| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ethan Tomlinson
   |
Posted - 2005.09.30 14:19:00 -
[1]
First off there have been a lot of threads on this topic and i couldn't the time to do much more than skim through some of em. I would just like to state my opinion and here others.
For tech 2 battleships to be worth the training to me they need to at least one of two things:
a) very good defense
or
b) very high damage output
It would be great if they had both so that they would be an ultra heavy assault ship and imo that wouldn't gimp the game. But since ccp's standpoint seems to be not wanting to give me that I would fly them if they just had one of the attributes above. I would want the ship to have very good defenses meaning great resistances and huge amounts of hitpoints in order to tank drednaughts POS's and a large magnitude of ships. I would also love a very high dmg output and only slightly improved resists and hit points. I really dont see this ship as going any other way as there is allready a leader ship for each race called battlecruisers.It might also be an option to have a high speed battleship capable of keeping up, have guns that track, and do damage to smaller ships better but i dont see that happeneing really...
All i know is it wouldn't be worth training for if i couldn't tank it and do damage better than my megathron to at least some degree meaning i would need to be able to fit a full rack of t2 neutrons and a tank...even if the ship doesn't come pre tanked. I believe a gank of 2 or 3 of them should be able to kill a drednaught with ease.
|
SIlver Light
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 14:28:00 -
[2]
T2 Battleships arn't going to be Uber HACs. CCP has said one several occasions that their going to be flagships or some kind. The HACs are still going to be the uber leet damage dealers. Same things with T2 battlecruiser. Command platforms...
------
Proud Member of 5punkorp |
SIlver Light
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 14:28:00 -
[3]
T2 Battleships arn't going to be Uber HACs. CCP has said one several occasions that their going to be flagships or some kind. The HACs are still going to be the uber leet damage dealers. Same things with T2 battlecruiser. Command platforms...
------
Proud Member of 5punkorp |
Ticondrius
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 14:29:00 -
[4]
DO we REALLY need ANOTHER topic about this?
Go away. 
|
Shadowsword
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 14:41:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: SIlver Light
CCP has said one several occasions that their going to be flagships or some kind.
That was BEFORE CCP's guys changed their minds and gave the fleet command role to T2 battlecruisers. Now they don't know which role to give to T2 battleships.
|
Kamate
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 14:42:00 -
[6]
You go away Tico....hehe....long time no see mate.
Drop me a line in game.
T2 BS will be interesting but will likely be fleet command ship style, not mini dreadnaughts or UltraHacs.
|
MrCjEvans
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 14:57:00 -
[7]
imho they should just be based on the bses atm, but with maybe 10% better resists in each field, and slightly higher hps. not sure about the ship bonuses though
|
Dofri
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 15:04:00 -
[8]
or they could be something between tech1 bs and dreads (like battlecruiser is between cruiser and bs)....
|
MrCjEvans
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 15:19:00 -
[9]
well it has to be something that isn't a win button, and well setup bs should have a chance vs them, just something that gives players something to look forward to.
|
Krulla
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 15:52:00 -
[10]
The day they add a battleship with assault type resistances, no matter what their damage output, is the day I quit the game.
It would just **** up every single facet of the game, except mining.
Respect the Domi. Or else. |
TZeer
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 15:52:00 -
[11]
Two words: Electronic Warfare.......
|
Denrace
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 16:06:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Denrace on 30/09/2005 16:06:24
Originally by: Krulla
The day they add a battleship with assault type resistances, no matter what their damage output, is the day I quit the game.
It would just **** up every single facet of the game, except mining.
Why?
Tech II stuff costs around 10x tech I price.
So its feasible to say Tech II BS BPO owners will build them, then sell for 1billion ISK+. due to demand, i think they will be more like 1.5bill+
for a ship to cost so much and have such poor return on insurance easily justifies its Assalt type resistances.
HELLO - its a tech II ship.
a tech II BATTLESHIP, its supposed to be the top of the food chain.
besides, just jam one. Or attack one in groups. people these days forget its an MMO.
When they come out and you quit, can i have your stuff?
____________________________________________
Custom Sigs Made. Convo for details
http://photobucket.com/albums/b4/Denrace/
|
Soltar Xion
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 16:13:00 -
[13]
Enforcer Battleships (With special bonus : +3 Warp Strength)
just 2 cent ...
|
Ranger 1
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 16:19:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Denrace
Edited by: Denrace on 30/09/2005 16:06:24
Originally by: Krulla
The day they add a battleship with assault type resistances, no matter what their damage output, is the day I quit the game.
It would just **** up every single facet of the game, except mining.
Why?
Tech II stuff costs around 10x tech I price.
So its feasible to say Tech II BS BPO owners will build them, then sell for 1billion ISK+. due to demand, i think they will be more like 1.5bill+
for a ship to cost so much and have such poor return on insurance easily justifies its Assalt type resistances.
HELLO - its a tech II ship.
a tech II BATTLESHIP, its supposed to be the top of the food chain.
besides, just jam one. Or attack one in groups. people these days forget its an MMO.
When they come out and you quit, can i have your stuff?
No, T2 BS's should have their own place in the food chain. The reason this game is so interesting compared to others is that there is no definative "Top" of the food chain.
Lets face it, if your playing a game where you already have the ultimate, uberest piece of equipment that destroys everything else in the game... well whats the point after that?
|
Slater Dogstar
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 16:23:00 -
[15]
I have to say this topic has been seen too many times.
Why not wait till ccp release them, also i doubt they will be uber hacs more like superior battleships. I can see them having good resists like the hacs after all battlehips of the tech 2 variety will be just larger versions of the hacs as hacs are a tech 2 version of cruisers.
So to list the obviouse.
They will have superior resists [larger ships larger armour]
The things that define there roles will be in the ship bonuses.
Gillet The Best A Man Can Get |
Ravenge
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 17:37:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Denrace
Why?
Tech II stuff costs around 10x tech I price.
So its feasible to say Tech II BS BPO owners will build them, then sell for 1billion ISK+. due to demand, i think they will be more like 1.5bill+
for a ship to cost so much and have such poor return on insurance easily justifies its Assalt type resistances.
HELLO - its a tech II ship.
a tech II BATTLESHIP, its supposed to be the top of the food chain.
besides, just jam one. Or attack one in groups. people these days forget its an MMO.
When they come out and you quit, can i have your stuff?
I just find it amusing that you are crying about the Ishtar being too uber, yet you are here wanting T2 battleships to be uber killing ships.
I'm curious.. is this so at a later date you can cry about them?
Any way, assault battleships would ruin any form of balance in the game.. and its been said that battleship are not ment to be solo pwnmobiles several times.. assault battleships would just go against that.
|
Utgardsloki
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 18:37:00 -
[17]
I can see it now, Tech 2 Battleships - the new Lvl4 Agent Mission solo pwn-mobile.
And don't forget the gate campers new ship of choice. Sentry guns? Nothing stupendously high T2 BS resists can't tank all day.
Enemy gang warps onto you? Just tank the damage with aforementioned resists, smack talk in local for a bit, go make a cup of coffee, come back, and then use those 8 warp stabs you have in lows to warp off to your safe-spot. That'll teach 'em for thinking they could beat you with less than a 15 ship blob.
Wow, T2 BSs, what a fantastic idea, why didn't CCP think of this sooner?
And yes, when they appear, first one to eve-mail me gets my stuff.
|
Druid R
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 18:46:00 -
[18]
Edited by: Druid R on 30/09/2005 18:46:11
just give em no drone bay and not able to fit small or med weaps, then they only good for bs vs bs, and have to be used in a fleet (else get owned by frigs/maybe cruisers)
Dru. |
Denrace
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 18:50:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Ravenge
Originally by: Denrace
Why?
Tech II stuff costs around 10x tech I price.
So its feasible to say Tech II BS BPO owners will build them, then sell for 1billion ISK+. due to demand, i think they will be more like 1.5bill+
for a ship to cost so much and have such poor return on insurance easily justifies its Assalt type resistances.
HELLO - its a tech II ship.
a tech II BATTLESHIP, its supposed to be the top of the food chain.
besides, just jam one. Or attack one in groups. people these days forget its an MMO.
When they come out and you quit, can i have your stuff?
I just find it amusing that you are crying about the Ishtar being too uber, yet you are here wanting T2 battleships to be uber killing ships.
I'm curious.. is this so at a later date you can cry about them?
Any way, assault battleships would ruin any form of balance in the game.. and its been said that battleship are not ment to be solo pwnmobiles several times.. assault battleships would just go against that.
The justification will be in Millions and Million of SP's needed to fly one and a huge costs/loss factor.
I never said anything about its offensive capabilities either.
Nearly every tech II ship has good resistances. Why stop the trend with a tech II battleship?
Afterall...its tech II.
And about the ishtar - leave that in the ishtar thread mate.
It has nothing to do with tech II battleships
____________________________________________
Custom Sigs Made. Convo for details
http://photobucket.com/albums/b4/Denrace/
|
Sadist
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 18:58:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Krulla
The day they add a battleship with assault type resistances, no matter what their damage output, is the day I quit the game.
It would just **** up every single facet of the game, except mining.
The game will become a better place, when people who have no clues and arguments to support their viewpoint leave the game. Good riddance, and dont let the door pwn you on the way.
---------------
VIP member of the [23]
Sadist - harsh to the idiots, kind to the smart |
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 19:57:00 -
[21]
Most T2 ships have higher resistances to increase survivability, particularly in the face of larger more powerful ships. T2 BS don't have "Larger more powerful ships" to deal with (excluding dreads, which are Alliance-run POS-busters). Do they really need that much more survivability, and if so could that be achieved purely through thicker armour/shields?
|
Ravenge
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 19:57:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Denrace
The justification will be in Millions and Million of SP's needed to fly one and a huge costs/loss factor.
I never said anything about its offensive capabilities either.
Nearly every tech II ship has good resistances. Why stop the trend with a tech II battleship?
Afterall...its tech II.
And about the ishtar - leave that in the ishtar thread mate.
It has nothing to do with tech II battleships
Sorry, but your justification of T2 battleship are supposed to be uber... well, is a joke.
as the same justification can be used in the ishtar argument, after all an ishtar take more skill points then a battleship to fly (like all hac.) costs the same as teir 2 battleships (in some cases more) and has a large damage output.
Your argument.. is the same but the comaprison would be T2 battleship and a dread.. skill point wise, cost wise.. but the chances are a t2 assault battleship would have a much higher dps as well as a god like tank.
You can't argue for T2 battleships to be uber, yet whine about hacs being too good... more so with the fact a battleship with assualt resists and assualt dps would totally unbalance the game ..
As for it not belonging in this thread.. it does, and it doesn't.. being as the argument you are using to justify assault battleships can be the same used as a counter argument for your whine.
|
Weirda
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 20:11:00 -
[23]
what about middle of the line better resists (like the blocade runner resists which are 1/2 the amount of HAC), or even just interceptor style resists (+20% to racial instead of +10), though that would leave shield tankers shafted.
weirda do think that there is a role for these - and the will be price/build time prohibitive (even more so then the HAC), not to mention skills, though pretty sure there are many of us that could jump in one tomorrow.
the main thing should be more slot flexibility/versitility then the current bs (extra mids/lows + extra choices on fitting launcher/turret in the available high slots). ccp seem to be taking it slow on this one - which is a good thing.
anyhow... there you have it...
--
Thread Killer
(attempting to train verbosity from 4 back down to 1)
<END TRANSMISSION> |
Ethan Tomlinson
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 21:01:00 -
[24]
they arn't at the top of the food chain i said dreds would be for that. Also as far as missions go not everyone will be able to afford or fly one the will require like 10mil sp's at least to fly and thats after all the other skills iin game are trained to fit stuff and shoot stuff. they will be like capital ships themselves but im just saying that since battlecruisers allready get bonus's to gang leadership and command modules i dont think that the t2 battleships should. it should have better resists and better dmg to compensate for the extra price and skill points needed...
it will at least need:
bs lvl 5
advanced spaceship commmand lvl 5
hac lvl 4 imo it should be lvl 5
and maybe a new skill at lvl 5
it should require more skills than the dred basically so that not everyone in there mother is flying one
|
Helmut Rul
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 21:38:00 -
[25]
While i do understand that a lot of people are understandably apprehensive about tech II Battleships becoming the PWNmobile of choice it is a simple fact that the nature of eve combat more or less demands vastly increased survivability.
Wether it is in gank circumstances or fleet ops a Battleship that pops as easily as the current ones but cost ten times as much is simply not viable ,Even with awesome special abilities such a ship would be killed almost instantly, it would be the very first target called in any fleet op because everybody would know that it is as easy to kill as any other battleship but it sets back the owner a billion or so, this would render any gang related bonus useless as the gang would only enjoy the benefits for a few seconds(additionaly as was mentioned gang bonuses seems to be the battlecruisers forte now)
As for the fear that mission runners will be able to do level 4 missions easily , well you are a bit late there a lot of mission runners already do most of the level 4 missions without a lot of trouble and perhaps more importantly if you set up your Battleship with the correct faction loot you end up nigh invulnerable , does this mean that it is ok for the filthy rich to be able to do this while the less affluent will have risk everything do do their missions ?
In the end however the problem is simply this : without improved survivability or improved damage output just what are the Tech II battleships going to be used for ? As far as i can see the only way to avoid that Tech II battleships share the fate of logistics ships is by giving them added survivability at the very least (balanced or not people must want to use them if people do not want to use them we might as well not have them in the game).
Also do remember that we already have Battleships that are thougher than the normal tech I ships namely faction ships but again those are rare , In many ways it seems that people arguing against thougher tech II battleships ignore that the problems that they predict already are here, We have better battleships there are people that do level 4 missions easily but somehow this is ok because the ships are rare ? this do not make any sense the problem is still there if it is a problem at all.
Now that in finishing i just would like to ask, Just what task do the antidamage/tanking crowd envision the tech II Battleships do that would not lead to its near instant demise EW ? gang bonuses? both would paint an even bigger bullseye on the ship than it already has.
|
Mangus Thermopyle
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 21:45:00 -
[26]
Originally by: Helmut Rul
In the end however the problem is simply this : without improved survivability or improved damage output just what are the Tech II battleships going to be used for ?
I think this is the reason CCP has removed them from their immediate plans. There simply is no good reason for them in the first place.
|
Helmut Rul
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 23:16:00 -
[27]
Well there is reason for them it is just that if you start out refusing any improvement in the two most fundamental abilities that a combat ship have , and then consider giving them other abilities that would make them even bigger targets you are arguing for a ship type that will be virtually stillborn.
If for no other reason than supplying battleship pilots with some goal and endgame the tech II Battleship is a necessity, I do agree however that they should take their time and try to get both the balance and and role of those ships correct.
|
Randay
|
Posted - 2005.09.30 23:23:00 -
[28]
They are going to have both a) and b). If they dont, noone will use them and then ccp will just buff them later so that people do use them. Maybe they will come into game underpowered and then get boosted when ccp realizes noones using them as much as they should.
-------------------------------------------
"Det hõr kan betyda krig!" |
Joerd Toastius
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 00:19:00 -
[29]
You have to bear in mind that, if they're not useful, they'll be cheap. That's more or less the way the market works. Ok, I can see an argument for more survivability to offset the fact that they're obviously going to cost a lot, but that doesn't necessarily mean HAC resists and it doesn't require a damage output bonus by default.
|
Randay
|
Posted - 2005.10.01 01:07:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Ereph
Edited by: Ereph on 01/10/2005 01:04:34
For those of you with arguments like "Jam it" "Just gank it" etc.. I'm not talking about PvP here.
If those things were not usable in PvE, I wouldnt have a issue with them.
However.... think about it. Add a BS with HAC resistances, even if it only have standard BS firepower. Result?
Even if it would cost 2 billion or something, you could make that back in a day or two using it.. Just go pwn your local 10\10 complex solo. Then do it again. At that point you've about broke even.
I dont give a **** about HABS in PvP... they can easily be countered. I do give a **** about them in PvE though.
EDIT: Goddamn. I'm Krulla's alt.
NPCs are getting a lot harder in next patch, and T2 BS are not coming out for a while, your arguement is moot. NPCs always get harder as player ships get better.
-------------------------------------------
"Det hõr kan betyda krig!" |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |