I think this is kind of a cool idea. I'd like to take this and run with it in my mind a bit - mind if I write about it later after I ruminate on it?

Sadly it is a problem that HACs can regularly outDPS, outrun, outsigtank, and outtank, the CBCs nowadays. But yet people in 1 thread try to argue that cost should be the balancing factor, when a minute later when talking of their favorite ships, cost doesn't matter.
There is always the T2 argument, but well T2 CBCs are commandships, which the only thing they compete on are tank, and perhaps utility in the command sense.

Although you can put a command module on your CBC and make you're gang extremely more effective without the cost of a CS. And someday when they finally figure out how they want to work out on grid boosting, they'll probably have a springback because of the lower odds of them being primaried.

And someday when they finally figure out how they want to work out on grid boosting, they'll probably have a springback because of the lower odds of them being primaried.

I'm all for 25% oh bonus, to effect that is.
Don't think it would be game breaking.

If it applied to abcs though... Heated talos dps.

Dat gank projection.

I would say Combat Battlecruiser need something more, with the recent warp speed changes, making the CBC even slower than they were before, the low speed, high sig, they do have a problem. I wouldn't say DPS is an issue, the Cyclone has a naturally low DPS in comparison to other CBC's exchange for a good active tank.

CPP already gave a new thing to CBC's, the MMJD, but I don't see people using them, at least not in Highsec wars that I participate in. Null, and Low may be different.

Personally I think all CBC need a speed buff, and maybe to counter it a slight mass increase. Making them good at flying fast in a straight line, that way they get to where they need to be quickly but not so they can turn on a dime and avoid fire like a hac could. Give them all a slightly better tank, increasing the main part of the ships tank while decreasing the unused part, IE: Raise the Ferox's shield HP by 500 and dropping the Armor EHP by 500. But keep the DPS the same. Also changing the warp speed to around 3 AU or 2.75 AU, because 2.5 is just waaay to slow for something with medium guns. The speed bonus plus the MMJD would make them great for landing inside a enemies fleet, and dealing damage there.

Also any bonuses given to CBC should NOT be given to ABC's. The Attack Battlecruisers have roles and are very good and making those roles work, they don't need any buffs.

Currently, bonuses that reduce heat damage are the domain of T3s. Personally, I think it should stay that way.

What I wouldn't object to, however, is seeing battlecruisers change a little bit to better reflect what they are. In terms of size, they're halfway between a cruiser and a battleship. They use cruiser-sized modules which puts them at a disadvantage against battleships and they're almost as slow as those same battleships which leaves them at a disadvantage against cruisers. If you think about it from a lore sort of perspective, those medium-sized guns look kind of small on a battlecruiser hull, which means there's a lot of room for all kinds of interesting ship systems. It doesn't have to all be taken up by hanging cages for exotic dancers.

We already have ships with overheat bonuses to tanking and prop mods, so that's out. Battlecruisers do have near-exclusive access to Medium Microjumps, which is good but doesn't seem like quite enough. Personally, I've always been underwhelmed by the tank on a battlecruiser - though that could admittedly just mean I'm bad at tanking them - and would like to see the EHP increased somewhat. That's power creep though and we don't really want that ... so perhaps ...

A specific % bonus to damage dealt by overheated guns.

HAC's obviously out damage them while matching the tank

I've finished the second part of The Current State of Combat Battlecruisers. This part focuses on data I gathered regarding the usage of combat battlecruisers. I think you'll be as surprised as I am to see the numbers laid out.

[quote=Psianh Auvyander]I've finished the second part of The Current State of Combat Battlecruisers. I think they could benefit from partial T2 resistances and a slight buff to DPS. Giving them an inherent -1 or even -2 warp core strength could give them an interesting role as well.

Combat Battlecruisers are in fairly dire straights having been consistently nerfed into the ground for the past year - the Drake in particular (no surprises there). I think they could benefit from partial T2 resistances and a slight buff to DPS. Giving them an inherent -1 or even -2 warp core strength could give them an interesting role as well.

No T2 resists and with EHP and DPS you have to be careful not to make them just smaller looking and faster Battleships.

BCs have their place in the tiericide but the problem lies in fleet composition, usually you go all BS or cruisers (T1-T2-T3), BC fleets are very rare, except for the 'fun' fleets. And it's not the fault of the model, rather the issue with pilots and FCs finding a good role for them. In the end they are mostly in-between ships and that's why they only appear in-between.
Certain roles have been created to give them, like CS-¦ and Assaults, a job to do. But most roles are filled by other hulls so it is difficult to imagine a sensible new role.

Personally I would let them be for a while until something pops up that really could fit a BC hull - so far, nothing has.

In the end the gap is just perceived - cause if nothing seems to fit in it, maybe it just isn't there or big enough to be a problem.

PS: Reading up a bit on certain subjects there is one thing that pops to mind a bit. The 'cheap' links. What if the BC would all get an extra support high and/or the ability to use 2 WF links ? This would make BC gangs much stronger without becoming more expensive by transferring to CS. And with the on/off grid debate going on, this could not only be a temporary fix making a transition much easier.

What of the people who dont/cant use links. What else can we bring to the table for bcs? If you train racial BC to 5, why would you use a cyclone/drake/hurricane? I cant be the only one who would enjoy soloing with a bc and it actually do something other ships cant. 600dps hurricane is meh, when you have brutix and myrm pushing well past that with a decent tank. Hell even hacs outclass most bcs. Deimos/vaga/sac/cerb can do all the same things a bc can, are slightly easier to train into, and are faster and smaller. Other than links, what else can they do? When theyre called "battle" cruisers, i would expect them to be more battle like.

Hence why my proposal goes hand in hand with their theme. They specialize in extended, high dmg and tank, and become much harder to engage for periods of time. I mean on a link perspective, you could make an uber tank drake with links for OGB that with OH gives it rediculous tank for a few minutes. Meaning if someone wants to kill your OGB, they better be ready to deal with chewing through high buffer/resists. Meanwhile theyre vulnerabe during the process. Makes t1 links posssible without being blapped off the field the moment someone notices.

This assuming they ever move links on grid.

Can you take off your glasses, that I shat all over your suggestion ? I didn't, don-¦t get defensive and argue against something I didn't say . Nothing I said goes angainst an OH concept, it's just a bit 'meh' to introduce a new type or reinvent an old role - and I didn't even say that.

And where is it easier to train into HACs ? And who said support highs (2 then) can only be used for links ???? 2 High neuts/vamps go a long way in small gang or solo PvP and there are more options. And all ships are not similar and play different, no same size - same dps rule.
And what is it with this moar HP, moard dps whining all the time ? A ship has more stats/traits to tinker with. The OH is a nice addition, but doesn't change the game, it's like a fancy bow-tie to an old suit.

And I take the on-grid boost as a given for the near (soon tm) future, it's worth considering.

I wasnt defensive, its a counter arguement/debate. No harsh feelings here. Internetz is tricky. Im just trying to make sure im not missing anything. Sorry if it seemed like i was attacking your point.

First off I love the myrm in model terms and PvE usage but haven't experienced PvP yet with it. However I'm thinking that with CBC's having a command role they (and Command Ships) should maybe be able to use the target spectrum breaker. Naturally any command ship will be one of the first targets to be shot down so interfering with enemy targeting would give a CBC or CS more of a fighting chance on the field. Until OGB is changed I doubt command ships will show up on the actual field of battle but for smaller groups a hard to target CBC with links could become a much nicer prospect.

I like the idea of the target spectrum breaker but don't hear of it being used much and it's really cheap so I assume it isn't that effective. Giving the CBC a bonus on its utility (I suggested the same for the nestor but with higher bonus) could give them the additional survivability to bring them back into the field more often.

Hehe, well, you quoted me .... but no offense taken, was just blustering myself up a bit

Anyway some thoughts on the one-more-support-highslot thingy ? Could give a lot more options and validity to the BCs. Maybe even just for one of them, not all per faction. Or two get an extra high slot, but only one the exrta free link.

.. go make em better ,)

stuff

I think you underestimate the hurricane. Yes the brutix does more damage but is limited to 3-6km. A hurricane projects out to 10km+ depending on faction ammo or hail.


I do like the heat damage bonus as the weapons are on larger ships therefore could have better heat dissipation.

They arent used a lot because it seems the meta atm is around kiting fast ships. But ive seen plenty of use in whspace with CBCs and they are very powerful in a brawl as a cheap low skill alternative to hacs.

I agree with the OP here that CBCs are in kind of a hard spot.

I saw a few people mention that the low popularity of CBCs is due to fleet composition considerations but I don't know if I really buy that as the reason for their waning popularity right now. I've been in a number of mixed fleet compositions recently with the DPS wings being made up of either eagles and feroxs or cerbs and drakes. In my experience the problem with CBCs in relation to HACs is that their sig radius and speed tend to make them relatively easy to take off the field compared to their HAC counterparts. As a result they get primaried early. Feroxes and drakes do have an EHP advantage over cruisers but it's outpaced by their signature inflation and slow speed- applied DPS against them is just too high for their EHP to compensate.

It's not really that different from what battleships face in fleet battles. Every time I've gone up against a battleship fleet lately with HACs or T3s, the battleship's DPS and EHP advantage just can't compete with sig and speed tank. It's similar on the small scale in PVP too, CBCs are very vulnerable to being blobbed and are too slow to get into position in fast paced fights.

I like what the recent balance changes have done for cruiser sized and smaller ships. They're fun and combat with them is fast paced and exciting. They're also cheap and easy for new players to skill in to. Most frigates, destroyers, and cruisers seem to have a role that they fill well and are, for the most part, well represented in the areas they excel. That's perfect- it's how it should be, but CBCs and battleships should be represented too. They're still used in small numbers, but all but a few aren't the optimal choice and as players train new skills to move towards optimal ships they're just going to get less and less popular.

If I remember rightly (and acknowledging this isn't a sea combat sim) BC's were designed to outrun what they couldn't outgun and outgun that which they couldn't ourun. They were designed for fast slashing attacks rather than go toe-to-toe with bigger guns and as such had BS size hulls but without BS guns (either smaller guns or less larger guns) but crucially they packed enough propulsive power to keep up with cruisers and even outrun heavy cruisers (HAC's in Eve I guess). Maybe heavily bonusing AB effect to reflect the huge amount of space assigned over to engines would help CBC utility (without giving them a sig the size of a small moon ;) )

Maybe heavily bonusing AB effect to reflect the huge amount of space assigned over to engines would help CBC utility (without giving them a sig the size of a small moon ;) )

OH bonus would apply to prop modules as well. As an example my cyclone goes around 500m/s with AB and 2k m/s with OH mwd.With OH bonus, you would be pretty close to doubling it. Temporarily anyway. That would give you options to outrun what you cant outgun.

I agree that having an OH bonus would be a fresh way of improving CBCs without having to straight up buff their base stats. Overheating is a fun mechanic but it isn't something that CCP has developed as thoroughly as I would like. A change of this kind to CBCs might be an interesting way of introducing a few new overheat mechanics and modules as well. We'll see.

I'm still skeptical that CBCs and battleships will be changed soon though. CCP does seem to be aware at least that battleships, while they might be well balanced against each other, aren't particularly well balanced towards other subcaps or capitals. They don't, however, seem to really have a cohesive plan as to what to do about it. The recent nestor changes are a good indication that they don't really have a good plan for what even a niche battleship ought to be. I think they've dug in their heels around the idea of power-creep and probably want to try to balance less linearly, but at least in the case of the nestor, it just doesn't work.

I apologize for the long delay, but I've finished this series with The Current State of Battlecruisers: Part Three.

I had a lot of fun with this topic overall. It was really interesting to see the stats in part two especially, and while I am not a fan of math, it was somewhat invigorating to see the results (albeit results achieved with a lot of help!)

Thanks for doing all the maths. though, i agree that a triple rep myrm with OH bonus would be borderline OP. So what about for tank bonus, while OH, cap consumption is reduced for boosters/reppers. Just a thought anyway.