| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Nemesiss
   |
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:00:00 -
[1]
Hi
Is there any plan of making tech II battleships ?
Take care,
Nemesiss
|
Bsport
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:11:00 -
[2]
i think we will, but i think they are planing EW and missiles changes first
--------
|~~~| I run out of money, so bunny has been
| OIL | grounded down to make grease for my
|____| rifter- poor bunny
|
Wotok
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:12:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Wotok on 10/06/2005 08:12:08
We got frigates, we got cruisers, we got industrials. They told us it's likely there will come some tl2 battlecruisers.
So why shouldn't there be battleships?
--
Wotok has no brain! |
Finix Jaeger
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:15:00 -
[4]
I would personally like to see more tech 1 Battlecruisers and Destroyers before we get tech2 battleships/battlecruisers.
|
SPIONKOP
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:19:00 -
[5]
I don't see why not but they will be rare. Based on the building times of other tech II ships my guess is they would take 2 days or more to build and with limited BPO's released that will reduce availability and increase cost.
If people are prepared to pay silly money for the current faction ships then the price of a tech II BS would be anyones guess.
I think however they are some time away yet due to the balance issues.
|
MutationZ
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:21:00 -
[6]
I doubt it and I hope not.
They will be too uber.
Imagine a battleship with the resistances of a HAC. It would be "overpowered"
|
hired goon
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:27:00 -
[7]
I don't think the devs like unbalancing enough to actually add 'assault battleships', probably something more specialized, like flagships, command ships, snipers, etc.
------------
We come in peace. And tanks. |
Nikolai Nuvolari
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:33:00 -
[8]
 Originally by: Finix Jaeger
I would personally like to see more tech 1 Battlecruisers and Destroyers before we get tech2 battleships/battlecruisers.
I agree very much.
But yes, there will be Tech II battleships. And it WILL get ugly. And eventually it will reach the point where you have to have been playing for years and have at least 2937564920384509238459028736423457029384509287364509287345908723408572093457092345672093845 ISK to even stand a chance at fielding a ship that can stand up in combat, and there will be no chance in hell of leaving high sec space because these people will be able to go into any system up to 0.4 in their insanely powerful ships and do whatever they want because they can completely ignore the gate guns and station sentry guns and every once in a while some poor unfortunate fool in ::gasp:: a Thorax or Ferox or Wolf will come into 0.4 space and instantly **** himself and die before the barrage of fire OMFGWTFBBQPWNZORZ him.
Somebody remind me to stop posting while completely direly in need of sleep and my medication...
___________________________________________
^^^***---All things serve the Beam---***^^^
GDBT is recruiting! |
Bsport
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 08:40:00 -
[9]
they could also be waiting for dreads as they will play the anti BS role
--------
|~~~| I run out of money, so bunny has been
| OIL | grounded down to make grease for my
|____| rifter- poor bunny
|
digitalwanderer
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 10:59:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Jasmine Constantine
I can see a big problem with techII battleships. If they are like HAC's but larger they will completely unbalance all kind of mission-running/npc hunting/shooting grind style occupations. Obviously a tech2 megathron with the resistances of a Deimos would murder virtually all pve engagements without a shadow of a doubt. Doesn't matter how much they cost really, it would generally be a license to print money. And if the introduction of tech2 Battleships sees the increase in difficulty of general 0.0 belts and or lev4 agents etc then it will just emphasise a class gap between the haves and have nots of Eve.
Its tricky, really difficult, and I don't envy the devs the design and implementation headache of tech2 Battleships. Given they will cost a billion each in all likelihood (once the prices settle down a bit) they are going to have to be as much an improvement over cruisers as HACs are to make cash sense though I guess, in the current cash-soaked reality it is possible to count on pure whimy and massive disposable income to buy something only a little better than the current tech1 mold?
I guess my main doubt is the special schtick - if they are high resistance beasts like the HACs its going to be pretty much an invulnerable ride of death  and I predict we'll see a lot more vampire doms and EW to counter ...
Quite true in all points,but the again it¦s part of the natural evolution of things T2,first started when T2 frigates and heavy assault cruisers ver released with performance and combat capability that was far too high relative to their T1 counterparts,at least in my opinion...
So now,pretty much everyone is getting their shorts in a twist if T2 BS¦s follow the general design guidelines as HAC¦s and T2 frigates,not considering their cost,which undoubtedly will be extremely high,and even if that isn¦t the case,the fact it will likely take players with at least a solid 12 months of skill training under their belt,in ship related skills,to even think of flying one at all,even if they could afford it,let alone use it to it¦s fullest capabilities,which would and should take much longer than that..
Personally,T2 bs¦s are one of the reasons i¦ve been playing the game for as long as i have(2 years now),and i know quite a few others that like to fly BS¦s for the most part,and that feel the same way as i do,so now that those who specialised in smaller T2 ships had a lot of fun flying those admitedly overpowered ships,It¦s about time those who primarily like to fly BS¦s to have their fun with T2 BS¦s that are equally overpowered relative to their T1 variants...
|
fairimear
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 11:04:00 -
[11]
Asked CCP hammerhead this during the titan event on sisi.
and a near as i can remember quote was "Once i get round to ballancing their bonuses".
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
|
QwaarJet
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 12:49:00 -
[12]
I'd like to see more Tech 1 Battleships first.
"Hobbes, she stepped into the Perimter Of Wisdom.Run!" |
IamBen
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 14:12:00 -
[13]
would much rather have more tech I battleships than some uber tech II ship.
|
Dionysus Davinci
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 14:48:00 -
[14]
Originally by: hired goon
I don't think the devs like unbalancing enough to actually add 'assault battleships', probably something more specialized, like flagships, command ships, snipers, etc.
I think they will when you consider dreadnaughts are coming out.
|
Jubie
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 15:01:00 -
[15]
As someone said earlier - a greater choice of tech 1 BS would be better, much easier to balance.
A nice ship would be a caldari BS with bonus's for rails
A gallente BS ships with bonus's for range so good for sniping, so then make mega better for blasterthron.
A minmatar ship which was built with more armor/shield but less speed or e/w bonus
dont fly ammarr so giving no suggestion on these
|
Corvus Dove
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 15:06:00 -
[16]
Originally by: SPIONKOP
I don't see why not but they will be rare. Based on the building times of other tech II ships my guess is they would take 2 days or more to build and with limited BPO's released that will reduce availability and increase cost.
If people are prepared to pay silly money for the current faction ships then the price of a tech II BS would be anyones guess.
I think however they are some time away yet due to the balance issues.
BPOs will not be limited.
Unlimited run BPCs will turn into limited run BPCs.
"You Griefer!!!" = "You Doodyhead!!!" |
Amataras
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 15:13:00 -
[17]
As it stands now, T2 Bs would unbalance the game and lead to an uber wave of nerfs. Perhaps post-Kali, but not now.
--------------
The Eve Diplomacy Table
|
Joe
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 15:21:00 -
[18]
i didn't see anything wrong with my bs class inty idea
How about bs class covert ops?
remember Assualt ships aren't the only Tech II ship variant. As long as we dont get a Bs class logistics ship i'd be happy. |
X'Alor
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 15:31:00 -
[19]
They will happen at some point no matter the nay sayers and waaaaaa that's unfair cuz some people will fly them and have more fun than me and have an easier time than me waaaaaaaaaa is utter crap.
It's a game people, and as wanderer said the training time for it will be atleast 12 monthes worth. ATLEAST
lets just call them heavy assault BS
so if they are inline with the others lets look at a possible skill tree.
Spaceship command 5
frigate 5
assault 4
cruiser 5
heavy assault 4
BS 5
Heavy assault BS 1
that alone is 6 monthes training.
now to make it feasible to pilot well so you won't loose it in your first flight you should include.
energy and sheild mnmnt 5's
all other energy/egineering skills at 4 minimum
your repairing skills to 5
and we hadn't even gotten to the guns yet. Immagine if you need large guns spec's to lvl 4 as a prereq to sit in a HABS.
if that were true then you now have to add all the gun skills to lvl 5 to qualify for gun spec skills plus small medium large guns to lvl 5 before you can train any of the specs and that includes doing the small/med specs to lvl 4 before you can train large spec.
So to those of you that say waaaaaa it would be unfair, your right. it's very unfair that you hadn't started playing the game sooner to be inline and in a position to pilot something like that.
And after someone has payed their subscription for that 1.5 years to train all that that high and managed to get the serious amount of ISK together to buy one ......... so be it
And if they wanted to use it for mining ...... who cares. that's their choice to waste it.
And i fthey use it to solo lvl 4's, again who cares it's their danm chioce.
waaaaaa it's unfair alright, it's unfair that people can't just play a game and have fun with it.
I still can't wait for the day I here a 2 day old character say, " I'm gonna heavy assault BS specialize"
LMFAO
|
digitalwanderer
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 15:46:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Amataras
As it stands now, T2 Bs would unbalance the game and lead to an uber wave of nerfs. Perhaps post-Kali, but not now.
Not really,since dreadnaughts are coming out in this next patch,so the following T2 class of ships can conceivably be T2 BS¦s,and not unbalance things that much as dreads will be cheaper and easier to train for,since they¦re still T1 ships,so they¦re quite likely to outnumber T2 bs¦s in a big way no matter what..
I say that T2 BS¦s should be so skill training intensive,that pretty much no one,even PvP veterans,would have the skills trained up to fly one within the next 4 months even if the BPO¦s were released tomorrow and they already have BS 5 trained up for any given race....That will make sure that T2 BS sightings will be rare for a long time to come,and only the most commited(or insane) players have the patience and dedication to fly one of these...
|
X'Alor
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 16:10:00 -
[21]
consider me clinically nutz.
|
digitalwanderer
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 16:27:00 -
[22]
Edited by: digitalwanderer on 10/06/2005 16:28:41
Originally by: X'Alor
consider me clinically nutz.
In addition,it would also put away fears of uber fleets of T2 bs¦s simply destroying everthing in their path,as i believe that such high numbers,all belonging to the same corp or even the same aliance for that matter,would be something that would only be possible to see perhaps in 12 months(or more)from now,if those skills are really that time intensive...
Besides,i¦d also enjoy the challenge of making a dreadnaught go boom with my very own T2 apoc or arma... .
|
Sangxianc
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 16:30:00 -
[23]
To whoever said that they now want their overpowered T2 battleships because us support pilots have our "overpowered" ships, there is a huge difference. As it stands, some people specialise in Battleships, which are easier to get hold of and sort of the multitools of Eve: you can do most things with a Battleship. Some people, like me, specialise in T2 ships which are generally harder to get hold of. Especially with HACs, these are the surgeon's knife to the multitool of a Battleship: in some areas, you're the best, but you're not much use at all anywhere else. Thus there is a point to both paths of specialisation.
The problem is that, if they released T2 Battleships, there would be literally no point in any other class of ship. This is unarguable. People are not going to start playing the game and say "oh, I'll specialise in Heavy Assault Ships" when there are Stupidly ******* Overpowered Assault Ships one rank up. Which would be pretty god damn annoying for anyone that's trained Heavy Assault Ships 5 because they'd be made redundant.
In my opinion, a T2 Battleship should definately go towards Fleet Command with gang bonuses, not Assault Ships.
Ps- If you think HACs are overpowered, I'll give you a hint. It starts with N, ends with U, and sounds like rosferatu.
-
Any man's death diminishes me, as I am involved in mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee. |
digitalwanderer
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 16:42:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Sangxianc
To whoever said that they now want their overpowered T2 battleships because us support pilots have our "overpowered" ships, there is a huge difference. As it stands, some people specialise in Battleships, which are easier to get hold of and sort of the multitools of Eve: you can do most things with a Battleship. Some people, like me, specialise in T2 ships which are generally harder to get hold of. Especially with HACs, these are the surgeon's knife to the multitool of a Battleship: in some areas, you're the best, but you're not much use at all anywhere else. Thus there is a point to both paths of specialisation.
The problem is that, if they released T2 Battleships, there would be literally no point in any other class of ship. This is unarguable. People are not going to start playing the game and say "oh, I'll specialise in Heavy Assault Ships" when there are Stupidly ******* Overpowered Assault Ships one rank up. Which would be pretty god damn annoying for anyone that's trained Heavy Assault Ships 5 because they'd be made redundant.
In my opinion, a T2 Battleship should definately go towards Fleet Command with gang bonuses, not Assault Ships.
Ps- If you think HACs are overpowered, I'll give you a hint. It starts with N, ends with U, and sounds like rosferatu.
And T2 bs¦s would still have some of the same drawbacks as thier T1 versions...Long lock times,large turrets that can¦t track smaller ships,they would also be slow and take a long time to align for warp,not to mention that that NOS are dangerous for pretty much any ship at under 25 kms,not just HAC¦s...
So a balanced fleet would still be composed of T2 frigates and HAC¦s even in the presence of T2 bs¦s...Only thing that a T2 BS will be really in a class by itelf,is in longer range damage dealing capability and even then,only against fairly large ships...
Only time a BS has any chance of hitting smaller ships is at ranges where their admitly crappy turret tracking isn¦t an issue...
|
Carl Jidona
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 16:47:00 -
[25]
Originally by: digitalwanderer
Originally by: Amataras
As it stands now, T2 Bs would unbalance the game and lead to an uber wave of nerfs. Perhaps post-Kali, but not now.
Not really,since dreadnaughts are coming out in this next patch,so the following T2 class of ships can conceivably be T2 BS¦s,and not unbalance things that much as dreads will be cheaper and easier to train for,since they¦re still T1 ships,so they¦re quite likely to outnumber T2 bs¦s in a big way no matter what..
I say that T2 BS¦s should be so skill training intensive,that pretty much no one,even PvP veterans,would have the skills trained up to fly one within the next 4 months even if the BPO¦s were released tomorrow and they already have BS 5 trained up for any given race....That will make sure that T2 BS sightings will be rare for a long time to come,and only the most commited(or insane) players have the patience and dedication to fly one of these...
I Have to agree with you on that in some ways the things is the game does not require you to long on and do skill grinding, you just have to log in pick skill to train and also see what time skill will be done then rinse and repeat.
The only advantage players in the game will be are the ones that started when EVE began as far as skill training if you have all your learning and advance learning skills up to level 5 will any kind of advantage be seen.
I think the new T2BS will not be an unstopable force it may take plenty of T1 ships to do it but it will happen; I see T2Bs more as varied roles that just for DPS even though their DPS will be impressive.
The Main thing people forget is that you need more than one type of ship in your fleet than just DPS and tacklers. If you have ships in fleet that can cause your enemy not to be able to hit you is more valuable than a ship that can take 5 ships on and kill 3-4 before going down; If that ship cant hit then it doesnt matter if its T2 or T1000.
I think we are about to see a big change in play style not as far as how many gun points you have but how varied your skills are; The new ships prob will require more electronics skills for jamming and more covert ops skills for scouting and hacking.
|
The Sloth
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 16:53:00 -
[26]
I don't think CCP could get away with not introducing Tech II battleships into the game. However, their impact on the balance of the game (as has been pointed out) could be quite severe.
Suggestions for Tech II battleships:
As opposed to the obviously unbalancing high resistences, Tech II battleships should fill special roles ie. specialising in one race's weaknesses or strengths or even a special subclass al la interceptors, bombers etc. Think of them like a third Tech 1 battleship for each race but require the relevent Tech 2 skills to fly. The greater options and variety they give in combat, however, make them worth that extra training effort and cost.
Perhaps they could also make them, or at least one class of them, illegal in empire space. For example they can only be built at POS/outposts in non-empire 0.0 space and empire gates from 0.0 space will not allow them to jump through because they are contraband.
Even if this class of battleship had super high resists then the restrictive nature of it would severely limit its impact on the balance of PvE.
Not only that, it would encourage more POS (to be able to build them) and also serve as a great defensive force for a POS. It would also encourage all those people who want to fly one go into 0.0 space.
Just some ideas.
The Sloth.
|
Andromeda1
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 16:56:00 -
[27]
Dont give us tech 2 bs it will make everythign change bs will be come crap.
i would like to see 2 more bs for everyrace if not 2 then 1.
HAC's will suck if tech 2 bs come out
but plz bring out tech 2 battle cruisrs its a must
|
fairimear
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 16:56:00 -
[28]
all i can see t2 bs being is around as good as a dread in normal pvp but no seige option so it can't******stations.
how is this going to unbalance the game more than a dread?
tbh u can't get much worse on balance than the situation with ganks,instas,snipers,wcs and log offs now.
(\_/)
(O.o)
(> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world Domination.
|
digitalwanderer
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 17:31:00 -
[29]
Quote:
And a T2 Battlecruiser would have a worse affect on normal bs than a t2 bs.
Due to the fact anything t2 better than a hac will eat a BS anyway.
Then add the fact t2 bs will need some badass skills so few will use them and cost a ton.
But a T2 bc will use less skills and cost less.
To me thats worse than a t2 bs for ballance with normal bs.
Quoted for truth...At least a T2 BS will have a role for which it¦s best suited anyway,but a T2 battlecruiser has the potential to outright replace HAC¦s as they can do evrything a HAC can,only better...
|
whejl
|
Posted - 2005.06.10 18:03:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Joe
I'd like to see Inty BS
2-3x the speed, 1/2 the turret hardpionts, and the signature of a cruiser.
Then i could orbit a Dread in my MegaTaranis without fear of their xl weapon.
They are called HACs i believe
|
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] |