EVE Search - When will the Command Ships get their Love CCP??

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

When will the Command Ships get their Love CCP??

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 124	Posted - 2015.10.08 11:22:43 - [1] - Quote Okay so the CBCs got their long overdue rebalance which are starting to make their T2 brothers redundant. So CCP, I really hope you intend on giving the Command Ships the same overdue treatment soon. Otherwise, their usefulness will further deteriorate even more than it already has as their cost continually escalates.
Tiberius Heth Say No to Features 176	Posted - 2015.10.08 11:50:18 - [2] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Okay so the CBCs got their long overdue rebalance which are starting to make their T2 brothers redundant. So CCP, I really hope you intend on giving the Command Ships the same overdue treatment soon. Otherwise, their usefulness will further deteriorate even more than it already has as their cost continually escalates. It probably has to do with on grid gang links. They're not going to touch A because it's loosely connected to B, which itself is still waiting on chances to C because they HAD plans for D but those got iced as the art department hadn't done its part yet.
Memphis Baas 684	Posted - 2015.10.08 12:23:28 - [3] - Quote I'd guess after they announce and implement their plans for the capital ships and what roles they can have in a space filled with citadel stations and entosis link gameplay.
unidenify Plundering Penguins Solyaris Chtonium 147	Posted - 2015.10.08 21:44:46 - [4] - Quote Tiberius Heth wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Okay so the CBCs got their long overdue rebalance which are starting to make their T2 brothers redundant. So CCP, I really hope you intend on giving the Command Ships the same overdue treatment soon. Otherwise, their usefulness will further deteriorate even more than it already has as their cost continually escalates. It probably has to do with on grid gang links. They're not going to touch A because it's loosely connected to B, which itself is still waiting on chances to C because they HAD plans for D but those got iced as the art department hadn't done its part yet. well, what about its combat part can it get 25% bonus that all CBC now have?
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2570	Posted - 2015.10.08 22:42:42 - [5] - Quote Memphis Baas wrote: I'd guess after they announce and implement their plans for the capital ships and what roles they can have in a space filled with citadel stations and entosis link gameplay. You obviously didn't read the last Citadel Dev blog, go read it.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 126	Posted - 2015.10.09 01:15:25 - [6] - Quote unidenify wrote: Tiberius Heth wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Okay so the CBCs got their long overdue rebalance which are starting to make their T2 brothers redundant. So CCP, I really hope you intend on giving the Command Ships the same overdue treatment soon. Otherwise, their usefulness will further deteriorate even more than it already has as their cost continually escalates. It probably has to do with on grid gang links. They're not going to touch A because it's loosely connected to B, which itself is still waiting on chances to C because they HAD plans for D but those got iced as the art department hadn't done its part yet. well, what about its combat part can it get 25% bonus that all CBC now have? Well they already have a range bonus (except Abso, which needs a complete rework) so I was thinking something along these lines. Command Ship Role Bonus Can fit 3 Warfare Links 70% reduction in Medium Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay 100% bonus to Cap Boost Injected Amount
unidenify Plundering Penguins Solyaris Chtonium 149	Posted - 2015.10.09 02:36:58 - [7] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: unidenify wrote: Tiberius Heth wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Okay so the CBCs got their long overdue rebalance which are starting to make their T2 brothers redundant. So CCP, I really hope you intend on giving the Command Ships the same overdue treatment soon. Otherwise, their usefulness will further deteriorate even more than it already has as their cost continually escalates. It probably has to do with on grid gang links. They're not going to touch A because it's loosely connected to B, which itself is still waiting on chances to C because they HAD plans for D but those got iced as the art department hadn't done its part yet. well, what about its combat part can it get 25% bonus that all CBC now have? Well they already have a range bonus (except Abso, which needs a complete rework) so I was thinking something along these lines. Command Ship Role Bonus Can fit 3 Warfare Links 70% reduction in Medium Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay 100% bonus to Cap Boost Injected Amount I do like 70% for MJD, because it create flavour where Frigate/Cruiser get MWD bonus and CS/Marauder get MJD bonus
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 691	Posted - 2015.10.09 03:18:54 - [8] - Quote Only buff command ships need is a change to off grid boosting :D To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 126	Posted - 2015.10.09 03:40:21 - [9] - Quote Markus Reese wrote: Only buff command ships need is a change to off grid boosting :D You don't fly Command Ships at all, do you? And if you do, you definitely don't use it for combat.
