EVE Search - battleship pass

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

battleship pass

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 19:38:21 - [1] - Quote Currently there are a few ships in the battleship lineup that could use some tweaks to help them along and set them apart. A good example of this would be the dominix, which languishes in the shadow of the Ishtar. Others like the Raven and typhoon could use a little tweaking as well. Give the raven a range bonus to heavy missiles; having as much viability with rapid heavies as the Caracal has with rapid lights should be a progression must, especially with the sad state battleships are in with small-scale combat. Change the Tempest's bonuses to 10% damage and 7.5% bonus to tracking speed per level. This would cement it nicely as a large-caliber artillery platform that sets it apart from the Tornado. Moving a high to a mid and giving it a 7/6/6 slot layout would be excellent as well, if at all possible. Dropping a mid on the Abaddon for an 8th low along with giving it a solid 25% boost in cap regen sounds excellent; it excels as a line battleship, and augmenting that role would be perfect for it. Drop the Dominix's tracking and optimal range bonus for the ability to field 1 extra drone per level. Balance this by dropping 2 turret hardpoints off of this, and reducing its capacitor amount, cap regen, and PG noticeably. P.S. The domnix tweak seems to be a good way to set it apart from other drone boats. While it is a very strong bonus to field on a t1 ship, I'm certain that with HEAVY nerfs to its fitting and capacitor, as well as its sensors make it viable. It's considered to be one of the oldest battleships in service, so I like the idea of having a very powerful ship for its role that shows its age, but still inspires respect. The only ones I feel really strongly about are the Raven and Abaddon; I mostly set the dominix apart as previously stated due to its overlap with the ishtar. I quite like the idea of turning it into a pocket carrier since there are a lot of uses that come along with that. I also think it's abominable that there's a gallente battleship that gets more lows than the amarr, especially with how the amarr line ships function.
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 3230	Posted - 2015.02.26 19:51:01 - [2] - Quote Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application?
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1603	Posted - 2015.02.26 19:55:05 - [3] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? Doubling the number of drones in space will definately not slow nodes down to a crawl either.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 19:57:05 - [4] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? Considering that it comes without the tracking bonus to heavies or sentries and the mobility/vulnerability issues that come with it, I don't see a problem. If it did develop as one, then I'd recommend that the navy gets that bonus, and the current domi reverts to the navy domi's bonuses. The issue I want to fix is with it overlapping on the Ishtar; there are plenty of good counters to large drones. What you're highlighting is also a problem with how the drones themselves are balanced, and not necessarily the ships that use them. I'm all for dps on sentries getting nerfed; I just want to make sure that there aren't redundant roles that obsolete certain ships in favor of others. So yeah; this would DEFINITELY have to come with a sentry nerf if it was to be implemented.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 19:58:31 - [5] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? Doubling the number of drones in space will definately not slow nodes down to a crawl either. Assuming that people use battleships en-masse in giant fleet battles, or that carriers don't already do the same thing?
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1604	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:02:42 - [6] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? Doubling the number of drones in space will definately not slow nodes down to a crawl either. Assuming that people use battleships en-masse in giant fleet battles, or that carriers don't already do the same thing? Giving more option to ship up server nodes is not a good plan.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:05:11 - [7] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? Doubling the number of drones in space will definately not slow nodes down to a crawl either. Assuming that people use battleships en-masse in giant fleet battles, or that carriers don't already do the same thing? Giving more option to ship up server nodes is not a good plan. You think it would be better suited on the Navy Domi?
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 15226	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:05:29 - [8] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? Doubling the number of drones in space will definately not slow nodes down to a crawl either. Assuming that people use battleships en-masse in giant fleet battles, or that carriers don't already do the same thing? Carriers do already do that. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1604	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:07:00 - [9] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? Doubling the number of drones in space will definately not slow nodes down to a crawl either. Assuming that people use battleships en-masse in giant fleet battles, or that carriers don't already do the same thing? Giving more option to ship up server nodes is not a good plan. You think it would be better suited on the Navy Domi? I think it's a bonus that should just not exist especially when we can just add damage bonus to drones already deployed to get the same result with less server load.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:08:30 - [10] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: I think it's a bonus that should just not exist especially when we can just add damage bonus to drones already deployed to get the same result with less server load. So go with a super drones approach maybe? I'm open to ideas; I'm not drawing the line on giving the dominix the extra drone bonus; i just want to set it apart from the ishtar.
Daichi Yamato Xero Security and Technologies 2304	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:15:09 - [11] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? 3 DDA's is kinda trying. i'm with catherine on this one. Perhaps not these exact changes, but i feel BS's could do with a pretty much straight buff to dps and tank to make up for the lack of mobility. Power creep and all i know. EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided" "So it will be up to a pilot to remain vigilant wherever they may be flying and be ready for anything at any time"
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1604	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:18:39 - [12] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: I think it's a bonus that should just not exist especially when we can just add damage bonus to drones already deployed to get the same result with less server load. So go with a super drones approach maybe? I'm open to ideas; I'm not drawing the line on giving the dominix the extra drone bonus; i just want to set it apart from the ishtar. I'm kinda curious as to why you want to give the domi or maybe it's navy version dps close to a void shooting vindicator with a set of garde deployed.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:19:13 - [13] - Quote Daichi Yamato wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Do you seriously think a domi should be able to top 1500 DPS without even trying? With near perfect application? 3 DDA's is kinda trying. i'm with catherine on this one. Perhaps not these exact changes, but i feel BS's could do with a pretty much straight buff to dps and tank to make up for the lack of mobility. Power creep and all i know. Exactly. I was reading a nice thread earlier on warp strength multipliers that would help out the vaunted solo/small gang battleship; things like augmenting tracking speed on the Tempest and missile speed for Rapid Heavy launchers on the raven help go towards assisting with that dream. Again I'll state: I'm not drawing a hard line on the dominix drone bonus; I would LIKE to hear alternatives that help set it apart from the Ishtar; that's WHY I made an effort to extrapolate on my reason for the changes. Any ideas?
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:22:04 - [14] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: I think it's a bonus that should just not exist especially when we can just add damage bonus to drones already deployed to get the same result with less server load. So go with a super drones approach maybe? I'm open to ideas; I'm not drawing the line on giving the dominix the extra drone bonus; i just want to set it apart from the ishtar. I'm kinda curious as to why you want to give the domi or maybe it's navy version dps close to a void shooting vindicator with a set of garde deployed. I stated that this would HAVE to come with a nerf to sentry drone dps for it to be viable, and that I would be open to alternative ideas as long as it sets itself apart from the Ishtar. I am not drawing a line in the sand and defending an idea to the death. I DO recognize it's not exactly the best idea to defend, but it would help bring it back to popularity over the ishtar. I'd prefer to see them useful in a wider variety of settings.
Frostys Virpio The Mjolnir Bloc The Bloc 1604	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:26:33 - [15] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: Frostys Virpio wrote: I think it's a bonus that should just not exist especially when we can just add damage bonus to drones already deployed to get the same result with less server load. So go with a super drones approach maybe? I'm open to ideas; I'm not drawing the line on giving the dominix the extra drone bonus; i just want to set it apart from the ishtar. I'm kinda curious as to why you want to give the domi or maybe it's navy version dps close to a void shooting vindicator with a set of garde deployed. I stated that this would HAVE to come with a nerf to sentry drone dps for it to be viable, and that I would be open to alternative ideas as long as it sets itself apart from the Ishtar. I am not drawing a line in the sand and defending an idea to the death. I DO recognize it's not exactly the best idea to defend, but it would help bring it back to popularity over the ishtar. I'd prefer to see them useful in a wider variety of settings. You could just remove sentries from the ishtar and be done with making them different...
