| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Tehyarec
   |
Posted - 2006.05.13 10:21:00 -
[151]
Yeah, anyone who says they don't need fixing frankly doesn't have a clue. They've got the worst of the both worlds: agility and sig radius of the BS (with more severe penalty for plates) and firepower more in line with cruisers. Firepower would be fine with me, but not when combined with the fact that it takes almost as much damage as a battleship, and is a slow. How is that "fine"? Just look at the damn models, BC is a LOT smaller than a BS and only slightly bigger than cruisers, yet their sig radius is nearly that of a tier 1 BS, and over TWICE that of a cruiser.
They're. Not. Fine.
|
Jai Cee
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 10:23:00 -
[152]
/Signed
BC definately need an agility boost, I was in a fleet mostly of BS today with my Brutix. It was hilarious seeing the fact that the megas in the fleet could accelerate and get to gates faster for those when we didn't have instas.
Sig radius could do with a slight modification too but not too much of a change is needed.
|
Cosmo Raata
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 10:49:00 -
[153]
Signed--
Biggest problem i've seen is BS's hit BC's like BS's used to hit frigs back in the old days. I land almost every shot on them, whereas a cruiser with some transversal will have me missing often. Either they need to tank better, or the more logical solution is bring their agility & sig radius more in par with the damage they deal (which is a lot closer to cruiser damage than bs damage).
|
Tehyarec
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 13:37:00 -
[154]
In my opinion the sig radius decrease is at least as important as the agility boost (given my mission running style, the better tanking it'd give would benefit me more than the agility, which I mainly need when I have to warp out quick). 300m sig radius for Brutix for example is just wrong.
I really hope the devs are looking into this, would be nice to get some sort of confirmation from them.
|
voidvim
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 13:49:00 -
[155]
/signed
I think the battlecrusier group should be better at tanking by having a small siq and be more agily
|
Kristen Ambrais
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 15:41:00 -
[156]
Consider this signed.
They get the top speed and turning radius of fat cow. They should be somewhere between cruiser and battleship in terms of speed and turning.
|
Jasminna deBoer
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 20:52:00 -
[157]
up to the top
|
kikosinosi
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 21:38:00 -
[158]
/boost battlecruisers
They should have:
1. less mass
2. more agility
3. they should be more noob friendly (too long training).
Avarage price for a tech 2 battlecruiser is 90 million and already you can see on escrow tech 2 battlecruisers at 110 millions - (e.g. check escrow now for Vulture prices)
On the other side it si not possible that HACs which has under 30 million production price to cost more than tech 2 battlecruisers.
/salute
|
kikosinosi
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 23:03:00 -
[159]
Edited by: kikosinosi on 13/05/2006 23:04:57
= my appologises for double post, this new reply corrects also some aspects =
/boost battlecruisers
They should have:
1. less mass
2. more agility
3. less signature radius
4. they should be more noob friendly (too long training).
Average production price for a tech 2 battlecruiser is 90 million and already you can see on escrow tech 2 battlecruisers at 110 millions - (e.g. check escrow now for Vulture prices)
On the other side it si not possible that HACs which has under 30 million production price to cost more than tech 2 battlecruisers. The actual price for tech 2 BCs reflect the fact that they need an urgent boost and or a revamp creating modules for them ( e.g. 50 MN AM & MWDs)
/salute
|
Turiel Demon
|
Posted - 2006.05.13 23:49:00 -
[160]
/signed
I don't want to lose half my lows on nano's to be usefull if the ship I'm in isn't a vaga 
----
nothing to see here, move along nicely now, is that a pink dread out there. aaww you just missed it -eris
It's not an Eidolon with 5 Basic Miner's on it, that's for certain.(FF04)  ~kieron
No love for me? :'( - Wrangler
If you can't beat Eris, join her, hmmm that sounded so much better in my head - Cortes
Cuddles Eeyore. He's soooo cute and doesn't play EVE. perfect -eris
Eve-online Forum mods arn't Pokemon, you don't need to collect them all - Ductoris
Here's my autograph - now do I get some groupie lub? Jacques'
Don't be greedy :P -Capsicum |
Heiken Wimast
|
Posted - 2006.05.14 01:21:00 -
[161]
Absolutely need an agi/sig boosting. Otherwise BCs stats are fine. And people likes them but their slowness making them unpopular. Let us bring out from hangar those fat birds 
|
Tehyarec
|
Posted - 2006.05.14 11:00:00 -
[162]
 Originally by: kikosinosi
They should have:
4. they should be more noob friendly (too long training).
Uhh, no, not really. Consider that you can start with racial frigate 4. Therefore all you need to train to get a BC is Spaceship Command from 2 to 4, Cruiser to 3 and one level of BC. Takes what, 4 days maybe, even with newbie attributes? Of course you need various gunnery and support skills to be useful, but no, BC really isn't skill-intensive to be able to fly it, and I don't see why you think it is. Cruisers are just as skill-intensive.
Of course, Tech 2 BCs do take long training, but then again so do HACs.
|
Da Death
|
Posted - 2006.05.14 11:18:00 -
[163]
Edited by: Da Death on 14/05/2006 11:18:56
Ever try to go in warp with an Absolution? man, I can cook tea on the way... 
EDIT: Typo
Absolution - Curse - T2 Laser Crystals - T2 Drones and more -> check Bio
|
Shadow Ballet
|
Posted - 2006.05.14 12:47:00 -
[164]
Just want to show my agreement for the thoughts in this thread. Warpout takes too long and general agility of these ships could be improved ever so slightly pleasenicelythankyou.
|
MOS DEF
|
Posted - 2006.05.14 13:23:00 -
[165]
Signed for agility boost. Why does the astarte while being th etopend te3ch 2 ship of gallente handle like a megathron while being so much lighter?
It just makes no sense. I'm not asking for HAC like agility but a BC shouldn't handle like a BS. Makes no sense AT ALL.
|
SilentSentinel
|
Posted - 2006.05.14 17:10:00 -
[166]
One more thing the devs have to look at please... Larger drone bay!! 25m3 is way too small for a BC. Should be around 75m3. Doesn't make sense that some cruisers have 50-75m3 and can carry med drones, while a proph with 25m3 can only carry 5 x lights. Need a boost here devs!!
Cheers
|
Waenn Ironstaff
|
Posted - 2006.05.14 18:08:00 -
[167]
Last I checked the Cruisers having large drone space are usually drone-centered cruiser like the Vexxor and Arbitrator where the small buggers are part of their DPS.
25m3 is fine for non-drone BCs.
|
Tehyarec
|
Posted - 2006.05.14 19:17:00 -
[168]
For Gallente I kinda wish Brutix had a 75m3 bay, since even the smaller Thorax has 50m3. But well, I can live with 50m3 just fine too, if I just get the agility boost and reduced signature radius 
|
Arashi Miike
|
Posted - 2006.05.15 01:39:00 -
[169]
/signed
I always knew that BC agility was bad. The numbers presented in this thread just prove it. Shouldn't be a big fix: just tweak a few of the numbers a bit.
Really, this is a great ship class, but so painful to fly because of the terrible speed and agility. It's also a great ship class for newer players. Think of the newbies! Wont anyone think of the newbies?
"I should have been a pair of ragged claws/
scuttling across the floors of silent seas." |
Hllaxiu
|
Posted - 2006.05.15 02:13:00 -
[170]
Originally by: SilentSentinel
One more thing the devs have to look at please... Larger drone bay!! 25m3 is way too small for a BC. Should be around 75m3. Doesn't make sense that some cruisers have 50-75m3 and can carry med drones, while a proph with 25m3 can only carry 5 x lights. Need a boost here devs!!
Cheers
You want more drones on the amarr battlecruiser than the gallente one?
---
Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson |
Martinez
|
Posted - 2006.05.15 02:27:00 -
[171]
great post mr rooflez. i agree bc need alittle help. Maybe it would get the t2 versions into battle a bit more.
|
Merin Ryskin
|
Posted - 2006.05.15 02:32:00 -
[172]
/signed
They're smaller than battleships, they have less firepower than battleships, they have less tanking than battleships. Give them better speed, better agility and possibly lower sig radius/lock time.
|
Mr rooflez
|
Posted - 2006.05.15 02:45:00 -
[173]
The easiest fix would probably be to just change the agility modifier from 1.1x to maybe 0.75x (Cruisers have 0.55x and 10-15% lower mass) This wouldn't need any rebalancing of afterburners/mwds since the mass isn't changed.
|
Foulis
|
Posted - 2006.05.15 05:08:00 -
[174]
/signed
Even though with a mass reduction the cyclone would be insane.
----
Cake > Pie - Imaran
Originally by: CCP Hammer
Boobies
|
FireFoxx80
|
Posted - 2006.05.15 10:38:00 -
[175]
*bump*
|
Kuninia
|
Posted - 2006.05.15 21:15:00 -
[176]
/signed
so no GM's interested in solving the big problems the battlecruisers have? Please fix them CCP!
|
jiane
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 12:15:00 -
[177]
/signed
I've been popped so many times just turning the ship for a warp, and i have evasive manuvering V =/
|
keepiru
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 14:18:00 -
[178]
tuxxx, look at mee... look at meeeeeeeee.....
----------------
Please fix BC Sig/Agility! |
Razin
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 14:25:00 -
[179]
Originally by: Mr rooflez
Here's also what kind of damage different close range BS guns do to brutixes and thoraxes orbiting them at their max speed after skills.
Battleships VS Thorax
Battleships VS Brutix
So a regular close range battleship's guns/missiles do around twice damage at half the range to a battlecruiser trying to keep up transversal compared with a cruiser.
And this is supposed to be compensated by a 5% resist/7,5% repair bonus per level. I think not.
These are some pretty scary numbers (as are the numbers for "time to warp").
There is too much agreement in this thread and this is causing it to slip down in the forums.  Maybe Tux could reply with his thoughts and we can stop bumping.
|
Taurgil
|
Posted - 2006.05.16 18:12:00 -
[180]
Edited by: Taurgil on 16/05/2006 18:14:43
At all: You failed !!!!
Just rename the thread title to: "We need a new high damage assault missile type for our caldari cruiser as waiting two weeks to become uber is still too long for me."
And soon you no longer need to bump and get a prompt DEV reply.
The truth is out there below..
The Truth
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 .. 16 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |