|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
77
   |
Posted - 2013.05.04 02:27:00 -
[1] - Quote
The attack battleship changes were making them looking agile and versatile enough that they could be used in smaller gangs, or in 'day to day' pvp. With the cost increase this really strongly discourages that.
Why spend so much on a battleship when there are so many cheaper and more mobile options, such as tier 3 battlecruisers? As far as smaller gangs go, 220 mil battleships will probably leave them in their old role of being used on station undocks or by rich players who don't care about throwing away isk. Added to that is the fact that battleships now are far more expensive than they were 18 months ago, with 40 mil domis rising to 90, geddons going from 50 to 100 and so on. It's no big deal to me, personally, but I can't see many other players rationally choosing an attack BS over other, cheaper options.
You're also faced with the problem of battleships being used less and less in fleet engagements, with a lot of alliances having replaced them with lokis, carriers and sniper BCs, amongst other doctrines. I also don't see the changes encouraging many switches away from rokhs or maelstroms, except for the occasional addition of a few neut geddons on a cap kill. Yes, you might see some raven fleets from rich, bored alliances, but for the most part there's no reason to be spending 220+ million on a slow to align cruise missile platform.
|
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
77
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 04:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
Quote:If people don't like it don't buy it.
This is what will probably happen, yes. People won't buy them. |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
80
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 08:03:00 -
[3] - Quote
Quote:Former T1 BS 2 days ago: 90-130mil
Playerbase: 'Waaaaaah! My [former T1 BS] will cost 250million!'
90 to 130mil, 40mil increase -> 250mil
Solid mathskills...
Factoring in the rigs and guns you'd be looking at well over 200mil.
Quote:As I see it the problem with battleships is a little different from this - due to the weapon systems one mounts on a BS and their lack of agility battleships are vulnerable to being killed, or at least tackled, neuted, and jammed out, by ships much smaller than themselves that they cannot themselves kill.
On paper I think the new BS could do very well as lightly tanked, ranged damage in small gangs. The apoc and mega seem like they could do well in that role, since there's a tracking bonus and their speed is reasonably high. However with the price being so high they seem kinda inferior to tier 3 battlecruisers.
Maybe people will work out some fleet fits, but I just can't see the use of tier 1 and 2 battleships increasing much, even though you rarely see them around now (outside of some fleets). |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
80
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 13:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
Quote:Scenario: A straight up fight between an equally sized Rokh Fleet and Naga fleet over some objective (breaking up a camp on a station, destroying a POS, whatever).
I can't see any plausible scenario where the Rokhs won't easily win.
I thought he was talking about the mega/raven/apoc/pest, which look like they've been re-designed as reasonably fast damage dealers with a limited tank. The problem is that at 200 mil or more there's no reason to choose any of those over a tier 3 battlecruiser. You also use rokhs and nagas as an example, which kinda says a lot since they're already both in use as very common fleet doctrines. |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
80
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 13:45:00 -
[5] - Quote
Quote: Adapt or die. Things happen, things change.
For individual players, sure. It depends on what CCP wants, but I'm struggling to see the appeal of the new attack battleships at that price. |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
80
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 13:50:00 -
[6] - Quote
Quote:Or my original prediction back on page 2 ("Around 185m for Combat, 175m for Attack, 165m for Disruption, assuming jita buy price for minerals" which Ruby's numbers actually get very close to anyway for the most part) is a more accurate reflection of the price.
Did you include the cost of rigs and guns? |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
82
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 21:47:00 -
[7] - Quote
Quote:More tritanium in 0.0-ores-> more mining -> lower mineral prices -> lower T1 ship prices.
Better production in 0.0 stations -> more competition -> lower T1 ship prices.
Base mineral requirement for BS increased to get closer to former Tier3 BS build requirements.
If the price of battleships fall won't battlecruisers go down as well? I mean we're already looking at tornados heading towards 60mil. You would still end up with the same situation - attack battlecruisers would be trivially cheap and would still offer much better performance for the isk spent. |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
83
|
Posted - 2013.05.04 23:39:00 -
[8] - Quote
You're right, although the t1 and t2 BS don't get used much now and I doubt they'll be used much in the future. |
Smabs
Higher Than Everest
Black Legion.
87
|
Posted - 2013.05.14 07:19:00 -
[9] - Quote
Quote:If enough of them do move to low sec we could very well see the cost of the BSs be 20-40M isk less than the 150-240M it looks like it will be
The problem with this is that all other tech 1 ships will also be cheaper. So let's say prices drop quite dramatically like that. In that case you would potentially be looking at 50 mil attack battlecruisers against 160 mil battleships. In most smal gang or sniper fleet scenarios you would still be better off going for the ABC since it's much cheaper, more maneuverable and therefore survivable, and easier to carry logistically. |
|
|
| |
|