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1098	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:34:21 - [16] - Quote pretty awful suggestions really.. Domi - nerfing the geddon too 100mb would help make the domi be the better droneboat - remove drone HP bonus and only have drone damage/tracking bonus for heavies/sentries - keep the HP for geddon , maybe bonusing only amarr heavy/sentries Abbadon - you want a 3 midslot laserboat really? .. i could see a rework of the highs too get the extra lowslot from there - 10% damage bonus on 6 turrets could work, leaves a utility high for a Nos, so 7-4-8 Raven - could use more mobility/lower sig Rokh - could use better cap regen - could use more mobility/lower sig Tempest - add a turret - remove damage bonus for a falloff bonus - could use more mobility/lower sig Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone/fighter assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Leyete Wulf Rolling Static Gone Critical 92	Posted - 2015.02.26 20:41:08 - [17] - Quote Tempest: sure why not though I fail to see what's wrong with the current slot layout. Abaddon: leave the slots alone but cap bonus yes pls, its pretty ridiculous that I have a battleship that isn't cap stable when the only thing turned on is the guns its built to use. Dominix: what are you smoking and is it legal where you live? More drones is the right answer to no question ever.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 21:07:16 - [18] - Quote Harvey James wrote: pretty awful suggestions really.. Domi - nerfing the geddon too 100mb would help make the domi be the better droneboat - remove drone HP bonus and only have drone damage/tracking bonus for heavies/sentries - keep the HP for geddon , maybe bonusing only amarr heavy/sentries Abbadon - you want a 3 midslot laserboat really? .. i could see a rework of the highs too get the extra lowslot from there - 10% damage bonus on 6 turrets could work, leaves a utility high for a Nos, so 7-4-8 Raven - could use more mobility/lower sig Rokh - could use better cap regen - could use more mobility/lower sig Tempest - add a turret - remove damage bonus for a falloff bonus - could use more mobility/lower sig -Changing inherent bonuses on the domi seems like a great route to go, but I don't see a need to nerf the geddon. I will change domi bonuses. -Question: what do you use mids on for the abby? If your answer is cap mods or tracking comps, that problem is solved with the current proposition. I suppose it could use a bit longer targeting range would be in order. -More mobility on the raven and lower sig? Done. -Gotta say I disagree with your assessment on the tempest. The tracking bonus makes it unique, and sets it apart from the Tornado. Making it a strong mid to short range battleship is the ideal outcome, and a tracking bonus will help it miles in regards to small gang combat.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1098	Posted - 2015.02.26 21:10:30 - [19] - Quote abbadon - cap booster -web/TC - cap battery ( great anti neut) aswell as more cap again .. there is a theme here -prop mod maybe or a point -eccm Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists. ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name.. remove drone/fighter assist mechanic. Nerf web strength ..... Make the blaster eagle worth using please.
Odethia Rondass 0	Posted - 2015.02.26 21:12:55 - [20] - Quote Rather than pursuing this ridiculous power creep, lets just nerf the OP T2/T3 and Pirate cruisers and Tactical destroyers.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 482	Posted - 2015.02.26 21:17:43 - [21] - Quote Odethia wrote: Rather than pursuing this ridiculous power creep, lets just nerf the OP T2/T3 and Pirate cruisers and Tactical destroyers. Battleships need love BECAUSE of how OP small gang has become. The problem lies more squarely with t2 cruisers and logi than with pirate cruisers and tac dessies. Hacs like the ishtar need the nerf hammer hard.
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 238	Posted - 2015.02.26 22:32:14 - [22] - Quote Catherine Laartii wrote: Dropping a mid on the Abaddon for an 8th low along with giving it a solid 25% boost in cap regen and rounding the cap amount out to 9500 (with max skills) sounds excellent; it excels as a line battleship, and augmenting that role would be perfect for it. 30km extra targeting range seems like a nice addition, as well as helping further offset the loss of the 4th mid. . This idea alone made me wonder if you were actually serious or simply trolling. I read it like this: First we get a doughnut, then we get into a car and grab soda and bacon and ice cream then to make it even more fun we throw toilet paper at the neighbours house but that's not the best thing while doing it we would listen to really loud music and wake up all the neighbours. Idea after idea after idea... Makes you sound childish and as if you didn't have a genuine idea but simply came up with bit by bit while writing.
FireFrenzy Satan's Unicorns 243	Posted - 2015.02.26 23:01:37 - [23] - Quote I dont think we should be fiddling with the tempest's slot layout... The double utility highs and 5 mids are pretty awesome in my opinion. Have you checked Baboli's "making battleships worth the warp" thread? It's got some really indepth math and some VERY reasonable suggestions..
Zan Shiro Alternative Enterprises 588	Posted - 2015.02.26 23:20:41 - [24] - Quote Odethia wrote: Rather than pursuing this ridiculous power creep, lets just nerf the OP T2/T3 and Pirate cruisers and Tactical destroyers. Power creep is sadly a viable option here potentially. James' rokh fixes above for example...as a rokh pilot I like them. Not on pos bash or meat grind 400 on 400 fleet ops, I get few reasons to pick rokh over Naga. Nerf t3.....which ones. CCP tried picking one, hml tengu. Well HML was a split drake/tengu HML setup nerf. People went to HAM or said lets give hybrids a go on tengu and they grew in popularity. Now depending on who you ask...hybrid tengu is op. Can't really nerf hybrid tengu, that just came out of the ignored pile its been in for years. T2 cruiser was buffed to be viable again, it was out of favor for a while. Pirate was buffed after t2 cruiser as they were becoming non-viable. Basically we had nerfed cruisers that limited their usage. Buffs fixed that, is rolling back the clock an option here really? T3 dessies are not even fully implemented and need time to see if they are op or if players just need to learn to play the game with them in it. Here we get the case of players who are not open to change versus those who embrace the new stuff, change their doctrine and roll with it. The really good ones who follow the latter path at some point also lean to counter them as well as they learn to use them. Can make balance hard here as some of the problems may lie on the simple fact some players are in the whole I have flown this way for years and I don't want to change group. that is not a balance issue, that is a player/crew preference one.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 15231	Posted - 2015.02.27 01:00:54 - [25] - Quote Zan Shiro wrote: Nerf t3.....which ones. All of them. Zan Shiro wrote: T2 cruiser was buffed to be viable again, it was out of favor for a while. Pirate was buffed after t2 cruiser as they were becoming non-viable. Basically we had nerfed cruisers that limited their usage. Buffs fixed that, is rolling back the clock an option here really? We are not talking huge bufs here, a great many stayed as they are. Lets not forget that Battleships also saw buffs. Zan Shiro wrote: T3 dessies Are hilariously overpowered. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 483	Posted - 2015.02.27 18:01:50 - [26] - Quote Celthric Kanerian wrote: Catherine Laartii wrote: Dropping a mid on the Abaddon for an 8th low along with giving it a solid 25% boost in cap regen and rounding the cap amount out to 9500 (with max skills) sounds excellent; it excels as a line battleship, and augmenting that role would be perfect for it. 30km extra targeting range seems like a nice addition, as well as helping further offset the loss of the 4th mid. . This idea alone made me wonder if you were actually serious or simply trolling. I read it like this: First we get a doughnut, then we get into a car and grab soda and bacon and ice cream then to make it even more fun we throw toilet paper at the neighbours house but that's not the best thing while doing it we would listen to really loud music and wake up all the neighbours. Idea after idea after idea... Makes you sound childish and as if you didn't have a genuine idea but simply came up with bit by bit while writing. The track I usually take with these kinds of things is to highlight an issue that DOES need discussion by mixing decent ideas for balance with some rediculous "I wish" ideas that I like anyway to cause enough consteration by folks such as yourself to get the attention needed for a serious discussion. Since I don't have a habit of burying my head in the sand about balance ideas, usually the bad bits get toned down and smoothed out as time goes on. On the Abaddon, the cap's a bit high, but not too much more than the Hyperion, which gets a solid 9k cap with top skills. I thought it was prudent to have the best battleship cap since the abby tends to use beams a little more heavily than the apoc. And dear lord to they gobble up the cap.
Tusker Crazinski Delta vane Corp. Mordus Angels 32	Posted - 2015.02.27 18:40:40 - [27] - Quote god I want that tempest so bad.
Catherine Laartii Imperium Technologies Evictus. 483	Posted - 2015.02.27 19:18:46 - [28] - Quote Tusker Crazinski wrote: god I want that tempest so bad. BIG BULLETS + BIG TRACKING = BIG BOOMS
Herzog Wolfhammer Sigma Special Tactics Group 6321	Posted - 2015.02.27 19:33:28 - [29] - Quote Standard Battleships (T1) outside of highsec are in an odd place somewhere between useless and forgotten. Bring back DEEEEP Space!
Feyd Rautha Harkonnen Origin. Black Legion. 1990	Posted - 2015.02.27 19:34:37 - [30] - Quote CCP: "Battleships are fine, no changes, f#%@ you.." Classic case of CCP not listening and CSM being asleep at the switch, again. Let me get this right, "battleships are being 'used' so based on them being used no change is needed..." WTF? They SUCK to use. Also, if they weren't AIDS to fly through gates and roam in, people might use them more or hey..actually enjoy flying them. Call me crazy, but when CCP is staring down the barrel of competitors with more twitch-based flight models like E:D and SC, shouldn't they do everything they can to make all the front-line ships pass the simple smell-test of "FUN to fly?" Sorry CCP, but your usage metrics don't include fun-factor, or conversely the groans at using said BC's and BS's because of AIDS warp speeds. F Would you like to know more?

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.