| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Frothgar
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
69
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 20:12:00 -
[1] - Quote
While I don't have much if any interest in ingame politics, I do love internet spaceships.
There are a number of fleets we tend to fly in WH space. The most common is the Tier3 BC and The Tech3 cruiser fleet. Both do their own thing, and do it well, but Sadly the lonely battship has been unloved in WH history barring the occasional Bhaalgorn (Which to date is a rarity these days due to how well Dreads smack things)
With the battleship tiericide hitting, I'd like to take a moment to ask CCP and really any WH based CSM to take up the cause to bring some love of battleships back to W-space.
What currently limits them is cold hard mass, and with the amount of mass they take up, its just not possible to have a BS oriented fleet comp of any reasonable utility. a C5-> C5 Wh (Where I live) is limited to about 10bs round trip, which due to the DPS/Utility/Speed they posess fall so far behind Tier3 BCs and T3 Cruisers that you would be crazy to bring one battleship when you could have 8 Tech 3s, or 4 Tier3 BCs.
I'm indifferent as to how this would be done so long as it doesn't increase the amount of capitals that are allowed through a wormhole (They really don't need any love)
The solution could be a module (Hic bubble's effect working on any ship save a cap) or a mechanic (Battleship mass counts as 1/3 for WH reduction)
I don't really care how its done, I just want to fly some new fleet comps and the new BS changes look fun. |

Axloth Okiah
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
55
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 21:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
Arbitrary mechanic seems stupid... and any mass reducing module will just get refitted on the other side.
So maybe a mass reducing rig? WH Realtor James Arget for CSM 8!
|

Frothgar
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
70
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 21:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
Maybe have the HIC bubble (reduces mass on the Hic when active) might be a good choice for bringing things through the WH.
I would want to avoid making it possible to bring more caps through a WH though. Caps don't need any love in WH space. |

Jack Miton
Aperture Harmonics K162
1589
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 22:27:00 -
[4] - Quote
the issue with BSs in WHs is not really mass, it's that they get absolutely obliterated by dreads and T2/T3 cruiser fleets. note that this isnt a bad thing as such, just how it is. BSs are designed to shoot BC and larger targets which they do quite well. unfortunately for them, WHs are not the best place to find large targets to shoot. |

Castor Troyy
DEEP-SPACE CO-OP LTD Polarized.
43
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 22:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
Not to mention their mobility..and ability to hit faster and smaller targets...you can have dedicated tacklers, but T3's and Tier3's pack the punch and are fast enough to where they can accomplish this on their own....the fact is the trade isnt worth it...you would have to bring the dps/tracking up enough to compare to 8T3 cruisers...and while it might get the BS involved more in w-space...meanwhile back in Kspace S H I * will be hitting the fan! It would be so imbalanced it wouldn't be funny.
Contrary to most of our beliefs, wspace is the best space..but it isnt the only space |

Frothgar
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
70
|
Posted - 2013.04.08 23:22:00 -
[6] - Quote
Jack Miton wrote:the issue with BSs in WHs is not really mass, it's that they get absolutely obliterated by dreads and T2/T3 cruiser fleets. note that this isnt a bad thing as such, just how it is. BSs are designed to shoot BC and larger targets which they do quite well. unfortunately for them, WHs are not the best place to find large targets to shoot.
While I agree somewhat, the drawbacks for Tech 3s are similar to BS in that The BS and Tech3s when similarly kit have similar tanks versus raw DPS numbers. However BS have greater range, and the Tech3s have greater agility and more versatility in projected effects (Bonused scrams, webs, etc), lets be honest, the mass factor is pretty major.
You can choose to bring ~80 Tier3 Cruisers + Triage carrier through a WH and still have mass enough to get it all back home. However you genuinely struggle to bring 10 BS and the same carrier. That alone puts the edge so far in the T3 cruisers court you wouldn't really even consider anything else. |

Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
424
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 11:29:00 -
[7] - Quote
Battleships in EVE have tons of drawbacks and few if any advantages
mass: obvious speed/agility: very low, except for a few battleships which are not really battleships except in name (Macha going 3 km/s lol)
Now that is not a problem as those are natural characteristics you'd expect in a battleship. But what do they have to show for it?
tank: much worse than t3 cruisers and even some bait cruiser fits damage: only slightly higher than many smaller ships, and that only on paper
So the problem is that many small ships, defying any common sense, have ridiculous amounts of raw armor/shield hp, with better resists on top and the agility and speed of a cruiser. There is no way battleships could compete here except for pricing, which is relatively unimportant in w-space.
A few random ideas for improving them: -give BS massive buffer (like 400k+ ehp in a balanced combat fitting) -but make it so that they are hard to support with active reps or logistics by lowering/capping their resists (think of 400k raw hitpoints with 0% resists (and low shield recharge) as an extreme example) -give them a much larger cap reserve, but very bad regen
Result: A massive battle fortress capable of withstanding heavy punishment for a long time, but almost impossible to sustain once its reserves have been depleted in a prolonged battle.
Even then, BS would need some special capability they can bring to the battlefield which helps other, smaller ships. some kind of force-multiplying module with non-stacking effect. . |

Lloyd Roses
Risk-Averse PLEASE NOT VIOLENCE OUR BOATS
50
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 11:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
Terrorfrodo wrote:Battleships in EVE have tons of drawbacks and few if any advantages
mass: obvious speed/agility: very low, except for a few battleships which are not really battleships except in name (Macha going 3 km/s lol)
Now that is not a problem as those are natural characteristics you'd expect in a battleship. But what do they have to show for it?
tank: much worse than t3 cruisers and even some bait cruiser fits damage: only slightly higher than many smaller ships, and that only on paper
So the problem is that many small ships, defying any common sense, have ridiculous amounts of raw armor/shield hp, with better resists on top and the agility and speed of a cruiser. There is no way battleships could compete here except for pricing, which is relatively unimportant in w-space.
A few random ideas for improving them: -give BS massive buffer (like 400k+ ehp in a balanced combat fitting) -but make it so that they are hard to support with active reps or logistics by lowering/capping their resists (think of 400k raw hitpoints with 0% resists (and low shield recharge) as an extreme example) -give them a much larger cap reserve, but very bad regen
Result: A massive battle fortress capable of withstanding heavy punishment for a long time, but almost impossible to sustain once its reserves have been depleted in a prolonged battle.
Even then, BS would need some special capability they can bring to the battlefield which helps other, smaller ships. some kind of force-multiplying module with non-stacking effect.
It's called a dreadnought with deactivated siege and offline DCU. |

Roime
Shiva Furnace
2471
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 12:04:00 -
[9] - Quote
Check out the F&I forums, the battleship rebalancing plans are already out.
Their place in EVE remains niche (yes, null blobs are a niche), no changes to their basic role.
+1 anyway, it would be nice to fly battleships in wormhole pvp.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |

Vincent Gaines
Cold Moon Destruction Transmission Lost
336
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 12:12:00 -
[10] - Quote
I'm really torn on this. I like Battleships. I was really hoping they would turn the Hyperion into something useful because I really like that ship.
But so far the only BSs worth having in w-space are Bhaals, Vindis, and maybe a Navy Domi for Pulsars.
It might be easy to say to tweak the mass, but that'll affect too many other things. You don't want to change WH mass limits either, so the only option would be to make a whole new attribute to all ships across the board, some kind of technobabble like "Molecular displacement" which can now be independently modified to ALL ship classes to make sure w-space is tweaked to allow the correct shiptypes through. Not a diplo.-á
The above post was edited for spelling. |

Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
424
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 14:45:00 -
[11] - Quote
Lloyd Roses wrote:It's called a dreadnought with deactivated siege and offline DCU. In fact the HMS Dreadnought was simply a new and bigger type of battleship :p
Imho it would be better if battleships moved closer to dreads than remain the more cumbersome version of battlecruiser they are now. . |

