| 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) |
Mr rooflez
   |
Posted - 2006.05.07 00:32:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Mr rooflez on 07/05/2006 00:33:52
Edited by: Mr rooflez on 07/05/2006 00:32:59
I'd long thought it odd how the Battlecruisers were always so slow to warp and align, especially when plated. I thus decided to run some tests.
These Tests were done in an eve window with the windows clock ticking beside it, not very scientific but it gives you an idea.
Time to get up to speed and warp:
Thorax: 7 seconds.
Thorax, 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates I: 9 seconds.
Not a very big difference between plated and unplated if you compare the 2000ish vs 5000ish armor hp.
Brutix: 14 seconds.
Brutix, 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates I: 19 seconds.
So a ship which has only 10% more mass than the Thorax takes twice as long to warp? And when you add a plate it's more than twice. Hmm.
Megathron: 15 seconds.
Megathron, 1600mm Reinforced Steel Plates I: 15 seconds.
No surprises here, you add on about 3% to the megathron's mass and that's well within the margin of error.
Ok. Now to explain a bit about ship agility. The way I've understood it is that if you multiply the ship's mass with the agility modifier (not shown in game but you can find it in data exports, it's 0.55 for cruisers, 1.1 for battlecruisers, and 0.155 for battleships) you get an arbitraty number which relates directly to agility. For instance a Thorax has a mass of 12 Mkg, so the agility would be 12000000*0,55 = 6,6m
Continuing this we get:
Thorax: 6,6m
Thorax with plate: 8,7m
Brutix: 14,6m
Brutix with plate: 18,7m
Megathron: 15,9m
Megathron w/plate: 16,5m
From what i understand, this number is what modifies everything agility-related. Turning, accelerating, you name it (well actually that's pretty much it).
Moving on.
After some math:
If you add a 1600mm plate to a Thorax you get a 29% increase to warp speed.
If you add a 1600mm plate to a Brutix you get a 36% increase to warp speed.
If you add a 1600mm plate to a Megathron you get almost no increase to warp speed.
It's fine for the Megathron and the Thorax, but the Brutix really suffers here and it makes no sense. You add proportionally less mass to the Brutix if you plate it compared to the Thorax, yet you get a disproportionally large increase in agility.
A cruiser with a 1600mm plate is much much more agile than a battlecruiser without one, yet a battlecruiser with a plate is much SLOWER than a battleship, even one with a plate.
I think what's wrong here is the agility modifier. The Battlecruisers have almost the same mass as cruisers, what makes them slower is the agility modifier, which is twice as big, meaning any agility/mass mod you put on it affects the ship twice as much.
I suggest first giving the battlecruisers a flat 15% or 20% agility boost. After that doubling or tripling the mass of the battlecruisers but halving or cutting in third their agility modifier, putting them more in line with the other ship classes. The Brutix obviously doesn't weigh the same as the Thorax when it's 50% bigger on the screen. Balance power/tankingwise the BCs are fine, they're just too damn slow.
And big.
|
Mr rooflez
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 00:33:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Mr rooflez on 07/05/2006 00:33:43
The signature radius of the BC are up next.
Cruisers range from 105m(Stabber) to 150m(Blackbird, Vexor, others)
Battlecruisers range from 240m(Cyclone) to 300m(Brutix)
Battleships range from 320m(Typhoon) to 480m(Scorpion)
Here are some interesting percentage differences:
smallest cruiser -> smallest BC: +129%
biggest cruiser -> biggest BC: + 100%
smallest BC -> smallest BS: +33%
biggest BC -> biggest BS: +60%
biggest cruiser -> smallest BC: +60%
biggest BC -> smallest BS: +7%
smallest cruiser -> biggest BC: +186%
smallest BC -> biggest BS: +100%
Battlecruisers are between 60% and 186% bigger than cruisers, while battleships are between 7% and 60% bigger than battlecruisers.
I don't think this is right, the battlecruiser are right in between the cruisers and battleships firepower- and tankingwise, but almost as slow and big as a battleship. I actually got killed in a plated brutix by a tempest with Quake L at 15km while not webbed and trying to keep my transversal up.
I think we should lower the battlecruisers sig radius to range between say 200 and 250m instead of 240 and 300. That way it would be 25% between the biggest cruiser and smallest BC and 28% between the biggest BC and smallest BS, this along with an agility boost should do nicely.
That is all. Thank you if you've read this, and discuss.
|
Redmond Fiur
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 00:42:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Redmond Fiur on 07/05/2006 00:42:26
Not sure about pvp or whatnot, but I recently climbed into a cyclone from my rupture and I have noticed that it is extremely slow to warp, my mammoth maneuvers, aligns, and warps faster then my cyclone 
Though im not sure on making them more agile, it seems ok for the amount of firepower these things can field. But then I have pvp experience that ranks in the negative so...
And about the sig radius, as I don't pvp (yet, hopefully) I cant really provide any imput for that area
|
Jin Entres
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 00:43:00 -
[4]
Being largely specialized in cruisers and battlecruisers, this is something that has caused me grief. The BC handles and takes damage too close to like a battleship while it's tanking is much closer to that of cruisers'.
So, I completely agree and support the demand for changes. 
|
Toaster Oven
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 01:00:00 -
[5]
Very well thought out post. I agree on all counts. The only issue is that CCP would have to introduce 50MN AB + MWD in order to keep up with new BC mass as current cruiser class propulsion mods would become ineffective. So that would probably result in BC mass being quadrupled and agility mod cut down to 1/4 of it's value to prevent oversized propulsion modules from being used on cruisers.
|
Lefia
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 04:40:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Lefia on 07/05/2006 04:43:21
I agree too, BCs are far too bulky for their own good. They are like a destroyer, made fragile by their own size. And, for something that I believe the DEVs referred to as "a Pocket BS", I don't think they should be as fragile as they are.
 Originally by: hired goon
I agree with every point and counter point that has been brought up in this and every other argument ever had.
do
|
Nyxus
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 05:24:00 -
[7]
Great post Mr Rooflez.
This is exactly what the problem with BC's are. They move like a BS, take damage like a BS, tank like a cruiser and deal damage like a big cruiser.
Thank you for taking the time to post the math and the reasoning for you suggested fix to BC's. I can't see how anyone could argue that they are balanced as is.
100% /signed
Nyxus
Macgyver can build an airplane out of gum and paper clips, but Chuck Norris can kill him and take it.
|
Wolfgang Jager
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 06:00:00 -
[8]
As another battlecruiser fan, I agree completely. They do need to be tweaked. Either slightly less plodding and cumbersome or slightly more "pocket battleship" like. Getting pounded like a BS and being less survivable would be okay if they had heavier firepower, or staying as they are and being a little more able to get out of the way.
|
Jerick Ludhowe
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 07:11:00 -
[9]
Can't agree with you more Mr rooflez. You backed uped your points with quick mathmatical reasoning and proposed some rather modest and imo well ballanced change ideas.
I do hope that if this is indeed looked into by the devs that they take a quick look at destroyers as well. Personally I think the sig radius is the bigger issue for both ships however the agility on the BCs is beyond embarassing for a ship class that should have a rather significan manuverability advantage when compared to its larger kin.
|
Beowulf Scheafer
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 07:24:00 -
[10]
tbh with you all, this is sad, but not a nessecerity to do, like for examples blasters.
when do u await the changes, this year or soon ?
no jokes now, it seems the maths for bc's are just completly wrong. even tho i don't think the ship agility is something that gets a primary on the tasklist
i'm a cheap ass (that only seem to have money  ) and take a hac with the agility of a cruiser and the dmg of a good bc.... easiest solution, me thinks.
|
|
|
Beowulf Scheafer
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 07:26:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Redmond Fiur
Though im not sure on making them more agile, it seems ok for the amount of firepower these things can field. But then I have pvp experience that ranks in the negative so...
yo, man. that outspeak (if thats a prosper word) is so cool that it will make its way into my bio 
|
Ginaz
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 08:49:00 -
[12]
Ever noticed that you have the thrust of a Cruiser on Battlecruisers?
That's the problem with BCs.... everything else is totally fine
|
Gronsak
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 08:53:00 -
[13]
biggest problem is their sig
needs to be 190-225 or there abouts, 300sig is far too high and they die fast to BS fire!
-------------------Sig-----------------------
Boost the raven, i dont know how since its got great volley damage, massive range, any damage type, overpowered tank BUT BOOOOOOOSTTTT them raveneeeeen |
Negative Nancy
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 09:06:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Negative Nancy on 07/05/2006 09:07:59
What about propulsion strength? How does that factor in to time to warp?
Oh yea and....Why not have the range bonus that you get similar to Destroyer/Frigate (the rate of fire anti-bonus is crap, that should be done away with IMHO)
|
Eximius Josari
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 09:10:00 -
[15]
Yeah, BCs seem very heavy for their role...either Bses are way too fast or they are way too slow.
~Shadowlord |
keepiru
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 09:12:00 -
[16]
Nice post.
It would be worth to note that with tier-2 BCs this is an issue that will come VERY MUCH to the fore, whether CCP is willing to admit it or not.
Think about it, if they make tier-2 BCs any bigger & slower and tier-1s, they will be BIGGER than battleships, and warp considerably slower. That would be just a little ridiculous.
Ive been occasinally whining for a look at BC agility - they got skipped when cruisers got that boosted - and their sig size... hopefully this will get tux to at least take it into consideration - even though hes got a lot on his plate atm - as its something that will absolutely require a look at soon anyway for the reasons stated above.
Well, here's to hoping :)
----------------
Official ISD cake & bree reserve thief.
Barricades a speciality!
Last stands on request. |
Max Hardcase
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 10:48:00 -
[17]
Ye mighty Tuxford take notice of this worthy thread please.
----------------------------------------------
Max Hardcase > yawn-o-rama
Max Hardcase > is this typical of RA warfare ?
FreaKsh0 > yes boredom fitted in all their high slots |
Reto
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 10:56:00 -
[18]
an agility increase to bc like the one for cruisers after....cold war, exodus ? would be ace. bc are very vulnerable to bs but make a hell of a cruiser killer so a a bit more agility would be simply a good idea. at least it would make using a bc more attractive than atm.
|
smallgreenblur
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 12:50:00 -
[19]
Agreed with this, especially if t2 bcs get the same boost. Having the agility /sig radius of a bs and tanking somwhere between HAC and cruiser level is a pretty massive penalty for an otherwise useful ship class.
sgb
C6 is recruiting ... visit www.c6-eve.com or join channel c-6 for details. |
Aberash
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 13:04:00 -
[20]
Nice post roof, and agreed, imo main problem is sig radius, like you said should be made more round 200, When pvp'ing in Ferox took a Raven 2 or so volleys to strip my hardened shield  whilst i was only making a dent.
Defo need to fix then BC's will be much more useful in the field.
|
|
|
Tehyarec
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 13:04:00 -
[21]
Very much agreed with rooflez.
The Brutix has twice the signature radius of a Thorax. When you look at them side by side in-game, the difference in their sizes sure as hell isn't that big. And then the Megathron is 400m sig radius, and when you look at the Brutix and Megathron side by side, the size difference is huge! Given that Thorax has 140m sig radius and Megathron 400m, Brutix should be no more than 225m.
And yeah, the propulsion and agility. I find it silly that my Megathron and Dominix are as maneuverable as the Brutix.
