EVE Search - Battlecruisers kill the appeal of cruisers?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Battlecruisers kill the appeal of cruisers?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Chainsaw Plankton IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE	Posted - 2010.12.27 05:56:00 - [31] Originally by: Von Kroll Originally by: Liang Nuren Originally by: Von Kroll In straight firepower, a Caracal can have about 72% of the firepower of a Drake, all in a smaller, more agile, faster, and cheaper package. I'll be extremely surprised if you can find a Caracal fit that does even half the damage of a Drake with a quarter the EHP. -Liang Standard HML PvP fit Drake shows 368 missile DPS with Lvl 5 skills versus an HML PvP Caracal fit with 263 missile DPS. That's 71%. And, I said firepower, with no comparison to tank. comparing various ships and only comparing one stat is pretty much meaningless. and I dunno how you fit ships but my pvp hml drake has about 100 more missile dps than yours.
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.12.27 06:16:00 - [32] Edited by: Omara Otawan on 27/12/2010 06:18:56 Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton and I dunno how you fit ships but my pvp hml drake has about 100 more missile dps than yours. That 4th BCU is really a waste of a slot. Not sure about how easy it is to get a hold of substantial quantities of DG Scourges for non-ludicrous prices, but prolly a waste as well. Looks good in EFT though. At least the dps figures.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.12.27 07:38:00 - [33] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 27/12/2010 07:39:40 Originally by: Von Kroll Standard HML PvP fit Drake shows 368 missile DPS with Lvl 5 skills versus an HML PvP Caracal fit with 263 missile DPS. That's 71%. And, I said firepower, with no comparison to tank. Two things: - You said nothing about missile only DPS - The Caracal can't fit a 3rd BCU. - The Caracal doesn't have the grid for HAMs. For your claim of the Caracal having 72% of the firepower of a Drake to be true, you'd need to be able to get 487 DPS out of it. But I'm only asking for 339 DPS and 20K EHP (1/2 DPS + 1/4 EHP). -Liang Ed: Originally by: Omara Otawan That 4th BCU is really a waste of a slot. Not sure about how easy it is to get a hold of substantial quantities of DG Scourges for non-ludicrous prices, but prolly a waste as well. Looks good in EFT though. At least the dps figures. Uh, his claim is 368 Missile DPS. 3 BCU + Fury = 462 Missile DPS. You are such an epic failure of a poaster. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
gpfault Blood Covenant Pandemic Legion	Posted - 2010.12.27 07:57:00 - [34] Originally by: Liang Nuren I'm only asking for 339 DPS and 20K EHP (1/2 DPS + 1/4 EHP). Quote: [Caracal, prop mods are overrated] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Large F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction Invulnerability Field II J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I X5 Prototype I Engine Enervator Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Terror Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Terror Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Terror Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Terror Assault Missile Heavy Assault Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Terror Assault Missile Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Ancillary Current Router I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Hobgoblin II x2
Omara Otawan	Posted - 2010.12.27 08:00:00 - [35] Originally by: Liang Nuren Uh, his claim is 368 Missile DPS. 3 BCU + Fury = 462 Missile DPS. You are such an epic failure of a poaster. God forbid you want to use your cruiser size weapons against a cruiser. Or a HAC. Or a Recon. Also, since this isnt CAOD its spelled poster.
Veliria	Posted - 2010.12.27 08:09:00 - [36] BCs could use a mobility/scan res reduction compared to cruisers. They're a little slower as it is, but widening the gap might encourage some to go more agile cruisers instead. The main issue is insurance though, putting BCs quite close to Cruisers when it comes to how it costs to lose. Maybe ships under say 10mil get cheaper insurance or something like that?
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.12.27 08:22:00 - [37] Originally by: gpfault prop mods are overrated I must admit that I laughed. I actually knew it was possible to get the DPS.. just a little skeptical on the tank. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Von Kroll Caldari Kroll's Legion	Posted - 2010.12.27 08:40:00 - [38] For full disclosure, these are the fits for my comparison, and Liang, in my original post in the thread, I said "from a straight firepower perspective" or something to that effect. And no, I wasn't comparing an HML Cara to a HAM Drake. We don't use HAMs for our fleet fit Drakes typically. It was purely a HML comparison, without drones, without tackle, with faction missiles, and no implants. [Drake, Standard HML] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Power Diagnostic System II Damage Control II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Sensor Booster II Invulnerability Field II Invulnerability Field II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile [empty high slot] Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I -and- [Caracal, Standard HML] Ballistic Control System II Ballistic Control System II Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon I Microwarpdrive Sensor Booster II, Targeting Range Sensor Booster II Invulnerability Field II Medium Shield Extender II Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Heavy Missile Launcher II, Caldari Navy Scourge Heavy Missile Medium Anti-EM Screen Reinforcer I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Medium Core Defence Field Extender I Ultimately my point was that a Cara provides a cost-effective ship for its inherent capability. The exact percentage of firepower can be debated, but the ultimate bang-for-the-buck was my point. YMMV
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.12.27 08:59:00 - [39] Originally by: Von Kroll For full disclosure, these are the fits for my comparison, and Liang, in my third post in the thread, I said "from a straight firepower perspective" or something to that effect. And no, I wasn't comparing an HML Cara to a HAM Drake. We don't use HAMs for our fleet fit Drakes typically. It was purely a HML comparison, without drones, without tackle, with faction missiles, and no implants. A couple of things: - Straight firepower implies straight firepower. You know, killin' ** firepower. Not limited firepower for specific situations. - If you try you can swap that PDU for a BCU. Quote:** Ultimately my point was that a Cara provides a cost-effective ship for its inherent capability. The exact percentage of firepower can be debated, but the ultimate bang-for-the-buck was my point. YMMV Bang for the buck is normally a term that compares the alternatives. In that light, the Caracal's bang for the buck is extremely low. -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
NoNah	Posted - 2010.12.27 09:36:00 - [40] Originally by: Liang Nuren Bang for the buck is normally a term that compares the alternatives. In that light, the Caracal's bang for the buck is extremely low. -Liang It's not. You're just buying rollerskates and expect them to make a big bang as you put them on fire. If you put your focus on cost the caracal is quite competent. Of course this means weapon, shield resistance or no rigs at all. Meta 0 equipment and possibly random cheap named modules. Parrots, commence! Postcount: 553465

Karn Velora	Posted - 2010.12.27 09:52:00 - [41] Originally by: NoNah Originally by: Liang Nuren Bang for the buck is normally a term that compares the alternatives. In that light, the Caracal's bang for the buck is extremely low. -Liang It's not. You're just buying rollerskates and expect them to make a big bang as you put them on fire. If you put your focus on cost the caracal is quite competent. Of course this means weapon, shield resistance or no rigs at all. Meta 0 equipment and possibly random cheap named modules. Exactly. Only way a cruiser feels competitive is to use it as an un-rigged junk-fit disposable pvp ship. Shame. Wish they had a use still, as something else than a base hull to make T2 ships out of.
Scorpionidae	Posted - 2010.12.27 10:01:00 - [42] I didn't read all of the post so sorry if this has already been said. But I'm pritty sure that the BC class of ship is bigger then the crusier class which should then mean that they should get more tank and more gank then the ships below its class? I said this when someone wanted to get rid of T3s because they was better then T2 and T1... Well ges what... there ment to be. Scorpionidae
Nanferr	Posted - 2010.12.27 10:32:00 - [43] Quote: I said this when someone wanted to get rid of T3s because they was better then T2 and T1... Well ges what... there ment to be. this is an insanely complicated concept which is impossible to explain to the vanilla eve player.
NoNah	Posted - 2010.12.27 10:50:00 - [44] Originally by: Nanferr Quote: I said this when someone wanted to get rid of T3s because they was better then T2 and T1... Well ges what... there ment to be. this is an insanely complicated concept which is impossible to explain to the vanilla eve player. Don't think anyone has ever stated it shouldn't be better - for many things. Question is if cost and ease of access is actually balanced to their performance. And they are. Assuming the difference in isk is noticable, which sadly it is not right now. Isk is easy enough to come by that drakes are as disposable as caracals, the encumberance for the average player when losing a drake is not to afford a new one - as you can make the isk back wherever you are in noticably less than an hour. Less if oyu already have a capital you keep active. So what all it actually roots back to is ships are to cheap in general, caracals are somewhat balanced to drakes(or would've been) if there was any difference in cost. Removing insurance was a tiny step on the path, now the cost just has to... tenfold. :\| Parrots, commence! Postcount: 517604
Petrov Kreigt Caldari Global Defence Initiative	Posted - 2010.12.27 11:23:00 - [45] So... youre whining about BC being better than cruisers... because theyre bigger, fit more guns and have more uses than a cruiser, they have more EHP and a higher damage output. Isnt that the intended purpose of a "battle"cruiser? to be better than a cruiser because its a ship class above it and requires higher skills to use properly? BC are like smaller BS in their role, they do good DPS, have a decent EHP (dont get pedantic with me) and are faster than battleships... which is exactly you want them to be. Stop whining.
Michael Zign Caldari Suddenly Ninjas Tear Extraction And Reclamation Service	Posted - 2010.12.27 11:26:00 - [46] Faction Cruiser V Battle Cruiser. Who is going to win?
ibnSin	Posted - 2010.12.27 12:59:00 - [47] yea did we really need a thread for this? thought it was pretty obvious for a while now lol
Moonmonkey Amarr Orange Clover	Posted - 2010.12.27 14:50:00 - [48] Let big guns easly hit small ships and be done with and if small ships don't like it, being more friends next time.

CCP Adida C C P C C P Alliance	Posted - 2010.12.27 15:48:00 - [49] Removed troll comments and replies to the comments. Adida Community Rep CCP Hf, EVE Online

Angie McFish Gallente Caldari Industrial Capitalist Consortium	Posted - 2010.12.27 16:21:00 - [50] Originally by: Petrov Kreigt Stuff Originally by: Scorpionidae Stuff Problem is that I feel that there is no reason to ever fly a cruiser when the battlecruisers can do everything they can and they can do it better. The idea with cruisers and battlecruisers is silly, if anything battlecruiser should be a T2 variant of a cruiser hull. Battlecruisers should be a transition class, as it is now the cruiser is a transition class from frigs to BCs.

baltec1 Antares Shipyards Phalanx Alliance	Posted - 2010.12.27 16:34:00 - [51] Whats wrong with the caracal? I love that ship.
Scorpionidae	Posted - 2010.12.27 16:43:00 - [52] Originally by: Angie McFish .... Please CCP don't listen to this guy and people like him. Leave the BCs as they are they are fine. Scorpionidae
Gypsio III Dirty Filthy Perverts	Posted - 2010.12.27 17:08:00 - [53] Nerf tier 2 BCs to tier 1 levels.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.12.27 17:18:00 - [54] Originally by: Gypsio III Nerf tier 2 BCs to tier 1 levels. DIAFKTHXBYE (ingame) TBH its not such a bad solution, but it hurts me to think of all the BCs being as good as the Prophecy. :( -Liang -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Zhim'Fufu	Posted - 2010.12.27 17:32:00 - [55] Originally by: Scorpionidae Originally by: Angie McFish .... Please CCP don't listen to this guy and people like him. Leave the BCs as they are they are fine. Scorpionidae Exactly. Tier 2 bc are perfect in balance and form. Tier 1 could use a boost and pretty much the entire t1 line of frigate and cruisers need a massive rebalance against the plethora of ships that have been introduced to the game since its launch. That is the reason people don't use t1 cruisers. They simply suck compared to everything else due to them being virtually abandoned by ccp's balance team over the years. So want to make t1 cruisers appealing? Retool them to be trainer ships for the t2 hulls and rework them all to be useful in some way. Just a quick few examples using the anemic amarr line of ships. Executioner: Give it a special bonus to propulsion jamming cap use like its inty cousins and a general buff to its stats so that a newish player can be effective in a gang as tackle or an older player with max skills can use it as a cheap inty substitute on risky roams. Maller: Drop the lasers and give it 4 launchers with a bonus to hams(5% damage per level) with the grid and cpu to fit 4 hams and at least an 800mm plate with mwd and tackle. Now future sac pilots will have something to run around in and get experience with as they skill up. Omen: Does it really need to be repeated? Prophecy: This should be changed much like the maller into a ham boat so damnation pilots can have something to use as they skill up. Then repeat for all races t1 lineups.
Liang Nuren Parsec Flux War.Pigs.	Posted - 2010.12.27 17:38:00 - [56] Edited by: Liang Nuren on 27/12/2010 17:37:52 Originally by: Zhim'Fufu Prophecy: This should be changed much like the maller into a ham boat so damnation pilots can have something to use as they skill up. I dislike this because the Damnation has so little DPS. I'd want to see 8 highs, 6 launchers, and a ROF bonus. And a 50m^3 drone bay. -Liang Ed: And a pony. -- Eve Forum ***** Extraordinaire On Twitter - Blog got deleted when Evepress died -
Zhim'Fufu	Posted - 2010.12.27 17:47:00 - [57] Originally by: Liang Nuren Edited by: Liang Nuren on 27/12/2010 17:37:52 Originally by: Zhim'Fufu Prophecy: This should be changed much like the maller into a ham boat so damnation pilots can have something to use as they skill up. I dislike this because the Damnation has so little DPS. I'd want to see 8 highs, 6 launchers, and a ROF bonus. And a 50m^3 drone bay. -Liang Ed: And a pony. Well command ships really were not supposed to be massive damage dealers even if a few can be fitted out for some pretty sick dps at the expense of fitting command links. As far as the prophecy goes yeah I totally agree it should be a close range slugger hence my desire to change it to a ham boat but maybe giving it 50m3 dronebay is a bit too much. Unless they kept the 25mbit bandwith of course.
Megan Maynard Minmatar Out of Order	Posted - 2010.12.27 19:24:00 - [58] Edited by: Megan Maynard on 27/12/2010 19:25:39 I love minny cruisers. But the difference between them and BC's isn't as vast in the minny line of ships as other races I think. Battleship cost is a big factor now that insurance sucks nuts. Originally by: F'nog Originally by: Stareatthesun No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down. Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S
Ephemeron Solitairian Society	Posted - 2010.12.27 19:53:00 - [59] If BC's were forced to use Large rigs, it would make them much more fair relative to cruisers and battleships. Costs matter.
Hirana Yoshida Behavioral Affront	Posted - 2010.12.27 20:04:00 - [60] Originally by: Ephemeron If BC's were forced to use Large rigs, it would make them much more fair relative to cruisers and battleships. Costs matter. That might actually work, would certainly make the decision "BC or BS" a lot harder and make Cruisers a good 'budget' option for a lot of the small scale stuff. Armour rigs would need a tweak to bring costs down 20% or so .. massive gap between shield and armour rigs at present.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: 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.