say. Focus for fixes in other areas.. local-chat change, ECM change, new mods that help influence BS prowess in the field.

---

Originally by: Umega

---

Why dumb down the game with 'simple' fixes that just end up breaking something else? When there is better options that add more diversity, style, color, flavor to the game.

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

Originally by: Umega

---

Battleships are fine. They fill a role.. thick-skinned, lotta guns.. and they fill that role very well. Those two principles combined are going to naturally equate to slow fat ass targets. Working as intended. So what if they require some support ships in certain scenarios?

---

BC fit exact same 'role' that you described.

Originally by: Umega

---

I think the pilots that fail at using them are what needs a fix rather than BSs themselves. People locked in 2-4 year old cookie fits, not willing to adapt. Not willing to understand the changes around them, and some of them have nothing to do with game mechanics that cause the biggest influence!

---

Some of the people here, me included, have flown 500+ battleships, scoring thousands of kills using battleships over the last 5 years. I think our opinions should count for something, and certainly not dismissed in such careless fashion.

Originally by: Umega

---

Solo PvP in a BS is just being ignorant to the fact that there are more people in the game now, more experinced people knowledgable on game mechanics, and that null and to a much larger degree, lowsec.. is a whole lot more organized than years past. This is a very important aspect.

---

First, it's important to note that the main focus of this thread is on gangs, not solo battleships. Second, the problems of flying battleships in gangs have nothing to do with the experience of the enemy. They have to do with the game changing patches CCP introduced over the years.

Originally by: Umega

---

Whats going to happen when you make them faster, track better.. then people are going to ***** about how useless BCs and some cruisers are. And the cycle continues until the most dreaded outcome possible...

Vanilla.

---

It is possible that in their attempt to fix battleship balance, CCP takes their favored sledge hammer approach and completely unbalances the game in opposite direction. However, the point of this thread is not to discuss failure of CCP to do the job right.

Originally by: Umega

---

Battleships are fine. Use them differently if the old ways don't work, adapt or die as people say. Focus for fixes in other areas.. local-chat change, ECM change, new mods that help influence BS prowess in the field.

---

Looking at your history on battleclinic it's hard to see how you'd know much about proper uses of battleships. And the fact that you want ECM change, which is currently a non-issue, makes you even less credible. Especially since you push the idea of "adapt or die" at same time.

Originally by: Umega

---

Why dumb down the game with 'simple' fixes that just end up breaking something else? When there is better options that add more diversity, style, color, flavor to the game.

---

CCP already dumbed down the game quite a bit over the years. And it is precisely because of their dumbing down of the game that we have this problem. Most reasonable solutions would involve undoing the damage done by CCP. Making the game more hardcore and interesting to serious gamer.

---

Originally by: Somal Thunder

---

Only thing I agree on is how bloody cheap capitals are.

---

Originally by: Omara Otawan

---

I said something about cov ops cloaks, but merely to point out how utterly ridiculous the "give all BS 3 extra slots and drop all drawbacks like scan res and speed" idea was.

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.

---

Originally by: Anubis Xian

---

There is no such thing as extra slots, especially when talking about BS compared to BC. And I didn't see anyone saying to 'drop all drawbacks like scan res and speed' anywhere.

---

Originally by: Omara Otawan

---

Originally by: Somal Thunder

---

Only thing I agree on is how bloody cheap capitals are.

---

This should have been fixed when they changed rigs by making capital sized and supercap sized ones.

Having capital rigs at 5x the cost of current large rigs, supercapital ones at 25x the cost of current larges wouldnt hurt.

---

Originally by: Liang Nuren

---

I think it would make a lot of sense for all ships to have the same absolute top speed, but that their acceleration curves should be dramatically different....

---

Quote:

---

Introducing only carriers probably would have been more than enough. Gives drone *****s a good option while still being vulnerable to sub-cap ships there by relegating them to the logistics ships they were meant to be.

No need for dreads/moms/titans at all really.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Quote:

---

Introducing only carriers probably would have been more than enough. Gives drone *****s a good option while still being vulnerable to sub-cap ships there by relegating them to the logistics ships they were meant to be.

No need for dreads/moms/titans at all really.

---

Then carriers would be the best ships.

Now however with both carriers and dreads it is reasonably balanced. In general dreads > carriers, carriers > BS, BS > dread. Because dread is imo pretty much the best balanced capital ship by far, simply because it cannot possibly hit a sub cap in siege.

---

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

---

Pet Project:
Allow weapon bonuses to apply to all weapons of a given type (ex. Abaddon: +5%/Lvl to S/M/L lasers). Provides a potential solution to all the tracking woes.

---

Originally by: Omara Otawan

---

Originally by: Somal Thunder

---

Only thing I agree on is how bloody cheap capitals are.

---

This should have been fixed when they changed rigs by making capital sized and supercap sized ones.

Having capital rigs at 5x the cost of current large rigs, supercapital ones at 25x the cost of current larges wouldnt hurt.

---

Originally by: TradeHat

---

Edited by: TradeHat on 08/12/2010 07:51:06
You are wrong
Battleships track abing hacs just fine if your smart enough.

---

Originally by: Dabljuh

---

Here's a suggestion: There should be battleship-sized weapons modules designed to kill cruisers and frigates efficiently. Like the Assault Launcher, a cruiser sized module that is designed to kill anti-frigate missiles.

Precision Cruises don't cut it, there's no BS turrets to that end, and drones are highly situational / unreliable.

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: TradeHat

---

Edited by: TradeHat on 08/12/2010 07:51:06
You are wrong
Battleships track abing hacs just fine if your smart enough.

---

Use your head. PL is infamous for dumping their SC blob ontop of other SC for easy kills. Battleships attract SC. PL is flying in battleships. What do you think they're trying to do?

---

Originally by: James Lyrus

---

Now there's a thought.
How about a siege module for battleships?
Something similar - but maybe not quite the same - as the dread ones. That gives a significant boost to tank/gank, but inhibits movement. Or maybe just 'warping', because lets face it, BS ain't that fast anyway.

---

Originally by: Amantus

---

Real men don't need to get into blaster range.

---

Originally by: The Djego

---

Originally by: James Lyrus

---

Now there's a thought.
How about a siege module for battleships?
Something similar - but maybe not quite the same - as the dread ones. That gives a significant boost to tank/gank, but inhibits movement. Or maybe just 'warping', because lets face it, BS ain't that fast anyway.

---

Well given how popular it is to siege a dread and get hotdroped I don't think this really would be this adorable.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Shield tanking > Armor tanking. However most ships period armor tank. Thus making a shield tanked "drake" fleet with scimis more efeective than armor fleets.
Solution - Make armor RR rep at the beginning of the cycle like shield ones. No reason they have to be different. At the same time lets nerf the logi ships a little bit. Two logis should not be able to tank a ship from 10 people.

---

Originally by: Kireiina

---

There's lots of null-sec alliances using battleship heavy fleets. They are actually having a resurgence given they're an excellent counter to drakes (eg. PL is spending a lot of time in abaddons).

---

Originally by: Kireiina

---

Ships not being able to one shot everything smaller than them is part of what keeps the strategic space interesting. And this has been extended with the latest change to fighter bombers which restricts them from being used effectively against sub-caps.

---

Originally by: Kireiina

---

Yes, super-cap proliferation is making sup-caps strategically meaningless. If you cannot counter the enemies super-caps, or at least the possibility of threat so they keep them off the field, then fly something you don't care too about losing (eg. drakes).

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Then carriers would be the best ships.

Now however with both carriers and dreads it is reasonably balanced. In general dreads > carriers, carriers > BS, BS > dread. Because dread is imo pretty much the best balanced capital ship by far, simply because it cannot possibly hit a sub cap in siege.

---

Originally by: Omara Otawan

---

Edited by: Omara Otawan on 08/12/2010 05:05:08

Originally by: Anubis Xian

---

There is no such thing as extra slots, especially when talking about BS compared to BC. And I didn't see anyone saying to 'drop all drawbacks like scan res and speed' anywhere.

---

So you dont remember your own post on page 1 where you suggest a buff in scanres by 100%, increased dronebays across the board, and a modular jump drive?

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

If i could be bothered to find the link i would post the KB link to a CVA abaddon/geddon fleet murdering a PL AHAC fleet. Was CVA also trying to attract SCs?

---

Originally by: Jaik7

---

rl battleships had shorebombardment guns sure, but they did also have a lot of aa and anti ship guns too.

the only reason that carriers are the primary ship in modern navies is that they outrange battleships in almost every respect.

in EVE, not only are carriers capable of sending damage clear across a system, they have some of the best tanks.

a fix needs to be made so that battleships can effectivly combat small ships, but not to the extent that a realativly small pack (2-3 cruisers, or even a single well played bc) cannot eliminate them.

in EVE, we have risk vs reward, and taking a battleship into low sec seems to be quite a risk, but there's not much reward in it.

i don't know what will balance the game, nor do i know what will break it. but for some reason the ability to fit different tiers of weapons on a ship appeals to me.

This fix would be an attempt to make it more like reality. when was the last time you've heard of a few speedboats full of pirates taking a navy vessel? when was the last time you heard about a frigate wolfpack getting a battleship in EVE?

---

Originally by: Luscious Linda

---

Originally by: Jaik7

---

rl battleships had shorebombardment guns sure, but they did also have a lot of aa and anti ship guns too.

the only reason that carriers are the primary ship in modern navies is that they outrange battleships in almost every respect.

in EVE, not only are carriers capable of sending damage clear across a system, they have some of the best tanks.

a fix needs to be made so that battleships can effectivly combat small ships, but not to the extent that a realativly small pack (2-3 cruisers, or even a single well played bc) cannot eliminate them.

in EVE, we have risk vs reward, and taking a battleship into low sec seems to be quite a risk, but there's not much reward in it.

i don't know what will balance the game, nor do i know what will break it. but for some reason the ability to fit different tiers of weapons on a ship appeals to me.

This fix would be an attempt to make it more like reality. when was the last time you've heard of a few speedboats full of pirates taking a navy vessel? when was the last time you heard about a frigate wolfpack getting a battleship in EVE?

---

In RL they mounted .50's/cannon on planes and wheeled vehicles as offensive weapons and on battleships as defensive/anti-air. These complimented their large bore cannon for the obvious reasons the BS in Eve can face.

Are BS subsystems the answer? Not sure

---

Originally by: BiggestT

---

I completely agree that BS's need love, however this bit is un-fathomable (this may have been touched on already)

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Problem - Shield tanking > Armor tanking. However most ships period armor tank. Thus making a shield tanked "drake" fleet with scimis more efeective than armor fleets.
Solution - Make armor RR rep at the beginning of the cycle like shield ones. No reason they have to be different. At the same time lets nerf the logi ships a little bit. Two logis should not be able to tank a ship from 10 people.

---

Armour tanking is already too prevalent in eve, for some stupid reason CCP never split it down the middle for shield tanking and armour tanking ship layouts, and shield tanking is very much a minority in fleets (with the exception of drake fleets).

If what you say were to go through, shield tanking would need compensation i.e. shield transfer mods take way more valuable cpu fitting and cap than does armour rr, make them easier to fit and maybe then your change would be fair.

Oh and make more minmatar ships shield tankers, it makes no sense to have a game with ~66% vs. ~33% prevalence of a vital mechanic that affects so much.

---

Originally by: James Lyrus

---

Originally by: Luscious Linda

---

Originally by: Jaik7

---

rl battleships had shorebombardment guns sure, but they did also have a lot of aa and anti ship guns too.

the only reason that carriers are the primary ship in modern navies is that they outrange battleships in almost every respect.

in EVE, not only are carriers capable of sending damage clear across a system, they have some of the best tanks.

a fix needs to be made so that battleships can effectivly combat small ships, but not to the extent that a realativly small pack (2-3 cruisers, or even a single well played bc) cannot eliminate them.

in EVE, we have risk vs reward, and taking a battleship into low sec seems to be quite a risk, but there's not much reward in it.

i don't know what will balance the game, nor do i know what will break it. but for some reason the ability to fit different tiers of weapons on a ship appeals to me.

This fix would be an attempt to make it more like reality. when was the last time you've heard of a few speedboats full of pirates taking a navy vessel? when was the last time you heard about a frigate wolfpack getting a battleship in EVE?

---

In RL they mounted .50's/cannon on planes and wheeled vehicles as offensive weapons and on battleships as defensive/anti-air. These complimented their large bore cannon for the obvious reasons the BS in Eve can face.

Are BS subsystems the answer? Not sure

---

Well, the real world they don't really care about game balance ;p.

---

Originally by: ZeJesus

---

Edited by: ZeJesus on 08/12/2010 23:01:25


TBH frigates/cruisers shouldn't be even able to scratch BSs.

But ppl want to see SW kind of feats, after all an X-Wing managed to take down the freaking Death Star, right?

---

Originally by: Zyress

---

In real Navy fleets Battleships never operated alone, they didn't need defensive weapons because they had escorts for that, they were meant for hitting large high value targets and bombarding fixed installations from long distances, they were not solo pwnmobiles. They usually did have other smaller guns for either anti-aircraft and anti ship use, these were not the main weapons though. The only way to simulate that in eve would be to have a lot more hardpoints or maybe different kinds of hardpoints, something like a Main weapon hardpoint that can hold a main offensive weapon and maybe a few heavy weapon (ie anti ship ) harpoints and a couple maybe rocket launcher like anti-frigate/drone weapon hardpoints. In real Navy Battleships these defensive weapons just supplemented the escorts firepower, it was not meant to be the sole defense of the Battleship. It can also be acknowledged that real Navy Battleships never had a flight of drones.