Archdaimon
NorCorp Enterprise No Holes Barred
179
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 14:50:00 -
[12] - Quote
I like battleships. I don't think they need love specifically for WH's. WH is for exploring and smaller agile ships in unknown space supported by occasional bs/caps.
BS belongs in known space, in large fleet battles. The moment that other shipclasses obsoletes bs for, say, null fleet warfare, something has to be done. Other than that. No.
BS should all be about firepower/tank/cost. T3's are all about firepower/tank. Conservative guesstimte would place a normal pvp-fit t3 a som 2-3 times the price of a bs.
In general WH-space has already seen too much proliferation of large caps (bs'es). I don't think anything could really be done about it without upsetting to much. It's probably a natural development, but forcing bs into wh seems wrong kinda fix in a grander scale. Wormholes has the best accoustics. It's known. - Sing it for me - |

Terrorfrodo
Renegade Hobbits for Mordor
424
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 14:52:00 -
[13] - Quote
If you think battleships should not be in w-space because they are too large, what is your opinion on capital escalations then?  . |

Meytal
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
176
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 15:25:00 -
[14] - Quote
Frothgar wrote:With the battleship tiericide hitting, I'd like to take a moment to ask CCP and really any WH based CSM to take up the cause to bring some love of battleships back to W-space. Off-topic, but I wouldn't hold your breath on a W-space candidate breaking through the Null zombie-vote. The current/new voting method just makes it easier for them to pad the CSM with less chance of screwing up and too many voting for one candidate, allowing non-endorsed candidates to slip through. I hope I'm wrong, and that CCP hasn't managed to completely dummy-proof the process; but then there is the issue of a 5-way vote split for top. I'm half surprised CCP didn't add the option for alliances to specify a voting sheet: log in and one-click to vote the way your alliance dictates.
More on-topic, Battleships fill a niche role in Null that doesn't exist in W-space: cheap damage soaks with good dps where mass has no limit. The mass limitations of W-space "strongly encourages" parties to bring Cruisers and maybe Battlecruisers.
The T3 Cruisers are expensive damage soaks with great dps. While not a "cheap" replacement for the Battleships, they are more maneuverable, have much less mass, and are much smaller targets. They have comparable, or even superior, dps to Battleships, and can apply it much better to compensate for the lack of range. Battleships have a different niche role for us which has already been mentioned.
There is also the economic aspect. Anything T1 or T2 benefits Null when it explodes. T3 cruisers benefit W-space when they explode. Current prices make me think more T3s need to explode.
|

Inkarr Hashur
Sine Nobilitatis
312
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 19:25:00 -
[15] - Quote
Meytal wrote:Current prices make me think more T3s need to explode.
I'm just going to quote the best part of your post so it stands out. |

Incindir Mauser
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
159
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 20:31:00 -
[16] - Quote
I do like battleships. I really do.
But because of mass limits, no cyno, and the fact that T3's are typically much better than a Battleship to begin with. BS's have very limited roles and worth in W-space as it is. Although with the recent announcements to BS changes, the Armageddon could very well become a "ghetto-Bhaal". The implications of a range bonus to neuts? Interesting times we live in.
What I'd like to see is an expansion on the T3 line of modular ships to include Frigates and Battleships.
|

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
919
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 23:14:00 -
[17] - Quote
Incindir Mauser wrote:What I'd like to see is an expansion on the T3 line of modular ships to include Frigates and Battleships. as a guy with too much money who likes flying expensive pimpmobiles i would also be happy to see more T3 hulls. but. balancing them is an inherent disaster. let's face it: battleships are not really suitable to do anything other than, well, battle. there are only so many subsystems with specialized purpose that you can implement and expect to be used. then there is still the price issue. for some reason there are still people who don't understand how more expensive ships need to be better for people to fly them.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Incindir Mauser
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
166
|
Posted - 2013.04.09 23:27:00 -
[18] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:Incindir Mauser wrote:What I'd like to see is an expansion on the T3 line of modular ships to include Frigates and Battleships. as a guy with too much money who likes flying expensive pimpmobiles i would also be happy to see more T3 hulls. but. balancing them is an inherent disaster. let's face it: battleships are not really suitable to do anything other than, well, battle. there are only so many subsystems with specialized purpose that you can implement and expect to be used. then there is still the price issue. for some reason there are still people who don't understand how more expensive ships need to be better for people to fly them.
If there is anything people like in an MMO it's being able to customize something. Price notwithstanding.
Strat cruisers are in a pretty good place right now. The Tengu has fallen out of favor some since the HML nerf. But otherwise the popularity for T3's is pretty good.
T3 battleships. Mmm. More customizable goodness. Plus it would make nullsec flip a lid, and start dumping money into our pockets and invading W-space giving us more things to shoot at. |

