EVE Search - Sticky:[Odyssey] Attack Battlecruiser balance pass

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Odyssey] Attack Battlecruiser balance pass

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 11 post(s)

CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 117	Posted - 2013.03.28 12:52:00 - [1] - Quote Hiyo! My first project here is touching up the set of attack battlecruisers. This class was in a fairly oppressive state following their creation, but the constant upgrades to frigs and cruisers has brought them back in line somewhat. Our goal here is to make a little more room for both battleships and cruisers at both large and small scales. We're doing this through tweaks to scan resolution and signature radius changes for all four, agility tweaks for Naga and Oracle, and mass increase for Talos and Tornado. Hopefully the end result is that they are slightly more vulnerable to probing, bombing, and being caught by tackle than they were. Note: we are aware that these ships will be getting hit twice. Once from these changes, and once from the TE change. We think they will still be a very strong option in many environments, even if both changes going through as proposed, but we are all ears to discussion. ORACLE: Amarr Battlecruiser Skill Bonuses: -10% to large laser cap use and +5% to large laser damage Slot layout: 8H, 3M, 6L; 8 turrets , 0 launchers Fittings: 1375 PWG, 345 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1575 / 2160 / 1980 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate) : 3500 / 875s Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 200 / .495 (+.02) / 14760000 / 10.1s (+.4s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 220 (-20) / 6 Sensor strength: 18 Radar Signature radius: 210 (+30) NAGA: Caldari Battlecruiser Skill Bonuses: +5% to large hybrid turret damage and +10% to large hybrid turret optimal range Slot layout: 8H, 6M, 3L; 8 turrets , 0 launchers Fittings: 875 PWG, 425 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2160 / 1575 / 1755 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate) : 2900 / 725s Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 195 / .525 (+.04) / 14760000 / 10.9s (+.8s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75000km / 200 (-20) / 8 Sensor strength: 21 Gravimetric Signature radius: 215 (+25) TALOS: Gallente Battlecruiser Skill Bonuses: +5% to large hybrid turret damage and +7.5% to large hybrid turret tracking speed Slot layout: 8H, 4M, 5L; 8 turrets , 0 launchers Fittings: 1100 PWG, 360 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1750 / 1890 / 2160 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate) : 3100 / 775s Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 220 / .45 / 15552000 (+1152000) / 9.7s (+.7s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 70km / 210 (-20) / 6 Sensor strength: 20 Magnetometric Signature radius: 220 (+20) TORNADO: Minmatar Battlecruiser Skill Bonuses: +5% to large projectile turret rate of fire and +5% to large projectile turret falloff Slot layout: 8H, 5M, 4L; 8 turrets , 0 launchers Fittings: 1000 PWG, 342 CPU Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1890 / 1800 / 1800 Capacitor (amount / recharge rate) : 2700 / 675s Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 225 / .475 / 15228000 (+1128000) / 10s (+.7s) Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 / 0 Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 60km / 230 (-20) / 6 Sensor strength: 17 Ladar Signature radius: 195 (+25)


CCP Fozzie C C P C C P Alliance 4732	Posted - 2013.03.28 12:59:00 - [2] - Quote I approve of this product and/or service. Game Designer \| Team Five-0 https://twitter.com/CCP_Fozzie


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 118	Posted - 2013.03.28 13:05:00 - [3] - Quote Quote: Will hardly change anything and surely will not help battleships Won't have much effect on BS vs ABC at a small scale (although any decrease in mobility will help some), but it should have more an effect at a large scale where things like align time and sig radius (probe time) make ABC very very strong.


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 118	Posted - 2013.03.28 13:06:00 - [4] - Quote Quote: they are slow and squishy enough as it is Squishy, yes. Slow, no. As I said in the post, cruisers and frigs both put a lot of pressure on them, but they are still substantially faster than anything that rivals their damage projection.


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 121	Posted - 2013.03.28 13:30:00 - [5] - Quote Grath, I'm not sure exactly what you mean about making room for the other BCs more. I feel like for the most part like combat BC have a very different role than attack BC, so one doesn't really tread hard on the other. Thats not always true, of course, but I wonder maybe what environment you're talking about and what sort of outcome you would be looking for?


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 121	Posted - 2013.03.28 14:00:00 - [6] - Quote Quote: Well currently, if you can use large guns, there is no reason to fly a brutix over say a talos. Honestly theres no reason to fly a Vaga over a Talos the ship is (in its current form) so incredibly broken with its extreme agility and dps projection. I think we're going to just have to agree to disagree here. In my experience you have several metrics that are all really important to what a ship is good at, and all the ships you mention have completely different allocation of those metrics. Combat BC EHP makes them a lot more ideal as tacklers/bait ships than attack BCs. So having a drake alongside your talos to hold points without getting killed is very valuable. HACs like the vaga generally are much more capable of dealing with small support. So having vaga (or deimos or zealot or even rupture) to support an attack BC by protecting it from tacklers is very valuable. Attack BC have the highest damage/projection so they are generally going to have a lot of value based on that. The prevalence of each role shifts based on a lot of things, but I don't see a direct tension between them. You don't get read for a roam and say - which ship has the most damage, lets take only those. At least thats been my experience.


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 121	Posted - 2013.03.28 14:02:00 - [7] - Quote @MuraSaki Siki Thanks for the cleanup - fixed accordingly.


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 121	Posted - 2013.03.28 14:09:00 - [8] - Quote Quote: Also why do the talos and nado have so much more mass than the naga and oracle? They way their mass vs agility was setup originally is definitely unusual, but there didn't seem to be a good reason to rework it all at this point.


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 178	Posted - 2013.04.04 09:19:00 - [9] - Quote [Brutix, Brutix fit] Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Magnetic Field Stabilizer II Tracking Enhancer II Tracking Enhancer II Nanofiber Internal Structure II Damage Control II Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I Warp Scrambler II Large Shield Extender II Large Shield Extender II Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M Heavy Neutron Blaster II, Void M [Empty High slot] Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Hammerhead II x5 1347m/s - 910dps - 47.9ehp - obviously the range is not as good. you said it just had to meet 2 of the metrics!


CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 178	Posted - 2013.04.04 09:50:00 - [10] - Quote Not saying it has to kite! Although it could kite some things. Just saying you can get some of the numbers to match up. And yeah...with void Talos should be more like 9 + 10, but even with null it does almost 800dps



CCP Rise C C P C C P Alliance 179	Posted - 2013.04.04 14:29:00 - [11] - Quote Just because I posted one shield fit doesn't mean thats the only viable way to fly the ship. It was just the best way to achieve the numbers sited above me. Personally, I think active tank brutix is extremely fun and have flown armor and shield variations both quite a bit. I'm happy to say that currently active armor bonuses are not as valuable as they maybe ought to be. We intend to keep looking at tank balance, and in the mean time we don't want to throw out all the bonuses and just give up on active armor ever having a place in the game.

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.