EVE Search - Introducing myself and asking for help with balance!

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Introducing myself and asking for help with balance!

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Buhhdust Princess Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 858	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:04:00 - [31] - Quote First of all, to correct the no-gallente-bs for fleets thing, here's what i'd do, personally. Highs: 6 (same) Mids 4 (-1) Lows 8 (+1) [This gives room for an armour tank AND drone damage augmentors The Current bonuses for the domi are as follows: "Gallente Battleship Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage and 10% bonus to drone hitpoints and damage per skill level." My proposed changes: Gallente Battleship Skill Bonus: 5% Bonus to drone tracking speed and drone engagement range per level and 10% bonus to drone hitpoints and damage per skill level. [This makes it so the lack of midslots doesn't have to be stacked with drone tracking] __________________________________________________ As for the EWAR, I propose 4 new ships: Amarr Battleship: Tracking Disruption and Cruise Missile/Torpedo Damage and Missile Velocity per level Gallente Battleship: Sensor Dampening and Bonus to Hitpoints and Effectiveness of Non-ECM Electronic warfare drones per level Minmatar Battleship: 50% bonus to Torpedo/Cruise Missile damage (role), 5% Bonus to Torpedo/Cruise missile explosion velocity per level, 10% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness per level Caldari Battleship: Is the Scorpion. Durrrrr, but that needs a little buff on the lowslots.
SMT008 SnaiLs aNd FroGs 526	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:09:00 - [32] - Quote Hello there CCP Rise. When it comes to balancing ships, I like to think as if every ship could be fitted the way they should be fitted. That way, we can set starting grounds. Amarrs have 3 battleships, Armageddon, Apocalypse and Abaddon. The Abaddon is fine, it's the tough powerhouse everyone knows about, it works fine. Maybe a +10 CPU and some tweaks regarding cap usage would be great tho. The Apocalypse is highly limited by fitting requirements. Just like on the Armageddon, you don't have much CPU to play around and absolutly have to use Adaptive Nanoplating. But what really hurts the Apocalypse is its inability to fit Tachyons. With a somewhat standard Apocalypse fit (2 plates, 2 EANMS, 2 damage mods, 2 tracking comps, MWD, HeavyCapbooster and a full rack of Tachyons), I'm at 791/631 CPU and 34032/25625 PWG. Every battleships can fit a full rack of the biggest long-range weapons with a single fitting module. Except the Apocalypse, which has troubles with both CPU and PWG. This, along with the useless cap usage bonus (Which translates to a "Hey, now you can use your guns, ain't that great ?!" bonus), is what makes the Apocalypse useless. The Armageddon is quite good, tbh. Here's how I would change it : Make it easier to fit (adding some CPU is non-negotiable, adding some PWG would be a welcomed boost as it would allow Armageddons to fit heavy capboosters). Change it so it uses 6 turrets instead of 7, switch the rate of fire bonus to an actual damage bonus, so that it doesn't hurt the ship's capacitor too much. Give it enough PWG to fit 2 heavy neutralizers. Done. It loses a bit of DPS because of the -1 turret, but it can finally fit utility mods. The other two Amarr battleships can't, they are fleet ships. Please make it so that the Armageddon becomes the true Amarrian Skirmish battleship. Eventually, switch the cap use bonus to a tracking bonus. Anyway, I liked what you did as a player, and I'll probably like what you're going to do as a balance-master. And I love battleships. Oh and, if you could think about us poor little things in wormholes that can't use battleships much (even in C5-C6 wormholes), that would be awesome.
Ranger 1 Ranger Corp 3804	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:10:00 - [33] - Quote First, congratulations! Quote: I agree here as well. Already been thinking about other options for one of the amarr bs - as a follow up question related to this: Which amarr bs seems most ripe for an overhaul in your opinion? This depends on the philosophy you are going to apply to the various BS hulls in game. My personal feeling is that: 1: T1 BS hulls in general do not apply themselves to a logistics role (outside of current uses of remote reps). I view this as a good thing as there are already plenty of repair options for fleets and gangs involving everything from cruiser hulls to carriers. Dedicating BS hulls to logistical duty instead of damage dealing won't be a popular choice in my opinion. 2: T1 hulls devoted to EW has the same limitations. In a common fleet situation BS hulls are more effective dealing damage and overwhelming enemy logistics efforts than devoting the numbers necessary to have a significant effect via EW. If a BS hull needs to be devoted to EW that (to my thinking) would be an excellent additional role for Black Ops BS (perhaps giving them bonuses to their ractial EW and tracking in addition to their cloaking abilities). This would give Black Ops BS a viable role in everything from Covert hot drop situations to larger fleet engagements if they are tweaked with this in mind. 3: With the above in mind, I'll assume that the BS hulls are going to be balanced around the Combat (one for primary weapons, the other for secondary) and Attack roles. Armageddon: This would seem the natural choice for the Amarr Attack hull. Strong laser weaponry, solid drone back up, relatively fast and agile. Abaddon: As a combat hull I believe this should remain the Amarr go to ship for fleet work. Fairly good range with lasers and hard hitting, with the capability to mount a very good buffer. Apocolypse: This is the one that I believe is most ripe for an overhaul. Currently it has uses as a very long range laser boat (with pulses it has very interesting advantages). However this is a litle bit of a niche role. To me the design has always suggested that it is the next step in the Prophecy line of ships (mostly due to it's beak I suppose), which see's use in both missile combat for certain hull variants and drone combat for others. For the Apoc I would suggest giving it a stronger role as a drone boat, perhaps focused on sentry drone use at range. If you are going to come up with a Khanid version of this hull devote it to missile work, if not make the standard Apoc use missiles as its secondary weapons system (keeping drones as it's primary). On a personal note I would love to see a Khanid version of this hull, but I recognize this may not be in the cards. It doesn't hurt that we have seen hints that the Apoc will have some hull redesign work done, and this might dove tail nicely with that. To carve a successful niche for yourself in EVE you need to be able to out sell, out produce, out fight,-á out run, or out wit your competitors. If you can do none of the above, your only option is to complain on the forums that somehow you are at a disadvantage using the exact same tool set-áas the rest of the player base.
Buzzmong Aliastra Gallente Federation 250	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:10:00 - [34] - Quote With regards to BS's, to start all that's needed is a baseline being picked for HP and slot counts (say, the Tier 2) as the tier 1's do come up lacking and the tier 3 being a little bit too good, and then each ship being adjusted accordingly for race and roles. For the most part, the bonuses and roles are really only ok for theCaldari due to their line up in the form of a dedicated EW boat, a missile boat (cruise need some love though) and their gun boat. Minmatar are somewhat ok due to a probably soon to be torpedo boat, a full dps attack boat and a slower tanky boat. The latter pair simply replicating the new design of cruisers as one is an Attack ship the other Combat. It gets harder with Gallente and Amarr. Gallente have an awesome drone boat and two very similar BS's, the Hyp having a questionable active rep bonus. As the lovely Megathron works well as a blaster boat, it would perhaps be senisble to give the Hype an EW bonus. The Hype with a damage bonus coupled with a damping bonus would make an interesting choice, although it might be sensible to move damps to be a high slot and lose a mid lest it stay as a shield boat. Amarr have three very similar ships. The 'Geddon for DPS, the Abaddon for tanking and the Apoc coming inbetween and also being a sort of sniper boat. The problem is that they're all quite good and a big change could risk ruining a decent ship. A TD bonus on the Apoc or Abaddon might work though. Tier 3 BC's however are a big problem due to how they were designed and released. I was very suprised when they were released with 8x high slots and matching amount of turret hardpoints + good bonuses, because it makes them step heavily on the toes of the entire gun based BS line up. Personally, I'd redesign them to field 4/5 or maybe at a max 6x large turrets, but with normal bonuses (certainly not the 100% bonuses seen on Marauders and faction ships with lower turret counts) and only enough grid/cpu to fit either the medium tier guns (ie, 350mm Railguns) or the lower tier large guns (Dual 250mm railguns) + tank. As a counterpoint, I'd let them keep their current mobility. This will give them BS range and edging towards BS damage while not eclipsing the BS's, and also mean they make more sense lore wise as they're battlecruisers with large guns bolted on rather than bespoke large weapon platforms. That should make it so they're not the most obvious DPS choice out of the BC's, with that role going to ships that can field 6x medium turrets + a bigger damage bonus. (Might be spelling mistakes and grammar mistakes in the above). Nb, I miss using coloured text for racial names.
Sofia Wolf Ministry of War Amarr Empire 165	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:30:00 - [35] - Quote Typhoon: I would advise against making it active shield tanking ship, that is already focus of Maelstrom. As was suggested before 5% bonus to missile damage or rate of fire is good first bonus but second bonus is much harder choice. Possible target painting or webbing would be appropriate for minamatar, but also would be speed/signature tanking bonuses like +5% speed per level, or -X% signature radius reduction. About ECM. Do you remember pizza guy and his griffin? Well say never more because I have a solution for you. I believe most solo PvP pilots would love it, while ECM would still remain very useful for dealing with remote reps, and drone ECM could still give solo pilot that one jam to escape tackle but also give target of ECM drone way to deal with them without mounting smart bomb.
Buhhdust Princess Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 860	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:33:00 - [36] - Quote Definitely a +1 to that ECM nerf. CCP Rise, Please, do the honours, do us all a favour, and actually inact a GOOD idea for ECM nerf, and give that guy a medal.
Brooks Puuntai Solar Nexus. 1233	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:33:00 - [37] - Quote Fix the Ferox. Don't Vote for Malcanis New Eden Training Simulation. -áIdea to improve NPE.
monkfish2345 D'reg The Methodical Alliance 39	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:40:00 - [38] - Quote Buhhdust Princess wrote: Definitely a +1 to that ECM nerf. CCP Rise, Please, do the honours, do us all a favour, and actually inact a GOOD idea for ECM nerf, and give that guy a medal. I'm inclined to agree, having worked on an AA system to train pilots, i can tell you that for us this is almost exactly how we would operate against brute force jamming. To maintain some degree of balance it would probably have to work along the lines of break all locks followed by only the ECMer being re-targetable. The initially burst of ECM is pretty much blinding and takes time to adjust targeting to etc. well done on a nice idea, have a + 1 from me.
Saile Litestrider Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 54	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:44:00 - [39] - Quote I really like the current Amarr BS lineup, you have really nice options depending on whether you want all-out gank, long range, or pure ehp and damage. Losing any of them I think would be a blow to the race as a whole. As much epic whining as it would likely cause, I'd love to just see some entirely new battleships for them, one focused on torpedoes (please please PLEASE, khanid abaddon with black armor plates!), one focused on neuts and TDs, and an Amarr-flavored drone BS.
Shinzann Dead poets society The Laughing Men 3	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:44:00 - [40] - Quote Ravcharas wrote: monkfish2345 wrote: please put some serious thought into having 4 dedicated BS ewar platforms. Please put some serious thought into avoiding a total homogenization across races and across the different size hulls. I concur with this opinion. Diversity is a good thing.

Maximille Biagge The Eden Trading International Corporation Gentlemen's Agreement 75	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:49:00 - [41] - Quote I always thought it was wrong that only caldari have an EWAR specific Battleship, weather the other three races should have their tier 1 BS turned into an EWAR platform or if the scorpion should just lose its ECM bonus is the question. But in my opinion the less ECM in the game the better. The typhoon needs to lose its dual weapon bonus, preferably to full torps in order to keep it in line with the bellicose and cyclone. The Apocalpyse could do with losing it's capacitor bonus in favour of something more useful such as tracking. The cap bonus on the armageddon makes sence to support it's RoF bonus but the Apocalypse has no real need for it considering it even has an extra midslot. Attack Battlecruisers are very balanced as they are, I don't see any immediate need to "rebalance" them.
Elise Randolph Habitual Euthanasia Pandemic Legion 993	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:51:00 - [42] - Quote PEOPLE OF RISE Wait...wrong one~ Attack Battlecruisers are in a pretty good place, at least on a high level. As some have noted in fleet combat they have made sniper HACs obsolete, but sniper HACs were obsolete well before Attack BCs showed up. In fact, Attack BCs added sniping back into the medium-to-large scale meta - so that's an incredibly good thing. Attack BCs are very fun to roam around in and in general they have the "feel" of a more nimble variant of their battleship counterpart. With the Cruiser and BC buff the roaming meta is significantly more dynamic so it's not all-Attack-BCs-all-the-time anymore. So from that respect I think they're in a good spot. There is one exception, however, and that is the Talos. The Talos feels more like a Vagabond than a mini-Megathron. Super fun to fly, don't get me wrong, but unlike the other BCs it can deal with smaller ships /incredibly/ well. ~
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition 80	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:52:00 - [43] - Quote many of the balance issues in eve come about as a result of things like optimal range bonuses for hybrid guns which work well with rails on Caldari Vessels but are often overpowered when Blasters are put on the same ship. I know this is just MHO and I understand that not everyone will agree with me, (but the OP asked for meta etc as opposed to specifics) why cant ships have a more specific bonus such as 10% per level Optimal Range for Railguns, (not blasters) or other targeted bonuses such as only applying to artillery not auto-cannons or auto-cannons not artillery etc. It might help some ship designs more than you think and allow some truly useful racial flavouring of ship classes.
Little Dragon Khamez Guardians of the Underworld White Mountain Coalition 80	Posted - 2013.03.21 16:55:00 - [44] - Quote Sofia Wolf wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Nalha Saldana wrote: So im guessing this is Kil2 This was OMG CCP assimilated kill2! Resistance if futile! Does this mean Fozzie is dead. I thought he was the balance man.
Tonto Auri Vhero' Multipurpose Corp 33	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:02:00 - [45] - Quote CCP Rise wrote: Quote: also as much as previous blogs have said how you guys are happy with amarr BS for the most part, an option other than just laser based DPS might be nice. I agree here as well. Already been thinking about other options for one of the amarr bs - as a follow up question related to this: Which amarr bs seems most ripe for an overhaul in your opinion? Abaddon. It's just a beefed Armageddon. Pull Armageddon up to the job (won't need much, just 8'th turret and some PG to close the deal), and Abaddon loose it's role. More direct change would involve a flat bonus of 50% to capacitor use of energy turrets for Armageddon and Apocalypse, and change Armageddon racial bonuses to 5% RoF and 5% damage or tracking. Then some PG buff to let her carry a rack of Tachions, and leave her with 7, or even 6 turrets. (6 if damage, 7 if tracking) Abaddon then gets 5% resists and 10% drone damage and HP. Ergo, you have attack/fleet BS (Armageddon), a sniper (Apocalypse, for which the second bonus would be FallOff or RoF, to not step on the Armageddon's toes too bluntly), and a carebear dream. To make it as a list: Armageddon 50% Turret cap role bonus. 5% RoF/level 5% damage/level (shrink to 6 turret hardpoints) 5% tracking/level (leave 7 hardpoints) Plus PG to let her fit full rack of Tach's. Apocalypse 50% Turret cap role bonus. 7.5% Optimal/level 5% RoF or FallOff/level Plus a bit of PG, if need. Abaddon 5%/level resists 10%/level drones However, it'll only assuming that drones are unnerfed and can actually be used again as a weapon against NPC.
Junko Sideswipe Love Squad Confederation of xXPIZZAXx 118	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:05:00 - [46] - Quote Attack BCs are probably the best balanced ship class in the game. They have allowed smaller null entities to be more maneuverable, output high damage, and skirmish far more effectively than ever before. Their smaller tanks keep them well balanced; with a good enough bubble and an enemy fleet right behind you can lose the whole thing pretty quickly if you're not careful and your intel sucks. As far as battleships go, unless you're flying a gimmick fleet, battleship play is almost always relegated to large numbers (100-200) with triage support in order to shut down any other fleet. Common doctrines include HBC's abaddons or navy apocs with archon triage and CFC's tempest fleet issues with logi and armor triage on standby. Both doctrines are usually supplemented with "slowcats", brick tanked armor RR carriers with sentry drones. These doctrines are designed to shut down an enemy aggressor entirely or force them to escalate into caps. The most creative use we've seen of battleships currently are Darkness of Despair's rokh fleet, which fits MJDs and can peace out whenever the fight gets too hot for them. CFC tempests: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=15842729 HBC apocs: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_detail&kll_id=16439555 DD rokhs: http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=16855431 I don't really know how you would balance BS, their large HP buffer and the availability of armor triage makes them a brick wall. Confederation of xXPIZZAXx CEO Watch PIZZA Videos http://www.youtube.com/user/LunchSquad

CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 4528	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:13:00 - [47] - Quote Little Dragon Khamez wrote: Sofia Wolf wrote: CCP Rise wrote: Nalha Saldana wrote: So im guessing this is Kil2 This was OMG CCP assimilated kill2! Resistance if futile! Does this mean Fozzie is dead. I thought he was the balance man. I'm not dead! What? Nothing, here's your 9 pence. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie

sten mattson 1st Praetorian Guard Curatores Veritatis Alliance 26	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:14:00 - [48] - Quote i've always thought the lack of mid slots for the amarr to be crushing when considering your options geddon , has 3 mids -> prop mods + point and either a cap booster or a web not many options there please dont make the baddon a drone platform , in ok with having a larger drone bay (aka Omen style) , but dont switch out an iconic ship like that. lazors are not obsolete , they just need some tracking love ( or that everyone else are dragged down to their level) IMMA FIRING MA LAZAR!!!
Capqu Love Squad 86	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:14:00 - [49] - Quote imo, all the attack bcs seem to have their own role and fill it well, but i'll go through them with my thoughts anyway Talos strengths king of small gang amazing damage and is able to apply that damage well within 35k~ good maneuverability 25m3 drone bay weakness low on the tank side fixed damage type (usually) no damage outside of 35k~ overall i think it's a bit fast, and completely eclipses the hurricane which i don't like. if there was a way to move it and the hurricane apart without hurting either one too much, that would be cool. perhaps it's tracking is too good for battleship guns, but i fear nerfing that would hurt its viability overall. Naga strengths great range strong tank both blasters and rails work great weakness tracking fixed damage type the naga performs extremely well in fleets due to its good tank and respectable damage at almost any range. it has significantly less speed than the talos and tornado, which i think works well with its higher tank capability. also worth mentioning, passive pve blaster fit, which works great as an entry level anom running ship in the right areas (fountain, dek) don't think any changes are needed to the naga Oracle strengths great range with beams great tracking with pulses strong tank with armor fast with shields weakness slow as armor, fragile as shields fixed damage type capacitor the oracle is pretty well balanced when you consider how versatile it is. similar to the naga, you'll see them in anoms where the damage type permits (delve, period basis), and in fleets of all sizes. as pulse nano shield ships they work great in small gangs, with insane tracking and boasting good range thanks to scorch. in 100 man armor fleets with good range and good tank, sometimes mixed with nagas or nados. the capacitor weakness and speed of the armor fit/tank of the shield fit keep it in check, so i don't think any changes are needed here either Tornado strengths alpha no really, have you seen it's alpha? good slot layout hella fast any damage type weakness fragile tracking primarily flown as artillery and for good reason, the tornado usually doesn't have much in the tank department and unlike the talos can't really stop frigs from tearing it apart. the insane alpha is good in medium scale fleet fights, but in larger fights it becomes irrelevant and the naga or oracle take over for their tank. damage type selection is not something to be overlooked, and neither is its speed. a common setup involves a sensor boosters, remote or otherwise as it is one of the best ships for small/medium scale camping of gates/stations/tradehubs/whatever i feel like tornados could use a small buff to their utility, perhaps in the form of 25m3 drone bandwith, or perhaps in increasing the damage bonus and removing two turrets, to help establish it in small/med gangs and distance it from the fleet versions of nagas/oracles, while not really buffing it at what its already extremely good at i guess my overall opinions are these ships are fine, but i started writing and couldn't stop http://pizza.eve-kill.net
Freeze3371 7	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:16:00 - [50] - Quote The Scorpion has too few strategic uses. I think it should be made more versatile.

Swifty Blowback Republic University Minmatar Republic 20	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:21:00 - [51] - Quote Regarding attack battlecruisers... They are hellish in large fleets, so nerf their EHP. Maybe even make them active tank bonused and remove a bit of their DPS / agility. keep them viable for small gang / solo players and reduce their effectiveness in fleet doctrines.
Jonas Sukarala Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 39	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:24:00 - [52] - Quote I think the first thing to do here is too think what is the point/meaning of a battleship? A tanky heavy weapon platform And then how do they fit into each race's style of fighting without making them all the same or close as. Gallente are rush close range brawlers. Amarr are plated laser-boats with flexible ranges but brawler range isn't the optimal use Caldari are all range/ tanky blasterboats Minnmatar are just flexible and mobile. so mega and hyperion are brawlers so tank and speed are priorities domi is versatile Apoc is sniper abbadon is a brick and geddon is what? mobile would be useful Rokh is tanky and versatile with op range bonus raven is sniper...yes really scorpion is ecm which defeats the point of battleship concept in my opinion i think its navy version is what it should be like. minmatar tempest is flexible typhoon will be mobile torps Maelstrom is ASB monster.
Jonas Sukarala Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 39	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:28:00 - [53] - Quote Tornado i think is OP with arties alpha i think all ranged weaponry needs attention. Missiles should be the highest alpha really considering its a explosion rather than a projectile which considering projectiles are really only small missiles its odd they don't have velocity and flight time like missiles i would think only lasers would be instant damage and would explain their large capacitor requirement.
Capqu Love Squad 86	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:28:00 - [54] - Quote Swifty Blowback wrote: Regarding attack battlecruisers... They are hellish in large fleets, so nerf their EHP. Maybe even make them active tank bonused and remove a bit of their DPS / agility. keep them viable for small gang / solo players and reduce their effectiveness in fleet doctrines. they are kept in check in fleets because of how vulnerable they are to bombs source: http://www.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=15741923 http://www.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=15669977 http://www.eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=15423069 http://pizza.eve-kill.net
Aiko Hanomaa State War Academy Caldari State 20	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:31:00 - [55] - Quote Some brainstorming questions about battleships: Would you bring a Caldari BS to a smallgang roam? Would you want to? What is the Gallente fleet BS? What is the Amarr mission BS? What is the align time of an "all V" Maelstrom? What is the maximum paper dps of the Typhoon?
Mesh Marillion Fairlight Corp Rooks and Kings 5	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:31:00 - [56] - Quote Beaver Retriever wrote: Please don't turn the Armageddon into a drone boat, ala the Prophecy. I would also second the poster who talked about T1 EWAR platforms for all races. It seems a bit silly that only Caldari get a T1 EWAR battleship. I You can easily fit an apoc or baddon for neuting (or any bs really). Not bonussed, granted, but still good enough to kill caps if employed correctly. Added benefit: your ship doesn't scream as much for getting primed by hostiles and you can hide it better in a bait group. On the meta level the problem at this point is, that the tiericide within BS at the moment creates very different sets of racial bs. Caldari get an ewar BS and one BS for each weapon plattform, both setup for range. Amarr get a cheap and an expensive pulse plattform as well as a sniping ship. Minis will get a missile plattform (Phoon), a very tanky tier 3 that can without a lot of problems fit the biggest sniping guns and the pest, which will probably become the primary close range gun plattform after the envisioned changes. Lastly Gallente get their cheap drone plattform, a buffer and an active blaster plattform (rail mega works but with the inherent agility and the lack of range bonusses its not a sniping plattform). Having said that i think the worst call ccp could make at this point is to take away those different flavours that racial BS have. Not only does it add more depth and allow for variation, it also increases the incentives for cross racial specialisation (beyond being able to fly pirate BS) which is in my opinion important to keep older players interested in the game. In fact the only change for general roles i'd consider is to remove the scorpions E-War bonus and leave that to specialized smaller crafts (and even that is just an idea, not a strong suggestion). Furthermore there is another aspect to consider: costs. At this point tier 1 BS often serve as a go to ship for risky operations where you want to have more tank than a tier 3 allows but still don't want to yahoo 400 mill per tier 3 bs hull away if it goes wrong. That kind of option would go out of the window if ccp decides to do the same to BS as they did in the previous tier. It is already a bit weird that a navy geddon takes over the role of the abaddon due to being cheaper while being less taxing on the capacitor. Speaking of throwaway ships: that role has increasingly taken over by tier 3 gank bcs (aka Nagas/Talos with Neutrons). Granted, low tank, but high mobility and if it breaks, its way cheaper than BS hulls. If that one gets a bit cut down megas with buffed agility might become an attractive alternative for fast attack fleets against caps and other high hp targets that need to be taken down (atm people use whelppests for that if the pick a bs hull). However i think that is less an issue than the rise of the naga as the rail plattform which is basicly the ultimate ship for FCs that never want to commit even large fleets cause the combination of range projection, mobility while having at least a ressemblence of a tank is pretty convincing. Counters for that fleet are scarce if you manage to dodge bombing runs. Another problem is that attack bcs have completely obsoleted hacs in any regard with very few niche ships and ahacs. As for EHP: the general problem at this point is a bit that there has been a continous powercreep towards more DPS. Main culprits being Tier 3 BCs and dreads (the naglfar changes are another small step into that direction). Said powercreep mechanic is another reason i think we shouldn't get more T1 ewar plattforms - if people feel damps are strong just use them on unbonussed hulls like it has happened in the past (before damps got buffed). Otherwise the meta of countering hostile comps becomes even more unforgiving than it is today. As for the tracking aspect: i personally feel that tracking at the moment is at a better spot than a lot of people claim. In the end tracking smaller ships only works if you add in webs and painters and tracking mods. Failing to bring that was what first gave rise to ahacs until people got smarter. And if you look at it, that is exactly what webs and painters are supposed to do: improve tracking. Stil, even today ahacs still remain a viable fleetcomp. I think ccp needs to avoid further exceptions to the tracking formula like the one that led to the titan tracking nerf. If the general direction in game design is to improve the ability to sig and speedtank than that should happen within the tracking formula and it should be approached with care. I think a lot of the ideas that are floating around about this topic will end up really one sided if implemented. Apologies for a rather lengthy post that does not even touch the subject of solo BS and the state of BS vs BS warfare at a larger scale, not to mention issues with T2 BS that are still there, even after the recent BO buffs. Also something to consider at the side: maybe increase calibration points on navy BS at least. Its a bit ridiculous that i can bring up the vanilla
Varesk Origin. Black Legion. 328	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:33:00 - [57] - Quote ATTACK BCs are fine. They have their strengths and weaknesses.
Garviel Tarrant Beyond Divinity Inc Shadow Cartel 682	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:46:00 - [58] - Quote Make attack BC's slower and make them harder to fit. Really don't see why they should be easier to fit than BS's with the biggest guns and all that crap. Ohh and remove the Talos tracking bonus and give it something that doesn't synergize quite that well with its role. As for BS's buff tier 1's and nerf tier 3's in general.. I don't think any of the BS's should be completely overhauled, for example i will be very very sad if someone makes the geddon or apoc drone ships. Beyond Divinity Recruitment is open!
Guns nButter Rim Collection RC Test Alliance Please Ignore 2	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:47:00 - [59] - Quote T3 battle cruisers have this nasty habit of vaporizing smaller things than them too quickly. Maybe you should look at large guns first? Either that or give T3s a sig radius penalty? As for battleships... I'm thinking flat out double their base HP. They are pretty fragile compared their price tag. The earlier comment suggesting dedicated battleship weight ewar for all 4 factions would be cool. As for separate roles: 1) Ewar - ewar 2) Utility - make them have multiple fitting options, maybe even multiple bonuses? Something that is handy for small gangs and multiple niche roles per ship. 3) Fleet - tanky with big guns. The maelstrom, Apocalypse, and rokh already fit this description, now Gallente needs one. Maybe give the Hyperion something to make it work in a fleet?
Jonas Sukarala Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 39	Posted - 2013.03.21 17:51:00 - [60] - Quote Tier 3 bc's should really have more tank than a combat cruiser its a class above after-all....... i would suggest removing a turret slot as-well their dps is a bit too high and invades battleships dps too much they are a different class and they should reflect their class more. like the attack cruisers are too combat cruisers and then the combat battle cruiser class



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 .. 15 :: 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.