Tsobai Hashimoto
Hard Knocks Inc.
125
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 01:41:00 -
[19] - Quote
you might get what you want soon. but not how you want it....most devs are not too keen on the power of T3s. soon they will get nerfed and your one bs might seem decent compared to 5 tengus.
about the off topic part. i dont think t3 battleships are comming soon if ever but tech3 battlecruisers? yes.
I think that is part of the reason to split the skill up to each race. to help intertwine a tech 3 battlecruiser line.
if they are to do that and have them cost 3 to 4 times in resources as a tech 3 cruiser then they might need to expand wh space too. something id love
lets get some class7 and 8 holes! |

Incindir Mauser
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
171
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 12:49:00 -
[20] - Quote
Tsobai Hashimoto wrote:you might get what you want soon. but not how you want it....most devs are not too keen on the power of T3s. soon they will get nerfed and your one bs might seem decent compared to 5 tengus.
about the off topic part. i dont think t3 battleships are comming soon if ever but tech3 battlecruisers? yes.
I think that is part of the reason to split the skill up to each race. to help intertwine a tech 3 battlecruiser line.
if they are to do that and have them cost 3 to 4 times in resources as a tech 3 cruiser then they might need to expand wh space too. something id love
lets get some class7 and 8 holes!
Tengus aren't as nice as they once were, but I can see your point. I certainly hope CCP Fozzie doesn't hit T3's too hard because then what would be the point?
They're good. Perhaps some variations of them tend to be a little OP, but then what is the point of living in W-space and having them if they're mediocre compared to T2 HACs and Recons? We already take a SP hit when we lose them, and in exchange for that we get a battleship in a cruiser's package.
And yes. W-space could see some love in the PvE department. Sleepers have become woefully predictable.
|

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
920
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 15:44:00 -
[21] - Quote
Incindir Mauser wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:Incindir Mauser wrote:What I'd like to see is an expansion on the T3 line of modular ships to include Frigates and Battleships. as a guy with too much money who likes flying expensive pimpmobiles i would also be happy to see more T3 hulls. but. balancing them is an inherent disaster. let's face it: battleships are not really suitable to do anything other than, well, battle. there are only so many subsystems with specialized purpose that you can implement and expect to be used. then there is still the price issue. for some reason there are still people who don't understand how more expensive ships need to be better for people to fly them. If there is anything people like in an MMO it's being able to customize something. Price notwithstanding. Strat cruisers are in a pretty good place right now. The Tengu has fallen out of favor some since the HML nerf. But otherwise the popularity for T3's is pretty good. T3 battleships. Mmm. More customizable goodness. Plus it would make nullsec flip a lid, and start dumping money into our pockets and invading W-space giving us more things to shoot at.
what's the point of customization if everyone "customizes" the same subsystems? when was the last time you saw a rail tengu or a ham legion? and how long did you laugh at the guy for flying this waste of nanoribbons? and that's not even taking into account the relation between T3s and HACs/command ships. i understand and approve CCPs reluctance to open another can of worms like that, though it pains me to admit it.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Vincent Gaines
Cold Moon Destruction Transmission Lost
341
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 16:16:00 -
[22] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote:[
what's the point of customization if everyone "customizes" the same subsystems? when was the last time you saw a rail tengu or a ham legion? and how long did you laugh at the guy for flying this waste of nanoribbons? and that's not even taking into account the relation between T3s and HACs/command ships. i understand and approve CCPs reluctance to open another can of worms like that, though it pains me to admit it.
The problem isn't people not changing up T3s, it's that many of the alternative fits just don't work, like a drone proteus. The laser Legion isn't very good. A rail Tengu just lacks in any offensive capibilities but that's because of rails themselves. Not a diplo.-á
The above post was edited for spelling. |

Tennessee Jack
Blac-x
41
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 18:59:00 -
[23] - Quote
Meytal wrote:[quote=Frothgar]I'm half surprised CCP didn't add the option for alliances to specify a voting sheet: log in and one-click to vote the way your alliance dictates.
The dev's tried to force people to actually think, look at the names of these people, and put them in order, rather than a 2-click, I-have-no-idea-who-i-voted-for, I just clicked a link fest.
Voting is cumbersome.. thats FINE. If you can't spend 5 minutes voting and putting people in the order you like.. don't vote. The bulk of the alliances got big evemails saying "Vote for these guys". Making it so that all people have to do is "click here, vote counted" without them making any concious decision on how they voted for would be.. well. wrong, bordering on fraud.
And there were automated ways of doing it (not automatic, but with some rejiggering people figured out how to mass vote multiple accounts quickly). That was their concious choice to do that though, though I can admit, those who did it, probably had no clue who they were voting for anyway.
I would make it more cumbersome, or find a way to stop automatic "click" voting. This was a first for CCP and I applaud them for the system they came up with (regarding the voting ballot itself). I'd adjust it so bookmarking does not work. |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
925
|
Posted - 2013.04.10 21:30:00 -
[24] - Quote
Vincent Gaines wrote:Daniel Plain wrote:[
what's the point of customization if everyone "customizes" the same subsystems? when was the last time you saw a rail tengu or a ham legion? and how long did you laugh at the guy for flying this waste of nanoribbons? and that's not even taking into account the relation between T3s and HACs/command ships. i understand and approve CCPs reluctance to open another can of worms like that, though it pains me to admit it. The problem isn't people not changing up T3s, it's that many of the alternative fits just don't work, like a drone proteus. The laser Legion isn't very good. A rail Tengu just lacks in any offensive capibilities but that's because of rails themselves. not very good in comparison to what? to the other subsystems? or other comparable ships? by this logic, there can only be one 'good' option; the one that performs best. this is the essence of the current balance issues between T3s and HACs and expanding these issues to frigates and battleships won't help anyone.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |

Lydia vanPersie
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 13:02:00 -
[25] - Quote
Daniel Plain wrote: not very good in comparison to what? to the other subsystems? or other comparable ships? by this logic, there can only be one 'good' option; the one that performs best. this is the essence of the current balance issues between T3s and HACs and expanding these issues to frigates and battleships won't help anyone.
Nice strawman, please try again. |

Oxandrolone
Bite Me inc Bitten.
169
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 13:10:00 -
[26] - Quote
Jack nailed it, BS's are not used in fleets because dreads murder them.
They are nerfing dread tracking a little (through the tracking module nerf) so lets see what that does. |

Frothgar
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
77
|
Posted - 2013.04.15 20:08:00 -
[27] - Quote
Oxandrolone wrote:Jack nailed it, BS's are not used in fleets because dreads murder them.
They are nerfing dread tracking a little (through the tracking module nerf) so lets see what that does.
I agree that dreads do murder BS, and that their presence mean for tough times for many ships.
That being said, even if I could swarm a dread with BS (Which I can't) I'm still going to take 10x more Tech 3 cruisers just for the sheer amount of utility that comes with them for the mass.
Is anyone not in agreement that 1x BS vs 9-10 T3 Cruisers for mass limits is a pretty convincing nail in the BS coffin? |

Deus Vex
Dark Falcon Operations
8
|
Posted - 2013.04.17 00:39:00 -
[28] - Quote
Battleships are alive and well for those who feel the constraint of a lack of pilots before the constraints of WH mass limits. |

chris elliot
EG CORP Talocan United
163
|
Posted - 2013.04.17 01:15:00 -
[29] - Quote
With the ginormous hateon fozzie and ytterbium have for t3's, battleships may kind of be forced to become more used in w-space in the future. |

chris elliot
EG CORP Talocan United
163
|
Posted - 2013.04.17 01:17:00 -
[30] - Quote
Oxandrolone wrote:Jack nailed it, BS's are not used in fleets because dreads murder them.
They are nerfing dread tracking a little (through the tracking module nerf) so lets see what that does.
It will do nothing because lokis will always be able to web and paint something so that a dread can track it. |

