- T3 cruisers need tank and dps nerfs, especially the T2 resists

- HAC's, mainly ishtar and cerberus offer lots of dps and high resists/low sig/good speed mainly ishtar needs the nerfs

- ABC's offer battleship dps at a lower cost with more mobility .. pushed to T2 might help with this and slight dps nerf

- faction cruisers like gila, VNI offer plenty of dps and tank with low sig and mobility.. some nerfs here needed

Would help a few battleships, but not all. If there weren't bombs apoc, napoc, mega, domis and baddons would probably be more common

After the recent mobility nerf/buff I've heard many people express that battleships are not as PVP-viable compared to HACs, Command Ships and T3s that apply damage much more flexibly and with greater mobility.

ishtar should keep sentries otherwise it becomes too samey as gila, smallerbay. reduced bonuses, specific damage bonuses too heavies and sentries at 7.5% are better options.

ABC's do lack the tank.. but the battleship dps they put out reduces the need for battleships too be used (point of the thread

VNI and gila putting out 900dps or more also makes using battleships much less desirable..

Scan ress and warp speed are the deciding factors, and agility is to bad.

i'd love too know when the T3 cruiser nerf is happening .. march, april, may?...
and if we get any input at all .. not much of that happening lately

I have an IQ of 163 and an 'average' peen of 10.328 inches.

Oh... sorry, I thought this was going in a different direction.


He's still right Baltec1. Of course you can make your mega do amazing things, but at a price.

I can put a higs rig on my mega and make it so slow that you wouldn't notice I was getting away.

Now all 3 of us have correct statements. I'm just not sure what you and I are trying to prove.

Actually, under the best circumstances (with max boosts) it takes 165 bombs to kill a baltec megathron with it's micro warp off and about 103 with MWDs on. It drops to 69 bomb sans MWD and a few less with MWD off without boosts. Also, this assumes that you're using max boosts, which is not the case if you're using t3 boosters.

For the best case scenario you're looking at 28 waves of bombs of six bombs. For a medium size bomb group launching staggered 4 wave runs you'd need about 7 runs to completely wipe a mega fleet, if they keep their wing, squad, and fleet boosters alive the entire fight. Absolute worst case, a single large bombing run could wipe your entire fleet.

Compare that with say, a tengu under bast case circumstances, which takes 593 bombs to destroy with t2 gear, or an eagle which takes about 315 bombs. All of this also ignores what's happening to your megathrons when you get hit by a bomb run, too. One of the biggest advantages of bombing is that it augments the ability of a DPS wing to chew through primaries for two reasons. First, it lowers the EHP pool and critical mass of DPS required to alpha an opposing fleet and second bomb waves break discipline. Each successive bomb wave makes the problem worse, and under continuous pressure your fleet will fall apart.

We know this, everyone knows this. It doesn't fit your narrative about being a special snowflake though. Like your arguments centered on a megathron that tracks as well as electron blasters (it doesn't because of math) or your mega that aligns and warps as fast as cruisers (this one can happen, but it's not doing much else,) it's just a red herring. You never post any fits or anything else, just some quip about how you can do it and no one else can.

It kinda ends up being go armor or go home tho. It takes over a hundred bombs to destroy a baltec but can the same be said about any non-armor boat?

an arty problem then

yeah so reduce the alpha for some RoF , maybe a few other tweaks with the ship and then other ships might get used more.

Two nanos on a mega is a naked align time of 8 seconds, which is about 2-3 seconds longer than most naked t1 cruisers, and a single hyperspatial is a warp speed of 2.4 au/sec.

Tell the whole story about implants if you're going to imply their use. If you actually want a megathron to warp and align as fast as cruisers that aren't using nanos it's more like 3 nanos and 3 hyperspatials.

Even then, are you following primaries or applying DPS as quickly as the cruisers in your gang? What happens when you try to make up for these deficiencies too?

Go find where I said nobody can do what I do with battleships.

Yep, EFT doesn't tell the whole picture; but it's certainly closer to the truth than your anecdotes are. You've always had a hard time answering posts that directly refute your statements with hard math, and this is a pretty characteristic response.

If you're talking about implants, lets talk about what we can do with implants then, and when players are actually going to use implants or how we should consider them when discussing ship balance. If we're going to fly a megathron with ascendancy implants, shouldn't we then start talking about harpies with snakes or halos?

So in the 12 seconds that it takes you to lock a cruiser primary that isn't killed by your entourage the opposing gang's logi isn't doing anything? And how's your warp speed fit megathron going to fare applying dps to your primary? What about in the 18 seconds or so it will take you to lock a frigate? When you've considered gun tracking, your applied DPS is going to weigh in at about the same or less than a cruiser, with the added penalty of having to fly with expensive implants and a long period of no damage at all. The net sum here is negative.

I stand by this statement because I feel that it's implied by many of your statements.

Your not actually getting the performance you claim

Excuse me, but what is all about?

i completelly missed the thread's subject ((

T3's are fine (except railgus)

so nerf ishtars and railgus and bombers

That's not true. I rarely get a second date.

Apparently it is if you can't understand the difference between six and eight. So what is a faster align time? Six or eight seconds? The only rubbish here is your ad hominem attack against my credibility as a battleship pilot, which is at worst unverifiable, and a pretty sad refutation. I've been a battleship enthusiast for some time now; but don't worry, you don't have to take word for it, but you do have to put your alignment time lie on the shelf.

No, they don't, but you tout your arguments as if the only thing a player has to do to make battleships compete is sacrifice a few modules for mobility. It's just a talking point for you that conceals the truth that a player looking to tag along in a megathron to a cruiser fleet without impairing the cruiser gang's warp speed needs to invest in an implant set. It doesn't sound so striking or stark when you wave the pricetag of the implants in players faces. So say what you mean next time, like three slots and six (very expensive) implants, instead of three slots, ok?

The locking speed formula (more math ) is locktime = 40000/(scanres * asinh(sigrad)^2). Even with ideal target calling, the cycle time of your weapons, fluid nature of fleet fights against small ships, and the tendancy of FCs to order orbit distances are still going to prevent you from applying substantial DPS. Your megathron isn't going to be able to react fast enough to a target's range of potential orbits to establish a transversal course before it becomes un-ideal. Reacting to immediate threats like dictor warpins is less possible, and with poor target calling you're left ineffectual.

Again, you don't know anything about my relationship with battleships, other than I care about them.

Whelp, take a look at the above. You're visionary and everyone else is stupid is the gist of it. They're two contradictory statements that came from the same fingertips. So which is it? That you're a visionary and no-one else is or that you never said that?

The truth, baltec, is that there are plenty of intelligent, capable, and innovative players involved in this game, and no matter what you think of me, if there's a good way to utilize an existing ship class, once the secret gets out, everyone will soon know about it. Take a look at the beam navy slicers that have been flying around the last few days. Word spreads, this time via TMC and EN24, and people take notice. You've been standing on your soap box for a long time now and I haven't seen people lining up to follow your advice. So where are the battleship support groups in cruiser and frigate gangs and why is it that you're the only one making claims about megathron superiority in your cruiser fleets?

Could it be that the friends that you play with like having a megathron as a hood ornament? Maybe, it's fun to have a little flair once and a while. Virtually every bash or fun fleet I've been a part of over the last three years has been bolstered by a morale drake, even if it's not the smartest choice. Are you a good enough player that you pay attention and execute fleet commands quickly enough to not at least have a negative impact on your fleets? Sure, it's possible. If you're not really hurting the fleets that you're a part of or causing trouble for them, no-one reasonable is going to care if it makes people happy.

Now I don't post on forums often, but I am bored in class and saw this thread.
First off, baltec1 is ~that guy~ in fleets who despite being told things will argue endlessly how you are bad and he is correct.

So with that out of the way, since he appears to be an EFT master/fitting guru, let's check his fit.

https://zkillboard.com/kill/42350895/

Yep. 4 CPRIIs, 2 Nanos, Shield fit, 0 Tracking, and only 34,000 damage taken with logistics.
Yeah, Ishtar literally has better stats than your fit in EVERY regard, hell a Drake would do better. Sorry, that's really bad.

So yeah, you can align as fast as cruisers, but you are also effectively worthless to the fleet and I could solo that terrible fit with a Merlin.

And before you bring "ranking" into the argument, Baltec1, as I know you will because you are merely grasping at straws now, 80% of your kills are POS modules and the least amount of people I've seen on a mail in your killboard is 11.
Your experience with this game is simply not enough to be making arguments for or against a ship/balance issue. Sorry. Go back to ratting in Deklein.

Have you seen this thread? It's like 50% Baltec1 arguing that because his Battleship is able to have similar stats to a Cruiser that they are fine and balanced.

Cool story, then why should I fly a battleship just to intentionally gimp every minor advantage it affords?

I think at this point I give up on trying to explain simple game mechanics to you. You have no idea what on earth you are talking about.
So let's try once more. If you need to gimp the tank of BS down to that of a cruiser yet still get out performed by a HAC at half the SP/ISK cost and you need billions of isk worth of implants, you have proven yourself wrong and everyone else right. Thank you for proving to Eve that BS are not viable.

Talos does it better, btw.

The ones I run with have 34k EHP, plenty. Tracking of 0.07 with void is plenty because we roll it in fleets with hard tackle.

It also has the massive advantage of looking more engagable, which appears to be 85% of eve roaming pvp these days.

I dunno, when the FC says harpy fleet and the guy shows up in a mega.... Do we really want to encourage that sort of behavior from everyone? I think the guy should be used as an example and handled accordingly. We have to stick the the doctrine or chaos will run rampant.

If a ship doesn't contribute anything to the fleet, it is accepted on some other reasons. Like in baltec's case.

I think it's cool that he always flies a Mega, and it's certainly fun for him and his group. However it doesn't have much to do with the discussion about viability of battleships in PVP.

Translation: just because most people suck and can't think their way out of a wet paper sack doesn't mean there is a problem with the class, it means people need to suck less.

I hope I got that right

I'd be interested in seeing more creativity with the lowest tier of large turrets i.e. 'dual' weapons (signature benefits/burst fire/medium ammo e.t.c e.t.c)

The addition of the RHML shows there is scope to play around with weapons that, fluff wise at least, are supposed to be multiple cruiser weapons bolted together...

Give Combat Battlecruisers and Battleships a secondary weapons array equivalent to half the number of turrets or launchers rounded up, to a maximum of five (each takes the place of a T3 subsystem slot in the fitting window). This does not apply to Attack Battlecruisers or Command ships. CPU and powergrid are *not* increased to offset these additions, and hull bonuses may or may not apply to secondary weapons.

GÇó Combat Battlecruisers: Secondary weapon slots are limited to light weapons (only)
GÇó Battleships: Secondary weapon slots are limited to medium weapons (only)

Examples:

GÇó Drake gains 3x light launcher slots; Drake Navy Issue gains 4x light launcher slots
GÇó All Marauders gain 2x light launcher or 2x light turret slots (Marauder bonuses should probably be revised to extend to medium weapon systems as well)
GÇó Armageddon, Typhoon and Typhoon Fleet Issue all gain 3x medium launcher and 3x medium turret slots (but are still limited to a maximum combination of 5)
GÇó Scorpion Navy Issue gains 3x medium launchers and 2x medium turret slots

Like I said, it's a very cool thing you do and I fully understand the added value for your personal game experience. I respect your persistence and fittings, and you get tons of extra points for the hull choice. It's just not the topic we're discussing.

I maintain that the game balance should allow battleships to be fitted and flown as battleships, not as battleships trying very hard to be Harpies. Currently the meta favours speed (on-grid) over the natural qualities of battleships, and my interpretation is that it's because battleships just don't have quite enough of their natural qualities to make the trade-off worthwhile.

Unfortunately all the latest new ship additions just reinforce the speed meta over staying power and raw damage with poor application.

First and foremost, run the numbers before passing judgement.

Seriously Baltec, you have yet to address the fact that your Mega has the stats of a T1 cruiser. Why should I fly it over a t1 cruiser?

But why should I fly that over a vigilant? Its half the cost and bonused for medium guns?
Or is it the 10% bonus to "Morale" that you are equating into your calculations?

You are quite possibly the least qualified person to speak about balance, yet it seems with standard Goon tradition you just can't stop posting after having been wrong on every single aspect.

I'll ask once again, how many times has your brain been concussed to think that your mega fit puts out 1200 dps?

So what's happening in R-ZUOL isn't a war then? Because I didn't see many battleships there. Mostly harpies, bombers, tengus, eagles and ishtars. Also, the wrecking ball relies on the archon, which doesn't even need to have subcap support to be effective.

And for the record, this is what tracking and signature radius mean in a fleet context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJYQ7_w0oEs

Well spin it how you want, but CFC isn't using battleships to win fights.

The point is that we use doctrines to win fights. A deployment isn't a trivial affair, even if it's something that designed to simply engender content, and players use the ships that win fights. It makes sense not to risk strategic assets like supercarriers to RF a random system, but the SRP and deployment headache to move battleships vs harpies or even ishtars isn't terrible as even a deployment to western curse is relatively easy to stage in to. It's not like the harpies and ishtars are coming from all the way up in dekein. A winning doctrine is a winning doctrine, and even if it's a hard one to move you'd never think twice about going through the trouble if it gives you a better chance.

Besides, good fights didn't stop the CFC from using them against BL, which never credibly threatened CFC sov in any way.

Gila