EVE Search - Tier 3 Battleships discussion

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Revelations Testing and Development

Tier 3 Battleships discussion

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 31 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 1 post(s)

Mephysto	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:16:00 - [1] Discuss here so we dont have to read 500000000 threads.

Tiuwaz Minmatar Omacron Militia	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:19:00 - [2] now you are just being lazy the maelstrom in its current state is a schizophrenic design at best the bonuses are geared for ac's, while the attributes (like cargobay, mass, speed etc) say its definetely an artillery boat it has a bigger dmg potential than tempest but in reality it will rarly be able to deliver it it feels and flies like a cyclone that doesnt know where its good at, it is again a try by the devs to give us a ship thats supposed to do both close and long range, while being good at none of it Originally by: Oveur This is not the conspiracy you are looking for.
Paigan Amarr Katsu Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:21:00 - [3] Edited by: Paigan on 26/10/2006 10:25:05 Originally by: Mephysto Discuss here so we dont have to read 500000000 threads. i dont see a sense in putting 20000000000 postings from 500000000 threads all together in ONE big thread. People posting to the abaddon, being interrupted by rokh posts, being answered by mealstrom posts. If you make a sticky with a flame to the customers at the beginning, then make one for each shiptype. -- This game is still in beta stage
Logan Xerxes Shinra Lotka Volterra	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:22:00 - [4] As said before and prolly by hte dozens of bug reports, the Rokh has bugged turret graphics and will crash whenever it shoots or gets shot at. As such I haven't got any other comments about the ship other than thanks for giving us a good ship that looks bloody sweet. Going to have a lot of fun with it. "Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion." -Sun Tzu
Blind Man Caldari 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:22:00 - [5] Edited by: Blind Man on 26/10/2006 10:22:04 agreed with Tiuwaz about the Maelstrom and would like to add active tanking bonus for an artillery boat sucks It's great flying Amarr, ain't it?
Hansoloo Supero Omnia	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:28:00 - [6] has anyone tested the new amarr BS sniping range, becouse I was getting ready to (befor the server went down).. I was fitted for short range, with the the 100km targeting range, with the guns I was using (with out a sniping setup), I was hitting at 100km just fine for 200 damge per gun fitted with radios. I would love to see someone with real sniping skills get a hold of her and really test her out.
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:29:00 - [7] The Hyperion is nice. But, give it a little more agility and PG. Then it will be more than 5% better than the 50m cheaper Megathron, and people will use it.
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:29:00 - [8] As for the Maelstrom, if those bonuses stay, a 7th midslot would be very nice. Even at the cost of a low if an additional slot would be too much to ask for. But look at the Cyclone, same bonuses, one more slot than the other BCs, but seems perfectly balanced. Same could work for the Mael. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
starship enginer	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:29:00 - [9] the apoc was pretty crap before in pvp compaired to the geddon, where it was slightly better was the alpha on sniping so, now with the amarr tier 3 BS what is the apoc for? what is it ment to do? its got no place where the tier3 or geddon is not better! suggestion: loose the 5% cap per level for 10% optimal range also can we get another level of plates and extenders please eg: 3200mm tungston, [2x HP of 1600mm] with 1.5k PG and 30 odd cpu [i think this is needed since we are seeing crusiers and BC with more than BS native HP
Rin Eyre Minmatar	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:31:00 - [10] Maelstrom looking too strange with such model, stats and so on. There is something it lacks. Or something that better be switched... something very small, but meaningful to get some streamlined beauty for big picture. Yes, it can be nerfed on shield department a little... but please, decrease mass (take away shield HP/regen if you must). Just seeng how it turing makes me (and I think many other people) sad. Give it at least some edge to use with artillery...

Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:32:00 - [11] Its a mistake to let people discuss everything about the 4 new battleships/battlecruisers in one single thread. Why? 1) People want to discuss different things. Slot layouts, damage, tanking, bonuses, you name it. Chaos to do that for 4 ships in one thread. 2) People will never stop disagreeing with eachother. Signal to noise ratio will be very high when someone makes a stupid suggestion, and everybody else attacks it. Just my opinion... I do understand your reasons though, but I dont think it will improve things, just make it worse. Constructive critisism... :) --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Butter Dog The Dead Miners Society	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:32:00 - [12] Originally by: starship enginer the apoc was pretty crap before in pvp compaired to the geddon, where it was slightly better was the alpha on sniping so, now with the amarr tier 3 BS what is the apoc for? what is it ment to do? its got no place where the tier3 or geddon is not better! Its cheaper. The Abbadon is supposed to be better.
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:39:00 - [13] I dunno, maybe we should get sub-forum channels for all major things (Tier3 BS, Tier2 BCs, whatever else there is) and then stickies in there for the individual items. Of course I don't know how easy that is to do with this forum, but with mine own it would be a matter of 30 secs... --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
Dupac Corsets and Carebears Whips and Chains	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:41:00 - [14] The Abbadon is supposed to be better, please make it better. Including Drones its about the same DPS as a geddon (with a slightly better tank) and much worse cap. Has the same grid and less CPU than the Maelstrom yet requires more grid for guns and it's an armour tanker. and can't do better than quoting this: Originally by: Toaster Oven Finally got onto Sisi for some testing. Here are some numbers for those of you wondering about the cap issue Relevant skills info Max gunnery, including Controlled Bursts 5 Amarr BS 5 Max cap skills Max armor tanking skills No implants Testing scenario Undock from station with 100% cap, 4 cap booster 800s loaded, and another 12 in cargo. Measure time from initial firing till cap death (ie. one or modules inactivate due to insufficient cap). If using cap booster (1x Heavy Electrochemical), cap boosting begins almost immediately after firing commences. If using repairer, delay 10sec before activating. Results are average of 3 attempts. Results 8x MP II + Conflag + 3x HS II without cap booster: 1min 21sec 8x MP II + Conflag + 3x HS II with cap booster: 4min 21 sec, last cap booster consumed at 3min 53sec 8x MP II + Conflag + 3x HS II + 1x LAR II with cap booster: 1min 58sec, 8 cap booster 800s remaining 8x MP II + Conflag + 3x HS II + 2x LAR II with cap booster: 1min 7sec, 12 cap booster 800s remaining 8x Tachyon II + Aurora + 3x HS II without cap booster: 1min 3sec 8x Tachyon II + Aurora + 3x HS II with cap booster: 2min 6sec, 8 cap booster 800s remaining These numbers are the absolute best you can expect and tbh a bit unrealistic. There aren't too many fights where you start out with 100% cap and have no one NOSing you. In testing, you can expect closer to 2/3 those times in a normal PVP scenario both short and long range. Or less if you're fighting a NOS Domi Mad. I capped out almost every time when fighting another BS. The cap use is simply put beyond ridiculous. Devs, I hope you reconsider and turn the Abbadon into something useful. As it stands, it's simply a joke and you should be ashamed for even releasing it. Gimme a ship where I can use both bonuses at the same time, like every other ship in the game /signed
Mysterlee Gallente 5punkorp Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:53:00 - [15] Edited by: Mysterlee on 26/10/2006 10:54:53 The reason I think the Hyperion, Abaddon and Maelstrom have turned out so bad is because CCP is trying to give them roles that are already filled. I personally think the hyperion should become a sensor dampening bs. 8-7-4 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 4 missile hardpoints, 5% large hybrid damage and 5% sensor damp effectiveness per level, it should have a limited grid but plenty cpu. The maelstrom should become a fast and agile armour tanking autocannon ship. 8-5-6 slot layout with 8 turret hardpoints, 5% large projectile damage and 7.5% armour rep amount per level. The Tempest should also be switched to an 8-6-5 slot layout to make it a shield tanking artillery ship. The abaddon should become a big arbitrator but not so good that it outclasses the dominix. 8-6-5 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 5 missile hardpoints, 10% laser cap reduction (or 10% drone damage) and 5% tracking disruptor effectiveness per level with a 200m3 drone bay.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:59:00 - [16] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 26/10/2006 11:05:29 About the Maelstrom (very brief) The problems as a artillery platform * 8 projectile turrets with no dmg bonus means its not better at alpha strikes than the apoc or any other 8-turret battleship. Needs a damage bonus to get a valuable role in fleets. * Shield boost bonus doesnt work in fleets where you take focused fire very quickly. Resistance bonuses are obviously better here, even if the Rohk has them too, because it doesnt mean that one of the medium slots have to be a shield booster to take advantage of its bonus. Also resists use no cap and is always active. It also allows for better passive tanking. The problems as a autocannon platform * Its a bit too slow. I feel the dps is pretty good, but only up close. One medium slot will automaticly be used with MWD, but the large mass and low base speed will make it difficult to reach the target to do its job. The problems as a mission runner * Not better than the Raven, but this is pretty much the case for every other ship out there. So except the fairly low artillery dps, it will be OK at missions. Here the rof bonus is more useful than a DMG bonus, and also the shield boost bonus is pretty good. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
El Yatta Caldari Mercenary Forces	Posted - 2006.10.26 10:59:00 - [17] The hyperion is similarly confused to the maelstrom between its bonuses and its stats. The original devblog stated that it was going to be a light, fast ship able to get into gank range faster - a versatile blaster platform. Im not going to complain that it is slower than a tempest (dont want to obsolete the pest) but I am going to complain that this idea doesnt fit with a tanking bonus. Its got the stats to match the idea as well, insufficient grid to fit a dual rep tank and still have gank potential. This is REALLY inconsitent with a rep amount bonus. Frankly, the quick, blaster-focussed boat should be dashing into close range fast with Neutron IIs and just a few 1600s, DCU and 3x mag stabs (like the most popular blasterthron fits atm) and the slower, older boat, with another LOW SLOT, (which can also choose rails) should be fitting a dual rep tank and either ion IIs or electron IIs and nos. The way to encourage this is to either give the mega the hype's rep bonus (unpopular!) or simply do away with it all together, give the hype more grid and a bonus that compensates for changed null (falloff). If the rep bonus stays, the hyperion needs SERIOUS fitting improvements, as the 8th turret means jack vs mega if you have to fit electrons simply to get use out of you rep bonus. ---\|\|---
Paigan Amarr Katsu Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.26 11:01:00 - [18] Originally by: Mysterlee Edited by: Mysterlee on 26/10/2006 10:54:53 The reason I think the Hyperion, Abaddon and Maelstrom have turned out so bad is because CCP is trying to give them roles that are already filled. I personally think the hyperion should become a sensor dampening bs. 8-7-4 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 4 missile hardpoints, 5% large hybrid damage and 5% sensor damp effectiveness per level, it should have a limited grid but plenty cpu. The maelstrom should become a fast and agile armour tanking autocannon ship. 8-5-6 slot layout with 8 turret hardpoints, 5% large projectile damage and 7.5% armour rep amount per level. The Tempest should also be switched to an 8-6-5 slot layout to make it a shield tanking artillery ship. The abaddon should become a big arbitrator but not so good that it outclasses the dominix. 8-6-5 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 5 missile hardpoints, 10% laser cap reduction (or 10% drone damage) and 5% tracking disruptor effectiveness per level with a 200m3 drone bay. /signed Some friends of me said almost the same thing when the first news abut the tier3 BS came out. In every race there's a ewar frig - cruiser (and BS only for caldari) Rokh is fine because it fills the missing turret gap. What's missing at the other races is a drone/tracking disrupter ship for amarr, a dampener ship for gallente and ... whatever (:-P) ... for minnies. -- This game is still in beta stage
Forsch Auctoritan Syndicate Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.26 11:07:00 - [19] YES to a big arbitrator. Slots: 7/6/6, 4 turret, 3 launcher Drone bay: 175m¦ or 200m¦ (5 heavy, 5 medium and optional 5 light) Bonus1: 10% per level for tracking disruptor optimal range Bonus2a: 10% drone hp/dmg per level Bonus2b: 5% armor resists per level (This means either 2a or 2b. I'd prefer 2a but if that comes to close to the domi, 2b would be fine, too.) Grid and cpu accordingly so stuff fits on it. Good armor, good sensor strength, long targeting range. Slow, big sig radius. Sooo yea.. when could we get this? Forsch Defender of the empire
Udyr Vulpayne Amarr PIE Inc.	Posted - 2006.10.26 11:19:00 - [20] The Abaddon needs a redesign to actually provide a new role for it and make it something other than a better version of the two already existing amarr battleships. yes i know the 8 turrets + laser rof is quiet powerful but its also nothing new. all it does is provide a new toy for those with enough cash to afford a little increase in power over the gedon/apoc. when it comes to deciding which of the amarr battleships you want to use for pvp it comes down to personal preference rather than what role you would like to fill. also: this problem was already apparent when the abaddons bonuses were first announced 2+ months ago and we saw the same complaints about it that we see now. as there has been no change to the design and not even some communication with the players as to why it was designed this way we can only conclude that tux (or whoever is in charge of designing it) has decided to ignore the players in this regard. as such i (and propably a few others as well) would really appreciate it if some dev (preferably the one who "designed" the ship) could step forward and explain what this ship is supposed to do and how it is something more than just a better version of the already exsiting amarrian battleships.

Panta Rei ISS Navy Task Force Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2006.10.26 11:22:00 - [21] Originally by: Mysterlee The reason I think the Hyperion, Abaddon and Maelstrom have turned out so bad is because CCP is trying to give them roles that are already filled. I personally think the hyperion should become a sensor dampening bs. 8-7-4 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 4 missile hardpoints, 5% large hybrid damage and 5% sensor damp effectiveness per level, it should have a limited grid but plenty cpu. The maelstrom should become a fast and agile armour tanking autocannon ship. 8-5-6 slot layout with 8 turret hardpoints, 5% large projectile damage and 7.5% armour rep amount per level. The Tempest should also be switched to an 8-6-5 slot layout to make it a shield tanking artillery ship. The abaddon should become a big arbitrator but not so good that it outclasses the dominix. 8-6-5 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 5 missile hardpoints, 10% laser cap reduction (or 10% drone damage) and 5% tracking disruptor effectiveness per level with a 200m3 drone bay. The Rokh could also do with losing a turret hardpoint, as it is its damage output comes to close to the Megathron when using rails yet it has 50% more range allowing it to use higher damage ammo than the Megathron thus outdamaging it at equal range. /signed My sentiments exactly.
Jim McGregor Caldari	Posted - 2006.10.26 11:48:00 - [22] Edited by: Jim McGregor on 26/10/2006 11:48:53 They wont change the battleships now, but its amazing that they could do such a awesome job on the battlecruisers, but failed to do the same for battleships. If they want to make better tier 3's, they should actually look at the battlecruisers they just created and work from there, for every race except Caldari. --- Eve Wiki \| Eve Tribune \| Eve Pirate
Ithildin Gallente The Corporation	Posted - 2006.10.26 12:02:00 - [23] Abaddon Capacitor is a real issue. Really needs those capacitor rigs. Possible fix might be to boost capacitor batteries or something. Rokh It's fine. I mean, over all range on battleships is silly, but as far as a ranged battleship goes, this is a fine ship. Hyperion We already got a blaster ship. Either the Hype or the Megathron is going to be the better. If you insist on having a "tanking" bonus on a blaster ship, it's much better off with an armour amount bonus. I'd rather the ship got changed so we didn't have TWO blaster battleships, which is counter productive. Maelstrom This was introduced as a fleet ship. As a concept it's fine, but it's lacking in one of the bonuses - the hated shield boost amount bonus. If it's changed to a shield capacity amount bonus, the Maelstrom will actually see increased survival in fleet combat since both initial hit point buffer is increased, and in that shield extenders become better. Related Any thoughts given into boosting the Controlled Burst skill now that combats have taken a turn for the longer? Gallente and Amarr ships are already aching for better capacitor control skills. - What am I listening to?
Sniser 4S Corporation Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.10.26 12:02:00 - [24] Edited by: Sniser on 26/10/2006 12:04:26 abaddon and maelstorm have the same powergrid while pulses and beams need more powergrid than AutoCannons and Artillery. So abaddon will help if their cap or cap recharge were increased a bit. Cap goes down too fast It's great being Amarr, ain't it?
Lonli Lonki The Scope	Posted - 2006.10.26 12:05:00 - [25] Originally by: Mysterlee Edited by: Mysterlee on 26/10/2006 11:02:27 Edited by: Mysterlee on 26/10/2006 10:54:53 The reason I think the Hyperion, Abaddon and Maelstrom have turned out so bad is because CCP is trying to give them roles that are already filled. I personally think the hyperion should become a sensor dampening bs. 8-7-4 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 4 missile hardpoints, 5% large hybrid damage and 5% sensor damp effectiveness per level, it should have a limited grid but plenty cpu. The maelstrom should become a fast and agile armour tanking autocannon ship. 8-5-6 slot layout with 8 turret hardpoints, 5% large projectile damage and 7.5% armour rep amount per level. The Tempest should also be switched to an 8-6-5 slot layout to make it a shield tanking artillery ship. The abaddon should become a big arbitrator but not so good that it outclasses the dominix. 8-6-5 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 5 missile hardpoints, 10% laser cap reduction (or 10% drone damage) and 5% tracking disruptor effectiveness per level with a 200m3 drone bay. The Rokh could also do with losing a turret hardpoint, as it is its damage output comes to close to the Megathron when using rails yet it has 50% more range allowing it to use higher damage ammo than the Megathron thus outdamaging it at equal range. yeah From myself -Rokh - really good ship which comlete caldari ships as it should be (merlin-moa-ferox?(change me on gunboat >_<)-Rokh [alittle offtopic] Myrmidion also complete gally dron ships Imicus(oh cmon it`s a dron boat =))-Vexor-Myrmidion-Dominix other ones are weird and i think they need few movements to side to become Family I dont like too much tanking bonuses (except neutral). I mean giv us more freedom to choose what to tank, caldari and amar was always "linked" to type of tanking, Gallente and Minmatar always was more "free" here. So A. go as tradition B. go on total reverse =) For gallente E-WAR BS, they miss it and make this BS maybe possible to fight and tanking on shield (2nd BS with a lot med slots) minnie also dont have E-WAR BS but i dunno what it should be.... Painter bonus? =) or something like " All hostile ships within target range of ships gets 5% signature per ur lvl of BS" =) Take Maelstrom and a Tempest one make a cannonboat other AC. Also maybe such formula 1. E-war + artillery/Rails 2. Tank+autocannons/blasters SPECIAL BONUS: i had hope what tier3 BS will be last thing we miss now... - a something equal to raven effience on missionrunning, i`m bored to fly raven, i want agentrunners boat #2 p.s. does it possible to read me? =)
Leandro Salazar Aeon Industries	Posted - 2006.10.26 12:06:00 - [26] Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 26/10/2006 12:06:26 The Problem with taking the tier2 battlecruisers as templates is that they are all small versions of the existing battleships. So going from there would lead to... nothing new. The EW approach seems to be a much better idea. Big Arbi for Amarr, Bit Celestis for Gallente, Scorp is the big Blackbird so Caldari gets a big Moa which is fine, and Minmatar get a big Bellicose. Err, wait, no. Minmatar get... Something. A big cyclone as 8/7/5 shieldtanking AC boat with current bonuses if I was asked, but anything goes. just make it consistent. --------- ZOMG my sig was concordokkened! Link removed due to bad language on remote site. -wystler
meppa Black Omega Security The OSS	Posted - 2006.10.26 12:14:00 - [27] About abaddon: It needs to get back in drawing board. In meantime as temporary fix, change rof bonus to energy turret cap use bonus. It won't be perfect, but atleast it will be usable and because of bigger grid it can be better sniper in fleets then apoc. Also it won't turn into super geddon because it would be lacking rof bonus. I am sure that no one would object this change as amarr would be giving dps away in order to get more lasting cap.
Idara Caldari Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2006.10.26 12:21:00 - [28] My thoughts Summary: The new ones are trying to fill roles that are already filled. Either change them (easiest) or change every other BS for that race into something else to accommodate it. --- Go! Go! Go pointless Tier 3s!
Ishina Fel Caldari Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2006.10.26 12:24:00 - [29] Edited by: Ishina Fel on 26/10/2006 12:25:26 Originally by: Mysterlee The Rokh could also do with losing a turret hardpoint, as it is its damage output comes to close to the Megathron when using rails yet it has 50% more range allowing it to use higher damage ammo than the Megathron thus outdamaging it at equal range. I disagree. 7x 125% is 875%, versus the Rokh's 800%; in essence, the Megathron still "almost has an extra turret" - all while eating less cap. Additionally, you are forgetting that the Megathron has a tracking bonus, so it will produce a higher hit quality at equal range. The Megathron also has more powergrid, which is quite important when trying to fit a full compliment of large railguns (15500 base for 7 rails versus 15000 base for 8 rails). A Megathron can also field 5 heavy drones (2 for the Rokh) to support it if the encounter is under 50km. I'd say that balances pretty well against the ability to switch to a higher damage charge type, and a tanking bonus. In fact, I think that the Rokh is perfectly fine as it is. It has its limits (very poor grid, smallest dronebay of all battleships, largest sig of all battleships, slowest of all battleships together with one other), but it fills its role well and offers a slightly different combat style than compareable ships. If any ships need nerfs or boosts, it's the three others (and the BCs, but that's for another thread).
Lonli Lonki The Scope	Posted - 2006.10.26 12:31:00 - [30] Originally by: Leandro Salazar Edited by: Leandro Salazar on 26/10/2006 12:06:26 A big cyclone as 8/7/5 shieldtanking AC boat with current bonuses good idea. actually minmatar almost got raven equal ship - Typhoon BUT ATM is it more like dominix (a little bit worst). Ship which will be good alternative to raven : 8 hi-slots 4 missle 4 gun OR 7 losts 5 missle slots 4 /3 gun slots 7 med-slots 4 low-slots OR 5 slots with bosunuses 7.5%/5% to Painter and 5% to missle ROF 6 slots for good shield tanking 7th for powered painter which compensate 4 missle bays, 4 guns + good dronebay compensate 5% to missle damage and again 5th,6th bay. in total we got minmatar EW ship which is good in missions/ratting too peeps wa u thing about it?



Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 31 :: 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.