EVE Search - Tier 3 as most people want them; Faction ships for everyone

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Tier 3 as most people want them; Faction ships for everyone

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)
Gierling	Posted - 2006.02.17 08:01:00 - [1] Just floating the idea that the stats being thrown around by a lot of folks, including the preliminary numbers completely outpace faction ships. Can we please reign in expectations a bit and remember that Ovuer said they would not tank or gank any better then existing ships. As it is with the existing stats the Minmater tier 3 easily outpaces a fleet tempest and might just beat the macharial with the right bonii. PRoposal to fix blobbing and make Charisma useful.

Tuxford	Posted - 2006.02.17 08:40:00 - [2] We are very much aware of that tier 3 battleships can not outpimp the faction battleships. _______________

Necrologic	Posted - 2006.02.17 08:49:00 - [3] Originally by: Tuxford We are very much aware of that tier 3 battleships can not outpimp the faction battleships. Tux, is it set in stone that they are going to be tier 3, or are you considering making a second tier 1 or 2 instead?
DigitalCommunist	Posted - 2006.02.17 08:52:00 - [4] For the sake of consistency, I hope not. We need more ships with bigger HP. Purchasing Complex Fullerene Shards, contact me ingame.
Necrologic	Posted - 2006.02.17 09:32:00 - [5] Originally by: DigitalCommunist For the sake of consistency, I hope not. We need more ships with bigger HP. Good point.
Shadowsword	Posted - 2006.02.17 09:59:00 - [6] Originally by: Gierling Just floating the idea that the stats being thrown around by a lot of folks, including the preliminary numbers completely outpace faction ships. The preliminary stats included in the database, while probably not definitives, show en equal number of slots than faction BS, less armor/shield/hp, a lower speed, and for some of them a much bigger mass, slower lock time, unknown bonuses, and, if I remember correctly, faction ships get 3 bonuses instead or two. The stats proposed by players are completely irrelevant. I'm curious. How can you consider faction ships outclassed?
Jhanne	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:03:00 - [7] I think it would be nice with another T1 Battleship, we have enought ships HP ships (Dread (special in sige mode), Carrier, Mothership and Titan).
Gronsak	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:10:00 - [8] Edited by: Gronsak on 17/02/2006 10:10:17 Originally by: Tuxford We are very much aware of that tier 3 battleships can not outpimp the faction battleships. could just boost the faction ships. and since they are uncommon/rare it wount really matter much -------------------Sig----------------------- Decrease blaster CPU useage Decrease Hybrid cap useage Balance all weapon systems DO IT SOON
Nadec Ascand	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:14:00 - [9] RP talking i would rather say than Tier 3 battle ship should be almost same as faction ship as time come ppl are researching about faction ship and here come the new Tier3 ship it should be close really close to faction ship (something like lets say same but 2 bonus when faction ship got 3 or a bit less cpu or pg but still they need to be close) they should also ask for BS 4, 3 sounds a bit low. OMG our war have been hijack -eris What 0_o LMAO Nadec 4TW - Vanamonde Here start a new WAR => X - Wrangler
Mable	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:29:00 - [10] Unfortunately only the pirate faction ships have 3 bonus', the navy ships have only 2.
Noriath	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:34:00 - [11] Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer.
Nadec Ascand	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:37:00 - [12] Originally by: Noriath Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer. /jk ?? no 2nd Tier 1 battleship for caldari so? as scorp is 1 one nor the best one Tier 1 ship around (well arma maybe too :p ) OMG our war have been hijack -eris What 0_o LMAO Nadec 4TW - Vanamonde Here start a new WAR => X - Wrangler
hired goon	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:52:00 - [13] Originally by: Gierling As it is with the existing stats the Minmater tier 3 easily outpaces a fleet tempest and might just beat the macharial with the right bonii. Where did you see stats for the Teir 3 bs? -omg-
HippoKing	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:54:00 - [14] Originally by: Necrologic Originally by: Tuxford We are very much aware of that tier 3 battleships can not outpimp the faction battleships. Tux, is it set in stone that they are going to be tier 3, or are you considering making a second tier 1 or 2 instead? please, tell me sigs of the 23/24/25 hijack just as well -eris yarrrr, i shall retake my sig -HippoKing Not a chance, our 1337 sig haXx0r sk1llz are too powerful! - Wrangler Ho-Ho-Hooooooo, Merry Saturday!11 - Immy Yo ho ho and a bottle of BReeEEEEeee.... - Jacques ARRRRRRchambault
Exelsior	Posted - 2006.02.17 10:54:00 - [15] Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: Noriath Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer. /jk ?? no 2nd Tier 1 battleship for caldari so? as scorp is 1 one nor the best one Tier 1 ship around (well arma maybe too :p ) Say what? Oh and hired goon, Database ------------------------- Thou shalt be dispatched. Skill Point Transfer
Somatic Neuron	Posted - 2006.02.17 14:57:00 - [16] Tier 3 should be better than Tier 2, just as Tier 3 Cruisers and Frigates are better than their Tier 2 counterparts. It should be by the same relative scale, as well...otherwise, why bother? If that makes them close to the faction battleships, so what? If it is that big of a deal, make the faction battleships have better or more bonuses. ----------
Jaketh Ivanes	Posted - 2006.02.17 15:45:00 - [17] I'm for that 2nd tier 1 BS. Don't really need a better BS than the tier 2's. DigitalCommunist got a point, but rather than boosting HP, lets lower RoF. Effectivly increse ships hitpoints and reduce server strain.
j0sephine	Posted - 2006.02.17 16:19:00 - [18] Edited by: j0sephine on 17/02/2006 16:20:35 "We are very much aware of that tier 3 battleships can not outpimp the faction battleships." Considering the faction ships are based on lower (2nd) tier, isn't that like saying Thorax should be unable to outpimp the Guardian Vexor..? (not faction ship, granted, but rare enough to count as one) Could very well have tier.3 battleships at least meet the level of current faction ships and (eventually) introduce new set of faction ship based on these tier.3's, while --optionally-- making tier.2 factions more available...
Lygos	Posted - 2006.02.17 16:32:00 - [19] Just so long as they have to compromise in order to fight certain classes. If a tier III BS, when not jammed, can beat just about any tier II BS, it should have a much harder time with inties and AFs than a tier I or II BS. 200m3 drone bays make beer go flat. Eunoia: The persistent suspicion that the universe is secretly conspiring to quietly improve one's life.
Rafein	Posted - 2006.02.17 16:32:00 - [20] We really do need a tier 3 BS, just to keep with natural progression. And it shoud have a bit more HP, armor, grid, CPU,, but not a lot. You figure, the rces are always coming up with new ships to overpower the old. Why make a new, underpowered ship
Shadowsword	Posted - 2006.02.17 18:02:00 - [21] Originally by: Noriath Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer. 1/ A second tier 1 would only be usefull if it did something new, and NOT too much specialised (specialisation if what T2 is for), and I can't think of any usefull role that a current BS can't already do. 2/ BS are mainly used for fleet battles, small-gang fire support and NPCing, and most of the players who do that (which mean a fairly big portion of the playerbase) want new ships to play with, but they won't use something that can't npc hunt, or do missions, or pound an enemy fleet, as well than current designs. A second Tier1 BS might be usefull, if their design was really bringing something fresh, but the need for them is a lot slower than for new brawlers boats...
HippoKing	Posted - 2006.02.17 18:18:00 - [22] Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: Noriath Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer. /jk ?? no 2nd Tier 1 battleship for caldari so? as scorp is 1 one nor the best one Tier 1 ship around (well arma maybe too :p ) i don't get it sigs of the 23/24/25 hijack just as well -eris yarrrr, i shall retake my sig -HippoKing Not a chance, our 1337 sig haXx0r sk1llz are too powerful! - Wrangler Ho-Ho-Hooooooo, Merry Saturday!11 - Immy Yo ho ho and a bottle of BReeEEEEeee.... - Jacques ARRRRRRchambault
Nadec Ascand	Posted - 2006.02.17 18:32:00 - [23] Originally by: HippoKing Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: Noriath Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer. /jk ?? no 2nd Tier 1 battleship for caldari so? as scorp is 1 one nor the best one Tier 1 ship around (well arma maybe too :p ) i don't get it /joke So there would not be any 2nd tier 2 bs for caldary as scorp is ubber maybe the best T1 bs with the arma OMG our war have been hijack -eris What 0_o LMAO Nadec 4TW - Vanamonde Here start a new WAR => X - Wrangler
Liu Kaskakka	Posted - 2006.02.17 19:31:00 - [24] Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: HippoKing Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: Noriath Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer. /jk ?? no 2nd Tier 1 battleship for caldari so? as scorp is 1 one nor the best one Tier 1 ship around (well arma maybe too :p ) i don't get it /joke So there would not be any 2nd tier 2 bs for caldary as scorp is ubber maybe the best T1 bs with the arma i dont get it King Liu is RIGHT!!
Gierling	Posted - 2006.02.17 20:30:00 - [25] I'll post some stats when I get home from work. Stay tuned. PRoposal to fix blobbing and make Charisma useful.
HippoKing	Posted - 2006.02.17 20:38:00 - [26] Originally by: Liu Kaskakka Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: HippoKing Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: Noriath Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer. /jk ?? no 2nd Tier 1 battleship for caldari so? as scorp is 1 one nor the best one Tier 1 ship around (well arma maybe too :p ) i don't get it /joke So there would not be any 2nd tier 2 bs for caldary as scorp is ubber maybe the best T1 bs with the arma i dont get it me neither sigs of the 23/24/25 hijack just as well -eris yarrrr, i shall retake my sig -HippoKing Not a chance, our 1337 sig haXx0r sk1llz are too powerful! - Wrangler Ho-Ho-Hooooooo, Merry Saturday!11 - Immy Yo ho ho and a bottle of BReeEEEEeee.... - Jacques ARRRRRRchambault
Gierling	Posted - 2006.02.18 06:07:00 - [27] Edited by: Gierling on 18/02/2006 06:10:30 First assumption: These ships will be primarily oriented towards fleetcombat, so if they are head and shoulders better at fleet combat then thier contemperaries it doesn't make them obselete. First Refutation: The majority of Battleship combat is in fleets, more then any other ship in Eve thier "time and place" is narrowly defined due to thier bulk and expense. So, we can look at fleet combat as the primary circumstance to balance these ships in. Lets look at the proposed Gallente ship, Since we do not know what the bonuses are lets go on the assumption that they follow the trends exactly. Immedietly we see that it has about 3 thousand more hitpoints, it also has about 30% more signature radius so I am not terribly concerned about imbalance there. Then we see that it has a 8-5-7 slot layout, the same layout as a Vindicator and same total as a Navy Megathron. However it has an additional turret hardpoint, so it may totally outclass both these ships in the fleet arena. If it has a tracking and a damage bonus (Which would be explicitly following existing gallente bonuses) it would quite simply be better then a Vindicator, and fully insurable. The MWD bonus doesnt come into play, and the Navy Mega only has the same bonuses but less turrets. Fitting doesn't seem like its any contest either. The bonii are crucial here, if they have the same or even similar bonuses as existing ships then they simply make them redundant even up to the faction ship level. You give it an MWD and a falloff bonus and its doing the Gallente racial philosophy but not the same way as existing ships. It'll hit further out and have an easier time closing but it won't do as much pure damage at the top and bottom end of the range spectrum as the regular mega and thus the faction megas as well. The caldari one looks like your taking the right route but 7 turrets and an optimal bonus is a little much. Turrets will do good damage at the low end of battleship fleet ranges, and will do significantly more at the high end. 7 turrets and the optimal bonus will make all the existing turret ships obselete in most all fleet combat. In this case extended range is a bonus that adds damage AND versatilty and as such you shouldn't get it with a hefty amount of guns. Minmater one just needs to come down to 7 turrets, it simply completely outclasses the Tempest with every concievable bonus if it has 8 turrets. The Amarr one should be easy to balance actually, but the problem here lies in making it distinct. ALL the amarr ships can fit 7 long range guns with little effort, howeverOne is the tanker, one is the ganker. I think the best alternative is to drop the Amarr one to 6 turrets overall with more midslots then you usually find on an amarr ship and a decent drone bay as well. Make it a versatile ship that can still actually do something (6 Tachyons is still fleetworthy). While your at it the Phoon can be balanced by making it have a fifth turret and 2500 more powergrid, it loses none of its appeal as a versatile ship but gains the ability to play the role as a long range fighter and can actually be a viable option compared to the tempest . It would simply be a matter of individual preference distinguishing the use of the two in fleet fights. One requires more effort but hits well and further, one is easier to use but doesnt have the range while posessing more damage a little closer in. The domi just needs 1750 more powergrid. Pretty much every BS can fit a full rack of thier best guns with perfect skills and one fitting mod. The Domi is no exception. IT still has less guns then a mega and one less gun bonus so it doesnt supplant the mega, but becomnes an option where oyu can do respectable damage AND do some anti support work. As it is you need one fitting module to fit 5 425's and it just doesnt do enough damage to the enemy fleet to justify bringing it out. Giving it more grid in no way takes away its versatility. PRoposal to fix blobbing and make Charisma useful.
Gierling	Posted - 2006.02.18 06:10:00 - [28] ALso for you snarky guys who way "The Domi can't be good its old" its description explicitly says that it is not obselete, it may not put the hurt on as much as a newer ship but it still has a respectable capability. PRoposal to fix blobbing and make Charisma useful.
Malthros Zenobia	Posted - 2006.02.18 07:05:00 - [29] Originally by: Tuxford We are very much aware of that tier 3 battleships can not outpimp the faction battleships. The problem you're going to face is you've gone and made the faction BSes using a tier 2 model. Other faction ships use the teir3. IMO, I'd expect a faction bantam or condor to be iffy when compared to a Merlin. Perhaps when tier 3 comes out, faction ships need to get changed, or more need to be made? Guristas Caracal with 50% missile velocity bonus please. Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu I'm probably one of the biggest Bush fanboys in Eve... This is like, Darth Vader, can't-reach-climax-without-killing-a-puppy evil. RAWR!11 Sig Hijack!11 - Imaran
Shadowsword	Posted - 2006.02.18 09:21:00 - [30] Originally by: Gierling Edited by: Gierling on 18/02/2006 06:10:30 First assumption: These ships will be primarily oriented towards fleetcombat, so if they are head and shoulders better at fleet combat then thier contemperaries it doesn't make them obselete. First Refutation: The majority of Battleship combat is in fleets, more then any other ship in Eve thier "time and place" is narrowly defined due to thier bulk and expense. ... First, talking about balance when considering only fleet battles is wrong. There's a lot of actions that include 5-6 ships gangs, and battleships are widely used as fire-support in those gangs. Second, a railgun on a megathron and a mega beam on an Apoc (with BS skill at lv5 in both cases) do approximately the same DPS, the railgun has a better range, but less tracking, even with the megathron tracking bonus. Right now both those ships are fairly well balanced, yet the Apocalypse has 8 turrets. According to your logic, there's a huge balance issue there, yet I don't see much whining about it on the forums. A tier 3 gallente BS with 8 guns would do barely 14% more damage than a megathron (a lot less than 14%, in fact, because the megathron has a slt to put a missile launcher on it, or a nos, or whatever) Third: Fittings: So, the gallente tier3 BS has 50 more cpu. Nice, but when you factor in the additional mid slot (25 CPU used, on averge), and the CPU requirment of a T2 425mm rail (77 CPU)-> Surprise, it doesn't fit. If you want to stuff your ship with 8 T2 425mm rails, 2 senosr boosters, 2 tracking comps, and 2 mag stabs, you don't have enough left for 2 or 3 hardeners. Fourth: current battleships are usefulls now, and you claim they'll become useless, withtout any of their stats being changed? I don't buy it. It's like those who said that HACs were made useless by command ships. Well, command ships are out, and HACs prices are still going up... Fifth: Do you really think CCP would be crazy enough to create a 8-guns minmatar BS with both a damage and a Rof Bonus? CCP is trying to make fights laste longer, not to give pirates an ultimate gate camp toy.
Pesadel0	Posted - 2006.02.18 10:22:00 - [31] I really hope that the minmater republic releases the 8 slot tier3 BS . Quote: "We are very much aware of that tier 3 battleships can not outpimp the faction battleships." Considering the faction ships are based on lower (2nd) tier, isn't that like saying Thorax should be unable to outpimp the Guardian Vexor..? (not faction ship, granted, but rare enough to count as one) Could very well have tier.3 battleships at least meet the level of current faction ships and (eventually) introduce new set of faction ship based on these tier.3's, while --optionally-- making tier.2 factions more available... Fully agree with jo,if and when they release of the T3 BS why can¦t they launch the faction counter part?And if they are releasing them in KalI the better lots off time to make ajustments :)
Calleb	Posted - 2006.02.18 10:44:00 - [32] I have read a lot of info on this topic and TBH all i would like to see from an Amarr point of view is a BS that offers a bit of variation. The apoc is just a bigger brother to the geddon. I would hate to see the new Amarr ship being just a bit bigger again, lets have something new
Vajell	Posted - 2006.02.18 11:10:00 - [33] I would like to see an amarr bs with a bonus to AB, 8 turret slots and a relatively small sig rad. With a good cap, it could go in close range and use its small sig radius to its advantage when fighting bs fitting artys etc.
Nadec Ascand	Posted - 2006.02.18 11:45:00 - [34] Originally by: HippoKing Originally by: Liu Kaskakka Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: HippoKing Originally by: Nadec Ascand Originally by: Noriath Insted of Tier 3 battleships there should rather be a second Tier 1 battleship for all the races. That way you can also have ships that aren't the pinnacle of that races combat philosophy without making something that really isn't what that race is about the best it has to offer. /jk ?? no 2nd Tier 1 battleship for caldari so? as scorp is 1 one nor the best one Tier 1 ship around (well arma maybe too :p ) i don't get it /joke So there would not be any 2nd tier 2 bs for caldary as scorp is ubber maybe the best T1 bs with the arma i dont get it me neither /me set mode dumb as nobody seems to understand my high intelligence. U ask for some T1 ship as T1 ship are atm not worth for many of us against their T2 counter part so i argue thats not right that a scorp can take down is grand brother raven wich is only the caldari case so caldari would not need a 3rd ship? OMG our war have been hijack -eris What 0_o LMAO Nadec 4TW - Vanamonde Here start a new WAR => X - Wrangler
HippoKing	Posted - 2006.02.18 12:42:00 - [35] ^^ obviously has no grasp of english or what he is talking about. i suggest you reread noriath's post sigs of the 23/24/25 hijack just as well -eris yarrrr, i shall retake my sig -HippoKing Not a chance, our 1337 sig haXx0r sk1llz are too powerful! - Wrangler Ho-Ho-Hooooooo, Merry Saturday!11 - Immy Yo ho ho and a bottle of BReeEEEEeee.... - Jacques ARRRRRRchambault
Denrace	Posted - 2006.02.18 14:32:00 - [36] Tier 3 Battleships should not be OMGWTF8GUNS ships. The reason for this is that Tier 2 Battleships have plenty of firepower as it is, and we do not NEED more firepower (what with Carriers and HACs and Command Ships and the like). What fleet battles DO need is something to make them last longer, which is both more fun AND more tactical at the same time. So what would be a great idea is to give Tier 3 Battleships: Less firepower than a T1 and T2. Maybe 6 Gun/Launcher slots, but no bonuses towards offence. This prevents people from using them as OMGWTFGANK machines. We DO NOT need a another bunch of variants on the Pre-RMR 8x Heatsink GankGeddon. More Hit Points. Maybe twice the base HP of a Tier 2 Battleship. This means that these Battleships can sustain much more damage and last far, far longer in fleet battles. As a balance, they wont be able to throw out much firepower themselves, as that is the job of the Tier 1/2 Battleships. Bonuses to tanking/resistances/support. Anything along these lines to make them geared towards co-operative supporting play. Obviously these bonuses shouldnt be as powerful as the Tech 2 support cruiser bonuses, but still useful nonetheless. Bonuses such as 10% to Armour/Shield HP, 5% to resistances, 7.5% rep amount, 10% reduced cap for energy/armour/shield transfer...you get the idea. Interesting? ________________________________________ Give the Nighthawk more Shield HP and a ROF bonus!! I make Custom Sigs.
CueCia	Posted - 2006.02.18 14:56:00 - [37] Originally by: Denrace Tier 3 Battleships should not be OMGWTF8GUNS ships. The reason for this is that Tier 2 Battleships have plenty of firepower as it is, and we do not NEED more firepower (what with Carriers and HACs and Command Ships and the like). What fleet battles DO need is something to make them last longer, which is both more fun AND more tactical at the same time. So what would be a great idea is to give Tier 3 Battleships: Less firepower than a T1 and T2. Maybe 6 Gun/Launcher slots, but no bonuses towards offence. This prevents people from using them as OMGWTFGANK machines. We DO NOT need a another bunch of variants on the Pre-RMR 8x Heatsink GankGeddon. More Hit Points. Maybe twice the base HP of a Tier 2 Battleship. This means that these Battleships can sustain much more damage and last far, far longer in fleet battles. As a balance, they wont be able to throw out much firepower themselves, as that is the job of the Tier 1/2 Battleships. Bonuses to tanking/resistances/support. Anything along these lines to make them geared towards co-operative supporting play. Obviously these bonuses shouldnt be as powerful as the Tech 2 support cruiser bonuses, but still useful nonetheless. Bonuses such as 10% to Armour/Shield HP, 5% to resistances, 7.5% rep amount, 10% reduced cap for energy/armour/shield transfer...you get the idea. Interesting? Very intresting...
St Dragon	Posted - 2006.02.18 15:32:00 - [38] Originally by: CueCia Originally by: Denrace Tier 3 Battleships should not be OMGWTF8GUNS ships. The reason for this is that Tier 2 Battleships have plenty of firepower as it is, and we do not NEED more firepower (what with Carriers and HACs and Command Ships and the like). What fleet battles DO need is something to make them last longer, which is both more fun AND more tactical at the same time. So what would be a great idea is to give Tier 3 Battleships: Less firepower than a T1 and T2. Maybe 6 Gun/Launcher slots, but no bonuses towards offence. This prevents people from using them as OMGWTFGANK machines. We DO NOT need a another bunch of variants on the Pre-RMR 8x Heatsink GankGeddon. More Hit Points. Maybe twice the base HP of a Tier 2 Battleship. This means that these Battleships can sustain much more damage and last far, far longer in fleet battles. As a balance, they wont be able to throw out much firepower themselves, as that is the job of the Tier 1/2 Battleships. Bonuses to tanking/resistances/support. Anything along these lines to make them geared towards co-operative supporting play. Obviously these bonuses shouldnt be as powerful as the Tech 2 support cruiser bonuses, but still useful nonetheless. Bonuses such as 10% to Armour/Shield HP, 5% to resistances, 7.5% rep amount, 10% reduced cap for energy/armour/shield transfer...you get the idea. Interesting? Very intresting... I have to admit you hit the nail right on the head for me. Damage wise make the the same sort of general strength as tier 2 battleships. However give them the best tanking for there race Sounds right to me. ----------------------------------------------- "Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god." -- Jean Rostand
madaluap	Posted - 2006.02.18 16:00:00 - [39] Originally by: Nadec Ascand /me set mode dumb as nobody seems to understand my high intelligence. U ask for some T1 ship as T1 ship are atm not worth for many of us against their T2 counter part so i argue thats not right that a scorp can take down is grand brother raven wich is only the caldari case so caldari would not need a 3rd ship? have you ever met a nossing/jamming/tanking domi? its insane. domi > than every bs class and lower _________________________________________________
KilROCK	Posted - 2006.02.18 17:56:00 - [40] :( cries for the tier 3 min if it's a support bs
Hast	Posted - 2006.02.18 18:32:00 - [41] I just have nightmares about a tier 3 phoon with 4/4 hp layout and bonuses to missile flight time and proj optimal
Fester Addams	Posted - 2006.02.18 18:32:00 - [42] We do not need a tier 3 BS. We need a tier 2 and tier 4 destroyer, we need a tier 3 battlecruiser and we need a tier 4 battleship.
Megadon	Posted - 2006.02.18 19:09:00 - [43] Tuxford, would you guys just p l e a s e please look at the Nightmare and tweak it a bit to elevate it from its place as the suckeist faction ship there is? Please? I'll buy you guys beer next time your in Austin, Tx.
Gierling	Posted - 2006.02.19 02:50:00 - [44] 5 on 5 is fleet combat, although more forgiving then 50 on 50. And I do a fair amount of PVPing (As far as my alliance goes I think I'm one of the more involved pilots), and I have never not once not ever seen a 1 on 1 battleship fight. 1v1 battleship fights are frankly a sign that you have more money then sense. Sorry EVERY Battleship needs to have a place on the line, if not its just a big cruiser. As far as the Domi ithas those crazy configs becuase it needs them. It cannot compete while fitted with a traditional config. Pretty much ANY ship in a vampa setup will pwn another single battleship in traditional kit one on one. The only reason you see so many vampadomis is frankly becuase thats all the poor Domi has to work with. Heck a Vampa mega can fit more nosses, a heavier tank and can move faster. It has slightly less drone damage but frankly once thier cap is dry you aint in no hurry to finish someone off. IMHO, the best course is simply other bonuses that offer you the ability to work within the racial philosophy using a slightly different approach. PRoposal to fix blobbing and make Charisma useful.
oDDiTy V2	Posted - 2006.02.19 03:07:00 - [45] Am I the only one that isn't worried about the stats of the tier 3 BS (dev's will obviously not make them as good as faction BS) and just plain psyched about having a cool looking new battleship come out for each race? I mean, looking at the latest models that have come out (carriers, titans, etc) they're bound to look awesome. Eye-Candy ftw.
Gierling	Posted - 2006.02.19 03:19:00 - [46] CCP is as vulnerable to the law of unintended consequences as anyone else, if its discussed it probably stands a better chance of coming up balanced. PRoposal to fix blobbing and make Charisma useful.
vanBuskirk	Posted - 2006.02.19 03:22:00 - [47] I'm not sure that tier 3 BS (i.e. generally better, more expensive, etc.) BS are the way to go. But I do think that a new tier 2, and maybe a tier 1 as well, would be useful as an extra choice. Example: Caldari ships up to cruisers are railgun boats, or maybe a mixture of rails and missiles. I rather like the idea of a second tier 2 Caldari BS with bonuses to railguns instead of missiles, while keeping its overall utility the same. (It ought to be possible to make the bonuses specific to rails rather than hybrids.) Or a second Minmatar tier 1 BS with maybe 6 turrets, but only 6 highslots (a bit like the Domi perhaps) and grid sufficiently low that fitting a full rack of 1400s is difficult. I'm sure that others can suggest more ideas along these lines. ---------------------------------------------- "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." ----------------------------------------------

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.