I love the Brutix, really, but currently the biggest thing keeping me from using it is that it really takes too much damage and is too slow and cumbersome. For lvl 3 missions that I currently do a battleship is simply a better choice. Much better survivability, and just as agile. And the latter point is just wrong.
Really, the BCs need some loving. They're a very nice ship class potentially, and Brutix and Cyclone are two of some of the best looking ships in the game, so I truly hope they will get the adjustments they deserve!
|
Tehyarec
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 13:34:00 -
[22]
Ough, though to take the Brutix out for the first time since I got the battleships last week. Fitted an afterburner for travelling to my destination to go finish the mission in which I blew up with my Catalyst before downtime (due to much weirdness) - and immediately upon activation remembered why I don't usually fit an afterburner on the Brutix.
Man, it accelerates slower than a BS with AB. I remember once slapping a 100mn AB on the Brutix too, max speed was good but acceleration sucked big time.
So, to fix that acceleration in general should be improved, and also as was previously mentioned, we'd need some sort of AB/MWD type between 10mn and 100mn for BC use.
|
SilentSentinel
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 13:41:00 -
[23]
Signed
I love my proph alot, but I've noticed it is slower to warp than my corpmates BS(Domi). BC's in general (all race bc's) need more love by the Devs. I agree with the OP.
1. Smaller sig.
2. Larger Drone Bay (it's sad that some cruisers have a larger drone bay than a bc) The Proph's drone bay is only 25m3... holds only 5 light drones. It should be able to hold 75m3 in drones. Needs a mix of heavy, med, and lights.
3. The Proph doesn't get any weapon dmg bonus at all. It needs one more mid slot. Otherwise, might as well be driving a Maller.
Cheers
|
babylonstew
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 15:27:00 -
[24]
i agree 100% with the op, bc needs its agility looked at big time, and a modest sig reduction might be in order to, i think if they were a bit more agile and slightly smaller, they would be a very usefull ship class, as it stands, they are kinda gimped as allready stated
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 15:28:00 -
[25]
Agreed.
Their sigs should be absolutely no more than 60-80% more than that of a cruiser, and their agility modifier should not be 10 times that of a battleship 
[23] Member: Official Forum Warrior
What's with the blue robots? Click my sig.
|
Malthros Zenobia
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 16:20:00 -
[26]
Originally by: keepiru
Nice post.
It would be worth to note that with tier-2 BCs this is an issue that will come VERY MUCH to the fore, whether CCP is willing to admit it or not.
They just need to give the Caldari Teir2 BC a 5%dmg, 5% rof bonus set, and I won't care if it gets hit easily like a Ferox with an extender.
Ofcourse, if Tux would make our assault missiles too, that'd be sweet since no short-range missile for cruisers = LAME.
At the Very least, make the assault launchers have a base ROF of 10 or so, so we can just machine gun light missiles for the time being.
|
Justice Bringer
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 16:28:00 -
[27]
I also agree with the OP, and I have long believed that BCs should have BC sized mods and not cruiser sized mods.
Maybe CCP will make some modifications, but I won't hold my breat ....
Justice 
|
Troye
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 16:51:00 -
[28]
I have to agree with this, yeah BCs do seem to take ages to warp. Afterall they are more cruisers than they are battle ships so should be abit faster.
/signed
_______________________________________________
[URL=http://www.glitteryourway.com][/URL]
|
Ghoest
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 16:52:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Ghoest on 07/05/2006 16:53:44
The current situation is fine.
I say this as someone who almost only uses battlecruisers(I occassionally fly various T2 frigs for fun and exploration.)
Battlecruisers are very good as they are.
EDIT: I do agree cruiser rockets/topedoes are needed, but thats not just a BC issue.
Wherever you went - here you are.
|
Raptornas
|
Posted - 2006.05.07 17:33:00 -
[30]
Agreed.
Brutix is a fantastic ship but why is it slower to warp than a mega :S.
__
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 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 |