EVE Search - Sticky:[Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Sticky:[Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance

» 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 .. 22 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Blackfeathers Unholy Knights of Cthulhu Test Alliance Please Ignore 31	Posted - 2015.09.13 11:10:57 - [301] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Does increased optimal/falloff really make BCs any better at killing cruisers? I would have thought optimal and tracking speed would have been better... + 1 mid and -1 low on the hurricane would have been nice. You leave my Hurricane alone you monster. Stay away from her - she doesn't like you and your lack of falloff bonus anyway!
Kenji Noguchi We are not bad. Just unlucky The Bastion 11	Posted - 2015.09.13 11:50:32 - [302] - Quote Are these bonuses being "ported" to the T2 versions of the ships? Are you planning on doing a rebalance pass on T2 BCs?
Amber Solaire Imperial Academy Amarr Empire 48	Posted - 2015.09.13 12:12:55 - [303] - Quote Can you please explain why both types of Harbinger get a larger Capacitor, but an increase in cap recharge time?? All the other BCs have got a lower recharge time, so why have you given the Harbinger a cap nerf??
Serenit Adoulin Stille Gewalt Dead Terrorists 35	Posted - 2015.09.13 12:24:43 - [304] - Quote will we see a balance for command ships to be better fitted for ongrid boosting as well? Their current fighting abilities are very powerfull as it is i guess.
Ortilus Orsides Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 4	Posted - 2015.09.13 13:22:28 - [305] - Quote Serenit Adoulin wrote: will we see a balance for command ships to be better fitted for ongrid boosting as well? Their current fighting abilities are very powerfull as it is i guess. Use a T3 for that.
Serenit Adoulin Stille Gewalt Dead Terrorists 36	Posted - 2015.09.13 15:19:28 - [306] - Quote Ortilus Orsides wrote: Serenit Adoulin wrote: will we see a balance for command ships to be better fitted for ongrid boosting as well? Their current fighting abilities are very powerfull as it is i guess. Use a T3 for that. But shouldn't every ship be able to surve within it's purpose? And why would the ship with the generally more spread bonuses for boosts be better than a specialized one. Also i can't use a t3 with 7links, I can't even tank one with 4 I daresay.
Reah Darknorth Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2015.09.13 15:25:25 - [307] - Quote I trained battlecruiser to level 5 a few months ago because I knew that these ships HAD to be getting buffed some time in the future. These changes all look amazing. I'm a bit disappointed that the Ferox no longer has a shield resist bonus but I guess that's alright. All in all this is going to be crazy. Welcome to the new T1 BC meta.
Serenit Adoulin Stille Gewalt Dead Terrorists 37	Posted - 2015.09.13 15:36:42 - [308] - Quote Reah Darknorth wrote: I trained battlecruiser to level 5 a few months ago because I knew that these ships HAD to be getting buffed some time in the future. These changes all look amazing. I'm a bit disappointed that the Ferox no longer has a shield resist bonus but I guess that's alright. All in all this is going to be crazy. Welcome to the new T1 BC meta. Right ? **** yea :D
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1704	Posted - 2015.09.13 15:46:32 - [309] - Quote Serenit Adoulin wrote: Ortilus Orsides wrote: Serenit Adoulin wrote: will we see a balance for command ships to be better fitted for ongrid boosting as well? Their current fighting abilities are very powerfull as it is i guess. Use a T3 for that. But shouldn't every ship be able to surve within it's purpose? And why would the ship with the generally more spread bonuses for boosts be better than a specialized one. Also i can't use a t3 with 7links, I can't even tank one with 4 I daresay. In this day and age you would not expect an Armageddon with eight Mega Pulse Lasers and eight Heat Sinks to do very well in a stand up fight. So why would you expect a Command Ship with seven links to do well in a stand up fight? It is more than possible to use on-grid Command Ships to support a small gang. My Claymore seems to do just fine in small gang fights: adequate tank while running three links and bringing some punch to the fight. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.
Leon Ruhh Federal Defense Union Gallente Federation 0	Posted - 2015.09.13 16:04:27 - [310] - Quote Rebalance and remodel of Gnosis gib? Also a gnosis skin would be adored.
unidenify Plundering Penguins Solyaris Chtonium 132	Posted - 2015.09.13 18:00:55 - [311] - Quote Reah Darknorth wrote: I trained battlecruiser to level 5 a few months ago because I knew that these ships HAD to be getting buffed some time in the future. These changes all look amazing. I'm a bit disappointed that the Ferox no longer has a shield resist bonus but I guess that's alright. All in all this is going to be crazy. Welcome to the new T1 BC meta. well extra mid slot should make it up though
Reah Darknorth Republic Military School Minmatar Republic 2	Posted - 2015.09.13 19:42:16 - [312] - Quote unidenify wrote: Reah Darknorth wrote: I trained battlecruiser to level 5 a few months ago because I knew that these ships HAD to be getting buffed some time in the future. These changes all look amazing. I'm a bit disappointed that the Ferox no longer has a shield resist bonus but I guess that's alright. All in all this is going to be crazy. Welcome to the new T1 BC meta. well extra mid slot should make it up though Yeah, that's the idea. I think a single invulnerability field will more than make up for the lack of shield resist bonus, actually.
Lidia Caderu Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 45	Posted - 2015.09.13 20:03:44 - [313] - Quote 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%?
Skyler Hawk Boars on Parade The Tuskers Co. 46	Posted - 2015.09.13 20:38:55 - [314] - Quote It would be interesting if they got the ability to fit at least one more link without requiring command processors, especially if there's eventually going to be a move to end off-grid boosting.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 1191	Posted - 2015.09.13 20:43:22 - [315] - Quote 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.. 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 assist, nerf sentries, -3 slots for droneboats Nerf web strength, Make the blaster eagle worth using
Dalikah TURN LEFT The Camel Empire 57	Posted - 2015.09.13 20:46:39 - [316] - Quote How do you feel about a bit of a speed buff to the Gnosis, while you're at it? .
Lidia Caderu Harbingers of Chaos Inc Gentlemen's.Club 45	Posted - 2015.09.13 20:56:06 - [317] - 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.. 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.
Arch-Magus Mephisto Black Scorpions Inc Fidelas Constans 9	Posted - 2015.09.13 22:48:24 - [318] - Quote I like the proposed changes. But it's not enough. Right now and it has been all about Heavy Assault Cruisers as well as T3 Cruisers. That said it sure seems as though players prefer Caldari and Gallente races. I say take it a step further and make Minmitar Battlecuisers overpowered or some ability that might rival their popularity to give Ishtars and Cerverus a run for their money. With Eve Online diversity is one of the game's strengths. Play to that. Otherwise the changes are little more than cosmetic.
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 528	Posted - 2015.09.13 22:57:46 - [319] - Quote 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. Because caldari always favor range over raw dps. I think you're looking for gallente ships if you want max dps but no range. The main reason the ferox got 5% only was to drop a turret to make fitting much easier. The ferox has always been setup for rails, which it will do better in its role than a brutix. Just because its a hybrid boat doesn't mean it should automatically get 10% dmg bonus. Proph/Myrm get 1 less slot because they're drone boats, that is normal for drone boats. They are bonused to drones, not guns. Meaning they can fill their high's with neuts, and still do decent damage. Or supplement unbonused weapons with bonused drones for more dps. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role
Rovinia Exotic Dancers Union SONS of BANE 388	Posted - 2015.09.13 23:55:05 - [320] - Quote I like the changes but it would be nice to give them a slight buff in sensor strength across the board.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 100	Posted - 2015.09.13 23:56:05 - [321] - 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 - [322] - 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 - [323] - 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.
Sizeof Void Ninja Suicide Squadron 597	Posted - 2015.09.14 00:38:55 - [324] - Quote Seems like there will be even less of a reason to fly battleships....
Fourteen Maken Omega Industry Inc. The Ditanian Alliance 189	Posted - 2015.09.14 00:57:01 - [325] - Quote 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.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2465	Posted - 2015.09.14 01:29:32 - [326] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Seems like there will be even less of a reason to fly battleships.... How can you balance BS without first balancing BC and seeing how that interacts with Cruisers online. Since balancing BS is based on how they interact with BC also.
Moac Tor Cy-Core Industries Stain Confederation 138	Posted - 2015.09.14 01:32:45 - [327] - Quote I wouldn't mind battleships having a bit more EHP to make up for their slow warp and poor tracking/application; but other than that they are pretty decent at the moment. Especially if more people start using BCs as mentioned above.
Kaarous Aldurald Black Hydra Consortium. 14418	Posted - 2015.09.14 02:21:05 - [328] - Quote Sizeof Void wrote: Seems like there will be even less of a reason to fly battleships.... The reasons battleships are bad remain unchanged whether CCP buffs battlecruisers or not. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Cearain Goose Swarm Coalition 1372	Posted - 2015.09.14 03:36:08 - [329] - Quote This is really nice overall. But I question whether the Harbinger will be competitive with the other navy bcs in pvp. It was relatively weak going into the changes and seems to be getting the fewest enhancemnts. Will these changes make the Navy Harbinger even less competitive? Make faction war occupancy pvp instead of pve https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=53815&#post53815
FT Diomedes The Graduates Get Off My Lawn 1708	Posted - 2015.09.14 03:39:21 - [330] - Quote 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. This is how it used to work, before BC's were nerfed and Cruisers buffed. Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. So, why do I post here? I'm stubborn.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 .. 22 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,11s, ref 20251005/0549
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

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.