---

Quote:

---

what would the result be if the range on medium weapons were reduced, say by 30%, or the battleship weapons range increased by 30%, so that battleships had the range advantage and thus positioning would become important. or heavy escort to tackle for the battleships?

---

Originally by: Gligan

---

I know 1 BS that absolutely owns every single type of BC, cruiser, t3, recon, command , or even frigate(if it isn't smart enough to get away). Yes - that's right - it's a domi with neuts.

Webs and points you, then shuts down your mwd/ ab , tank? whatever you're using with cap, releases the drones, MWD's in your direction while laughing at your dps.

Alternatively use MWD'd machariel.


But seriously - there's only 1 single change that CCP devs have to do to put BS's back in the game - do not limit the BS bonuses to BS weapons only. I.e. instead of the bonus being to large projectiles for the typhoon - make it a bonus to projectiles, and instead of bonus to torpedoes and cruise missiles , give a bonus to missiles for the raven ... and so on.

So a maelstrom with 425's AC's and a web would be a tough mofo that can hit almost any class out there.

And a raven with HAM's , while it may sound stupid would most likely destroy smaller ships just because it has more endurance.(ok I'm not missile guy and don't know wth different missiles sizes can hit but still)

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

If i could be bothered to find the link i would post the KB link to a CVA abaddon/geddon fleet murdering a PL AHAC fleet. Was CVA also trying to attract SCs?

---

If you could find dozens of such examples showing battleships in fleet use over the past few months your point would hold. One group doing one thing with a fleet once doesn't prove anything one way or the other.

---

Quote:

---

This is actually why dreads are fail, they're restricted to hitting inanimate objects. Even carriers kill other carriers better than dreads, especially with the spider tank. You actually think dreads are balanced?

Super carriers > titans > carriers >>>>>>>> dreads

The argument "ZOMG THE DREAD IS SO BALANCED BECAUSE IT CAN'T HIT SUB CAPS" is way outdated thinking, thinking that predates even the advent of the titan. As soon as sub-cap pwning cap ships were introduced the dread became useless, especially given that super carriers effective against EVERYTHING, including towers.

---

Originally by: James Lyrus

---

Originally by: The Djego

---

Originally by: James Lyrus

---

Now there's a thought.
How about a siege module for battleships?
Something similar - but maybe not quite the same - as the dread ones. That gives a significant boost to tank/gank, but inhibits movement. Or maybe just 'warping', because lets face it, BS ain't that fast anyway.

---

Well given how popular it is to siege a dread and get hotdroped I don't think this really would be this adorable.

---

It would give battleships something else they could do though. And certainly, a hot drop is a hazard, but is it really any worse than battleships running into a bubble? Bubble -> Cyno ... who cares if they're 'sieging' or not?

Make it a lighter form of siege module, and you at least give them active tank and enough firepower to be a threat to said hot drop though.

And yes, I know 'most' hot drops are overkill or they just don't bother, but that's not really the point now, is it?

---

Originally by: Amantus

---

Real men don't need to get into blaster range.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Edited by: DHB WildCat on 07/12/2010 05:09:37
It has been a sad fact these last few months that a Battleship is practicly laughed at these days. Why? What has happened to them? Well there are several reasons for this both in small gangs / solo, and in large fleets.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

You mean less fighting since losses are more expensive and new players first need a t2 BS before they can be competetive. And more one sided ganks because they are easier to catch.

---

Originally by: Amantus

---

Real men don't need to get into blaster range.

---

Originally by: Carniflex

---

..Granted it would fall relatively fast to fighter-bomber swarm being immobile and all that.

---

Originally by: The Djego

---

..The positive points I see in it, at least for Low Sec, is that it might drive down the BC population a bit, what makes flying Cruisers and HACs more sensible again and promotes overall more use of larger hulls what leads to more fighting, since they are plain easier to catch.

---

Originally by: Gligan

---

I know 1 BS that absolutely owns every single type of BC, cruiser, t3, recon, command , or even frigate(if it isn't smart enough to get away). Yes - that's right - it's a domi with neuts.

Webs and points you, then shuts down your mwd/ ab , tank? whatever you're using with cap, releases the drones, MWD's in your direction while laughing at your dps.

Alternatively use MWD'd machariel.


But seriously - there's only 1 single change that CCP devs have to do to put BS's back in the game - do not limit the BS bonuses to BS weapons only. I.e. instead of the bonus being to large projectiles for the typhoon - make it a bonus to projectiles, and instead of bonus to torpedoes and cruise missiles , give a bonus to missiles for the raven ... and so on.

So a maelstrom with 425's AC's and a web would be a tough mofo that can hit almost any class out there.

And a raven with HAM's , while it may sound stupid would most likely destroy smaller ships just because it has more endurance.(ok I'm not missile guy and don't know wth different missiles sizes can hit but still)

---

Originally by: Vmir Gallahasen

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

If i could be bothered to find the link i would post the KB link to a CVA abaddon/geddon fleet murdering a PL AHAC fleet. Was CVA also trying to attract SCs?

---

If you could find dozens of such examples showing battleships in fleet use over the past few months your point would hold. One group doing one thing with a fleet once doesn't prove anything one way or the other.

---

Originally by: Billy Kidd

---

What about something as simple as letting a dread's siege module deactivate instantly but disallowing re-activation until the full cycle is up? This would make dreads much more mobile and hopefully would be a viable counter to supercarriers. Of course, battleships are a great counter to dreads so a nice rock-papers-scissors situation would be setup.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Now come the largest ships in eve, super capitals. They can be right on top of you from another region by pressing one button.

---

Originally by: afkalt

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Now come the largest ships in eve, super capitals. They can be right on top of you from another region by pressing one button.

---

A valid point - perhaps some sort of warning they're inbound would help

If there isn't already one, I cant profess to have any super cap experience.


I remember a game from my youth - Frontier: Elite 2. Warp jumps there left little "signatures" but at departure and arrival so you could see where people were coming in (and they had a little mod where you could analyse it to see the ETA). Was very cool

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Originally by: afkalt

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Now come the largest ships in eve, super capitals. They can be right on top of you from another region by pressing one button.

---

A valid point - perhaps some sort of warning they're inbound would help

If there isn't already one, I cant profess to have any super cap experience.


I remember a game from my youth - Frontier: Elite 2. Warp jumps there left little "signatures" but at departure and arrival so you could see where people were coming in (and they had a little mod where you could analyse it to see the ETA). Was very cool

---

They do have this in eve.... the way it works is a ship already in system lights a cyno. Which is the beacon the supercaps jump to. It leaves a triangular symbol in space that you can warp to like a planet. It also shows up on your overview if you have the right settings.

Now with this all being said... by the time the cyno is lit, the pilots click "jump to", and the ships appear in local next to you.... is about 5 seconds. Yes its 5 seconds warning but .... well you decide 8)

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Yes dreads are balanced, as i showed you before, they form a nice counter triangle with BS and carriers. There is nothing wrong with sub caps pwning cap ships, that is actually something very good. It forced people to use support fleets instead of what we have now, super carriers being all that is required besides some hics and dics to tackle other supercaps.

The only thing you are proven is that supercaps are unbalanced, well duh sherlock. But normal caps are balanced quite fine, especially the dreadnaught.

---

Originally by: Proxyyyy

---

Silly thread tbh (is running around scouted by a alt/falcon/cloaky, solo battleship pvp?). I dont find it hard to find fights in a battleships (as i once thought), but dealing with ECM drones and ECM in general is my biggest issue (nothing ever esplodes including me).

I dont roam with them per-se, but i do use them to counter specific fleets solo (Domi). I do now believe you could roam around with the help of the in-game map and not being flashy. Dont know much about flying a battleship would go down in null-sec, because i have'nt tried yet.

I dont see as much battleships roaming around, like it was just 2 years ago. Pvp in eve-online is always evolving. Change with the game or be left behind...

---

Originally by: Moir Mukkula

---

I think a few in this thread are missing what the problem with probing is.

If you have to engage on a certain grid (station/gate/SBU/IHub/POS etc) the prober can sit cloaked on that grid with probes deployed and positioned. Once the BS start to drop out from warp he can probe them down within seconds, warp to them and provide a warpin at optimal range against the BS fleet. They can have a dic/cyno/whatever on them before they've even had time to (start) align out.

---

Originally by: Cutslawn2

---

DHB and some others in Burn Eden were in unprobable Mach's today, hitting at over 160-200km out instapoping bc's... think BS's need a nerf to be honest.

---

Originally by: Terrance O'Conner

---

Edited by: Terrance O''Conner on 07/12/2010 10:00:39
It's funny how the BSs dissapeared in RL after the introduction of the carrier.

Now all we see is small fast specialized ships, medium fast agile fire-support and carriers.

Maybe this whole thing could (should) have been foreseen. Introduce something that has better firepower, vastly larger span of control (jump-drive) and think that the ship that has only one thing going for it (Tank and Damage) isn't screwed.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Tbh the entire jump drive mechanics is fundamentally broken. If i am somewhere in a region flying with my gang i know a hostile frig gang can arrive quite fastly, HACs slower, and BS even slower (although imo that disparity must be much larger by making warp acceleration curve dependent on max warp speed and increasing the differences there). Now come the largest ships in eve, super capitals. They can be right on top of you from another region by pressing one button.

---

Originally by: Zantris

---

... and the effectiveness and overabundance of capitals are the major reason they are having problems.

---

Originally by: Cutslawn2

---

DHB and some others in Burn Eden were in unprobable Mach's today, hitting at over 160-200km out instapoping bc's... think BS's need a nerf to be honest.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Edited by: DHB WildCat on 07/12/2010 05:09:37
Problem - Probing. Yes Battleships are the longest hitting sub cap ships in the game. However a prober can literally probe down a Battleship and be on top of it before it can get out of warp and turn around to warp out. Thus bringing the rest of the fleet ontop of the snipers.
Solution - Nerf the living crap out of probing. It is very overpowered. Make the time it takes to scan longer. Make it so that people have to work to get a position on snipers and thus a sniping BS fleet would be viable again.

---

Originally by: Murtific

---

Edited by: Murtific on 09/12/2010 23:29:04

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Edited by: DHB WildCat on 07/12/2010 05:09:37
Problem - Probing. Yes Battleships are the longest hitting sub cap ships in the game. However a prober can literally probe down a Battleship and be on top of it before it can get out of warp and turn around to warp out. Thus bringing the rest of the fleet ontop of the snipers.
Solution - Nerf the living crap out of probing. It is very overpowered. Make the time it takes to scan longer. Make it so that people have to work to get a position on snipers and thus a sniping BS fleet would be viable again.

---

You my friend are not the uber pilot everbody thinks you are and you have clearly not met my Assassin Class Battleships (tm).....

-Gl in your troll on forum xD

P.S. Ur nightmare vid rocks!!!

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Originally by: Billy Kidd

---

What about something as simple as letting a dread's siege module deactivate instantly but disallowing re-activation until the full cycle is up? This would make dreads much more mobile and hopefully would be a viable counter to supercarriers. Of course, battleships are a great counter to dreads so a nice rock-papers-scissors situation would be setup.

---

Minus that dreads would still not be a viable counter to supercarriers, they would still get ****d by them.

---

Quote:

---

Oh please, even the carrier has infinitely more flexibility than the dread. The dread isn't even great against other capitals. Carriers can at least spider tank and apply DPS to moving targets, even BCs, unlike the dread, which couldn't hit its own nose. This argument "It's ok for sub-caps to pwn caps, but not visa versa" is still outdated. Carriers were always good vs. sub-caps. Yes, in large numbers carriers get owned, but dreads get owned regardless. They have no real defense against sub-caps. The advent of the super carrier just completed the phasing out of the dread. Now only broke players who were gullible enough to train up dreads instead of carriers still fly them, simply because A) they can't afford a super carrier, B) they can't fly a super carrier, and C) they don't want to be married to a super carrier. Everyone else buys a Nyx pilot. Super carriers will never go away, so wishing that things were back to the days of "dreads = the win" is just nativity. Adapt dreads to the new environment instead of pining over the old one. It's blatantly obvious that they aren't balanced.

---

Originally by: Joss56

---

With basis ratio of 2.26 i can't see how you can make an Machariel improbable, i'm not saying it's impossible but i would like to see his fit/implants.

---

Originally by: Target Painter

---

Edited by: Target Painter on 10/12/2010 13:56:56

Originally by: Joss56

---

With basis ratio of 2.26 i can't see how you can make an Machariel improbable, i'm not saying it's impossible but i would like to see his fit/implants.

---

Look at it holistically. Halo implants, X-Instinct boosters, a Gallente T3/CS providing sensor strength bonuses, local and projected ECCM. Avoiding shield rigs and extenders. It's not just about what's on your ship or in your head, you can boost performance to an absurd degree if you look at the gang as a whole and not as individuals.

---

Originally by: Target Painter

---

Edited by: Target Painter on 10/12/2010 13:56:56

Originally by: Joss56

---

With basis ratio of 2.26 i can't see how you can make an Machariel improbable, i'm not saying it's impossible but i would like to see his fit/implants.

---

Look at it holistically. Halo implants, X-Instinct boosters, a Gallente T3/CS providing sensor strength bonuses, local and projected ECCM. Avoiding shield rigs and extenders. It's not just about what's on your ship or in your head, you can boost performance to an absurd degree if you look at the gang as a whole and not as individuals.

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

It's a none issue. Scanning is too good already, allowing you to get bs sniper warp point in seconds.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Edited by: DHB WildCat on 07/12/2010 05:09:37Lets face it, if you roleplay you know the battleship has the most syphistacated* (spelling 8)) electronic sysytems around!

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

if someone puts that much money and team effort into making 1 ship unscannable, surely they deserve it?

---

Quote:

---

It's a none issue. Scanning is too good already, allowing you to get bs sniper warp point in seconds.

---

Originally by: Furb Killer

---

Right now it is pretty much exactly the same time as jumping through a gate takes. Capital jumping needs to first broadcast the cyno after which they can jump to it, which takes a bit more time than jumping through a gate. However at the same time they dont need to get rid of jump cloak, so that 'balances' out.

Difference obviously is that the other side of a gate is easily scouted, those supercarriers can be anywhere within 1.5 region radius and can jump anywhere, not just to gates.


Give all jump drives, excluding BOs, 15 second warmup timer, make it longer for supercaps. Then you need to have proper tackle in place and a strong ship + logistics if you want to cyno them on grid.

That and just severely reduce their jump range since it is ******ed that they can travel so much faster than conventional ships.

---

Originally by: Ulstan

---

Big ships locking smaller ones fast would be highly imbalanced. Suddenly you don't need small stuff with your BS at gate camps.

Big ships *should* lock other big ships extremely quickly, I think. Both for balance reasons but also because of the aforementioned 'realism' issue.

We kind of have two different discussions going on. I think there are more problems with BS than them not being very good solo platforms, and the problems aren't necessarily the same.

---

Originally by: Infinity Ziona

---

Originally by: Ulstan

---

Big ships locking smaller ones fast would be highly imbalanced. Suddenly you don't need small stuff with your BS at gate camps.

Big ships *should* lock other big ships extremely quickly, I think. Both for balance reasons but also because of the aforementioned 'realism' issue.

We kind of have two different discussions going on. I think there are more problems with BS than them not being very good solo platforms, and the problems aren't necessarily the same.

---

I disagree. Big ships locking small ships makes perfect sense. A small ship still has its speed and sig radius to counter a battleship. Wheres the threat of being locked by a battleship in a reasonable amount of time if its not able to hit you.

Also I can't see battleships with a more realistic locking time eliminating tacklers, tacklers are not tacklers purely for their fast locking and I doubt anyone is suggesting giving battleships the lock time of a frigate.

---

Originally by: Ranka Mei

---

'Lean and mean' is the new cool. I guess battleships really are on their way out. Can't say I'm losing much sleep over it, though.

---

Originally by: Ling Vyr

---

BS are not the tool for hit and run games (solo pvp) and have good purpose in fleet figths.

---

Originally by: Amantus

---

Real men don't need to get into blaster range.

---

Originally by: CCP Oveur

---

The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.

---

Originally by: Ranvaldy

---

No

---

Originally by: Tub Chil

---

Funny thing is that in RL carriers also made battleships obsolete.

---

Originally by: Koizumi Kumiko

---

No, surface-to-surface missiles and long range radars together with cruise missiles made battleships obsolete.

---

Originally by: Emperor Cheney

---

I hear Battleships make great macro ratters though, can OP confirm?

---

Originally by: Reaver Glitterstim

---

Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim on 12/12/2010 22:51:04
Uh-oh it looks like somebody is unhappy his solopwnmobile got nerfed. l2p noob and get more than 1 ship.

[Edit]and don't take my battleships away from me!

---

Originally by: Emperor Cheney

---

I hear Battleships make great macro ratters though, can OP confirm?

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Originally by: Emperor Cheney

---

I hear Battleships make great macro ratters though, can OP confirm?

---

Couldnt tell you. I have two accounts, my main and alt both of whom are in GE-8 fighting IT/INIT/-A-/Stain wagon ect.

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

Ability of 1 player to beat superior forces by use of tactics and specialized equipment is what drives people to excel in the game. It promotes elite players, allows "heroes" to exist. When you need a gang to achieve anything great in PvP, you are just a pawn, easily replaceable by any other nameless pawn.

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

Originally by: Reaver Glitterstim

---

Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim on 12/12/2010 22:51:04
Uh-oh it looks like somebody is unhappy his solopwnmobile got nerfed. l2p noob and get more than 1 ship.

[Edit]and don't take my battleships away from me!

---

Ability of 1 player to beat superior forces by use of tactics and specialized equipment is what drives people to excel in the game. It promotes elite players, allows "heroes" to exist. When you need a gang to achieve anything great in PvP, you are just a pawn, easily replaceable by any other nameless pawn.

---

Originally by: Amantus

---

Real men don't need to get into blaster range.

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

Originally by: Reaver Glitterstim

---

Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim on 12/12/2010 22:51:04
Uh-oh it looks like somebody is unhappy his solopwnmobile got nerfed. l2p noob and get more than 1 ship.

[Edit]and don't take my battleships away from me!

---

Ability of 1 player to beat superior forces by use of tactics and specialized equipment is what drives people to excel in the game. It promotes elite players, allows "heroes" to exist. When you need a gang to achieve anything great in PvP, you are just a pawn, easily replaceable by any other nameless pawn.

---

Originally by: iKill Giants

---

If there are no battleships, what is there to shoot?

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

The guys with the most ships will win even if the other guys have better tactics and more experience. The mechanics only allow for number superiority to be king.

---

Quote:

---

I'm not arguing for any ship to be a solopwnmobile, but at the same time, a battleship should stand a fighting chance. If ambushed by a 5 man HAC gang, a battleship SHOULD lose, but should be able to take down a few HACs before succumbing to enemy fire.

---

Originally by: DHB WildCat

---

Originally by: Ephemeron

---

Originally by: Reaver Glitterstim

---

Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim on 12/12/2010 22:51:04
Uh-oh it looks like somebody is unhappy his solopwnmobile got nerfed. l2p noob and get more than 1 ship.

[Edit]and don't take my battleships away from me!

---

Ability of 1 player to beat superior forces by use of tactics and specialized equipment is what drives people to excel in the game. It promotes elite players, allows "heroes" to exist. When you need a gang to achieve anything great in PvP, you are just a pawn, easily replaceable by any other nameless pawn.

---

Well said.

It was people like

Farjung
Kessah
Yourself - Ephemeron
DaMiGe
Kil2
Garmon

that I strove to take after. These guys kept me going, gave me something to strive for. Now.... well now you better bring more than the other guy. Good fights are hard to find, great fights even more so. 99% of everything I see and sadly am a part of is ganks.

The guys with the most ships will win even if the other guys have better tactics and more experience. The mechanics only allow for number superiority to be king.

---

Originally by: Emperor Cheney

---

Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 13/12/2010 03:35:47

Oh my goodness. So, in the same post you complain about blobbing, you propose the battleship be made so great it could take down multiple hac's even if ganked? In your game, the only valid ship would be the battleship, and battles would be won or lost by whoever brought more.

---

Originally by: Jonathan Xavier

---

Originally by: Emperor Cheney

---

Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 13/12/2010 03:35:47

Oh my goodness. So, in the same post you complain about blobbing, you propose the battleship be made so great it could take down multiple hac's even if ganked? In your game, the only valid ship would be the battleship, and battles would be won or lost by whoever brought more.

---

So basically, your counter-argument is that if you are the gank gangs don't deserve to take losses? That no ship can be powerful enough to put up a fight to your uber 5 man HAC gang? That's ludicrous. Not only that, but I suggested later that BS double in price and have fewer EHP so as to further balance the risk/reward ratio. No one would be forced to fly only BS with the victor being decided by who brings more. It would bring more vulnerable isk onto the field to be destroyed

---

Originally by: Emperor Cheney

---

Edited by: Emperor Cheney on 13/12/2010 03:35:47



edit to add:

Quote:

---

I'm not arguing for any ship to be a solopwnmobile, but at the same time, a battleship should stand a fighting chance. If ambushed by a 5 man HAC gang, a battleship SHOULD lose, but should be able to take down a few HACs before succumbing to enemy fire.

---

Oh my goodness. So, in the same post you complain about blobbing, you propose the battleship be made so great it could take down multiple hac's even if ganked? In your game, the only valid ship would be the battleship, and battles would be won or lost by whoever brought more.

---

Originally by: Emperor Cheney

---

My five man hac gang should win because HACs are pretty good ships and we brought five of them.

---

Originally by: Jan'z Kolna

---

these days battles are won by whoever brought more supercaps , boosting battleship in any way would actually lessen a gap in combat power between powerblocs and smaller entities

IMO battleships are too weak, supercaps too strong

flatten the curve ,says I

---