Deus Vex
Dark Falcon Operations
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.19 23:12:00 -
[31] - Quote
Bring forth the upcoming new geddon :D |

Omen Nihilo
AQUILA INC Verge of Collapse
202
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 01:09:00 -
[32] - Quote
Battleships in solo/small gang pvp are underpowered no matter where you goGÇöw-space and k-space. I think if CCP rebalances them to make them viable again in solo/small gang pvp then they might see a resurgence in w-space. |

Frothgar
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
79
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 16:29:00 -
[33] - Quote
First person going to Fanfest to ask/get a CCP comment about
"Any thoughts about making battleships a more viable ship type in wormholes? Mass limits mean you can bring only 10ish of them if you want to come back home vs 100+ Tech 3 cruisers"
I'll give 250mil ISK to.
If a Dev wants to just comment about it, I'll donate said ISK to a person or group (eve uni) of their choice.
Post said Comment in the Wormhole forum or this thread to claim your ISK.
For those commenting on Balance. Thats a secondary issue. Balance is making the BS an attractive ship to fly (which is why I want to use them in the first place) Mass limitations alone mean its just not an option. |

Calexis Atredies
Jazz Associates Azgoths of Kria
1
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 18:14:00 -
[34] - Quote
I quite like where BS are at the moment, WH mass restrictions means you have to be careful with what you bring with. The BS isnt really in the DPS role in this case but more its utility, T3's are better for making up the bulk of the dps platforms due to their tanking profile and respectible damage output (Legion fleet is best WH fleet). BS on the other hand take on the "utlity role" by this I mean effects like neuting from Bhaal's or jamming from Widows.
Black Ops are one of the coolest ships to have in your hole seeing as Black Ops bridging onto targets in nullsec from the entrance to your wormhole gives the enemy 0 warning. Most of the time the scouts they position in bottleneck systems are made obsolete by the spawn location of your wormhole.
Don't be too disheartneded by not seeing the BS taking a leading role in wormholes, though they are not the fleet main battle line they are still incredibly important. |

Scilent Enigma
Cosmology Deadly Unknown
0
|
Posted - 2013.04.20 20:21:00 -
[35] - Quote
Reading this thread somehow made my brain hickup and give me an idea, (mind you, it's probarbly bad but when my brain hickups, well, might as well get it out rather than lookin like I have to pass gas)...
The problem: BS mass is too great to be viable in WH ops.
Not so good idea that what I think is my brain came up with: Script the microjumpdrive, without script it works the same as now, but with the script "Wormhole Attunement" (copyright and trademark registration pending, or not) activating the MJD with a WH on grid within reasonable range will let the BS pass through leaving only the mass footprint of a BC on the WH.
There.. sorry about that, feels so much better now.. please feel free to ignore... |

Frothgar
V0LTA Verge of Collapse
80
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 16:41:00 -
[36] - Quote
^^^^^
Thats actually a pretty cool idea since it has a blob restricting cooldown. |

chris elliot
EG CORP Talocan United
163
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 18:34:00 -
[37] - Quote
CCP does not like multipurpose modules though. It is a good idea though but doubtful they would do it without having to make another module. |

Sum Olgy
Future Corps Sleeper Social Club
17
|
Posted - 2013.04.21 22:40:00 -
[38] - Quote
Saw a guy with 2 SB fit Scorps camping a C5/C2 the other day.
I've seen enough Bhaals recently to know they're still in use.
BS's are still viable for PvE, just not optimal.
Back in the day we all trained Amarr BS and large lasers - many POS's would still be alive today if we hadn't... And yes then came the Tier 3 BC adn all that stopped.
I'd say they're still around - perhaps the majority of people who are commenting here have been there, done that adn seen the (better skilled) light? |

Hoodie Mafia
Boris Johnson's Love Children
2
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 10:10:00 -
[39] - Quote
I honestly think we will see a lot of armageddons used in fights where there was no intentions to use the hole for capitals. While they might be less effective than Bhaalgorns and in some cases even more effective due to the stupid range they will get on heavy neuts, they only cost a fraction of what a Bhaalgorn costs and therefore can be committed to a fight a lot easier |

Roime
Shiva Furnace
2609
|
Posted - 2013.04.22 10:47:00 -
[40] - Quote
Scilent Enigma wrote:Reading this thread somehow made my brain hickup and give me an idea, (mind you, it's probarbly bad but when my brain hickups, well, might as well get it out rather than lookin like I have to pass gas)... The problem: BS mass is too great to be viable in WH ops. Not so good idea that what I think is my brain came up with: Script the microjumpdrive, without script it works the same as now, but with the script "Wormhole Attunement" (copyright and trademark registration pending, or not) activating the MJD with a WH on grid within reasonable range will let the BS pass through leaving only the mass footprint of a BC on the WH. There.. sorry about that, feels so much better now.. please feel free to ignore... 
Great idea, but how about this tweak: MJD reduces mass during the spool-up time, for the same reason as HIC bubble, so it's easier to bump the battleship out of alignment? No scripts needed, just a little copypasta from the bubble mod.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |

Untanas Volmyr
Running with Knives Nexus Fleet
9
|
Posted - 2013.04.25 21:59:00 -
[41] - Quote
Its a battleship. It should be a machine built for war. Maybe people just aren't fitting them right. To soon to mention a DBB? |

Josilin du Guesclin
University of Caille Gallente Federation
4
|
Posted - 2013.04.26 13:42:00 -
[42] - Quote
Untanas Volmyr wrote:Its a battleship. It should be a machine built for war. Maybe people just aren't fitting them right. To soon to mention a DBB?
The problem is that even if you fit a BS purely for tank 'n' gank it's not a good choice in a WH. For example, a Tech II fit Sleipnir costs about 40% more than a Tech II Tempest. It does 80% of the Tempest's DPS, and has 70% of the EHP. Sounds good for the Tempest, but there's the other side - the Sleip is 35-40% faster, has only 70% of the sig radius, and 2.2 times the sensor resolution. Thus it locks faster, is harder to lock (and harder to scan down with combat probes), dictates range and is better at getting on and off grid, and takes considerably less damage once locked.
Overall the Sleip delivers its damage better, and takes a good deal less damage in the process, making it easier for the logis to rep, and thus harder for the enemy to break the gang's remote tank through raw DPS. On top of all that, a Sleip is only 1/8th the mass of a Tempest, so you can hop back and forth through WHs without much fear of collapsing them, whereas a Tempest fleet has to be careful and always watching a WHs remaining capacity.
The result is that battleships are marginally useful for system defence and minimally useful for anything that requires leaving your system. They are useful for crashing holes, though.
The funny thing is that low-end WHs have a per-transit limit low enough that you can't fit battleships through them, but T3s and command ships fit fine, and yet the latter are far more useful than the former for almost everything.
EDIT: On top of all that, Sleips and T3 aren't tied to their logis by remote cap chains, either. |

EndersChild
Anomalous Existence Existential Anxiety
15
|
Posted - 2013.05.01 19:42:00 -
[43] - Quote
Roime wrote:Scilent Enigma wrote:Reading this thread somehow made my brain hickup and give me an idea, (mind you, it's probarbly bad but when my brain hickups, well, might as well get it out rather than lookin like I have to pass gas)... The problem: BS mass is too great to be viable in WH ops. Not so good idea that what I think is my brain came up with: Script the microjumpdrive, without script it works the same as now, but with the script "Wormhole Attunement" (copyright and trademark registration pending, or not) activating the MJD with a WH on grid within reasonable range will let the BS pass through leaving only the mass footprint of a BC on the WH. There.. sorry about that, feels so much better now.. please feel free to ignore...  Great idea, but how about this tweak: MJD reduces mass during the spool-up time, for the same reason as HIC bubble, so it's easier to bump the battleship out of alignment? No scripts needed, just a little copypasta from the bubble mod.
Or a new script for the Field Generator that has a remote mass reduction effect to all sub-cap ships within the bubble. This could even be a side-effect to a non-scripted HIC bubble. Would make the safe feeling of a crit hole a little more interesting if the number of already low mass ships getting in has been increased
Likely too easy to exploit, low class hole ship mass limit being an obvious one
Would still be good to get the BS as a viable class option in WH's, so some mass reducing mechanic is needed
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |