EVE Search - Will we ever get tech II battleships ?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Will we ever get tech II battleships ?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Allen Deckard	Posted - 2005.06.10 18:09:00 - [31] great something else that those with to much isk for their own good get to make pvp even less popular with the common folk.
X'Alor	Posted - 2005.06.10 18:24:00 - [32] I see a lot of oh noes they are having more fun than me. com'on already. play the game and enjoy it the way you chose to. Couple things to consider. HAC skill book at 28.8 mill ......... what ya think the HABS skill book gonna cost. Wouldn't be surprised if it were 100 mill just for the skill book. And the ship itself Cost: my guess 1 bill probably even more insurance cost for full coverage 50 mill insurance payout for full coverage 150 to 200 mill. and how many people going to soak that much isk into a ship and take it into fleet battles to risk loosin it to lag fest '05. I'm sure they will be there but safe to assume that you would see more of them in use in missions cuz they don't wanna risk that kinda loss in some cheesey lagged out fleet battle. not saying fleet battles are cheesey but loosing a ship like that in a fleet battle due to lag definitely will be. all T2 ships are ISK sinks compared to cost and insurance payouts. you guys keep screaming need more ISK sinks, need to limit mission runners incomes, nerf the uber payouts, take the mission runners income away it's not fair. well if they came in and were primarily used in lvl 4 missions. well guess what, the introduction of T2 BS will be the biggest sink in game and the hardest loss to recover from. And if they are used by mission runners then all you other pilots won't have a thing to worry cuz all the T2 BS will be in missions and you all specialized other ship fleet battle pilots won't have a thing to worry yourselves and your play with. So where is the problem in that? All I can see and say is when they do get here. I WILL have one. And I WILL use it to solo missions. Heck I might even use it in " lvl 3 " missions just to p i s s all you off. Where's my T2 apoc with a mining bonus when i need one. remember, I am clinically nutz
digitalwanderer	Posted - 2005.06.10 18:32:00 - [33] Originally by: Allen Deckard great something else that those with to much isk for their own good get to make pvp even less popular with the common folk. PvP is possible with any ship or equipement...All it takes is the will to do so and that will never change. The current discussion has more to do with ships that can still challlenge even veteran players in terms of skills and isk,as part of a larger group of objectives wich they haven¦t acheived yet and want that challenge... It¦s no different than the feeling one gets when getting into his/her first cruiser or BS,after a lot of work and dedication,only scaling that difficulty/dedication and ISK requirements several notches higher for T2 BS...
Asfa	Posted - 2005.06.10 18:35:00 - [34] Releasing tech 2 battleships seems to be assured at some point. That being said, there is nothing to say that there has to be a heavy assault cruiser variant for battleships. I rather hope for tech 2 battleships that give bonuses to gangs, or that have area effects like improved tracking for all ships within a set range. In short, fleet command ships or flagships. There is a lot of room to make such ships worthwhile without being overpowered.
digitalwanderer	Posted - 2005.06.10 20:26:00 - [35] Originally by: Asfa I rather hope for tech 2 battleships that give bonuses to gangs, or that have area effects like improved tracking for all ships within a set range. In short, fleet command ships or flagships. There is a lot of room to make such ships worthwhile without being overpowered. Nice idea in theory,but that kind of bonus pretty much assures that in the case of a fleet battle,the flagship is the first ship targetted by the opposing force and even if the flagship has high shield armour resists,i seriously doubt it can take concentrated fire from multiple enemy BS¦s for long.... Now a T2 dreadnaught with that kind of bonus and overall amount of HP(shields or armour)that¦s at least 5~6 times higher than any BS and high resists to boot,properly set up to be able to repair itself quickly or with a couple of logistics cruisers to keep it going for as long as possible,might last long enough to actually make a difference in a fleet battle...Only one per fleet would be allowed tho.
GlimmerMan	Posted - 2005.06.10 20:34:00 - [36] Edited by: GlimmerMan on 10/06/2005 20:35:43 Quite frankly they can't come soon enough, I've been flying battleships and nothing else (save for the odd hauling trip in an indy etc) for over 23 months, it'd be nice to finally get a new ship that's higher up in the food chain, be it a dreadnaught or T2 battleship. Lord knows I'm more than ready in terms of wealth and skills, all that's missing is the opportunity to buy them! I think waiting 23 months for something better than what I have is more long enough. __________________ - GlimmerMan
Allen Deckard	Posted - 2005.06.10 21:06:00 - [37] Originally by: digitalwanderer Originally by: Allen Deckard great something else that those with to much isk for their own good get to make pvp even less popular with the common folk. PvP is possible with any ship or equipement...All it takes is the will to do so and that will never change. The current discussion has more to do with ships that can still challlenge even veteran players in terms of skills and isk,as part of a larger group of objectives wich they haven¦t acheived yet and want that challenge... It¦s no different than the feeling one gets when getting into his/her first cruiser or BS,after a lot of work and dedication,only scaling that difficulty/dedication and ISK requirements several notches higher for T2 BS... Pvp is possible in my ibis but doesn't mean I am gonna have a snow balls chance.
digitalwanderer	Posted - 2005.06.10 21:13:00 - [38] Quote: Pvp is possible in my ibis but doesn't mean I am gonna have a snow balls chance. And i didn¦t say that you should be able to kill a BS in a frigate either,but they are very good for tackling work..PvP doesn¦t mean having to fire a gun to be usefull in a fight.
Selim	Posted - 2005.06.10 21:23:00 - [39] All I can say is they better not be any stronger offense-wise or resistance-wise like assault ships. It would make HAC's useless.
Allen Deckard	Posted - 2005.06.10 21:27:00 - [40] Originally by: Selim All I can say is they better not be any stronger offense-wise or resistance-wise like assault ships. It would make HAC's useless. Kinda like the hac made the crusier useless?
Selim	Posted - 2005.06.10 21:29:00 - [41] no... cruisers were always useless. HAC's are at least good at taking damage and dealing it.
Corvus Dove	Posted - 2005.06.10 21:36:00 - [42] Originally by: Selim no... cruisers were always useless. HAC's are at least good at taking damage and dealing it. Agreed. HACs are, IMHO, what cruisers should have been, and BCs should be beefed a little more. "You Griefer!!!" = "You Doodyhead!!!"
digitalwanderer	Posted - 2005.06.10 21:38:00 - [43] Originally by: Selim All I can say is they better not be any stronger offense-wise or resistance-wise like assault ships. It would make HAC's useless. T2 battlecruisers will make HAC¦s useless if they¦re ever released since they have the same role as HAC¦s only do it even better... For instance,i just shiver at the idea of a T2 brutix with 7 med T2 blasters fitted,as that would make the deimos obsolete and likely have the ability to kill a BS¦s on it¦s own... T2 BS¦s still have some of the same drawbacks as their T1 versions,slow,long locking times,large guns with low tracking,takes them a while to align for warp,so they have a specific role that¦s diferent from a HAC...
Raven	Posted - 2005.06.10 22:08:00 - [44] T2 battleships will be released, I would bet anything on that. I seriously doubt that their role will be heavy assault though. I find it much more likely that the devs will implement them as flagships, ships with good gang bonuses, and a litter better resistances than their T1 counterparts. They won't have the insane resistances that the HAC have, but most likely a little better than T1. Skill requirements will be insane and the cost most likely around 1-2 billion. I don't think that the devs will have problems balancing such ships.
Sadist	Posted - 2005.06.10 23:02:00 - [45] Tier 3 battleship first...They would be more powerful (maybe 1-2 more slots and 1-2k more armor/PG), but with the same resists, and 8 slot limitation, meaning you'd be able to kill them rather easily. --------------- Originally by: Dark Shikari "One Trit to rule them all, One Trit to find them, One Trit to bring them all, and in the veldspar bind them"
Selim	Posted - 2005.06.11 00:08:00 - [46] Yeah, they'd give the minmatar a Hurricaine class Battleship, which is exactly like a tempest except it is 5 m/s faster. W00t.
SlaneeshZ	Posted - 2005.06.11 02:45:00 - [47] Edited by: SlaneeshZ on 11/06/2005 02:45:46 It would be very cool if all NPC factions get battlecruisers added in their spawns. If that happens I can see Tech II BBs justified. ---- A true player does feel no need to remind himself or fellow players that it is just a game.
sableye	Posted - 2005.06.11 03:47:00 - [48] Originally by: X'Alor all T2 ships are ISK sinks compared to cost and insurance payouts. you guys keep screaming need more ISK sinks, need to limit mission runners incomes, nerf the uber payouts, take the mission runners income away it's not fair. well if they came in and were primarily used in lvl 4 missions. well guess what, the introduction of T2 BS will be the biggest sink in game and the hardest loss to recover from. when most people babble on about isk sinks they are meaning ways to remove money from he economy, buying a ship does not do this as the money is passed on to another player. Even tech 2 payouts being as bad as they are add isk into the economy. there is only afew isk sinks in game 1) clones, 2) tax, 3) insurance if you don't lose your ship and 4) market items you buy from npc's.
OffBeaT	Posted - 2005.06.11 05:25:00 - [49] i think they are re-thinking some of the rolls of these new upcoming ships in the game. some good ideas came there way about these new ships and how they can work with in the game.. i hope they are anyway. no need too rush them out boys.. work them out.
Sadist	Posted - 2005.06.11 05:42:00 - [50] First, a tier 4 frigate, then a tier 4 cruiser, and finally a tier 3 BS, is what i say... --------------- Originally by: Dark Shikari "One Trit to rule them all, One Trit to find them, One Trit to bring them all, and in the veldspar bind them"
digitalwanderer	Posted - 2005.06.11 13:04:00 - [51] Originally by: Sadist First, a tier 4 frigate, then a tier 4 cruiser, and finally a tier 3 BS, is what i say... Wouldn¦t be a bad idea either,thought i¦d also add another tier for battlecruisers as well....Let¦s say 5~10% base stats improvement over lower tier frigate/cruiser/Battlecruiser/BS¦s,and an extra slot thrown in for good mesure,if nothing else than to add more ship variety in the game,and add more incremental improvements in terms of T1 ship capabilities,while players are on their way to be able to fly T2 variants,(money,skills,etc)....
Astarte Nosferatu	Posted - 2005.06.11 17:41:00 - [52] No tech II bs's plz. Follower of the Blood Revolution. Sani Sabik.
Gripen	Posted - 2005.06.12 00:44:00 - [53] Why T2 BC and T2 BS should be like oversized HACs? HACs are much better than regular cruisers just because T1 cruisers right now are pretty useless. Creating T2 battlecruisers with same approach as HACs will make HACs obsolete. Before Exodus everyone expected BCs be able to use large turrets. Why not give this ability to T2 BCs? Give them bonuses to reduce fitting requirements and to increase damage of large turrets. Whey should have little more slots and hp/cpu/grid but no high resists or capacitor recharge times HACs have. Such T2 BCs will be more antibattleship ships while HACs will be the best choice to counter other cruisers which I suppose will have more use after next patch where missiles will be nerfed and cruisers (hopefully) boosted. Following this trend T2 battleships can have ability to fit XLarge turrets. Instead of resists they can have bonuses to shield boosters and armor repairers to be only ships capable to fight with dreadnoughts. The only thing that worries me as addicted cruiser pilot is that every T2 BS pilot will use HACs almost as good as I am. So from my point of view it is very important for the specialization that T2 BC's and BS's should use another skill path apart form assault->heavy assault.
Sadist	Posted - 2005.06.12 01:39:00 - [54] Originally by: Gripen Why T2 BC and T2 BS should be like oversized HACs? HACs are much better than regular cruisers just because T1 cruisers right now are pretty useless. Creating T2 battlecruisers with same approach as HACs will make HACs obsolete. Before Exodus everyone expected BCs be able to use large turrets. Why not give this ability to T2 BCs? Give them bonuses to reduce fitting requirements and to increase damage of large turrets. Whey should have little more slots and hp/cpu/grid but no high resists or capacitor recharge times HACs have. Such T2 BCs will be more antibattleship ships while HACs will be the best choice to counter other cruisers which I suppose will have more use after next patch where missiles will be nerfed and cruisers (hopefully) boosted. Following this trend T2 battleships can have ability to fit XLarge turrets. Instead of resists they can have bonuses to shield boosters and armor repairers to be only ships capable to fight with dreadnoughts. The only thing that worries me as addicted cruiser pilot is that every T2 BS pilot will use HACs almost as good as I am. So from my point of view it is very important for the specialization that T2 BC's and BS's should use another skill path apart form assault->heavy assault. I can't believe im saying this, but this is actually a VERY good idea... --------------- Originally by: Dark Shikari "One Trit to rule them all, One Trit to find them, One Trit to bring them all, and in the veldspar bind them"
Maxine Stirner	Posted - 2005.06.12 01:49:00 - [55] As others have said with great brevity, the npcing and pvping environments have to be reworked to allow for techII BS or even dreads for that matter. In the same way that I'd like to see frigates able to skate under BS, one would expect to see cruisers slip around Dreads like they're on different battlefields, unless the dread pilot severely gimps his setup.. and even then, locking time should still be a major annoyance. TechII BS (just as Ravens should be) in npcing should be barred from high-rewarding cruiser or high-rewarding elite frigate content. It takes a LOT of skills to fly a frigate or a cruiser at the limit of its capacities. This should be rewarded rather than just making it easier to move on to BS. A lot of money can be spent on frigs and cruisers and this should be encouraged rather than dismissing them as cannon fodder. Making techII BS without fixing other areas will just make them the next "must have" thing in order to even play the game. More people will be asked to remain subscribed for a year or more just to participate. In addition, if prior necessary changes are not made, combat setups and fleet makeups will become even more static and predictable. TechII BS will mainly be used in sniping role most likely without other changes with the familiar effects only made worse. The background must change more than the objects in it. Locking Times & Evil Asteroids
Mordessa	Posted - 2005.06.12 02:32:00 - [56] Why does the mention of Tech II battleships have to ring up thoughts of uber resistances and other things that make them look and feel like the uberness of the HAC? Why not just make them upgrades of the current battleships or even better yet lets get some new types of battleships out there instead of the 2 per race we currently have and instead of huge increases of resistances, armor, shields etc and of coarse the special race abilities lets just have better CPU, and powergrids on these things. or even perhaps one more slot per ship? Sooner or later Tech III(?) will be coming up and the current ships just arent going to be enough to handle a good loadout. As it is most people with higher skills sometimes have to sacrifice slots to tech I mods because of the requirements of tech II
digitalwanderer	Posted - 2005.06.12 11:46:00 - [57] Edited by: digitalwanderer on 12/06/2005 11:46:17 Quote: Why does the mention of Tech II battleships have to ring up thoughts of uber resistances and other things that make them look and feel like the uberness of the HAC That unfortunately is the consequence of having made previous T2 ships far too powerfull in terms of how good they can actually shield/armour tank,thanks to the base resists being so high,so it¦s sets the precedent for larger T2 ships,even more so because the skills needed to fly T2 BS¦s will be much higher than any Frigate or HAC,so people expect them to be worthwhile for the several million skill points needed to fly them.. Quote: Why not just make them upgrades of the current battleships or even better yet lets get some new types of battleships out there instead of the 2 per race we currently have and instead of huge increases of resistances, armor, shields etc and of coarse the special race abilities lets just have better CPU, and powergrids on these things. or even perhaps one more slot per ship? They already exist,they¦re called faction BS¦s,and don¦t even need extra skills to fly for the most part,and even if they didn¦t exist,a bit more powergrid/cpu and an extra slot would hardly be worth training lvl 5 BS among many other skills,which again,quite possibly adds up to several million sp in total,in order to fly them now wouldn¦t it?.. Quote: Sooner or later Tech III(?) will be coming up and the current ships just arent going to be enough to handle a good loadout. As it is most people with higher skills sometimes have to sacrifice slots to tech I mods because of the requirements of tech II Quite true,but then again,were long overdue for more engineering and cpu related skills,and even if they¦re rank 5+ skills and only provide no more than 2% per lvl,would be a god send in certain setups... If and when Tech III modules do show up,the only ships that have a reasonable chance of mounting a decent offence/defence/ECM capability(as the case may be),would be T2 ships,and even then,with all necessary fitting skills duly maxed out,so adding up all the requirements for flying T2 ships,maxed out fitting skills,and be able to use T3 gear to boot,would likely represent a 30 million+ sp investment,meaning ships like will be extremely rare for a very long time to come..

Pages: 1 [2] :: 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.