|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
98
|
Posted - 2015.09.11 23:59:02 -
[1] - Quote
Baali Tekitsu wrote:All these buffs should also apply to command ships as they struggle with the same issues Combat battlecruisers do, just on a lesser scale as theyre flown less and are also a tiny bit better. If they do apply to command ships aswell, then sorry for posting this.
EDIT: the role bonus I mean and the agility buffs. Also the Absolution needs its optimal bonus finally.
I agree completely, I continued to ignore the Absolution because it lacked an Optimal Range Bonus. It desperately needs an Optimal Range bonus along with better cap recharge rates.
Also all the Command Ships need a 70% reduction in Medium Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay and a 100% bonus to Cap Boost Injected amount added to their Role Bonuses along with larger cargo bays.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
98
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 00:33:25 -
[2] - Quote
Buzz Kill wrote:Dont forget about the command ships
Yes, The Command Ships are the biggest time sinkers in the game right now. Don't Forget about them!! |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
98
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 02:52:14 -
[3] - Quote
Nevil Kincade wrote:About the T1 Harbinger skill level bonus:
"10% bonus Medium Energy Turret capacitor use"
This is essentially not a bonus but merely compensating for the terribly balanced cap consumption of lasers and their ammunition types.
All other hulls are getting a bonus on their tank, damage or application instead.
Agreed, this skill should be built into the hull itself and replace with an Armor Resist, Optimal Range, or a Tracking Speed bonus. Same with the Abso. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
98
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 03:09:51 -
[4] - Quote
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:Ah some love for the Cyclone, my favorite ship.
One note: Interceptors are bubble immune, recons D-scan immune. The T2 command ship variant of the BC needs some "special ability" to further the cost and time of training for and using them. I don't know what, but something would be interesting.
Been thinking about this for ages and came up with:
* 70% reduction in Medium Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay * 100% Bonus to Cap Boost Injected Amount
And Increase cargo bays for Command Ships to around 650m3 to 800m3. Or increase their Cap Recharge rates by an additional 35%. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
98
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 03:17:06 -
[5] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Buzz Kill wrote:Dont forget about the command ships Yes, The Command Ships are the biggest time sinkers in the game right now. Don't Forget about them!! But they are not, they are up there in their training time, but it is iirc less than before.
They currently only have ONE (very niche) Role Bonus. I mean seriously, a T2 BC shouldn't have only ONE Role Bonus. Their current abilities doesn't justify the 1 year training time it takes to fly these hulls.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
98
|
Posted - 2015.09.12 14:23:06 -
[6] - Quote
baltec1 wrote:Doris Dragonbreath wrote:This buff does not include T2 BC's? I believe these could use some love as well? Best love they can get is for t3 cruisers to lose the ability to fit warfare links and be nullified and fit a cov ops cloak at the same time.
baltec seriously, could you please give the T3C hate a rest. Nerfing the T3C isn't what this thread is about.
Also nerfing the T3Cs to hard could destroy blue loot value and forcing many wormholers into galactic poverty. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
99
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 05:25:25 -
[7] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:
Good to see however you have decided to make BC's more like Dessies as they should be. The food chain is becoming more healthy again. Kill T3 Cruisers and we might actually see solid "ship size" balance for the first time since 2010.
As I already mentioned, killing T3Cs would destroy the blue loot value. WHs provide a vital income stream to many players and even huge WH corps. What do you thinks gonna happen when they see their precious blue loot value plummet from estimated 1bill to 200 mill because the T3Cs got jackknifed by CCP which relegated them to Oblivion. Not to mention the same players who primarily use these T3Cs to conduct their activities in WHs.
Answer: Sub rates plummet another 35-50%.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
99
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 07:02:50 -
[8] - Quote
Mario Putzo wrote:Daniela Doran wrote:Mario Putzo wrote:
Good to see however you have decided to make BC's more like Dessies as they should be. The food chain is becoming more healthy again. Kill T3 Cruisers and we might actually see solid "ship size" balance for the first time since 2010.
As I already mentioned, killing T3Cs would destroy the blue loot value. WHs provide a vital income stream to many players and even huge WH corps. What do you thinks gonna happen when they see their precious blue loot value plummet from estimated 1bill to 200 mill because the T3Cs got jackknifed by CCP which relegated them to Oblivion. Not to mention the same players who primarily use these T3Cs to conduct their activities in WHs. Answer: Sub rates plummet another 35-50%. I doubt it. T3s are so universal their value will always remain high, even if you nerfed their tankability down to a spot between C and BC (which is probably the only change really need to be made). They would still be the dominant cruiser option for most things, but they would be opposed by well piloted BC's. The relationship would function much like how T3Ds kind of bridge between Dessies and Cruisers. A good T3D group can kill a decent cruiser group, but a good cruiser group can kill a good T3D group. T3's absolutely should not have BC DPS and BS Tanks. Its dumb.
They have an offsetting penalty if they die (SP LOSS) so T3Cs needs their current tanks. The only time their 150 EHP is OP is when receiving logi from outside support. So I propose that CCP add a penalty to the buffer sub systems that disallows them from receiving logi from external sources.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
100
|
Posted - 2015.09.13 23:56:05 -
[9] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Lidia Caderu wrote:Quote:Ferox: Caldari Battlecruiser skill bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage (Was shield resistances) Why does FEROX gets only 5% damage instead of 10%? added a bit: Nice changes. Few poins: - why hardinger still have turret cap bonus, instead some more valuable bonus? Better give faster cap recharge bonus instead. Harb will be more universal. - cyclone is still ******** with shield bonus, 5 med and 2 hi non-launcher slots. Move 1 hi-slot to med. - prophecy and myrmidon still have less one slot than other BCs, that is stupid, there is no need in such big drone bay. Cut drones a bit a return that slot to hi rack. ferox will have awesome range on 7.5 turrets worth of blasters + 5 drones, on droneships i think the amount of turrets/launchers and highs should be cut down by at least -2 slots as drone damage requires no highs at all. harbinger and all amarr ships using lasers should have the best cap recharge rate, its in the lore is it not that amarr have the best cap technology..
Agreed! Amarr ships are completely cap dependent and should have the strongest cap recharge rates.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
100
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 00:05:14 -
[10] - Quote
Lidia Caderu wrote:Harvey James wrote:Lidia Caderu wrote:Quote:Ferox: Caldari Battlecruiser skill bonuses: 5% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret damage (Was shield resistances) Why does FEROX gets only 5% damage instead of 10%? added a bit: Nice changes. Few poins: - why hardinger still have turret cap bonus, instead some more valuable bonus? Better give faster cap recharge bonus instead. Harb will be more universal. - cyclone is still ******** with shield bonus, 5 med and 2 hi non-launcher slots. Move 1 hi-slot to med. - prophecy and myrmidon still have less one slot than other BCs, that is stupid, there is no need in such big drone bay. Cut drones a bit a return that slot to hi rack. ferox will have awesome range on 7.5 turrets worth of blasters + 5 drones, on droneships i think the amount of turrets/launchers and highs should be cut down by at least -2 slots as drone damage requires no highs at all. harbinger and all amarr ships using lasers should have the best cap recharge rate, its in the lore is it not that amarr have the best cap technology.. 5 LIGHT drones is indeed terryfying. Totally not worth +5% to turrets. Better not to have droes at all and have +10% to turrets. CCP please do ships fully finished, not partly normal, partly crap. Ammar cap bonus is useless, sometimes better just to use different turrets instead of lasers, or do it more valuable, like +15% to cap usage.
CCP needs to reduce the cap usage for the medium lasers and give lasers a better built in tracking bonus if they insist on keeping the "10% reduction in Medium Energy Turret activation cost" as a ship bonus skill. And give these ships better cap recharge rates so they don't need cap mods for cap stability just to use the guns.
|
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
100
|
Posted - 2015.09.14 00:08:04 -
[11] - Quote
Rovinia wrote:I like the changes but it would be nice to give them a slight buff in sensor strength across the board.
Yes, but only for the T2 BCs so they won't be so easily jammed by griffins.
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
100
|
Posted - 2015.09.15 03:34:16 -
[12] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Fourteen Maken wrote:Sizeof Void wrote:Seems like there will be even less of a reason to fly battleships.... Or more of a reason depending on how you look at it, if battlecruisers see more use it seems like battleships would be the natural counter. I guess that I'm wondering if a BS *can* counter a BC, after these changes. Seems to me that a BC should be able to more easily kite a BS, with the buffs to both speed and weapon range. Maybe a drone or missile BS would still be ok, but anything with large guns is probably going to do less damage. I don't see how that's possible. A 25% bonus to medium turrets doesn't get them anywhere near the ranges of their large turret counterparts. Not to mention that many PvP battleships field heavy neuts that stretch out to 25km (even longer if you're in an armageddon). There's no way any of the proposed Battlecruiser projection bonuses will help them avoid damage from Battleships. What it does do is stop Battlecruisers from getting kited by Cruisers as easily. As for the balances in general. I love them and they're pretty much spot on to the suggested numbers I proposed a while back. As for Command Ships, I think some of them need a look at as well. I think several Command Ships like the Sleipnir and Eos are perfectly fine and that giving them the same role bonuses would be overkill, but I think passing on some of the agility/speed changes to Command Ships would be a good idea.
Sleipnir not so much as the others, but it still needs a MMJD bonus and an increase in cargo space at least.
An increase in Sensor strength would be helpful also. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
100
|
Posted - 2015.09.15 06:35:25 -
[13] - Quote
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:[quote=Daniela Doran][quote=Iyacia Cyric'ai] Even bonused how many people would fit an MMJD on a shield tanked CS that's already very fast with good damage projection? A typical brawl Sleip needs scram + web + mwd. That leaves 2 mids for tank (usually dual XLASB). With MMJD that's 1 slot for tank... For arty Sleipnirs people burn in to scram them anyway making the MMJD useless.
The MMJD bonus will eliminate the need for a dual-prop on the Sleip that only has 5 mids. And when I began using the Sleipnir for PVP, it will be dual web fitted so anything within scram range will have to fight it at it's strength, which is brawling (assuming 180s can still get the job done).
|
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
105
|
Posted - 2015.09.17 06:53:15 -
[14] - Quote
Roti Rotineque wrote:Ok, ty CCP. Now fix the skill thingy please. I have to train 102731923 days of leadership just to fly an absol? Are you serious. This is shi... not good. Fix it. Fix it now. CCPlleeeeease.
Nope, why should they. They'll just replace those skills with some other useless time sink skill so what's the difference. Just suck it up and train those skills if you want to undock in CSs. If anything you should request that CCP make them worth training for. |
Daniela Doran
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
106
|
Posted - 2015.09.18 07:01:32 -
[15] - Quote
Rampage2010 wrote:Plz forget about the Gnosis
Corrected that for you.
|
|
|
|