EVE Search - Tier 3 BCs, balance and fitting discussion

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Tier 3 BCs, balance and fitting discussion

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Theodoric Darkwind PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore 35	Posted - 2011.10.22 06:53:00 - [1] - Quote Feel free to voice your opinions over how the new tier 3 BCs should be balanced and some ideas for how they might be set up (in terms of slot layouts, bonuses, etc). Please direct any trolling, goon hate or general QQ to the myriad of QQ threads about the tier 3 BCs in the general discussion section and try to keep this thread constructive.
Ines Tegator Project ELT 18	Posted - 2011.10.22 07:03:00 - [2] - Quote In contrast to their tier 2 counterparts, they should be more specialized, most likely as DPS boats. Otherwise they will just categorically replace everything else. We already have the basic tank/gank split in the existing BC's. The new ones should add a unique function. Using large guns opens them up as obvious sniping platforms; thought should be given to how they will function at close range though and make sure they don't overshadow the other BC's as a do-it-all platform, a role that is already perfectly filled by the tier2 BCs. On that note, tier 1 battlecruisers need more fitting space, so we can use them for things other than ship spinning.
Theodoric Darkwind PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore 35	Posted - 2011.10.22 07:07:00 - [3] - Quote and ill take a first stab at how I think the new BCs should be set up. Tornado - 6/6/5 slot layout, 6 turret hardpoints, projectile gunship, 30m^3 dronebay 30mb bandwidth, like a cane but sacrificing its highslot utility for firepower, intended to shield tank. Should be able to squeeze 800mm ACs on in a typical pvp fit with a modest tank and tackle, or 650 ACs in a heavy tanked fit, or 1200 arty with a modest tank and sebo/TC, or 1400 arty in an instalocking glass cannon (like an instacane but better). Bonuses, 5% large projectile damage and 10% large projectile falloff per level. Gallente BC - 6/5/6 slot layout, 6 turret hardpoints, hybrid gunship, 75m^3 dronebay 50mb bandwidth, can shield or armor tank like the myrmidon but aside from that is pretty much like a brutix on roids. Should be able to fit ions/350 rails with a modest tank and tackle, electrons/dual 250 rails with a heavy tank, or neutrons/425 rails as a glass cannon. Bonuses, 5% large hybrid damage and 7.5% large hybrid tracking per level, additional role bonus to reduce the capcitor need of large hybrids. Amarr BC - 6/4/7 slot layout, 6 turret hardpoints, laser gunship, 50m^3 dronebay 25mb bandwidth, like a harbinger but sacrifices utility for firepower, intended to armor tank Should be able to fit mega pulses with a modest tank and tackle, smaller BS pulses with a heavy tank, mega beams as a glass cannon, and tachyons only with a bunch of ACR rigs and RCUs. Bonuses, 5% large energy turret damage and 10% large energy turret optimal range per level, additional role bonus to reduce the capcitor need of large energy turrets. Caldari BC - 5/7/5, 5 launcher hardpoints, missile boat, 25m^3 dronebay 25mb bandwidth, intended to shield tank, more like a baby raven than a drake on roids. Should be able to fit a modest tank with cruise missiles and torpedos as a glass cannon. Bonuses, 5% to cruise missile or torpedo damage, 10% to cruise missile or torpedo velocity per level
Aesiron Squadron 1 2	Posted - 2011.10.22 07:12:00 - [4] - Quote Amarr - we currently have a heavy tank and a heavy DPS. Caldari - we currently have a heavy tank and a railgun DPS. Gallente - we currently have a tank/drone boat and a hybrid turret/tank. Minmatar - we currently have a versatile DPS and a shield/DPS omni. We need: Amarr - some kind of sniper that uses railguns instead of lasers. If not a railgun Amarr boat with damage bonuses. Caldari - some type of drone boat for the Caldari that uses shield tanking. Not a common combo: drones and shield tank. Gallente - a pure DPS ship similar to the Harbinger. Minmatar - some type of sniper/tank.
Aamrr HnL Enterprise 99	Posted - 2011.10.22 07:14:00 - [5] - Quote The Tornado should not get a damage bonus. It should get a RoF bonus. If you give it a damage bonus, you've created a battlecruiser with the alpha damage of a Tempest -- which is definitely not a good thing. This ship class is already poised to replace every other suicide gank platform in existence. Don't make it worse. Likewise, if you're trying to make a miniature-raven, the Caldari BC should be RoF bonus'd. Capless weapon platforms perform nicely with RoF bonuses anyway.
Pr1ncess Alia Perkone Caldari State 31	Posted - 2011.10.22 07:15:00 - [6] - Quote I would like to see a general ship bonus to turrets/bays of all sizes. Allowing these ships to fit large weapons ala glass cannon, med weaps with beefy tank or small weapons impossible tank would be nice. However I think they'll probably do like they do with the stealth bomber and just make the ship bonus shave down the fitting requirements of the large weapons to restrict crazy fits and only apply bonus to large weapons. Any way you look at it, all i want is to fit a tornado like: 1400s - mwd, track comp, painter - gyros, speed mods HIT AND RUN BABY or, hit and die gloriously. I'm ok with that too.
Theodoric Darkwind PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore 35	Posted - 2011.10.22 07:26:00 - [7] - Quote These new BCs also glaringly show the huge disparity in fitting requirements for weapons. Tachyon Beams are hard enough to fit on an abbadon, they would pretty much be a non-option for the new BC. Same story with the new gallente BC and 425 rails you need at least a PDS to put a full rack of 425 rails on a megathron and fit any sort of tank. Also shows the lack of variety in large missiles. With the turret ships I would envision using the smaller size BS guns (i.e. electron blasters, 650 autocannons, whatever the smaller size of BS lasers is) to make room for a decent tank on the new BCs. Caldari dont have that option, its cruise or torp ... period.
Pr1ncess Alia Perkone Caldari State 31	Posted - 2011.10.22 07:33:00 - [8] - Quote Theodoric Darkwind wrote: These new BCs also glaringly show the huge disparity in fitting requirements for weapons. Tachyon Beams are hard enough to fit on an abbadon, they would pretty much be a non-option for the new BC. Same story with the new gallente BC and 425 rails you need at least a PDS to put a full rack of 425 rails on a megathron and fit any sort of tank. Also shows the lack of variety in large missiles. With the turret ships I would envision using the smaller size BS guns (i.e. electron blasters, 650 autocannons, whatever the smaller size of BS lasers is) to make room for a decent tank on the new BCs. Caldari dont have that option, its cruise or torp ... period. while some of that is a maybe (and you make good points) don't confuse glaring disparity with a need to vanilla-ize the weapon systems. Nothing prevents people from cross training and nothing could be more damaging to Eve pvp than making all the weapons the same. Tachyons are 'supposed' to be a weapon class all to themselves. Hybrids are... well hybrids. They need fixed (RoF increase imo)
Theodoric Darkwind PonyWaffe Test Alliance Please Ignore 35	Posted - 2011.10.22 07:37:00 - [9] - Quote Well these new BCs should be rolled out with newly fixed hybrids. but the weapon fitting vs ship PG/CPU disparites still exist (though may get fixed by the hybrid rebalance) gallente ships still have the 2nd worst CPU (only better than amarr) and 2nd worst PG (only better than caldari) but hybrids have the 2nd highest fitting requirements for both PG (only lasers use more grid) and CPU (only missiles use more cpu and even there its close, torp launchers are the only BS weapon that uses more CPU than 425 rails) by comparison minmatar have the 2nd highest CPU (only behind caldari), and 2nd highest powergrid (only behind amarr) but projectiles are the easist fitting weapons in the game.
Shriven89 Tactical Knightmare 8	Posted - 2011.10.22 08:17:00 - [10] - Quote First post in this area of the forum, and only really skim read this thread, but my eyes caught on the "Caldari drone shield boat" Wat? That just ain't Caldari baby. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but battlecruisers can run links right? And command ships with a bunch of links out the ass are their Tech 2 counterpart? So why not make these new 3rd tier BCs a mini command ship? I mean, nobody uses the regular BCs to run links, from the little I've seen, so perhaps incentivise people to do so? I'd not know where to start with number of slots and bonuses and what not mind you. dons nomex ALL the things
Pr1ncess Alia Perkone Caldari State 31	Posted - 2011.10.22 08:19:00 - [11] - Quote Shriven89 wrote: First post in this area of the forum, and only really skim read this thread, but my eyes caught on the "Caldari drone shield boat" Wat? That just ain't Caldari baby. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but battlecruisers can run links right? And command ships with a bunch of links out the ass are their Tech 2 counterpart? So why not make these new 3rd tier BCs a mini command ship? I mean, nobody uses the regular BCs to run links, from the little I've seen, so perhaps incentivise people to do so? I'd not know where to start with number of slots and bonuses and what not mind you. dons nomex ALL the things yeah that's what we need is another command link platform
Tanya Powers Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 47	Posted - 2011.10.22 11:27:00 - [12] - Quote Theodoric Darkwind wrote: Well these new BCs should be rolled out with newly fixed hybrids. but the weapon fitting vs ship PG/CPU disparites still exist (though may get fixed by the hybrid rebalance) gallente ships still have the 2nd worst CPU (only better than amarr) and 2nd worst PG (only better than caldari) but hybrids have the 2nd highest fitting requirements for both PG (only lasers use more grid) and CPU (only missiles use more cpu and even there its close, torp launchers are the only BS weapon that uses more CPU than 425 rails) by comparison minmatar have the 2nd highest CPU (only behind caldari), and 2nd highest powergrid (only behind amarr) but projectiles are the easist fitting weapons in the game. Don't forget to add: Cruise can hit for over 100km, decent torps fit over 60, glass canon dps Autocanons hit like hell at over 80km with no issue (can shoot further), glass canon dps Scorch pulse is at least 65km, glass canon dps Then you have the most ridiculous of all, blasters scratching paint in the fall off at 40km with lol fits but 10% more dps the other weapons system have at ... 7km? Has it stands for hybrids right now, blasters most probably will keep the ridiculous range envelope with ridiculous +dps if they don't mess them more than they already are, in short: gank versions -since rails are crap no need to comment.
Cunane Jeran 14	Posted - 2011.10.22 12:23:00 - [13] - Quote The large weapons do pose some problems, as mentioned earlier, 6 800mm autos with a damage bonus and you have a more nimble, cheaper Tempest. it'd make the BS redundant So I'd like to see say 3-5 BS weapons on the new BC's, and to make it a little more unique not just flat damage/tank bonus, but something to add some flavour to each one. for example in the case of Gallente 4-5 Turret slots Either 7.5% tracking or 5% damage per level then something different like a Warp Scram range bonus, or MWD cap reduction just something different Maybe a 5/5/6 layout. or Minmatar 3-4 Turret slots 1-2 Missile Either 5% damage or 5% ROF then something like Web range bonus, or a speed bonus or something 5/6/5 layout Who knows.
Jerick Ludhowe Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising. 1	Posted - 2011.10.22 13:27:00 - [14] - Quote Errr.... you do know that 3-5 turrets is going to be joke DPS right? These ships will probably have 6 turrets each and sport 2 offensive bonuses, no double damage bonuses of course. As for the Tornado obsoleting the Tempest... WTF is wrong with you people... You look at one aspect of a ship that does not even have stats yet and determine it will be superior to the tempest... Fail. Tempest is a BS (dur) thus it has BS level hp with BS level cap, mods, and fittings. Large Nuets and a large cap booster are already enough of an advantage when comparing stand up performance of a BC to BS.
