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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

biggest issue I have is that going up one size in guns results in a mere 33% increase in DPS... for massive penalties in tracking and sig res (and cap use for hybrids/lasers).

What I'd really like to see, is the loss of size specific bonuses.

That armageddon of yours... imagine if you could fit medium size lasers, and still get the ROF bonus.... you'll only do 75% the max DPS of a Armageddon with large guns, and you'll have reduced range... but much better ability to hit small targets...

Imagine the surprise when a frigate lands on top of a mega, and finds the mega sporting 7 Light Neutron Blasters with +7.5% tracking & +5% damage per level...

Then Imagine what happens to that mega when another mega lands at 10km, and starts pounding it with mega neutron blasters
-> 77% more DPS, 10km falloff, 7.2 km optimal vs 2.5km falloff, 1.5km optimal - 4x better falloff, 4.8x better optimal - that mega fit with small guns gets blown out of the water.

Its balanced, and makes battleships more versatile

biggest issue I have is that going up one size in guns results in a mere 33% increase in DPS... for massive penalties in tracking and sig res (and cap use for hybrids/lasers).

What I'd really like to see, is the loss of size specific bonuses.

That armageddon of yours... imagine if you could fit medium size lasers, and still get the ROF bonus.... you'll only do 75% the max DPS of a Armageddon with large guns, and you'll have reduced range... but much better ability to hit small targets...

Imagine the surprise when a frigate lands on top of a mega, and finds the mega sporting 7 Light Neutron Blasters with +7.5% tracking & +5% damage per level...

Then Imagine what happens to that mega when another mega lands at 10km, and starts pounding it with mega neutron blasters
-> 77% more DPS, 10km falloff, 7.2 km optimal vs 2.5km falloff, 1.5km optimal - 4x better falloff, 4.8x better optimal - that mega fit with small guns gets blown out of the water.

Its balanced, and makes battleships more versatile

No it's not ;) It makes battleships solowtfpwnmachines with medium and small weapons because they're tank is scaled so that they are unkillable by smaller crafts. Right now battleships are in general very very well balanced. You have guns to fight slow ships, powergrid enough to fit large neuts (especially if you downsize guns a bit), and drones to handle smaller targets.

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.

What really killed Battleships? Well besides reluctance, Missiles. Missiles could penetrate the toughest Armor in ways Torpedo's and Cannons could not, out ranged guns 2-5 times and ended most Armored Warfare at sea. Ships today are not heavily armored relying on missile countermeasures instead, Guns currently are not a big deal most ships are 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.

While the analysis of range of missiles vs guns is more or less correct the assumption that an anti ship missile is more effective against a large warship compared to high caliber guns is incorrect. An armor piercing 16 inch shell fired from an iowa weighed more than 2600 lbs and impacted at velocities that only soviet and few other nations anti ship cruiser missiles come close to. To put it simply, a 2600lb + anti ship round is more powerful than a 2000lb guided bomb which is significantly more powerful than a harpoon or other comparable missiles. Furthermore, the development and proliferation of extremely effective anti missiles systems present in large numbers on the worlds leading warships is pushing nations such as the US and others to develop large caliber EM guns to counter these type of defenses.

While the "stopping power" of these EM guns may not be comparable to a harpoon or 16 inch shell, the range and more importantly flight time will more than make up for this. These guns also have the added benefit of not requiring explosive propellant significantly improving survivability compared to large gun warship of the past. The day of gun based nuclear powered war ships may very well be upon us.

biggest issue I have is that going up one size in guns results in a mere 33% increase in DPS... for massive penalties in tracking and sig res (and cap use for hybrids/lasers).

What I'd really like to see, is the loss of size specific bonuses.

That armageddon of yours... imagine if you could fit medium size lasers, and still get the ROF bonus.... you'll only do 75% the max DPS of a Armageddon with large guns, and you'll have reduced range... but much better ability to hit small targets...

Imagine the surprise when a frigate lands on top of a mega, and finds the mega sporting 7 Light Neutron Blasters with +7.5% tracking & +5% damage per level...

Then Imagine what happens to that mega when another mega lands at 10km, and starts pounding it with mega neutron blasters
-> 77% more DPS, 10km falloff, 7.2 km optimal vs 2.5km falloff, 1.5km optimal - 4x better falloff, 4.8x better optimal - that mega fit with small guns gets blown out of the water.

Its balanced, and makes battleships more versatile

Even with missile defenses like the ones that worked so well in a Falklands the cost of building an maintaning a fat battle platform like a single Iowa sized ship would cost more then an entire fleet of small Missile Ships that would be much more effective. That is why Navies have switched to these smaller Missile Hulls that can put out most of the firepower at a 1/40th the weight.

That is a ways off to a reusable coil platform but I have been keeping up with Coil Gun Technology and it does look promising. The Zumwalt seems to be being designed around incorporating this future warfare philosophy with its 155mm Guns.

A big part of the Zumwalt is on the USMC request though. Losing the Iowa's meant they lost real beach cover with the navy now only using small scale artillery. Planes and Missiles have trouble laying down the kind of general fire support they need especially since launching an attack on a specific target costs half a mil to a million dollars a shot compared to 9 big guns leveling everything in front of you whether you know where the mortars are coming from or not.

They were a big part of getting these new Destroyers to have big guns.

-Better tracking would be nice, but then they become overpowered against smaller ships. this would not be balanced.

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. ;)

There's hardly anything wrong with battleships (as a whole) that cannot be fixed by simply nerfing some overpowered stuff introduced over last years. On the other hand, starting another power creep coil is never a good solution.

Battleships are broken.

It's a problem when there's virtually few reasons to select a battleship over a battle-cruiser. When a single frig, cruiser, or T3 can solo you--while all you can do is sit and watch--things are not balanced. It's completely non-nonsensical. If anything, such 1v1 engagements should be a draw.

Battleships desperately need a total re-balance and re-think with the current state of the game.

There are plenty of reasons to use a battleship, assuming you have the support available.

You can say that about any ship in the game. What's your point? You can also fly a shuttle, assuming you have the support available.

Wow. Thank you for that insight.

Ok send BCs against battleships with equal numbers see who wins.

Battleships are broken.

It's a problem when there's virtually few reasons to select a battleship over a battle-cruiser. When a single frig, cruiser, or T3 can solo you--while all you can do is sit and watch--things are not balanced. It's completely non-nonsensical. If anything, such 1v1 engagements should be a draw.

Battleships desperately need a total re-balance and re-think with the current state of the game. I'd personally like to see drastically higher tank and resists on these ships.

biggest issue I have is that going up one size in guns results in a mere 33% increase in DPS... for massive penalties in tracking and sig res (and cap use for hybrids/lasers).

What I'd really like to see, is the loss of size specific bonuses.

That armageddon of yours... imagine if you could fit medium size lasers, and still get the ROF bonus.... you'll only do 75% the max DPS of a Armageddon with large guns, and you'll have reduced range... but much better ability to hit small targets...

Imagine the surprise when a frigate lands on top of a mega, and finds the mega sporting 7 Light Neutron Blasters with +7.5% tracking & +5% damage per level...

Then Imagine what happens to that mega when another mega lands at 10km, and starts pounding it with mega neutron blasters
-> 77% more DPS, 10km falloff, 7.2 km optimal vs 2.5km falloff, 1.5km optimal - 4x better falloff, 4.8x better optimal - that mega fit with small guns gets blown out of the water.

Its balanced, and makes battleships more versatile

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 have long supported this idea, it's balanced because it makes BS better against small ships at the loss of value against other battleships. Though I would extend it to allow cruisers to do the same w/frigate guns.

The two classic complaints against this are: Everybody will fly battleships (not really as the small guns don't make them more agile or faster) small ships have the GTFO factor working in their favor.

The other complaint is that it allows senior players to dominate newer players, which they always can anyway, but what's the use of sticking with eve and training ships that take long to master anyway?

This simple change wouldn't make battleships overpowered, as you are trading off quite a bit for effectiveness against smaller ships, but would add in some nasty fitting options and make the typical AF/Intercepter pilot worry about more than "I wonder how many heavy neuts he has?" Imagine the shock of tackling a ratting raven in an AF and discovering he's got 6 bonused Assault Launchers.

I think something that was said to me recently sums it up:

"Why fly a battleship when you can get the same EHP from a T3 and have a tiny sig? And if you're worried about money BC's are much better value"

BS's do need a serious balance. I think one major improvement would be to change neuts to cycle more often but for equally less energy neuted. i've had single NOS frigs be fully active against my twin heavy NEUT tempest (even with staggered cycle). Webs dont counter frigs anymore and neither do heavy neuts. Drones die to easily and smartbombs are pretty much designed to troll... but not good for a straight up fight.

Exactly.

Lots of stuff

....If eve worked like world of tanks, BS would not be able to easly deal with smaller threats, but they could effectively ignore them as well.

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 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 think the problem is that battleships don't have enough tank. Battleship tank modules are frequently fit onto battlecruisers (except for the large armor repairer which sucks anyway). Here's my proposal, which comes with zero changes to current battleships:

X-Large Shield Extender
3200mm Armor Plate
6400mm Armor Plate

and fix the X-Large Shield Booster and Large Armor Repairer such that the LAR repairs at a good rate and the X-L SB isn't as easy to fit to a battlecruiser. (the second one is less of a problem)

The issue is that the web nerf effectively turned battleships into pointless ships - the megathron is the only one who can hit small targets due to its huge tracking bonus.

The whole binary thing of being webbed or not being webbed, imo, was a stupid reason to change webs. A frigate with an afterburner could still sit under a battleships guns even when webbed - so i don't see where the issue was. I do agree that battleship active tanking needs a buff, but they still lack in other area's.

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.

I wish that ships were given 'lesser' highslots in particular for the battleship, in junction with it's current high slots to add more guns / different launchers leave the bonuses off said guns launchers and yeah. Be the giant gunboat I always imagined to be and like such ships in war destroyed by that one bomber or balls to the wall fighter.

But honestly until we get more modular methods of destroying ships I wouldn't support such a change, and think a less cap intensive ship would be a good start to those ships. But looking about everything I can only see them increasing their stats anyway given this past revamp.

I'd rather reduce battlecruiser scan resolution than increase that of battleships. Battlecruisers are some of the largest sub-caps out there, they shouldn't be able to so easily lock frigates in less time than the frigate can align to warp. That should be a feat reserved for sensor-boosted tier 1 battlecruisers at minimum.

The trouble with your plate/extender HP values is that they give far too little consideration to the benefit of passive regeneration.

Perhaps we could consider giving extenders a shield regeneration rate penalty to reduce the effect on passive tanks.

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.

Give us a new 'tier-3 BC' style battleship that sports over sized guns

capital guns on a sub-cap ship hells yeah!

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.

Give us a new 'tier-3 BC' style battleship that sports over sized guns

capital guns on a sub-cap ship hells yeah!

No, but going in exactly the opposite direction might be a good start.

Tier 3 style battleships with 50% role damage bonus to medium weapons and high sensor resolution, paying for it with speed (50-70 m/s top). That way they aren't the ultimate ganker's wet dream that outclasses everything, but rather a pretty stationary anti-cruiser platform (that is really damn good at it) with a lot of toughness.

Battleships are by no means bad ships and imo are the most fun ship class to fly. If you look at the stats they get about 800-1200 dps with buffers of ~120k or active tanks of at least 1200dps. This outclasses bc's by quite a lot and the average bs I'd say = 3 bc's.

