Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
SilentAsTheGrave
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
15
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 07:08:36 -
[91] - Quote
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Let's not also forget with the recent warp changes BS"s just simply suck to fly now from a roaming perspective. Maybe, just maybe; not every ship is suited for roaming?
The battleship is meant to be deployed with a purpose. It is not some nimble butterfly who has the luxury of just zipping around just because. It is a hard hitting beast. It moves with a goal in mind, a target, for heavy defense of your home.
Roaming around is not what it does and most certainly does not need to have this changed.
Keep in mind that it not just affects you, but your enemies. It means that when they opt to bring cruisers and smaller to roam around and end up on your front door; you are able to enjoy undocking battleships to start sending hay-makers their way. All with the knowledge they can not snap their fingers and have their battleships zip over to match yours.
Granted the whole bombers thing needs to be addressed in an elegant way, but my point stands. The battleship is in a good spot when it comes to the mobility of other ships.
Another thing to consider is resetting some blues so you don't have to travel as far with your battleships to find targets. Or would that be just a bit too dangerous for you? |
Nina Lowel
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
7
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 08:14:13 -
[92] - Quote
SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Let's not also forget with the recent warp changes BS"s just simply suck to fly now from a roaming perspective. Maybe, just maybe; not every ship is suited for roaming? The battleship is meant to be deployed with a purpose. It is not some nimble butterfly who has the luxury of just zipping around just because. It is a hard hitting beast. It moves with a goal in mind, a target, for heavy defense of your home. Roaming around is not what it does and most certainly does not need to have this changed. Keep in mind that it not just affects you, but your enemies. It means that when they opt to bring cruisers and smaller to roam around and end up on your front door; you are able to enjoy undocking battleships to start sending hay-makers their way. All with the knowledge they can not snap their fingers and have their battleships zip over to match yours. Granted the whole bombers thing needs to be addressed in an elegant way, but my point stands. The battleship is in a good spot when it comes to the mobility of other ships. Another thing to consider is resetting some blues so you don't have to travel as far with your battleships to find targets. Or would that be just a bit too dangerous for you?
Battleships serve no purpose. The moment they hit the battlefield they are probed, warped to at range for bombs and bombs launched before they can even get aligned out. They are a joke right now. Doesn't even take that many bombs either.
In Null, any type of engagement that matters is going to have a sizable wing of bombers which means battleships are worthless in any engagement that matters, it's really that simple. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15331
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 09:19:56 -
[93] - Quote
Nina Lowel wrote:SilentAsTheGrave wrote:Feyd Rautha Harkonnen wrote:Let's not also forget with the recent warp changes BS"s just simply suck to fly now from a roaming perspective. Maybe, just maybe; not every ship is suited for roaming? The battleship is meant to be deployed with a purpose. It is not some nimble butterfly who has the luxury of just zipping around just because. It is a hard hitting beast. It moves with a goal in mind, a target, for heavy defense of your home. Roaming around is not what it does and most certainly does not need to have this changed. Keep in mind that it not just affects you, but your enemies. It means that when they opt to bring cruisers and smaller to roam around and end up on your front door; you are able to enjoy undocking battleships to start sending hay-makers their way. All with the knowledge they can not snap their fingers and have their battleships zip over to match yours. Granted the whole bombers thing needs to be addressed in an elegant way, but my point stands. The battleship is in a good spot when it comes to the mobility of other ships. Another thing to consider is resetting some blues so you don't have to travel as far with your battleships to find targets. Or would that be just a bit too dangerous for you? Battleships serve no purpose. The moment they hit the battlefield they are probed, warped to at range for bombs and bombs launched before they can even get aligned out. They are a joke right now. Doesn't even take that many bombs either. In Null, any type of engagement that matters is going to have a sizable wing of bombers which means battleships are worthless in any engagement that matters, it's really that simple.
It would take over 100 bombs to bring down a baltec fleet. Only shield doctrines that use ships without a resist bonus are easy targets. The reason you dont see BS fleets is due to three things.
T3 being massivly overpowered Ishtars abusing sentries ( not just sentry firepower but their better tracking) logistics.
All three need to be sorted, the battleships themselves dont need any buffs.
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
3
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 11:06:07 -
[94] - Quote
One-part fix would be to relegate sentry use to battleship hulls - increase the volume of sentries and up battleships' dronebays.
1) Ishtar won't be able to sport more than 1 set of sentries, if a full set at all. 2) Sentries' damage and tracking stay the same 3) Battleships might sneak into the meta of fleet warfare again due to 1)
If bandwidth stays the same, then an Apocalypse battleship with its 50 Mbit/sec drone bandwidth, would be able to wield the same number of sentries as it does now - two.
Someone lobby for this, because I'm le tired. |
March rabbit
Federal Defense Union
1547
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 12:18:19 -
[95] - Quote
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:One-part fix would be to relegate sentry use to battleship hulls - increase the volume of sentries and up battleships' dronebays.
1) Ishtar won't be able to sport more than 1 set of sentries, if a full set at all.... btw: little offtopic here. Recently unpacked my old Gila (bought in 2010 and seen many different spaces since). Found that Gila can no more use heavy drones. Yes, i recall something about changes to drones. So the question: how did it happen so Gila was 'changed' and Ishtar was not? For me it looks very strange.
The Mittani: "the inappropriate drunked joke"
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2182
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 12:23:45 -
[96] - Quote
March rabbit wrote:Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:One-part fix would be to relegate sentry use to battleship hulls - increase the volume of sentries and up battleships' dronebays.
1) Ishtar won't be able to sport more than 1 set of sentries, if a full set at all.... btw: little offtopic here. Recently unpacked my old Gila (bought in 2010 and seen many different spaces since). Found that Gila can no more use heavy drones. Yes, i recall something about changes to drones. So the question: how did it happen so Gila was 'changed' and Ishtar was not? For me it looks very strange.
Basically, the Guristas ships were changed in such a way that they now receive bonuses to drones in their size class. The Worm has amazing light drones (2 of them), the Gila has amazing medium drones (2 of them) and the Rattlesnake has amazing heavy or sentry drones (2 of them) or a Gecko. |
Spurty
Dimension Door We need wards.
1426
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 13:09:12 -
[97] - Quote
Ravasta Helugo wrote:They need a significant boost in EHP or a significant boost to the damage they deal to smaller ships or a significant boost to the damage they deal to larger ships.
Preferably specific battleship hulls will specialize in each of these rolls.
A good practical example is the Rattlesnake: It's damage bonus is to MISSILES, not to Cruises or Torps. This allows it to project terrific firepower onto frigates if it chooses to fit rapid lights. This flexibility should be available to more battleships.
Where should they commence from?
- frigates and work up - battle ships and work up and down - Titans and work down
Asking as I favor such a balance, but it needs to follow some theory such as "1 trit = 1 hit point" math and distribution across hull, armor and shields
There are good ships
And wood ships
And ships that sail the sea
But the best ships are
Spaceships
Built by CCP
|
Commander Spurty
Dimension Door We need wards.
1429
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 13:09:12 -
[98] - Quote
Ravasta Helugo wrote:They need a significant boost in EHP or a significant boost to the damage they deal to smaller ships or a significant boost to the damage they deal to larger ships.
Preferably specific battleship hulls will specialize in each of these rolls.
A good practical example is the Rattlesnake: It's damage bonus is to MISSILES, not to Cruises or Torps. This allows it to project terrific firepower onto frigates if it chooses to fit rapid lights. This flexibility should be available to more battleships.
Where should they commence from?
- frigates and work up - battle ships and work up and down - Titans and work down
Asking as I favor such a balance, but it needs to follow some theory such as "1 trit = 1 hit point" math and distribution across hull, armor and shields
There are good ships
And wood ships
And ships that sail the sea
But the best ships are
Spaceships
Built by CCP
|
Scira Crimson
No Tax No
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 10:43:28 -
[99] - Quote
I read that CCP stated, that they do no plan on changing the warp speed of battle ships because they want more tactical depth. This sounds reasonalbe, but I still think that this is buying a small advantage with a big disadvantage.
A game needs to be fun and thus its important to keep up FLUID GAMEPLAY. Jumping throuh gates and warping, espacially with battleships, is the very definition of "not fun".
Its never a good idea to balance game mechanics around tediousness.
Why not change warp speeds to 10,9,8,6 (depending on ship classes) and balance the ships strengths and weaknesses elsewhere?
I am too new to make good suggestion for specific balance changes, but I think avoiding tediousness and lameness in any game is universally true for good game design.
Another point: Why shouldnt battleships not be slightly better overall than other ships? They have a high costs.
When I get into fleet PvP one day I dont want to see only paper frigates which cost <20 mio, but I want to see player who invest into the win and be rewarded for their bravery.
And I dont want to play fleet PvP when it takes 2h until the fight actually starts...
High mobility and flow is of UTMOST IMPORTANCE in any good PvP game!
(if BS have only 2 AUs I could also play chess via mail... would basically be the same...) |
knobber Jobbler
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
514
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 11:49:39 -
[100] - Quote
Kestral Anneto wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Regarding the battleship damage chart presented here http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66946/1/STEVE_7.png as a link directly from here http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/balance-changes-coming-in-scylla I notice that there are several different colours and that care is taken to directly avoid actually putting names on which ships those colours belong to. No efforts made to specifically cite examples of common usage. I'm led to suspect that pirate faction battleships make up either the lions share or come in close second to more accessible ships like navy apocs and navy megathrons. Just for *once* I'd really like to see a bulletpoint format list of things. Let me even provide an example: Total percentage of pvp damage done by battleships = 100% Navy apoc 14% Navy thron 13.8% Machariel 13% Navy phoon 11% - - - Rokh 1% Navy tempest 1% Something like this would be much appreciated for the public because WE can see where the game is lacking by virture of raw performance alone. People *will always use the best tool available* and will even instruct you dutifully to train for ******* capitals and sentries as soon as you join their alliance because that's what they want and expect from you as a player. Or whatever. Obviously time and money are not considered valid obstacles to fleet engagements above a certain size but you can bet your left testicle noone is going to deliberately bring an underpowered ship for goodfeels in flying an underdog fleet comp and then wiping. i wonder how much of the damage done by BS's is just camping gates, rather than fleet engagements?
Given that Napoc with Triage is an Ishtar hard counter for structure fights, it's probably mainly fleets for the first one. Machariel also works well in fleets right now. Not sure who is using the Mega Navy or Typhoon Navy though.
|
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
15360
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 12:22:24 -
[101] - Quote
knobber Jobbler wrote:Kestral Anneto wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:Regarding the battleship damage chart presented here http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66946/1/STEVE_7.png as a link directly from here http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/balance-changes-coming-in-scylla I notice that there are several different colours and that care is taken to directly avoid actually putting names on which ships those colours belong to. No efforts made to specifically cite examples of common usage. I'm led to suspect that pirate faction battleships make up either the lions share or come in close second to more accessible ships like navy apocs and navy megathrons. Just for *once* I'd really like to see a bulletpoint format list of things. Let me even provide an example: Total percentage of pvp damage done by battleships = 100% Navy apoc 14% Navy thron 13.8% Machariel 13% Navy phoon 11% - - - Rokh 1% Navy tempest 1% Something like this would be much appreciated for the public because WE can see where the game is lacking by virture of raw performance alone. People *will always use the best tool available* and will even instruct you dutifully to train for ******* capitals and sentries as soon as you join their alliance because that's what they want and expect from you as a player. Or whatever. Obviously time and money are not considered valid obstacles to fleet engagements above a certain size but you can bet your left testicle noone is going to deliberately bring an underpowered ship for goodfeels in flying an underdog fleet comp and then wiping. i wonder how much of the damage done by BS's is just camping gates, rather than fleet engagements? Given that Napoc with Triage is an Ishtar hard counter for structure fights, it's probably mainly fleets for the first one. Machariel also works well in fleets right now. Not sure who is using the Mega Navy or Typhoon Navy though.
Phhon is a great anti cruiser platform. As for the mega...
Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
|
Soldarius
Kosher Nostra The 99 Percent
1172
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 14:17:17 -
[102] - Quote
Faridah wrote:Maybe defender missile launchers could finally find it's place. You load them with those new blitzing fast bomb-seeking warheads?