Jerick Ludhowe Shadow Legion Industries Dark Phoenix Rising. 1	Posted - 2011.10.22 13:38:00 - [15] - Quote Shriven89 wrote: So why not make these new 3rd tier BCs a mini command ship? I mean, nobody uses the regular BCs to run links, from the little I've seen, so perhaps incentivise people to do so? I'd not know where to start with number of slots and bonuses and what not mind you. dons nomex ALL the things The reason no one uses these modules on t1 BCs is because they have stupidly high fitting requirements relative to the ships while requiring allot of cap to run, aka fail. Gang Links are BROKEN at the moment and pretty much have been since their conception years ago. Off grid afk gang boosters is such a ****** dumb concept it's not even funny anymore... The entire "Gang Link" system needs a conceptual re-write if we as players want something more involved than pressing f1 through f3 and going afk at a pos for 5 hours...
SpaceSquirrels Scordite Excavating Xenaphobe 9	Posted - 2011.10.22 15:36:00 - [16] - Quote Some sort of niche role, or support role give options other than cruisers.
Tamiya Sarossa Hedion University Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2011.10.22 15:49:00 - [17] - Quote Jerick Ludhowe wrote: The reason no one uses these modules on t1 BCs is because they have stupidly high fitting requirements relative to the ships while requiring allot of cap to run, aka fail. Gang Links are BROKEN at the moment and pretty much have been since their conception years ago. Off grid afk gang boosters is such a ****** dumb concept it's not even funny anymore... The entire "Gang Link" system needs a conceptual re-write if we as players want something more involved than pressing f1 through f3 and going afk at a pos for 5 hours... No, the reason no one uses them on BC's is because their infinitely better on alts in offgrid t3's than on a BC - more links, more bonuses, less damage. Fix the offgrid business, and you will see them used more in BC roaming gangs.
Steve Ronuken Fuzzwork Enterprises 28	Posted - 2011.10.22 16:37:00 - [18] - Quote ROF Penalty. Big guns, big alpha, slower fire rate. The Destroyer of BCs
Songbird 26	Posted - 2011.10.22 17:40:00 - [19] - Quote Well the obvious bonus they all get is some break on turret and launcher fitting requirements - think stealth bomber. A maxed out stealth bomber - all gank no tank , faction ballistics , t2 rage torps, DPS rigs and implants will deliver a bit over 815 DPS at 54km range. Think along those lines when you think BC's with BS guns :)
Ines Tegator Project ELT 20	Posted - 2011.10.22 17:46:00 - [20] - Quote The only stipulations I can think of regarding bonuses ATM, is that there should be absolutely no alpha bonuses (at the risk of replacing battleships) and absolutely no tracking bonuses or drone boats (at the risk of replacing the existing BC's). This will force them into a specialized target selection simply because of the existing stats on large guns, and will give these ships a unique role.
Goose99 Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 79	Posted - 2011.10.22 17:58:00 - [21] - Quote Steve Ronuken wrote: ROF Penalty. Big guns, big alpha, slower fire rate. The Destroyer of BCs Suicide gankers and blob masters, rejoice.
Cade102 Cade Industries 3	Posted - 2011.10.22 21:13:00 - [22] - Quote I think people are getting carried away with the "Tier 3 BC will have Large guns" statement. All this talk of 1400mm arty and Tachyons is crazy. I think it will transpire that these BC will only just be able to fit the often lamented and ignored Large weapons such as the Dual 425mm AC, Dual 250mm Rails etc To fit the more "regular" Large guns will result in terrible glass cannons
Dibblerette Eclipse Navy 0	Posted - 2011.10.23 05:32:00 - [23] - Quote Can someone provide a link to wherever it said that there would be large guns on these ships? Is anything known about the blueprint releases? Thanks.
Desudes Pixelmoon The Star League 3	Posted - 2011.10.23 05:51:00 - [24] - Quote Tamiya Sarossa wrote: Jerick Ludhowe wrote: The reason no one uses these modules on t1 BCs is because they have stupidly high fitting requirements relative to the ships while requiring allot of cap to run, aka fail. Gang Links are BROKEN at the moment and pretty much have been since their conception years ago. Off grid afk gang boosters is such a ****** dumb concept it's not even funny anymore... The entire "Gang Link" system needs a conceptual re-write if we as players want something more involved than pressing f1 through f3 and going afk at a pos for 5 hours... No, the reason no one uses them on BC's is because their infinitely better on alts in offgrid t3's than on a BC - more links, more bonuses, less damage. Fix the offgrid business, and you will see them used more in BC roaming gangs. Add bonus(50-100% increase) to on-grid boosters; keep the CS alt subs and give on-grid boosting a use, win/win. FOR THE DESU!!!
Ruah Piskonit PIE Inc. 11	Posted - 2011.10.23 06:38:00 - [25] - Quote Sounds like people want this tier 3 BC to be imba. The idea for example that the tier 3 Amarr BC should fit rails is. . .LOL. There are other weapons systems that would be much better suited - HAM BC (remember Rockets, HAMs and eventually Torps will be Amarr), Drone BC (in keeping with the Arbi and such) would be much better fit. To b honest, I hope t3 BCs don't have large weapons - it would completely make battleships redundant. Its an idiot idea. The slot layouts being proposed in a lot of these posts is also way out of wack. I think people want t3 BCs to be some super gank ship that can tank, do damage and move fast. . . their imba dream. Actually, reading through this post, i think most of the ideas here are pretty idiotic and i hope CCP is not really paying too much attention to this madness. Finally, th statement that 'no one uses BCs' is pretty stupid too - I see lots of BCs. Harbis, Cains, Drakes. . . maby no one uses them in 0.0 - but get over it - almost no one lives in 0.0 either (see what I did there?)
Sphit Ker Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 11	Posted - 2011.10.23 07:11:00 - [26] - Quote I want my tier 3 BC to be an anti-skirmish platform. High warp speed, high scan res. Stuff like that. I want that boat to land on a Cynabal at zero and actually manage a lock on it before it's 40km away and laughing. Guess why I want that? Hi Snigg!
Kitana Muerte Demons Pit 0	Posted - 2011.10.23 08:03:00 - [27] - Quote I just hope that the new tier 3 BCs will not replace HACs as a better sniper or hit and run platforms. It will be tech 1, so i guess insurable. I'm also affraid to see gangs of fast Tornados insta poping everything with their might artie alpha. We don't want the whole eve flying one ship class, do we?
Gaien Haart Corpus Alienum 0	Posted - 2011.10.23 08:10:00 - [28] - Quote I'm already flying 20k ehp glass artycane, if i can go for the same, but with 1400mm, i'm sold.
Syoned Die Enklave Y G G D R A S I L 0	Posted - 2011.10.23 08:16:00 - [29] - Quote Those new BCs will be the suicide gankers wet dream. I am not sure if and how this can get addressed, but it is a point that should be take into consideration carefully. If you don't need a couple of BS any longer to pop a freighter but can do with a bunch of probably much cheaper BC or blow up even a tanked Hulk with a single BC it will have a significant impact on global economy. So either the defensive capabilities of the industrial ships should be increased correspondingly (preferably) or game mechanics should be included to prevent such an abuse of the new ships or make it at least less attractive.
Roisin Connor Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2011.10.23 12:05:00 - [30] - Quote Dibblerette wrote: Can someone provide a link to wherever it said that there would be large guns on these ships? Is anything known about the blueprint releases? Thanks. Ship-troduction: The Minmatar Tornado Quote: "The most unique thing about them is that they will be able to fit battleship-sized weapons. Yes, you heard correctly... battlecruisers with oversized guns."

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.