The biggest issue with going with bs's is the amount of people that fly nano. Due to the way eve works, being able to engage without actually commiting is very attractive since every other person is bait for another gang, has falcon/logi, or can just straight up kill you if you get within its' weapon range. Tier 3 bc's really hurt bs's viability because you can now get bs dps with cruiser speed. The last place where bs's shine then would be brawling, however they're no longer the biggest kids on the block. Strategic cruisers can easily out buffer your average bs + provide more utility and the speed of cruisers with decent dps.

It's not that bs's are bad, it's just that there are better options out there.

The problem is not that battleships as a whole is bad. What he said was that the vanilla tech 1 battleships suck. And they do. That's a real issue.

You can put together a reasonably successful fleet in vanilla BS, but you still need the 90% webs of the vindi, and the neuting power of the bhaalgorn somewhere in the fleet. Also, Apocs are pretty much your only obvious choice. When your enemy can engage from whatever range they want against you, you have to be able to match them either with high dps at close range or at least doing something at long and only apocs really give you that. And Napocs do it better still, so why wouldn't you?

All the other tech 1 bs were designed for a different age. They do need rebalancing in light of tier 3 BCs and tech 3 cruisers. Battleships should never be simple to win with, but at the very least each race needs something to give them a chance in a fight against smaller ships.

The Phalanx and SeaRAM would like a word with your Harpoon. :)

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.

If they do manage to stop a heavy barrage of Missiles it doesn't help guns be more useful since the ships that launch them will surely be far out of range with current non rail technology.

It's missiles here in out until someone develops and deploys something better.

Why are so many people asking for a slow and overtanked ship that can use medium weapons? Like that wouldn't be easy to kite if it was trying to solo (slow boat with guns packing medium range... lol recipe for failfit). If you give them more speed then you essentially just end up with a Macharial. With a few exceptions, battleships are meant to be flown with support. Seriously this thread to me is like saying "why can't I use dreadnaughts to kill tackler frigs". A battleship is for fleet and needs support. In this role their substantially larger buffer makes them far better than T3 BCs since those can get alphaed very easily and it's often rather clutch to fly them.

The only thing Battleships need is for all the tiers to be balanced in terms of slots/hitpoints/pg/cpu, larger drone bays, higher scan res and for cruise and torps to be fixed. Perhaps enhance the tracking of those Dual "insert name of medium weapon" guns as well although I imagine their shorter range will still probably limit them to a small selection of fast hulls like the tempest/phoon to be viable, otherwise again, you're just asking to get kited.

Battleships (or the majority of them) should be about EHP, Damage and Damage Projection. Everything else should be left for smaller ships to support them.

Why are so many people asking for a slow and overtanked ship that can use medium weapons? Like that wouldn't be easy to kite if it was trying to solo (slow boat with guns packing medium range... lol recipe for failfit). If you give them more speed then you essentially just end up with a Macharial. With a few exceptions, battleships are meant to be flown with support. Seriously this thread to me is like saying "why can't I use dreadnaughts to kill tackler frigs". A battleship is for fleet and needs support. In this role their substantially larger buffer makes them far better than T3 BCs since those can get alphaed very easily and it's often rather clutch to fly them.

The only thing Battleships need is for all the tiers to be balanced in terms of slots/hitpoints/pg/cpu, larger drone bays, higher scan res and for cruise and torps to be fixed. Perhaps enhance the tracking of those Dual "insert name of medium weapon" guns as well although I imagine their shorter range will still probably limit them to a small selection of fast hulls like the tempest/phoon to be viable, otherwise again, you're just asking to get kited.

Battleships (or the majority of them) should be about EHP, Damage and Damage Projection. Everything else should be left for smaller ships to support them.

Here, let's thing about it logically:
Battleships have 2-6 meter thick armor.
Frigates have 0.4-0.8 meter thick armor
Thus, small frigate guns should have lowered penetratability towards thicker armor, and battleships should have a lot of damage on frigates but since they have low tracking, it compensates everything.
That way frigates will be effective against frigates, battleships against battleships, and so on.
Bombers should stay though, they are amazing :D

Summary: I suggest adding armor thickness into the "damage received" formula

Smaller the gun, lesser effectiveness against thicker armor.
Right now in EVE it is little different, you can go through battleship's armor if you have enough small rocks (<--- bad!)

Really the only thing thats needed for BSs,is a scaling up of their EHP.To reflect the fact they would have thicker armour,and are ment to brawl in fleets,If the EHP was increased across the board by 50%.Historically that would be about right.Speed doesnt need to change,but tracking should be better but not by a big margin say 10-12%,so they at least have a chance of hitting a frigate/destroyer,and maybe a tad extra drone bay,Drones should be a BSs primary defence against frigates/destoyers.

Qolde, once upon a time, Tech two mods were expensive and rare, most ships were fit with meta modules. there were posts like yours about how certain modules needed to be more abundant. they became more abundant. now you sell them for 20k isk without even thinking about it. this is called power creep.

You wouldnt think that your eft numbers were so great when you had everyone and their alts in ships like that. really jsut lok at your t2 fit ships, once those were crazy numbers too.

this. high dps, high ehp , low mobility. but, like many others said: small ships and even gangs of several ships should hava a real real hard time to break the tank of a BS. maybe something like a damage multiplier that takes into account the size of the one shooting and the size of target he-¦s shooting at ?
of course you have that in total ehp but still:
the logic goes like this:
how many mosquito-¦s do you need to kill an elephant ?
frigs = mosquitos
their damage output should be ignorable by larger ships. maybe the BS as the largest subcap should be able to get killed by them, but a reasonable force should be needed.
an elephant, the other way round, is guaranteed to kill a mosquito , if he ever stands a chance to hit it...

the multiplier equals out if the aggressor and target size is equal.

done.

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.

Amen brotha....

Just read initial post but the soft spot in my EVE Heart is my pet Hyperion that have spent gawd awful amounts of ISK on to equip with the best of the best of the best. Even still it wouldn't hold up to much of anything and has issues with simple sites I scan down.

EVE is a strategic cruiser world.

too bad that these kind of threads turn into "show me yours i show you mine"-fitting evaluations.

its not the fitting that is the problem. it-¦s the fact that shows in almost every game where damage and defense are measured against each other.

take the classic roleplaing game for example: D&D (basic, way bach then).

lets say a giant has 20Hitpoints

a goblin has 2.

lets imagine the goblin attacks the giant (he-¦s hungry and desperate..)

i mean its a game and all but lets be honest: no way that a single goblin could ever stand a chance to kill a giant on his own.
(mosquito-elephant-scenario).

this is something that is just totally lacking in eve.

just increasing / decreasing dps/ehp will not help because it still does not take into effect the actual "effect" the weapons of small ships will ever have on way larger ships.

or to transport the scenario into more modern pictures: a guy with an AK47 can unload all the shots he want on a tank, he will never stand even a remote chance to damage , nevertheless destroy the tank.

how shall a frigate ever stand a chance to destroy a battleship ?
tackle it ? oh sure. web it ? of course
damp, TD, ecm hell yeah. but seriously damage or destroy it ? c-¦mon. thats what you need bigger guns for.

if, of course you could fit larger calibres in smaller ships , that would e a totally different scenario....

Never could you be so wrong. The Hyperion is a beast of a vessel and can dps as much as a Vindicator if you only cook it's guns for a little while. It's the perfect ship for putting on serious amounts of hurt and with the hybrid rebalance should make anyone who squares off against one think twice.

Heavy power

8x Neutron Blaster Cannon II

Medium power
2x Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
1x 100MN Microwarpdrive II
1x Large Shield Extender II
1x Heavy Capacitor Booster II

Low power
1x Damage Control II
3x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
2x Tracking Enhancer II

Rig Slot
3x Large Core Defense Field Extender I

Drones

4x Ogre II

EHP: 102,626

DPS: 1376 DPS [1122.1 Guns 253.4 Drones] Volley: 4865. This is with CDA. For lulz overloaded 1544 DPS.

Speed: 1041 M/S [Overloaded]: 1490 M/S

Capacitor Lasts: 9 Minutes with Cap Booster 800 charges.

Ok send BCs against battleships with equal numbers see who wins.

I find it interesting that this ship become 'beast' or 'amazing' when not using it's active armor-tanking bonus. Same thing about the brutix. Almost like armor holds the ships back.

Never could you be so wrong. The Hyperion is a beast of a vessel and can dps as much as a Vindicator if you only cook it's guns for a little while. It's the perfect ship for putting on serious amounts of hurt and with the hybrid rebalance should make anyone who squares off against one think twice.

Heavy power

8x Neutron Blaster Cannon II

Medium power
2x Adaptive Invulnerability Field II
1x 100MN Microwarpdrive II
1x Large Shield Extender II
1x Heavy Capacitor Booster II

Low power
1x Damage Control II
3x Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
2x Tracking Enhancer II

Rig Slot
3x Large Core Defense Field Extender I

Drones

4x Ogre II

EHP: 102,626

DPS: 1376 DPS [1122.1 Guns 253.4 Drones] Volley: 4865. This is with CDA. For lulz overloaded 1544 DPS.

Speed: 1041 M/S [Overloaded]: 1490 M/S

Capacitor Lasts: 9 Minutes with Cap Booster 800 charges.

too bad that these kind of threads turn into "show me yours i show you mine"-fitting evaluations.

its not the fitting that is the problem. it-¦s the fact that shows in almost every game where damage and defense are measured against each other.

take the classic roleplaing game for example: D&D (basic, way bach then).

lets say a giant has 20Hitpoints

a goblin has 2.

lets imagine the goblin attacks the giant (he-¦s hungry and desperate..)

i mean its a game and all but lets be honest: no way that a single goblin could ever stand a chance to kill a giant on his own.
(mosquito-elephant-scenario).

this is something that is just totally lacking in eve.

just increasing / decreasing dps/ehp will not help because it still does not take into effect the actual "effect" the weapons of small ships will ever have on way larger ships.

or to transport the scenario into more modern pictures: a guy with an AK47 can unload all the shots he want on a tank, he will never stand even a remote chance to damage , nevertheless destroy the tank.

how shall a frigate ever stand a chance to destroy a battleship ?
tackle it ? oh sure. web it ? of course
damp, TD, ecm hell yeah. but seriously damage or destroy it ? c-¦mon. thats what you need bigger guns for.

if, of course you could fit larger calibres in smaller ships , that would e a totally different scenario....

SImple. Introduce tackle class vs ship class scale.

If a frigate webs battleship, its 10% (or something). If a battleship webs a frigate, its 90%.
It takes 3 frigates, 2 cruisers/bc, and 1 battleship to warp-disrupt a battleship.

The original problem comes from the fact that back in the day, before signature radius shenanigans, battleships could just instapop bejesus out of everything smaller then a battleship. The days of 3 sensor booster megathrons instapopping interceptors. So they introduced the whole signature radius thing.

Well, just continue the thought, and apply it to every offensive module, not just weapons. How come frig can jam a battleship? There should be wolfpack of frigs required for the task, not 1.

If you have an assault frigate able to repair drone damage, you can hold a battleship indefinitely. Try holding down a ship on sea with a dinghy?

first of all a BS that can be scary to a frig? Not sure if somebody posted the domi , 6 medium neuts, 2 cap boosters, 2 reppers, 2 webs....