This has been suggested multiple times by both players and CSM members. Apparently it is too difficult for CCP to implement relative to the payoff. (Effort/reward ratio too high.)
That being said, I really like and support the idea of turning Defender missiles into anti-bomb missiles.
http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
|
DHB WildCat
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
421
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:32:43 -
[103] - Quote
So I have a little experience flying Battleships. Ask Chainsaw he'll tell ya 8P. Anyways, here is why "in my opinion" Battleships slowly died over the years and are now useless.
A long time ago CNR's were able to do 11km/sec. Machariels 30km/sec. It was the day of the nanos and even more deadly was the nano Phoon! Orbiting a target at 30km with the agility of a cruiser thanks to non stacked nanos in the lows. Able to warp in less than 3 seconds. This was the hay-day of the Battleship. However since then CCP has .............
1) Nerfed Nanos
2) Nerfed webs! Biggest downfall imo for battleships, all webs used to be 90% which means Battleships could hit small ****
3) BOMBS .......... **** Bombs, but you know whats even worse than bombs?
4) Titan doomsdays. In the old days a Battleship could tank the AOE DD, now they drop you, kill you, and warp off.
5) Fighter Bombers and Fighters ..... Before Drone Damage mods you, in a Battleship, could tank a mother ships drones. Yes they used to be called mother ships. Now you just die!
6) Blops.... Hot Drops ..... nothing you can do against them, and you are not fast enough to get away.
7) Remote Reps ... yes RR used to not exist and it was glorious. Now a single RR logi can rep all of your damage, you have no chance and oh yeah you cant catch them. Also how the **** can 3 vexors with rr (non bonused) tank a 1500 DPS Vindi...... **** that!
8) Warp Speeds - It just takes forever to move around. Which makes roaming boring (20-30 minutes to go 10 jumps) and dangerous since you cannot escape someone chasing you.
9) Cant hit small ****! Missiles are horrible against cruisers and below. Turrets have a hard time tracking..... yes even when target is scrammed and dual webbed. Once again web nerfed ****** Battleships hardcore!
10) T3 - Lets face it, these stupid CRUISERS have more tank, more dps than most Battleships, are faster, and many have awesome bonuses like neut amount, scram range, web, range, ect.... why the hell would you ever fly a BS.
11) Eve's Population - Again, back in the day, a large fleet was maybe 20-30 guys. Now fleets are in the thousands. Battleships take full damage from all sub super class ships. Battleships just dont have the EHP to survive against the blob, even with RR.
12) CCP - So afraid to reward old players. This games core is based around skill points and training. You should be rewarded for playing 10 years and training to get to more powerful ships... which used to be Battleships. However after hundreds of Battleship nerfs, and Hundreds of Cruiser / Frig buffs. The smaller ships with hundreds of thousands of skillpoints less are almost as good. CCP went the cowards way and killed Battleships from killing small ships.
I could go on forever but I am now officially pissed off and want to stop. There are hundreds of reasons that Battleships are dead
and it makes me really sad. |
Alice Saki
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
125777
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:16:49 -
[104] - Quote
Hear Hear!
FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
|
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:26:49 -
[105] - Quote
Word, DHB.
BS need an overall EHP & DPS/DPS application buff, if they want to keep the slow-warping brick concept alive. Marauders - now there's a good direction, but again, a single logi will shut down your damage entirely. So much for "Battle"-ship.
It has been Cruisers Online for some years now. |
Alice Saki
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
125779
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:28:29 -
[106] - Quote
I do like a Battleship, Suppose I could go spend 3 to 4bil on a Marauder fit....
FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
|
Wraith Soulsark
Black VooDoo Asassins The Kadeshi
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:30:18 -
[107] - Quote
Orlacc wrote:You young punks! In my day we used Battleships to mine! (true story) And it was uphill both ways!
you forgot the space snow it was uphill both ways in the space snow and we didnt have shoes either we had to duct tape newspaper to our feet |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:45:59 -
[108] - Quote
Alice Saki wrote:I do like a Battleship, Suppose I could go spend 3 to 4bil on a Marauder fit....
Bastion module needs to be available to T1 Battleships. Or its lesser version at the very least!
Currently, a Bhaalgorn, and pretty much every other pirate/faction battleship hull, can do 190k EHP or 1.2k DPS active tank; the Legion 160k/1.2k and the Proteus 225k/1.2k.
The Scylla patch will reduce T3 EHP, but it's not enough. |
Alice Saki
Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic
125797
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:50:25 -
[109] - Quote
Oh I know...
Many Bhaals Lost to Moros...
FREEZE! Drop the LIKES AND WALK AWAY! - All I want from Xmas is YOUUUUUUUUUUUUU
|
Kestral Anneto
Bentusi Heavy Industries
60
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 18:24:11 -
[110] - Quote
why not give the new entosis link thing to battleships only? would give BS's a much needed role. |
|
Kiandoshia
Applied Anarchy SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2224
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 18:30:23 -
[111] - Quote
I don't think so. With these fights over systems and stations and what not, the actual capturing will take place after the fighting is over. Kind of like Rorquals building POSes with a fleet sitting there to protect it.
Also if you made the Entosis Link BS only, you wouldn't really have the fluid sort of thing CCP wants to achieve and roaming gangs centered around battleships really aren't all that roaming. |
DHB WildCat
Genos Occidere Warlords of the Deep
423
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 18:52:22 -
[112] - Quote
Just purposed an idea for web changes and pirate faction Battleship changes on the faetures and ideas forum. Please like and support if you like the ideas. I really want Battleships to be competative again!
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5566518#post5566518 |
Pyralissa
Kite Co. Space Trucking
9
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 18:58:03 -
[113] - Quote
Bombs invariably get blamed for the demise of Battleships, but bombs aren't a threat to a Hyperion undocking to add a killing punch to a HAC gang. Warp changes and the rather steady stream of skirmish platforms released have done a lot more to kill off the battleship then bombs have.
Battleships are, at their core, brawling platforms. While some of them have great range and decent speed it's nothing compared to what skirmish platforms like the Orthrus are capable of. And that just means you'll either never catch a target you are chasing, or escape someone running you down. This makes battleships a huge liability to a small gang and, this is particularly critical, unfun to fly.
I've seen the Macharial and Barghest floated around as proof that battleships are still being used, but both are basically cruisers masquerading as battleships (particularly the mach with it's enhanced warp speed). The Raven and Typhoon are examples of ships that should be thriving in the current skirmish-first meta, but both simply don't enough speed and agility to compete. It's only when you get into the pirate faction ships, which are ships designed to break the mold of their hull size, that you see battleships being deployed in any manner outside of the handful of battleship doctrines which survive in large fleet actions. |
Iroquoiss Pliskin
Hedion University Amarr Empire
9
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 19:09:34 -
[114] - Quote
Too many changes for my cup of tea.
I'd just introduce a new 90% Webifier Module with high powergrid requirments -> http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=Stasis_Webifier
Officer webs already exist with similar stats, but that's officer - Would be great to have a lesser version (10-12 km range w/ 90% effect) as a battleship-dedicated module. |
SmilingVagrant
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
2666
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 23:42:41 -
[115] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:Aralyn Cormallen wrote:I feel your pain At the moment, the big problem is Bombers. Those tubby, slow-moving battleships make wonderful targets to swarming wings of bombers, whereas the faster, smaller-sigged (and in the case of T3's equally-tough) cruisers are less vulnerable. People still use Battleships (as do we from time to time), but til the threat of bombs recedes a little, they are going to rarely be a mainstay This is trotted out every time someone brings this up and its BS (also along with isboxer cheater crap). Sure bombers are very effective against BS. They is what they are for. But a few AF in the fleet and well the bombers are no more. Oh bombs you say? Well then BS would be used in LS.
Let me tell you about how effective AF's are in antibomber support considering the ship (Bomber) is on grid generally less than 3 seconds.
They are useless.
The fact that you think AF's are a solution just shows you have no clue how a proper bomber FC does his work.
Bomber FC places his bombers in 3/4 wings around the edge of the action. Bomber FC probes enemy fleet. He then fleetwarps his wings at 40k (ish). The bombers drop bombs and immediately warp out and reload at a safe. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |