| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |

Boris Ginnungagap
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 13:40:00 -
[31] - Quote
I failed. I read from the blog that 'tech 3' battlecruiser instead of tier 3... So thread...
Anyway 
I just wonder why they choosed battlecruiser class..
What did happen to Black Ops buff???
Black Ops should get cov ops cloak and ability use capital class weapons  |

Sunviking
Mushroom inc
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 17:05:00 -
[32] - Quote
CCP has described these new ships as being low on tank but fast. So we are relying on speed-tanking in these. Think a bigger and more cumbersome Tengu, a lower-tech version if you will, but just as fast.
The only way these new ships will be able to tank level 4s is if they can go faster than Tengus - because Tengus also have high resists, so the speed of Tier3 battlecruisers needs to be faster than Tengus to compensate.
And that means having enough potential powergrid available to fit a Battleship-sized 100MN Afterburner to these ships to reach that high speed.
Lets hope they have this capability....  |

Brynhilda
Massive PVPness EntroPraetorian Aegis
55
|
Posted - 2011.10.22 19:49:00 -
[33] - Quote
I only hope that this doesn't further solidify Minmatar's superiority due to their naturally high speed. A ship as fast as a Nanocane with 1400s on it will be a pain to fight.
I hope the Amarr BC can bring something interesting to the table. Maybe superior Dual Heavy Pulse optimal... How may I drug you with drugs? |

Boris Ginnungagap
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
8
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 07:34:00 -
[34] - Quote
Sunviking wrote:CCP has described these new ships as being low on tank but fast. So we are relying on speed-tanking in these. Think a bigger and more cumbersome Tengu, a lower-tech version if you will, but just as fast. The only way these new ships will be able to tank level 4s is if they can go faster than Tengus - because Tengus also have high resists, so the speed of Tier3 battlecruisers needs to be faster than Tengus to compensate. And that means having enough potential powergrid available to fit a Battleship-sized 100MN Afterburner to these ships to reach that high speed. Lets hope they have this capability....  You mean 100 MN MICROWARP DRIVE?
If they can fit long range BS sized guns... They also can fit small range BS sized guns, and the smallest versions of them....AND be able to fit 100 MN MWD! |

pussnheels
Vintage heavy industries
132
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 10:42:00 -
[35] - Quote
Sunviking wrote:CCP has described these new ships as being low on tank but fast. So we are relying on speed-tanking in these. Think a bigger and more cumbersome Tengu, a lower-tech version if you will, but just as fast. The only way these new ships will be able to tank level 4s is if they can go faster than Tengus - because Tengus also have high resists, so the speed of Tier3 battlecruisers needs to be faster than Tengus to compensate. And that means having enough potential powergrid available to fit a Battleship-sized 100MN Afterburner to these ships to reach that high speed. Lets hope they have this capability....  and even then you got size and if you are using turrets , tracking issues , will they have a drone bay large enough , what are the resists etc , my guess is that they will be more pvp orientated than pve , doesn't mean they will be useless in pve just much harder i however can see use in incursions with the right amount of support I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire |

Shadowsword
The Rough Riders Ares Protectiva
40
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 12:27:00 -
[36] - Quote
Boris Ginnungagap wrote:You mean 100 MN MICROWARP DRIVE?
If they can fit long range BS sized guns... They also can fit small range BS sized guns, and the smallest versions of them....AND be able to fit 100 MN MWD!
You are probably wrong.
Those ships are clearly meant to be glass-canons, and that wouldn't be the case if you could slap a trio or large extenders or plates on them. CCP obviously know that, too.
So how do you allow a ship to fit tachyons while preventing it to fit 100MN MWD and/or 1600 plates? You simply give it a 95% weapon powergrid fitting reduction role bonus, just like stealth bombers can use torp launchers, but not fit BS MWDs.. |

Zanthosistine
Perkone Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.10.24 12:47:00 -
[37] - Quote
They sound like the might could be great fleet ships...and a the lower skilled pilots will be able to contribute in something other than a drake. |

Tash'k Omar
Apple Construction Inc Northern Associates.
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 18:22:00 -
[38] - Quote
Zhilia Mann wrote:Boris Ginnungagap wrote:BS sized missile launchers and damage.
BC sized hull. I've yet to have seen a reason to get excited about Raven-level damage in a smaller hull ...
I get excited about my Tengu all the time. |

Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
280
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:05:00 -
[39] - Quote
Looks like they are gonna be low on PG and low on tank... so good for PVP, not so good for tanking in PVE.
They might make AWESOME DPS ships for L5's though? The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |

Widemouth Deepthroat
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 22:28:00 -
[40] - Quote
I'd still use torp raven for dps in lvl5s. Utility high for cloak, a bit of tank so you don't have to warp out (torp cnr with a dg large shield booster manages that just barely), mwd to do mwd + cloak trick.
Or bomber if you are in hot area with many pirate.
also torp explosion bonus doesn't matter so much in lvl5s where you spend most of your time blowing up bs and structures. |

Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
60
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:07:00 -
[41] - Quote
Tash'k Omar wrote:I get excited about my Tengu all the time.
Yeah. Because it does slightly more paper damage and dramatically more applied damage. This... won't.
|

Bloody Wench
85
|
Posted - 2011.10.25 23:15:00 -
[42] - Quote
Quote:[DISCLAIMER] Info taken from latest test client data. Obviously this may/will change in release.
Oracle
Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 7.5% bonus to Large Energy Turret tracking speed and 7.5% bonus to Large Energy Turret optimal range per level.
95% reduction in the powergrid need of Large Energy Turrets 50% reduction in the CPU need of Large Energy Turrets 50% reduction in the capacitor need of Large Energy Turrets
Naga
Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Torpedo Velocity, 5% bonus to Torpedo explosion velocity, 10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret optimal range and 7.5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret tracking speed per level.
95% reduction in the powergrid need of Large Hybrid Turrets 50% reduction in the CPU need of Large Hybrid Turrets 50% reduction in the capacitor need of Large Energy Turrets 40% reduction in the powergrid need of Siege Missile Launchers 58% reduction in the CPU need of Siege Missile Launchers
Talos
Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage and 10% bonus to the velocity factor of stasis webifiers per level.
95% reduction in the powergrid need of Large Hybrid Turrets 50% reduction in the CPU need of Large Hybrid Turrets 50% reduction in the capacitor need of Large Energy Turrets
Tornado
Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Projectile Turret Rate of Fire and 10% bonus to Large Projectile Turret falloff per level.
95% reduction in the powergrid need of Large Projectile Turrets 50% reduction in the CPU need of Large Projectile Turrets
url=http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/lo9it/tornado_oracle_naga_and_talos_tier_3_bcs_stats |

Desudes
Pixelmoon The Star League
6
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 01:12:00 -
[43] - Quote
Optimal range bonus for caldari: **** yeeeaaahh...
No tracking bonus for Talos: **** yeeeaaahhhh....
Gonna get sniped by arty Tornados: **** yeeeaahhh...
Amarr are stupid: **** yeeeaahh....
Can't wait. FOR THE DESU!!! |

Headerman
Quovis Shadow of xXDEATHXx
282
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 03:28:00 -
[44] - Quote
A BC that can do 12k alpha... that's gonna be interesting.
I would have preferred a damage bonus rather than an opimal range bonus for the Amarr one too, but this keeps things interesting :) The Apostle : I want a kangeroo Captain Kirk : Silly Austrians Sarmatiko : Let me guess: you're from US? Captain Kirk : Yeah Riverside IA - why? |

Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
781
|
Posted - 2011.10.26 06:14:00 -
[45] - Quote
Desudes wrote: Amarr are stupid: **** yeeeaahh....
Can't wait.
Range bonus and a tracking bonus for a ship that can use Scorch L is "stupid"? +37.5% tracking with a base optimal of 62Km doing 353 base DPS. Dear God. It's going to be the mid-range sniper from hell.
Well "stupidly good", I suppose. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |

Desudes
Pixelmoon The Star League
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.01 23:57:00 -
[46] - Quote
Malcanis wrote:Desudes wrote:Amarr are stupid: **** yeeeaahh....
Can't wait. Range bonus and a tracking bonus for a ship that can use Scorch L is "stupid"? +37.5% tracking with a base optimal of 62Km doing 353 base DPS. Dear God. It's going to be the mid-range sniper from hell. Well "stupidly good", I suppose.
I said, "Amarr are stupid", said nothing of the ship.
I do wonder how many people are going to have to get used to not screwing their transversal with these big guns' tracking while zipping around with their nanos. Excuse me, but what the f*ck are you desu? |

Chira'Relael
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:32:00 -
[47] - Quote
Desudes wrote:Malcanis wrote:Desudes wrote:Amarr are stupid: **** yeeeaahh....
Can't wait. Range bonus and a tracking bonus for a ship that can use Scorch L is "stupid"? +37.5% tracking with a base optimal of 62Km doing 353 base DPS. Dear God. It's going to be the mid-range sniper from hell. Well "stupidly good", I suppose. I said, "Amarr are stupid", said nothing of the ship. I do wonder how many people are going to have to get used to not screwing their transversal with these big guns' tracking while zipping around with their nanos.
good to see you're putting people in their place |

Songbird
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 00:34:00 -
[48] - Quote
no drones on the new BC's except for 25 m^3 in the gallente one. It will be kinda impossible to pve with torps only and no drones. |

Tenris Anis
Schattenengel Clan
0
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 06:52:00 -
[49] - Quote
Boris Ginnungagap wrote:Sooo, what's your point of view on this matter? BS sized missile launchers and damage. BC sized hull. Or will it totally suck since it doesn't come with TP bonus and cruise missiles are just absolutely horrible? 
I bet it got mentioned already about 100 times, but still. there are no t3 battlecruisers, we are getting tech 1 tier 3 battlecruisers. . Playing the game of life means to pvp. Get used to it or become extinct. |

Cyniac
Twilight Star Rangers Black Thorne Alliance
30
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:04:00 -
[50] - Quote
As far as PVE goes they'll probably fill a role similar to what bombers are doing today.
Tricky to use solo, but excellent when you need to just bring extra DPS against largeish targets onto the field. |

Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
207
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:35:00 -
[51] - Quote
Songbird wrote:no drones on the new BC's except for 25 m^3 in the gallente one. It will be kinda impossible to pve with torps only and no drones. Indeed. Nothing OP with the Naga. Bonusses for Hybrids and Torps .. so no range advantage here. The only promising feature is the 8/6/4 layout which is one extra slot compared to the other tier 3 BCs.
I think I'll fly the Oracle a lot more often. |

stoicfaux
349
|
Posted - 2011.11.02 18:47:00 -
[52] - Quote
And with HP that's a little bit better than a T1 cruiser, it wouldn't take much pimping for a t3 BC to become a loot pinata. Plus, it's easier to skill up faction BS4 than to get BC5, and BS4 should get you more effective firepower to boot.
I'm just not seeing the new BCs as being PvE friendly except in very specialized cases.
Tinfoil. It should be at the top of everyone's food pyramid.
|

Kaptain Kruncher
Gemini Technologies Fortis Malleus
2
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 08:30:00 -
[53] - Quote
I love when we have these threads about how epic or fail the new "ship, feature, skill, mod" will be when it comes out.
There is nothing more exciting than an argument that breaks out over the statement- "It will probably..."
You guys know that the balancing evolves right up to the release date.
Anyway- I will proudly fly my new Tornado in the face of all my PVE enemies and then get ganked by my PVP enemies, cause that's how I roll. Mainly because that friggin ship looks cool. And if you ever bother to look at my KB stats, you will see that fail fits and coolness has always reigned supreme over common sense and skill.
|

Jenn Makanen
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
36
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 12:57:00 -
[54] - Quote
Songbird wrote:no drones on the new BC's except for 25 m^3 in the gallente one. It will be kinda impossible to pve with torps only and no drones.
Newest update's suggesting no drones in any of them. |

Tasko Pal
Spallated Garniferous Schist
10
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 15:43:00 -
[55] - Quote
Jenn Makanen wrote:Songbird wrote:no drones on the new BC's except for 25 m^3 in the gallente one. It will be kinda impossible to pve with torps only and no drones. Newest update's suggesting no drones in any of them.
I wonder if they did that to make these the ideal blob fleet ships. A thousand of these babies, especially if you don't have many missile spewing nagas in there, could be a lot lower lag than just about anything else you could fly. |

Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:51:00 -
[56] - Quote
XXSketchxx wrote:kratos candre wrote:From the blog, I'm guessing they will be pvp based. That's quite possibly the most ignorant pubbie statement I have ever seen. The only ship type that I can think of that was "designed" for PvE is marauders. All other ships are balanced around pvp. They just also happen to get used for PvE.
I'd really like to see how a nightmare is 'balanced' around pvp. |

spacelumberjack
Quantum Cats Syndicate
1
|
Posted - 2011.11.03 16:53:00 -
[57] - Quote
Goose99 wrote:Since when were large guns preferable to medium in typical pvp, outside of blobs?  for ranged engagements obviosly
|

pussnheels
Vintage heavy industries
152
|
Posted - 2011.11.04 21:30:00 -
[58] - Quote
They are designed for pvp first , mainly as Dps machines n using them for pvp will probably end in tears since they all lack a drone bay and have a weaker tank than the other BC ( according to the latest data available) They probably too big and too slow to speedtank like a t3 cruiser and i don't think anyone wants to go in a lvl 4 missions with out drones and no possibility to kill off the frigs and close orbitting cruisers I do not agree with what you are saying , but i will defend to the death your right to say it...... Voltaire |

Mfume Apocal
Origin. Black Legion.
81
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 05:30:00 -
[59] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:As for PvP, a cruise/torp BC might spell the end of Drake blobs due to the Drake's sig bloom from shield extender rigs/modules.
Hellcats, Alphafleet and a few others already counter Drake armies pretty effectively, while doing everything else decently well. |

Rip Minner
ARMITAGE Logistics Salvage and Industries
6
|
Posted - 2011.11.05 07:15:00 -
[60] - Quote
Well it mite be good if the Winmater one do's not turn into a cheaper pocket sized verson of of a Machariel or Malstorm.
Becouse if it do's it will blow everyone alse out of the water.
Edit: Also I hear they have no drone bays so ya that will be bad for level 4 missioning with the only possable pass being a Winmater auto cannon set up as I dont have to use drones with my Malstorm/Vulger/ or Mach.
Edit: Though depending on the blaster changes and the tracking boost a Gallent blaster set up mite not need drones ether. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |