EVE Search - Building a better battleship.

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Building a better battleship.

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ken 1138 Enslave. Persona Non Gratis 1	Posted - 2012.10.12 21:46:00 - [1] - Quote While looking into various battleship fits it occurred to me on how ridiculously under powered the current selection of standard battleships in eve online are. To anyone that has done any kind of low and null sec pvp they will know that a single battleship coming on to grid again isn't anything to sweat over. In fact to most it's a chance for an easy kill. Battleships as a combat ship are pretty much last step in subcaps until you step into a carrier or dreadnought. With that said a current battleship even in a T2 fit is out classed in every aspect like DPS and defense even unique bonuses. Battleships aren't known for their speed but that is to be expected of ship over 1KM in length. The issue is that most anyone can get cruiser to out DPS a battleship and as for defense well a frigate with enough ammo and a scram can kill a passive tanked battleship. In 40-50+ fleets with logi yes it can be capable but on it's own it's a soon to be dead ship. And no one is going to bring pirate or faction battleships that cost well over 1 bil to a fight unless they have money to burn or hate their own respective killboards. Putting 1 bil of mods into one may have it last longer in a fight maybe even take a few down along with it. In the end it's scrap metal. What i'm suggesting is massively boosting battleships in both standard defense and DPS. Have it be able to hold it's own in a fight. This could be done by either making a new type of battleship, an expensive assault battleship a ship that can be a fair fight with a T3 cruiser or battlecruiser for example. Either that of make a new ship type to bridge the gap between Battleships and combat capable capitals. High sec and combat capable capitals anyone?
Moondancer Starweaver The Drones Club Shoot 2 Thrill 4	Posted - 2012.10.12 22:03:00 - [2] - Quote Isn't that one of the next steps in rebalancing, I mean i assume they would continue next year with Battle Cruisers and Battleships to round out all of the tech one rebalancing.
Riot Girl RADIO RAMPAGE Initiative Mercenaries 150	Posted - 2012.10.12 22:08:00 - [3] - Quote I don't think Battleships are supposed to be able to hold their own in a fight. If you look at how battleships were used in history, they were expensive ships that needed an escort of smaller ships to protect them. They were particularly vulnerable to crappy torpedo boats. In history, battleships were mostly just a way for a nation to show off how powerful they were. The battleships themselves were actually pretty pointless and crap.
Ken 1138 Enslave. Persona Non Gratis 1	Posted - 2012.10.12 22:36:00 - [4] - Quote Riot Girl wrote: I don't think Battleships are supposed to be able to hold their own in a fight. If you look at how battleships were used in history, they were expensive ships that needed an escort of smaller ships to protect them. They were particularly vulnerable to crappy torpedo boats. In history, battleships were mostly just a way for a nation to show off how powerful they were. The battleships themselves were actually pretty pointless and crap. I see your point but you can't compare eve online ships to anything in real live for one. If you look at eve ships by size and damage it goes up and up until you hit battleships then it takes a dive. If you had something basic like a level 4 mission and had a choice between any type of Battlecruiser, battleship or T3 cruiser each worth the same. I can guess what most would pick. Plus battleships are predominantly shown in eve online videos and in-game as a capable ship. But what i'm pointing out is that it's not that at all, in fact it's pretty low tier for what it can do.
Dread Pirate Pete Tribal Core Defiant Legacy 70	Posted - 2012.10.12 22:47:00 - [5] - Quote Battleships are EHP bricks with guns attached. They sit statically and shoot. They are for fleet engagements and need support craft or they will be outmanoeuvred. You're not supposed to run around with one unsupported, no matter what lvl4s have taught you. ;)
Klymer Hedion University Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2012.10.12 23:20:00 - [6] - Quote Riot Girl wrote: In history, battleships were mostly just a way for a nation to show off how powerful they were. The battleships themselves were actually pretty pointless and crap. I'm sure you would feel differently had you been on the receiving end of the 16" guns on the Iowa class.
Alara IonStorm 3268	Posted - 2012.10.13 00:16:00 - [7] - Quote Riot Girl wrote: In history, battleships were mostly just a way for a nation to show off how powerful they were. The battleships themselves were actually pretty pointless and crap. Actually the greatest weakness of Battleships have always been reluctance to use them for fear of them sinking. Even in WW2 they could be incredibly dangerous and very difficult to sink. Tactical mistakes are mostly responsible for their poor showing. In the few battles they were pressed into in both World Wars they were a deadly force. The idea that they were weak came from the Japanese who hoarded them expecting an American Battleship offensive against the home island instead of western sea control to focus on Europe and an island hopping campaign. This meant that in the small skirmishes they lost their pilots and ships that would cover BS from air and sub attack. The result of an American faulty torpedo design kept American Submarines from being a real threat so the Japanese never invested in modern Sonar Technology or dedicated ASW Ships. Technology moved faster then you could believe in the war, blink and you miss it sort of thing. When the Torpedo problem was fixed and the states suddenly had a 100+ Sub Fleet out of nowhere and the Japanese had to use their Destroyers as dedicated ASW platforms lacking real options. They built a fleet of tiny Escorts but without Frigate sized AA Armament like the American Tacoma's had or proper Sonar combined with their best pilots becoming self inflicted paint stains on the side of US Ships those escorts were wholly wrecked by US Air Power and the Subs they were meant to be hunting and unsuitable for fleet protection. This left the Japanese Navy in a bind. America could launch mass attacks from the Air with hundreds to thousands of Aircraft and thanks to the failed Kamikaze tactic there was no air cover. Their Cruisers and Anti Sub Force was whittled down to nothing. This all combined to create one thing, the Japanese Battleships were completely vulnerable to US Submarines which was responsible for sinking the majority of them and to a lesser extent air power. Basically they were heavily outnumbered. The Germans in WW1 benched all their Battleships after Jutland not needing control of the sea as they were not relying on foreign trade the same way Briton was. They were also outnumbered 2-1, so after Jutland they switched to a strategy of commerce raiding with Cruisers and Subs avoiding the British fleet wherever possible. By the time the war was ending and it was all or nothing the Germans mutinied and their fleet became unusable. The final battle never fought the war ended soon after. They never rebuilt their Capital Fleet for WW2 and despite the 2 Bismark Ships they were outnumbered 5-1 in Battleships. The Italians used their Battleships to good extent in WW2 but they were out of date, under supplied and out numbered as well. Ironically the most dangerous Battleships the Japanese unleashed on the US was the 4 ships of the Kongo Class which were relatively light. They fought in every major battle because they were not priority and therefor were not hoarded by naval command. When the mighty 2 Yamato Battleships finally fought all the planes and support had been exhausted and they were slaughtered with ease, the primary reason being they were not used early when Japan had a chance and wasn't outnumbered 8 to 1. What really killed Battleships? Well besides reluctance, Missiles. Missiles could penetrate the toughest Armor in ways Torpedo's and Cannons could not and ended most Armored Warfare at sea. Ships today are not heavily armored relying on countermeasures instead, Guns currently are not a big deal most ships armed with one light Duel Purpose Gun. Anti-Ship Missiles killed Battleships in the modern age, reluctance to use them killed them in the past age.
Alara IonStorm 3268	Posted - 2012.10.13 00:17:00 - [8] - Quote Honestly I think the best thing CCP could do for Battleships is take a peak at their MWD's. Cap Booster is pretty much mandatory unless you are sitting still. Just letting them run for the time frame of a BC's MWD would be a big buff. Probably could take a second quick peak at sensor strength as well, bring it somewhere in between BC and current, 140-160ish average max skill. After that it is all about Tier Work and flushing out the slots and bonuses in the rebalance.
Schalac Apocalypse Reign 91	Posted - 2012.10.13 03:08:00 - [9] - Quote 90% web nerf killed the BS.
Paikis Lycosa Syndicate Surely You're Joking 205	Posted - 2012.10.13 04:17:00 - [10] - Quote There needs to be a good reason to use a battleship, and currently there just isn't one. A battleship at current is just a really expensive, really slow battlecruiser that does a tiny bit more damage. I'd personally like to see a straight up 50% damage bonus to all battleship sized guns/launchers. Battleships simply do not do enough damage to be worth the cost and lack of speed. Not sure how you would modify the T3 Battlecruisers and Stealth Bombers to compensate though. Maybe give Battleships a 50% role bonus to all large weapons (and sentry/heavy drones)?

Tamiya Sarossa Resistance is Character Forming 211	Posted - 2012.10.13 04:34:00 - [11] - Quote Heavy neuts are pretty much the sexiest things ever. All battleships need is a reduction in 100mn MWD cap use and I'd strongly consider flying nothing else.
Maeltstome Caldari Deep Space Ventures Tribal Band 100	Posted - 2012.10.13 10:42:00 - [12] - Quote Lot's of good point in this thread. The main factors i think that effect BS's poor performance are: Web nerf: You CANNOT HIT anything with an afterbuner even at close to 20km. Even battleships can mess each others tracking up. Active armor tanking: LAR II's are a joke, so you need to plate your BS... which means you're a brick. ASB's have helped Shield tanking, not to mention shield tanking is generally better than armor tanking. Weapon Range: of T1 BS, only Amarr have good weapon ranges that operate in optimal without stepping up to artillery. Either tracking on BS weapons needs to go up, or optimal needs to go up. They need to be on top of ships to do their damage, which tracking kills. The varguur's tracking bonus is amazing and makes it worth using - perhaps this should be investigated for other BS ships in terms of a weapon buff. I must say though that battleships are relatively cheap (except Tier3's) given they are insurable. The price of modules is the only real downside. You get a lot of DPS and Tank out of something for the cost of 2xBC's - but in terms of general usefulness i think they are lacking. The current climate (and the climate from now on... this will NEVER CHANGE because people are intelligent and have worked this out) is the use of ships who are relatively fast and can stay out of tackle range, deal damage then disengage when they take damage. Battleships cant do this (cept the mach) and therefor once committed to a battle are generally in it until the fight is over. So peoples choice is a 20-30% increase in damage and tank, 100-300% increase in cost to fly a BS in PVP versus getting a BC and having the option of bailing out if the s**t hits the fan.
Exploited Engineer Creatively Applied Violence Inc. 90	Posted - 2012.10.13 12:14:00 - [13] - Quote EVE battleships are too vulnerable to frigate- (and some extent cruiser-) sized weapons. If you plan on killing battleships with your frigate or cruiser, you should have to bring appropriately-sized weapons (making your ship very vulnerable to attack by ships of the same size class). Stealth bombers and T3 BCs kind of work by this philosophy. It should be extended to more ships.
Exploited Engineer Creatively Applied Violence Inc. 90	Posted - 2012.10.13 12:19:00 - [14] - Quote Paikis wrote: There needs to be a good reason to use a battleship, and currently there just isn't one. A battleship at current is just a really expensive, really slow battlecruiser that does a tiny bit more damage. Err ... The Naga outdamages the Rokh. By a whopping 25%! The Tornado has the same paper DPS as the Maelstrom plus a significantly improved damage projection (+25% falloff) The Oracle has the same paper DPS as the Abaddon, plus better damage projection. The Talos has the same paper DPS as the Hyperion, plus better damage projection. The only thing the actual battleships are better at is not breaking when someone sneezes at them. But they're only slightly better there.
Schalac Apocalypse Reign 91	Posted - 2012.10.13 16:54:00 - [15] - Quote Yes, the fact that a raven has an effective EHP of 45-50k while a drake has almost the same EHP and far better damage projection coupled by the fact that the drake costs 1/3 the price of the raven is just plain sad. A 50% role bonus to BS weapons wouldn't even come close to fixing that and with the talked about changes to the drake it will gain an even bigger advantage in real DPS compared to the raven. I said this years ago before the whole drake bandwagon and people just laughed. Now we are seeing an upcoming drake buff and unless CCP does something to fix BS torps and cruise you might as well just delete the raven from the database and start over.
Ken 1138 Enslave. Persona Non Gratis 3	Posted - 2012.10.13 18:00:00 - [16] - Quote Schalac wrote: Yes, the fact that a raven has an effective EHP of 45-50k while a drake has almost the same EHP and far better damage projection coupled by the fact that the drake costs 1/3 the price of the raven is just plain sad. A 50% role bonus to BS weapons wouldn't even come close to fixing that and with the talked about changes to the drake it will gain an even bigger advantage in real DPS compared to the raven. I said this years ago before the whole drake bandwagon and people just laughed. Now we are seeing an upcoming drake buff and unless CCP does something to fix BS torps and cruise you might as well just delete the raven from the database and start over. Pretty much this. I can tank a battleship better than a drake for example but then the drake will out DPS (with T2 guns no less) my battleship which is just ridiculous for 4 times the value. Logically it should be a real threat for the drake having more DPS and Tank. It shouldn't plow into fleets like some people have said in this thread but not be the sitting duck it is.
Doddy Excidium. Executive Outcomes 290	Posted - 2012.10.13 18:07:00 - [17] - Quote Tbh you guys don't have a clue, most succesful fleet doctrines in eve since people actually started using doctrine; Bs orientated - Sniper bs (now defunct) -> RR BS -> Welppests -> Hellcats -> Alpha Maelstroms -> Rokhs ->Napocs. Succesful doctrines that were not bs orientated -> sniper hacs (now defunct) -> ahacs ->drakes -> Thunderbirds -> armour t3s -> Tier 3 snipers. Basically the only downsides to bs are the web nerf and the introduction of bombs. Bombs are only an issue in null while the web nerf is countered just by having support. Tier 3s are basically a just a mobile version of the old sniper bs. So really the only non bs doctrines are either hml (getting nerfed) or ahac (created to kill bs) or expensive (t3s). People who think bs with no support should just wtfpwn smaller ships just don't understand eve and probably thought tracking titans were legit.
illirdor The Grey Eagle Society 23	Posted - 2012.10.13 18:38:00 - [18] - Quote Exploited Engineer wrote: Paikis wrote: There needs to be a good reason to use a battleship, and currently there just isn't one. A battleship at current is just a really expensive, really slow battlecruiser that does a tiny bit more damage. Err ... The Naga outdamages the Rokh. By a whopping 25%! The Tornado has the same paper DPS as the Maelstrom plus a significantly improved damage projection (+25% falloff) The Oracle has the same paper DPS as the Abaddon, plus better damage projection. The Talos has the same paper DPS as the Hyperion, plus better damage projection. The only thing the actual battleships are better at is not breaking when someone sneezes at them. But they're only slightly better there. lol and you think that a t3 BC would woop a BS,s ass right ?? Come to Amamake... The universal answer to everything...
Nalha Saldana Eternity INC. Goonswarm Federation 327	Posted - 2012.10.13 18:58:00 - [19] - Quote If they just nerf the Drake and Tech 3 ships back to where they should be BSs will be fine.
Khoul Ay'd Khoul's Space Dogs 12	Posted - 2012.10.13 19:08:00 - [20] - Quote I agree with the OP in principle, as a noob I'd worry when a BS unexpectedly warped in on top of me. Then I started flying them and learned how under-awesome they really are. Look at BSs and their equivalents throughout history; arrays of different sized guns to deal with different sized threats. And most important, awe-inspiring when they'd roll onto the field of battle. Why should EVE be so different? I know that this isn't F&I forum, but why can't we have 1-2-4 fitting scheme on these ships? 1 large=2 medium=4 small weapons mounted. Yeah, you leave the BS with the large weapon bonus, but allow it to fit an array of weapon sizes that feels/looks/acts like a 'real' BS. But do it in a way that down't turn it into a gimped fail-fit. For example: a classic Megathron with 7x 425mm + 1 utility could instead fit 5x 425mm, 2x 250mm and 4x 125mm. It gives up some ranged gank in exchange for some close in defense weapons. To prevent overkill limit it to two high slots downgraded, so at maximum you could fit 8 smalls, 4 mediums, or 4 smalls and 2 mediums. How do CCP implement it, skills, rigs, modules? I don't know the right answer, but it seems plausible.

Onictus Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities 228	Posted - 2012.10.13 19:09:00 - [21] - Quote Exploited Engineer wrote: Paikis wrote: There needs to be a good reason to use a battleship, and currently there just isn't one. A battleship at current is just a really expensive, really slow battlecruiser that does a tiny bit more damage. Err ... The Naga outdamages the Rokh. By a whopping 25%! The Tornado has the same paper DPS as the Maelstrom plus a significantly improved damage projection (+25% falloff) The Oracle has the same paper DPS as the Abaddon, plus better damage projection. The Talos has the same paper DPS as the Hyperion, plus better damage projection. The only thing the actual battleships are better at is not breaking when someone sneezes at them. But they're only slightly better there. Slighly? Rokh and Abaddon have about 3 times to the buffer of a their tier 3 counter parts. Talos can't mount a plate and Neutrons, and if you want to compare shield fits a nano-hype is nothing to sneeze at with 1200 DPS and a 85k eHP with links running ands with dual nanos you can run down a Drake with it. Tornado, what can you say, a Maelstrom ****** a fleet stabber, that is a beautiful thing. However, with ACs nano-phoons and and pests are fast enough and have neuts, and a heavy neut is no laughing matter.
Syrias Bizniz Carnivore Company To be Announced. 13	Posted - 2012.10.13 19:40:00 - [22] - Quote Just because a shipclass mostly designed for fleet-pvp that suffers from tiericide isn't able to solo-kill a Tech3 cruiser and some Tier2 battlecruisers are able to chew through a battleship doesn't mean you should buff them above all else and make them solowtfpwnmobiles. It's an indicator for the following things: a) Your battleship setup sucks and you should overthink it. b) You ****** up and used a battleship for a situation where you shouldn't have chosen a battleship. c) Someone brought the exactly right ship to kill you. d) Maybe some ship(classe)s are overpowered and one should consider nerfing them. e) You haven't seen a Hyperion yet. Well, to make EVE work there was this (GREAT!) idea of... different weapon sizes where bigger doesn't mean better but suits another task. If Battleships were able to track everything they engage, then there would be noone flying frigs ever again. Cause would you look at that, battleships everywhere, how should you tackle one when you know exactly it will f*ck you up way too fast before your backup lands on grid? People would only bring battleships to fight battleships to fight battleships to fight battleships - and maybe some blap dreads and stealthbombers. Fortunately, they aren't able to track everything. They have a pattern of prey they can engage very well. Just as frigates have such a pattern, just like supercarriers have one, cruisers have one, and yeah, maybe battlecruisers and T3 cruisers have a bigger pattern. But come on, you wouldn't bring a frig to kill a Navy Caracal. You just KNOW that you are screwed if you do so. But i don't hear you screaming to buff frigates so it can be on par with a Navy Caracal or Stabber Fleet Issue. A frigate can engage a battleship and keep a point long enough for a) backup to arrive or b) wear down all the drones and maybe something in between like ignore drones and chew through buffer tank because 'LOL i'll just buffer my BS for solo! 1v1 to be honored!'. EVE is like Rock Paper Scissors - but on crack. Get over it and wait until the balancetrain hits battleship tiericide.
bloodknight2 Talledega Knights 23	Posted - 2012.10.13 20:41:00 - [23] - Quote To me, the greatest problem with BS is their scan resolution. A BS is a state-of-the-art ship and yet, they have one of the worst scan resolution of every subcap ship in this game. The abaddon has 85 scan res VS 75 for the orca. A BS should have the best computer, not a Pentium 2 taking 45sec for targetting a frig.
Stegas Tyrano GLU CANU Open Space Consultancy 11	Posted - 2012.10.13 21:38:00 - [24] - Quote How about a role bonus? Maybe 30% bonus to smartbomb range per level.
Arazel Chainfire Sons Of 0din Dark Therapy 132	Posted - 2012.10.13 22:43:00 - [25] - Quote I read this, and I wonder if you have ever flown a battleship before. Hell, if you have ever engaged in actual PvP before. Battleships excel at a number of things. Please, go tell Rooks and Kings that their battleship fleets are obsolete, and they should go scrap them, because they are useless. Go tell the CFC that their alpha fleet is useless, and they should go re-process them all (ok, so they aren't getting used much atm, but that is because they don't do great against tengu's). Go tell the HBC that their foxcats are worthless, and that their rohkfleet is a waste of minerals. Go tell the WH's that their vindicators, mach's, abaddons, megathrons, etc. are all useless. What is not mentioned here - skirmishing, small scale engagements, faction warfare. What does this tell you? Battleships are doing what they are designed to do - engage in large scale warfare, usually to back up capital fleets. They engage in situations where mobility isn't paramount, as it is in small scale engagements. Now, are they the only thing on that stage? No, drakefleet competes with them, as does tengufleet. And AHAC's compete on the smaller scale (say, 30-70, though their ability to actually win is greatly reduced the larger the fleet gets - they do significantly better against drakefleet though). Teir 3's can skirmish with them, but they can't effectively engage except against small battleship fleets. Are all battleships balanced? No. You will rarely see a domi anymore. The phoon is a rarity (probably due to the necessary skills to make it work). The raven is straight up lol-tastic, but that is really more attributable to the state of large missiles. The hyperion suffers from the active tanking bonus, and the megathron has kind of lost its niche (I have however seen signs that it may soon be re-discovered as a fleet ship), though it is still used in WH PvP. But you do see all the amarr ships in fleets. The scorpion and the rohk both have places. The maelstrom and the pest both have places. They are no longer the mega super-destruction ships they were in the past. And I do miss my solo megathron. But aside from the few examples above, they all see use. And, here is the most important part - they don't make every single other ship obsolete... like they used to. -Arazel
Onictus Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities 228	Posted - 2012.10.13 22:49:00 - [26] - Quote Arazel Chainfire wrote: I read this, and I wonder if you have ever flown a battleship before. Hell, if you have ever engaged in actual PvP before. Battleships excel at a number of things. Please, go tell Rooks and Kings that their battleship fleets are obsolete, and they should go scrap them, because they are useless. Go tell the CFC that their alpha fleet is useless, and they should go re-process them all (ok, so they aren't getting used much atm, but that is because they don't do great against tengu's). Go tell the HBC that their foxcats are worthless, and that their rohkfleet is a waste of minerals. Go tell the WH's that their vindicators, mach's, abaddons, megathrons, etc. are all useless. What is not mentioned here - skirmishing, small scale engagements, faction warfare. What does this tell you? Battleships are doing what they are designed to do - engage in large scale warfare, usually to back up capital fleets. They engage in situations where mobility isn't paramount, as it is in small scale engagements. Now, are they the only thing on that stage? No, drakefleet competes with them, as does tengufleet. And AHAC's compete on the smaller scale (say, 30-70, though their ability to actually win is greatly reduced the larger the fleet gets - they do significantly better against drakefleet though). Teir 3's can skirmish with them, but they can't effectively engage except against small battleship fleets. Are all battleships balanced? No. You will rarely see a domi anymore. The phoon is a rarity (probably due to the necessary skills to make it work). The raven is straight up lol-tastic, but that is really more attributable to the state of large missiles. The hyperion suffers from the active tanking bonus, and the megathron has kind of lost its niche (I have however seen signs that it may soon be re-discovered as a fleet ship), though it is still used in WH PvP. But you do see all the amarr ships in fleets. The scorpion and the rohk both have places. The maelstrom and the pest both have places. They are no longer the mega super-destruction ships they were in the past. And I do miss my solo megathron. But aside from the few examples above, they all see use. And, here is the most important part - they don't make every single other ship obsolete... like they used to. -Arazel Foxcats aren't that scary when there aren't a pack of carriers repping them.
Red Teufel Blackened Skies Nulli Secunda 79	Posted - 2012.10.13 23:43:00 - [27] - Quote the only thing bothering the battleships...is the drake.
Arazel Chainfire Sons Of 0din Dark Therapy 132	Posted - 2012.10.14 05:00:00 - [28] - Quote Onictus wrote: Arazel Chainfire wrote: I read this, and I wonder if you have ever flown a battleship before. Hell, if you have ever engaged in actual PvP before. Battleships excel at a number of things. Please, go tell Rooks and Kings that their battleship fleets are obsolete, and they should go scrap them, because they are useless. Go tell the CFC that their alpha fleet is useless, and they should go re-process them all (ok, so they aren't getting used much atm, but that is because they don't do great against tengu's). Go tell the HBC that their foxcats are worthless, and that their rohkfleet is a waste of minerals. Go tell the WH's that their vindicators, mach's, abaddons, megathrons, etc. are all useless. What is not mentioned here - skirmishing, small scale engagements, faction warfare. What does this tell you? Battleships are doing what they are designed to do - engage in large scale warfare, usually to back up capital fleets. They engage in situations where mobility isn't paramount, as it is in small scale engagements. Now, are they the only thing on that stage? No, drakefleet competes with them, as does tengufleet. And AHAC's compete on the smaller scale (say, 30-70, though their ability to actually win is greatly reduced the larger the fleet gets - they do significantly better against drakefleet though). Teir 3's can skirmish with them, but they can't effectively engage except against small battleship fleets. Are all battleships balanced? No. You will rarely see a domi anymore. The phoon is a rarity (probably due to the necessary skills to make it work). The raven is straight up lol-tastic, but that is really more attributable to the state of large missiles. The hyperion suffers from the active tanking bonus, and the megathron has kind of lost its niche (I have however seen signs that it may soon be re-discovered as a fleet ship), though it is still used in WH PvP. But you do see all the amarr ships in fleets. The scorpion and the rohk both have places. The maelstrom and the pest both have places. They are no longer the mega super-destruction ships they were in the past. And I do miss my solo megathron. But aside from the few examples above, they all see use. And, here is the most important part - they don't make every single other ship obsolete... like they used to. -Arazel Foxcats aren't that scary when there aren't a pack of carriers repping them. Well, thank you for proving my point. Battleships excel when there are capitals on the field, with either battleships backing up the capitals, or the capitals backing up the battleships. Drakes... not so much. I was going to say something snarky and ask why you keep running away from foxcats... then I decided to stop beating that dead horse. Moving on now. -Arazel
Onictus Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities 229	Posted - 2012.10.14 06:21:00 - [29] - Quote Arazel Chainfire wrote: Well, thank you for proving my point. Battleships excel when there are capitals on the field, with either battleships backing up the capitals, or the capitals backing up the battleships. Drakes... not so much. I was going to say something snarky and ask why you keep running away from foxcats... then I decided to stop beating that dead horse. Moving on now. -Arazel Except your point is wrong. Battleships aren't that good with caps on the field. We use Tengus for that specific reason, GTFO factor. ..and your snarky is on EvE24 right now read the 4-0/49- battle report. The Foxcats were getting wrecked under a cyno jammper with logis we lost maybe 2 ships to something like 20 before they bailed back for 49- where they hid under ECM busting supers and had their usual cap support. But feel free to take on foxcats when you are outnumbered in sub cap capital and supers and feel free to stay on the field and get farmed.
Barrak Wormhole Engineers Greater Realms 66	Posted - 2012.10.14 09:22:00 - [30] - Quote Ken 1138 wrote: I see your point but you can't compare eve online ships to anything in real live for one. If you look at eve ships by size and damage it goes up and up until you hit battleships then it takes a dive. If you had something basic like a level 4 mission and had a choice between any type of Battlecruiser, battleship or T3 cruiser each worth the same. I can guess what most would pick Like someone else pointed out, to which you replied with the above, Battleships are not really meant to solo! They are a fleet ship that requires support. Whilst it is a little silly to compare internet space ships to the current world sea fairing vessels, one thing that generally does remain correct is the CLASS of ship. EvE Generally sticks to the correct classes and when you apply the same method to EvE you end up with a nice fleet. It sounds to me as though you are generally referring to playing solo, particularly with your reference to L4 missions. Also... in relation to that (L4 Missions), I'm not sure where you get your info from because all three of those classes are flown a lot in L4's. BC's are the starter ship and are often used by poorer or lower skilled pilots, then it's a toss up between BS and T3's. All you need do is look at this very forum to see the number of threads about L4 fits. T3's, Tengu in particular, might be used slightly less after the Winter Change, but that is due to an AMMO change not a ship change. Another thing to also bear in mind is that fighting against Rats/Sleepers is entirely different to fighting players. Rats are generally low skilled, therefore varying combinations; Kiting, speed tanking etc are very effective (Kiting=BS, Speed Tanking=T3). Sounds to me as though you either do not have the skills to correctly fly a BS or that you are trying to make it do something it can't. Regards



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 :: 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.