Scipio Artelius The Vendunari End of Life 40473	Posted - 2015.10.09 03:44:28 - [10] - Quote Markus Reese wrote: Only buff command ships need is a change to off grid boosting :D While changes to OGB might hopefully eventually happen at some point or not in the near distant futureGäó, I actually hope it's a lot more creative than simply bringing links on grid. Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 126	Posted - 2015.10.09 04:13:07 - [11] - Quote Scipio Artelius wrote: Markus Reese wrote: Only buff command ships need is a change to off grid boosting :D While changes to OGB might hopefully eventually happen at some point or not in the near distant futureGäó, I actually hope it's a lot more creative than simply bringing links on grid. edit: probably shouldn't have even mentioned that tbh. This is a thread about Command Ships, not links. Personally, I use CSs for combat only (no point using them for links since T3C and OGB still exist). The miner above you probably only use his (if he can even fly em) for links only, hence his clueless response.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16748	Posted - 2015.10.09 04:56:47 - [12] - Quote Best help command ship can get is for off grid boosts to be removed and t3c nerfed to the level of cruisers. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
unidenify Plundering Penguins Solyaris Chtonium 150	Posted - 2015.10.09 04:58:38 - [13] - Quote while I can't drive CS, I do see their value as combat ship. Since they add 25% range bonus to CBC as their role to fight against cruiser. why not for CS to get 25% role bonus as well in order to combat against HAC?
ImYourMom Republic University Minmatar Republic 90	Posted - 2015.10.09 08:31:17 - [14] - Quote Im confused didn't they JUST get balanced like in the past year?
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 127	Posted - 2015.10.09 08:34:52 - [15] - Quote ImYourMom wrote: Im confused didn't they JUST get balanced like in the past year? More like a touch up but definitely not a REAL balance. CCP has gotten lazy in regards to properly rebalancing the CSs.
Val'Dore PlanetCorp InterStellar 1086	Posted - 2015.10.09 08:47:24 - [16] - Quote They can't buff them too much, else they'll be the best ships in the game. Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy. I invented Tiericide
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 127	Posted - 2015.10.09 08:54:09 - [17] - Quote Val'Dore wrote: They can't buff them too much, else they'll be the best ships in the game. Not the best, but considering their lengthy training time and status as T2 BCs, they should be one of the best sub-caps ships in the game.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16749	Posted - 2015.10.09 09:19:51 - [18] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Val'Dore wrote: They can't buff them too much, else they'll be the best ships in the game. Not the best, but considering their lengthy training time and status as T2 BCs, they should be one of the best sub-caps ships in the game. They are already good, it's other problematic ships that are causing the issues. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Janeway84 Def Squadron Pride Before Fall 177	Posted - 2015.10.09 09:21:02 - [19] - Quote They could make their stats over run the t3 cruisers since you need to spend more time to train CS than t3's Imo CS could need more cpu and grid and perhaps a midslot more on each and perhaps a highslot more aswell for +1 turret / launcher. MJD bonus would be fun and cap injector bonus gets huge original idea points +1
ChromeStriker Out of Focus Odin's Call 953	Posted - 2015.10.09 09:33:37 - [20] - Quote All of these things are linked and would have to be delt with at least close to the same time: - Links - T3 Cruisers - Commandships Potential things that may be linked (see what i did there) -Titans -Other capitals -Structures No Worries
Salvos Rhoska 1539	Posted - 2015.10.09 10:11:56 - [21] - Quote Ive not flown one, but their stats look fantastic (especially the Sleipnir). Perhaps one indirect option is reducing the Warfare Link type specific pre-req skills to I, inorder to access Command Ships I? To the result that you can fly the ship, as it is, earlier, and then pick/choose which warfare link types you would like to specialise in therafter, whilst flying it. This would parallel the T3Cruiser line in its subsystem pre-reqs, as subsituted by warfare link pre-reqs for CBC. (Albeit it with caveat T3cruiser subsystems are race specific therafter, whereas Warfare Links skills are universal). Its rather unusual that you need nigh perfect warfare link skills, across the board, to even get into the ship. This doesnt "buff" the class, just lowers the threshold for getting into one, as well as not having to "waste" SP on links you may not have any intention of ever using. PvE v PvP Selling CODE licenses! 9.99mil isk! Bid for unique CODE neon edition special agent certificate!
Glathull Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic 1143	Posted - 2015.10.09 10:17:22 - [22] - Quote I love how all the people who don't even fly the ships have all these great ideas about how to "fix" them. And by love, I don't actually mean love. I honestly feel like I just read fifty shades of dumb. --CCP Falcon
Salvos Rhoska 1539	Posted - 2015.10.09 10:20:29 - [23] - Quote Glathull wrote: I love how all the people who don't even fly the ships have all these great ideas about how to "fix" them. And by love, I don't actually mean love. This doesnt change the ship itself at all. Just reduces the training time to get into it. In order to benefit from the Warfare Links, you have to train them at the same rate anyways. PvE v PvP Selling CODE licenses! 9.99mil isk! Bid for unique CODE neon edition special agent certificate!
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 127	Posted - 2015.10.09 12:18:33 - [24] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Val'Dore wrote: They can't buff them too much, else they'll be the best ships in the game. Not the best, but considering their lengthy training time and status as T2 BCs, they should be one of the best sub-caps ships in the game. They are already good, it's other problematic ships that are causing the issues. The Sleipnir is the best CS at the moment because XLASBs. If it wasn't for that one module the Sleipnir would be in horrid shape like the rest of the CSs. The others need cap badly (especially the Abso) so CCP needs to either buff their cap recharge or give them a cap boost inject bonus. Additional cargo space would also be needed since the Sacrilege have a bigger cargo hold then any CS. A MMJD bonus falls in line with the Marauders T2 role bonus and would solve the limited mobility issue CSs has. I don't know who created the idea of the T3C, but it looks like the current CCP develop staff wasn't the ones behind it's origin. But due to the T3Cs popularity and close ties to WH space economy, it looks like CCP are up against a wall as to what to do with them. If they remove them from the game like you want baltec, It could lead to disaster. CCP isn't going to take that risk right now, given the already shakey PO situation so I wouldn't hold my breath. I would rather see another higher ship class meet (or slightly surpass) the T3Cs potential instead, namely the CSs.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 127	Posted - 2015.10.09 12:19:51 - [25] - Quote Glathull wrote: I love how all the people who don't even fly the ships have all these great ideas about how to "fix" them. And by love, I don't actually mean love. I fly both both the Sleipnir and Astarte Einstein. Get a clue before posting rubbish.
Soldarius Naliao Inc. Test Alliance Please Ignore 1389	Posted - 2015.10.09 14:59:30 - [26] - Quote Command Ships got a major rebalance about 2 years ago at the same time as the BC and dessie skill split into racial skills. They are solid combat ships (some more so than others) as well as link boats. http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY
Lloyd Roses Artificial Memories 1278	Posted - 2015.10.09 15:03:01 - [27] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Glathull wrote: I love how all the people who don't even fly the ships have all these great ideas about how to "fix" them. And by love, I don't actually mean love. I fly both both the Sleipnir and Astarte Einstein. Get a clue before posting rubbish. Sure buff the Sleip I throw more or less blindly at anything that I can't kill with a sabre, I'm the last to complain. (But I think they're excellent already and buffing anything outside of on-grid mobility or cargohold would go terribly wrong)
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 3369	Posted - 2015.10.09 15:18:10 - [28] - Quote Command ships are so bad it's funny. I've got command ships 5 and near perfect skills and I'm still not going to touch one with a ten foot pole.
Faenir Antollare The Idiot Kings Get Off My Lawn 443	Posted - 2015.10.09 15:22:24 - [29] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: Command ships are so bad it's funny. I've got command ships 5 and near perfect skills and I'm still not going to touch one with a ten foot pole. Very much the same. RiP BooBoo 26/7/1971 - 23/7/2014 My Lady My Love My Life My Wife
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16749	Posted - 2015.10.09 17:06:09 - [30] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: Val'Dore wrote: They can't buff them too much, else they'll be the best ships in the game. Not the best, but considering their lengthy training time and status as T2 BCs, they should be one of the best sub-caps ships in the game. They are already good, it's other problematic ships that are causing the issues. The Sleipnir is the best CS at the moment because XLASBs. If it wasn't for that one module the Sleipnir would be in horrid shape like the rest of the CSs. The others need cap badly (especially the Abso) so CCP needs to either buff their cap recharge or give them a cap boost inject bonus. Additional cargo space would also be needed since the Sacrilege have a bigger cargo hold then any CS. A MMJD bonus falls in line with the Marauders T2 role bonus and would solve the limited mobility issue CSs has. I don't know who created the idea of the T3C, but it looks like the current CCP develop staff wasn't the ones behind it's origin. But due to the T3Cs popularity and close ties to WH space economy, it looks like CCP are up against a wall as to what to do with them. If they remove them from the game like you want baltec, It could lead to disaster. CCP isn't going to take that risk right now, given the already shakey PO situation so I wouldn't hold my breath. I would rather see another higher ship class meet (or slightly surpass) the T3Cs potential instead, namely the CSs. I don't want them taken out of the game, I want them to be cruisers. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Frostys Virpio KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 2326	Posted - 2015.10.09 17:22:21 - [31] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: Command ships are so bad it's funny. I've got command ships 5 and near perfect skills and I'm still not going to touch one with a ten foot pole. What do you expect them to do beside being a little better at combat than a T1 BC and much better at boosting than a T1 BC? Their current "better at combat than T1" might be debatable since the last buff to T1 BC but their T2 role of boosting is already in place. The train time and cost are not really supposed to be argument to ask for a ship to be better. Making a ship better is supposed to be based on it not filling it's role because it's out-done by something else. They boost better than their T1 counterpart and are arguably better in combat than their T1 counterpart. If you really want a T2 "combat" BC, it might warrant a new class instead of stapling additional role on a ship that already has a defined role.
Salvos Rhoska 1539	Posted - 2015.10.09 21:02:35 - [32] - Quote Vimsy Vortis wrote: Command ships are so bad it's funny. I've got command ships 5 and near perfect skills and I'm still not going to touch one with a ten foot pole. This begs the question, why the hell did you get these skills in the first place? PvE v PvP Selling CODE licenses! 9.99mil isk! Bid for unique CODE neon edition special agent certificate!
Nicolai Serkanner Jebediah Kerman's Junkyard and Spaceship Parts Co. I N F A M O U S 507	Posted - 2015.10.09 22:25:10 - [33] - Quote Salvos Rhoska wrote: Glathull wrote: I love how all the people who don't even fly the ships have all these great ideas about how to "fix" them. And by love, I don't actually mean love. My cursory proposal doesnt change the ships themselves at all. Just reduces the training time to get into them. In order to benefit from the Warfare Links, you have to train those skills at the same rate as before anyways. The modules in and of themselves themselves provide very little benefit. Skilling is required to multiply it to pragmatically useful levels. While the player is skilling those, the T2 Battlecruiser hulls themselves still provide a very formidable weapons platform, but are largely useless in the Link department, till the player skills them up. Glathull's point still stands, doesn't it? But then again, you do love to hear yourself type those responses.
Salvos Rhoska 1540	Posted - 2015.10.09 22:42:03 - [34] - Quote Nicolai Serkanner wrote: Glathull's point still stands, doesn't it? But then again, you do love to hear yourself type those responses. He didn't make a point. He expressed an opinion and preference. But yes, it still stands, as does mine. And I can't hear myself typing my responses as my keyboard is very silent. PvE v PvP Selling CODE licenses! 9.99mil isk! Bid for unique CODE neon edition special agent certificate!
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 128	Posted - 2015.10.09 23:31:24 - [35] - Quote Frostys Virpio wrote: Vimsy Vortis wrote: Command ships are so bad it's funny. I've got command ships 5 and near perfect skills and I'm still not going to touch one with a ten foot pole. What do you expect them to do beside being a little better at combat than a T1 BC and much better at boosting than a T1 BC? Their current "better at combat than T1" might be debatable since the last buff to T1 BC but their T2 role of boosting is already in place. The train time and cost are not really supposed to be argument to ask for a ship to be better. Making a ship better is supposed to be based on it not filling it's role because it's out-done by something else. They boost better than their T1 counterpart and are arguably better in combat than their T1 counterpart. If you really want a T2 "combat" BC, it might warrant a new class instead of stapling additional role on a ship that already has a defined role. As long as TC3 capability of using OGB exist, that defined Role you speak of is redundant. CSs main focus should be combat, not link boosting. And as combantant ships they pale in comparison to their little cousins, the HACs. HACs has nearly identical tanking, better cap recharge, identical cargo hold capacity and far better mobility then the CSs. It's clearly obvious to me that CCP didn't thoroughly complete the CSs rebalance 20 months ago when they did the HACs.
Barbara Nichole Cryogenic Consultancy 694	Posted - 2015.10.10 01:28:42 - [36] - Quote I beg you to remember that balance is boring. I didn't think they needed to be nerfed back when they were nerfed. -á-á- remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not-á "afk" cloaking-á- [IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 691	Posted - 2015.10.10 03:05:18 - [37] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: You don't fly Command Ships at all, do you? And if you do, you definitely don't use it for combat. PEW! PEW! PEW! I love command ships. Had full L5 for all leaderships and hulls plus fittings before I could fit T2 turrets. This picture is a fave of mine. I play eve for fun, so I brought em on roams. Hell, full tank config, I loved attracting agro. Meant they were shooting at toughest hull on grid instead of the damage dealers and logi. On grid also meant I wasnt having to warp around to evade scanners. Links dont work in warp. I like that current tactics means that a T1 frig can completely take command ships out of the fight. Sides, on grid is more fun! Scipio Artelius wrote: While changes to OGB might hopefully eventually happen at some point or not in the near distant futureGäó, I actually hope it's a lot more creative than simply bringing links on grid. edit: probably shouldn't have even mentioned that tbh. This is a thread about Command Ships, not links. They are closely related. Command ships used for command do very well. Not sure what people want until their role gets improved. Most every command complaint relates to or can be remedied by something separate from the hull To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Otso Bakarti Filial Pariahs 328	Posted - 2015.10.10 04:04:11 - [38] - Quote Janeway84 wrote: They could make their stats over run the t3 cruisers since you need to spend more time to train CS than t3's Imo CS could need more cpu and grid and perhaps a midslot more on each and perhaps a highslot more aswell for +1 turret / launcher. MJD bonus would be fun and cap injector bonus gets huge original idea points +1 If they protect themselves, one more high to make that a reasonable expectation. The additional mid? I guess if shield tanking. If armor tanking then a low. Fighting in one of these? I always thought that was a bit odd. CS should be almost purely a support ship, with enough tank and oompf to protect itself should an engagement start to go sideways. The ships it supports should be providing the firepower and protection (to state the obvious). There really are better ships to fight with. Maybe it's not a good idea to view the requirements of this ship in terms of solo PvP, or using it as a main damage doer. It'd be a shame to lose any of it's support function to such cross purposes. One size fits all usually doesn't fit anybody. Back from the 90-day suspension for speaking truth to power.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 130	Posted - 2015.10.10 04:28:33 - [39] - Quote Otso Bakarti wrote: Janeway84 wrote: They could make their stats over run the t3 cruisers since you need to spend more time to train CS than t3's Imo CS could need more cpu and grid and perhaps a midslot more on each and perhaps a highslot more aswell for +1 turret / launcher. MJD bonus would be fun and cap injector bonus gets huge original idea points +1 If they protect themselves, one more high to make that a reasonable expectation. The additional mid? I guess if shield tanking. If armor tanking then a low. Fighting in one of these? I always thought that was a bit odd. CS should be almost purely a support ship, with enough tank and oompf to protect itself should an engagement start to go sideways. The ships it supports should be providing the firepower and protection (to state the obvious). There really are better ships to fight with. Maybe it's not a good idea to view the requirements of this ship in terms of solo PvP, or using it as a main damage doer. It'd be a shame to lose any of it's support function to such cross purposes. One size fits all usually doesn't fit anybody. CCP really made a big mistake when they bridged all CSs into the "Supporting Fleet Boosting" Role. Before they were divided with one being a fleet support booster and the other solely combantant role. Now at this rate, they're gonna need to come out with an entirely new class of T2 BCs meant for pure combat. This way there would be no more confusion about the roles of the CSs.
NFain Elysian Ascent Empyreus 154	Posted - 2015.10.10 07:29:19 - [40] - Quote 101 guide to CS balance: 1) add a mid and a low slot 2) add a 6th hard point to all 3) increase cpu/pg to allow for variations in fits, not one fit that magically make them work decently. 4) give us back the old ship models >:( But yeah basically they used to be awesome, then they blew, then they got kinda better but with tiericide they're useless in the state they're in.
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 130	Posted - 2015.10.10 09:20:23 - [41] - Quote NFain wrote: 101 guide to CS balance: 1) add a mid and a low slot 2) add a 6th hard point to all 3) increase cpu/pg to allow for variations in fits, not one fit that magically make them work decently. 4) give us back the old ship models >:( But yeah basically they used to be awesome, then they blew, then they got kinda better but with tiericide they're useless in the state they're in. Well to be honest I wouldn't say they're useless, just lacking (quite a bit). More so when compared next to the HACs.
Nicolai Serkanner Jebediah Kerman's Junkyard and Spaceship Parts Co. I N F A M O U S 510	Posted - 2015.10.10 10:24:50 - [42] - Quote Salvos Rhoska wrote: Nicolai Serkanner wrote: Glathull's point still stands, doesn't it? But then again, you do love to hear yourself type those responses. He didn't make a point. He expressed an opinion and preference. But yes, it still stands, as does mine. And I can't hear myself typing my responses as my keyboard is very silent. Semantics. Your trolling becomes way to obvious.
baltec1 Bat Country Goonswarm Federation 16753	Posted - 2015.10.10 10:36:44 - [43] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: NFain wrote: 101 guide to CS balance: 1) add a mid and a low slot 2) add a 6th hard point to all 3) increase cpu/pg to allow for variations in fits, not one fit that magically make them work decently. 4) give us back the old ship models >:( But yeah basically they used to be awesome, then they blew, then they got kinda better but with tiericide they're useless in the state they're in. Well to be honest I wouldn't say they're useless, just lacking (quite a bit). More so when compared next to the HACs. Command ships are not supposed to be hacs only bigger, they are a fleet support ship. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 692	Posted - 2015.10.10 13:42:19 - [44] - Quote Otso Bakarti wrote: If they protect themselves, one more high to make that a reasonable expectation. The additional mid? I guess if shield tanking. If armor tanking then a low. Fighting in one of these? I always thought that was a bit odd. CS should be almost purely a support ship, with enough tank and oompf to protect itself should an engagement start to go sideways. The ships it supports should be providing the firepower and protection (to state the obvious). There really are better ships to fight with. Maybe it's not a good idea to view the requirements of this ship in terms of solo PvP, or using it as a main damage doer. It'd be a shame to lose any of it's support function to such cross purposes. One size fits all usually doesn't fit anybody. An additional tank spot would be nice if nothing to encourage squad on squad instead of blob combat comes up. If there was to be a short term change, I would make ganglink bonus have a falloff based on range. This should be no problem, even OGB. Buff mid and low, happy. Expand and focus on the command ship functionality. Heck, I have, for a long while, thought that tactical overlay should be removed from default and reserved for command ships or similar. Want damage, isnt that what the smaller, and faster HACs are for? More combat out of them just means they are overshadowing another role or just not being used for current role. Want high damage that can take a beating while tackled? Isnt that the role of T1 battleships? To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Divine Entervention Rational Chaos Inc. Phoebe Freeport Republic 670	Posted - 2015.10.10 13:50:40 - [45] - Quote Seeing as how a command ship is my mid-term goal after the falcon(like 2 weeks until it's at level 4 so enjoy being able to target things while you still can), I approve this request.
Eternus8lux8lucis Primus Inc. LEGIO ASTARTES ARCANUM 515	Posted - 2015.10.10 16:00:53 - [46] - Quote I was thinking about that new idea for the fleet MJD action. Why not put that into command ships and only give it to fleet positions? IE you need to be in a command position in a fleet and in a command ship to use it. Would bring back the need to keep your commanders alive and give a reason for command ships as a whole to do the "command" sort of thing like their name would allude to. Just a random thought of the day. Imam: Have you heard anything I've said? Richard B. Riddick: You said it's all circling the drain, the whole universe. Right? Imam: That's right. Richard B. Riddick: Had to end sometime.
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 693	Posted - 2015.10.10 16:24:01 - [47] - Quote Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: I was thinking about that new idea for the fleet MJD action. Why not put that into command ships and only give it to fleet positions? IE you need to be in a command position in a fleet and in a command ship to use it. Would bring back the need to keep your commanders alive and give a reason for command ships as a whole to do the "command" sort of thing like their name would allude to. Just a random thought of the day. Okay, as far as good ideas go, that one rates pretty highly for me. Give command ships the more advanced fleet warps and the like? That would be pretty awesome. To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Val'Dore PlanetCorp InterStellar 1087	Posted - 2015.10.10 22:57:46 - [48] - Quote Markus Reese wrote: Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: I was thinking about that new idea for the fleet MJD action. Why not put that into command ships and only give it to fleet positions? IE you need to be in a command position in a fleet and in a command ship to use it. Would bring back the need to keep your commanders alive and give a reason for command ships as a whole to do the "command" sort of thing like their name would allude to. Just a random thought of the day. Okay, as far as good ideas go, that one rates pretty highly for me. Give command ships the more advanced fleet warps and the like? That would be pretty awesome. Yeeeesss. Make them actual Command and Control platforms. Star Jump Drive A new way to traverse the galaxy. I invented Tiericide
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 130	Posted - 2015.10.11 01:16:46 - [49] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Daniela Doran wrote: NFain wrote: 101 guide to CS balance: 1) add a mid and a low slot 2) add a 6th hard point to all 3) increase cpu/pg to allow for variations in fits, not one fit that magically make them work decently. 4) give us back the old ship models >:( But yeah basically they used to be awesome, then they blew, then they got kinda better but with tiericide they're useless in the state they're in. Well to be honest I wouldn't say they're useless, just lacking (quite a bit). More so when compared next to the HACs. Command ships are not supposed to be hacs only bigger, they are a fleet support ship. Like I said, this "Fleet Support Role" that CSs are now labeled as, was an error by CCP. They were clearly meant to be combantant T2 BCs 2 years before CCP derped them all together into that boring role. Now the only logical thing for CCP to do would be to either make them both a combantant and fleet support booster or introduce another T2 BC class designed for pure combat. From my speculation, I'm guessing CCP planned on introducing T3 BCs using the same designs from the T3Ds. But harsh feedback from the T3Ds designs have put that on hold. So while the plans for introducing another T2 or T3 BC are at a stalemate, I'd rather them to add necessary improvements on the current T2 BCs. Lets face it, with the T1 BC buff who would pay 6x the price and train 3x as long to fly a CS in their current state?
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 130	Posted - 2015.10.11 01:36:33 - [50] - Quote Markus Reese wrote: Eternus8lux8lucis wrote: I was thinking about that new idea for the fleet MJD action. Why not put that into command ships and only give it to fleet positions? IE you need to be in a command position in a fleet and in a command ship to use it. Would bring back the need to keep your commanders alive and give a reason for command ships as a whole to do the "command" sort of thing like their name would allude to. Just a random thought of the day. Okay, as far as good ideas go, that one rates pretty highly for me. Give command ships the more advanced fleet warps and the like? That would be pretty awesome. Yea that was pretty good, at least their roles would be more definitive. Of course that also means the players can at long last look forward to additional combat focused T2 or T3 BCs in the future.
Kaldi Tsukaya Deveron Shipyards and Technology 182	Posted - 2015.10.11 08:14:40 - [51] - Quote The problem with links is the Command Processor. Either limit 1 per ship, or else make a low-slot CP available to balance shield/armor tanks on Command Ships. Limiting the fitting will also reduce the T3C OGB issues.
Markus Reese Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State 695	Posted - 2015.10.11 17:48:39 - [52] - Quote Kaldi Tsukaya wrote: The problem with links is the Command Processor. Either limit 1 per ship, or else make a low-slot CP available to balance shield/armor tanks on Command Ships. Limiting the fitting will also reduce the T3C OGB issues. Well... That goes back to the OGB. Most subprocessor fit T3 and command ships are frail and would not last on grid if more than one. However, back in my final days of nullsec, I flew a command archon. Heavy tank and supportt for the logi carriers, etc. Needed the subproc. To quote Lfod Shi The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.
Servo Libertas Federal Dynamics 0	Posted - 2015.10.11 18:35:28 - [53] - Quote I like my eos, but even with the bonus to heavies they still die fairly quickly. The tracking speed for medium turrets is in flavor with most Gallente ships, but in this case I'd rather have something like +7.5% or 10% hit points for heavy drones on top of the +10% it already has for all drones. It could use a slight boost to drone bay capacity, but it is not in dire need of it. Another option, though probably way over the top, would be to have something like "-7.5% heavy drone signature resolution per level".
NFain Elysian Ascent Empyreus 154	Posted - 2015.10.15 06:12:53 - [54] - Quote bumping for the love this desperately needs
Ioci Bad Girl Posse Somethin Awfull Forums 601	Posted - 2015.10.15 10:33:46 - [55] - Quote The only alliance I have ever heard of who implemented a Command Ship fleet was Pandemic Legion and while they only tested it by tormenting Provi ratters they did make a vulture fleet. From what I put together it wasn't something you want to butt heads with. If you had enough of them on the screen that they didn't stick out like a sore thumb, they would be formidable. You would need a super rich and super bored alliance to see it happen though. R.I.P. Vile Rat
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 135	Posted - 2015.10.15 11:05:51 - [56] - Quote Ioci wrote: The only alliance I have ever heard of who implemented a Command Ship fleet was Pandemic Legion and while they only tested it by tormenting Provi ratters they did make a vulture fleet. From what I put together it wasn't something you want to butt heads with. If you had enough of them on the screen that they didn't stick out like a sore thumb, they would be formidable. You would need a super rich and super bored alliance to see it happen though. Almost any ship in eve when formed in a mass fleet with a competent FC would be formidable. That doesn't mean the ship when used solo would be just as formidable. Command ships used to be very powerful solo combatant ships, but that's no longer the case since other classes received substantial buffs while the CSs remained statistically untouched for the past 3-4 years.
Nevyn Auscent Broke Sauce 2590	Posted - 2015.10.15 11:06:57 - [57] - Quote Ioci wrote: The only alliance I have ever heard of who implemented a Command Ship fleet was Pandemic Legion and while they only tested it by tormenting Provi ratters they did make a vulture fleet. From what I put together it wasn't something you want to butt heads with. If you had enough of them on the screen that they didn't stick out like a sore thumb, they would be formidable. You would need a super rich and super bored alliance to see it happen though. Someone in lowsec had an Absolution fleet I believe also. But again it was one of the powerhouse corp/alliances in Lowsec. And no-one else picked it up. It was good, but I'm not sure it was actually better than other options, just cool and different and still effective.
Lan Wang V I R I I Ineluctable. 1664	Posted - 2015.10.15 11:24:45 - [58] - Quote seen a couple of absolution doctrines, one of my old corps had absolution fleet and so either shadow cartel or snuffbox Recruiting V I R I I Small Gang Nullsec PVP Drinking rum before 10am makes you a pirate, not an alcoholic \| Angel Cartel \| Serpentis \|
Daniela Doran Ministry of War Amarr Empire 135	Posted - 2015.10.15 11:32:48 - [59] - Quote Lan Wang wrote: seen a couple of absolution doctrines, one of my old corps had absolution fleet and so either shadow cartel or snuffbox I believe they both used them. They were just tinkering about trying to do something different and unique. If they wanted to, they could've use the Zealot, Sacrilege in the same fashion, but choose the Abso. Why? Because nobody hardly uses them in fleets. So yea they're gonna appear to be good due to unfamiliarity.
Vimsy Vortis Shoulda Checked Local Break-A-Wish Foundation 3407	Posted - 2015.10.15 11:47:51 - [60] - Quote baltec1 wrote: Command ships are not supposed to be hacs only bigger, they are a fleet support ship. Given how they're actually designed I'm not sure what CCP actually thought they were supposed to be. Field command ships are clearly intended to be HACs but bigger to a point where it's questionable as to why they even have gang link bonuses as at all. Fleet command ships however are clearly intended to serve as support ships by providing bonuses and not much else. There's clearly a demand for both of these functions. People want T2 combat oriented battlecruisers and people want their fleet bonus ships. However for some reason at this point these distinctly different roles are lumped onto the same class of ship.
Tora Bushido EVE Corporation 987654321-POP The Marmite Collective 2833	Posted - 2015.10.15 11:54:25 - [61] - Quote Daniela Doran wrote: Okay so the CBCs got their long overdue rebalance which are starting to make their T2 brothers redundant. So CCP, I really hope you intend on giving the Command Ships the same overdue treatment soon. Otherwise, their usefulness will further deteriorate even more than it already has as their cost continually escalates. Soon and it will be a great update Go train CS and cloaking to V. DELETE THE WEAK, ADAPT OR DIE !
Pookoko Sigma Sagittarii Inc. 127	Posted - 2015.10.15 12:18:03 - [62] - Quote For me personally command ships are working very well and actually feels like what they are supposed to be. I've used it mainly as part of 3~6 men small gang and there it shines. My main experience is with pure Gallente mix, where EOS is the king pin and any combinations of Deimos/Onerios/Arazu/Proteus are thrown in the mix. Armor & Skirmish boosts it gives complement these boats very well. It is situational though, because I've used it mainly for brawling around low sec gates. If you want to be on grid part of a kitey nano shield hit & run gang I can see how a CS can be so crappy. But when you use CS in a close range brawl in a fleet size below 10 or so, it feels exactly like how it was meant to be. Nice on-grid boosts for the fleet, tanks well enough for this fleet size and does very respectable DPS. EOS giving boost to Deimos/Proteus tanking while giving them scram/web range bonus fits so well with the Gallente philosophy. Sure, this type of fighting has been out of trend for like a half a decade or something. :p But you can still force this type of fights in certain situations. It is limited, but when it works, it is beautiful and the ship just feels perfect for the role. I don't think it's that CS have no purpose/defined role. As the example I gave show, they have very niche role in very specific situations. It's just that the trend of recent years in small gang warfare emphaise so much on speed and range control, that any ship that can't 'keep up' feels out of date and obsolete. But I would hate to see T2 ships' roles always changing to fit the current meta. Just my two cents. :p
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 446	Posted - 2015.10.15 14:27:56 - [63] - Quote Sleipnirs are a thing because they are a bloody good ship. Yep it is a long train mostly because a bit of the train is "off attribute map". But they are a command ship. Live with it. A full links train is much much longer. For a triage carrier i still need to train drone interfacing lvl 5. There are a lot of unlock skills like that. I have a perfect links account, and everything else to fly these ships with all lvl 5. Not normal for me. But it just worked out that way. Most of the command ships are really good. You have to know how to fit for the role your fly them for however. Also brain in the box will almost certainly end OGB. I don't even expect much of a cry from anyone over this. However talking to devs at Amsterdam, brain in the box gives all sorts of really really interesting ways to adjust on grid boosting/links. Should be really interesting what is coming around the corner. AKA the scientist. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one 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.