Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
O2 jayjay
Sickology Together We Solo
34
|
Posted - 2015.10.22 23:38:19 -
[1] - Quote
Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.
As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.
Keep it simple.
|
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
3932
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 00:34:44 -
[2] - Quote
Do we really want two thousand DPS out of T1 ships though?
I mean, really?
And would you buff BCs as well? I'd like two thousand deeps out of my talos too please. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2619
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 00:38:13 -
[3] - Quote
Don't need the DPS increase on BS. They project pretty well for their DPS. Instead give them a larger EHP increase. My suggestion would be doubling their base EHP, while adjusting shield recharge rates appropriately to keep the same passive tank. This obviously doesn't work out to a straight doubling of EHP or anywhere near since 1600 plates add massive amounts, but does do a significant improvement. |
Omnathious Deninard
Novis Initiis
3223
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 02:18:32 -
[4] - Quote
Don't buff battleships to try to nerf T3s. If battleships need a buff then they should bet a buff. T3 cruisers should be balanced as a cruiser.
If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
683
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 02:38:22 -
[5] - Quote
Omnathious Deninard wrote:Don't buff battleships to try to nerf T3s. If battleships need a buff then they should bet a buff. T3 cruisers should be balanced as a cruiser.
I thinj t3c should be treated like BC. Slow them down and sig bloom them a bit. Then at least their tank will reflect the kind of ship they are rather than just being a straight cruiser+2.
Also at Nevyn:
Maybe making battleships have a role bonus where they receive double hp bonuses from shield extenders/plates? And not for every vessel mind you. Suitable ships could include
Raven. Megathron Abaddon Tempest.
Role bonus: shield extenders and armour plates grant double the HP value listed on the module.
Think about it. Just take 5 minutes to think about it.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
W0lf Crendraven
Welfcorp
385
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 02:43:53 -
[6] - Quote
t3s are fine and if anything need a buff |
Leto Aramaus
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
327
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 03:25:23 -
[7] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Do we really want two thousand DPS out of T1 ships though?
I mean, really?
And would you buff BCs as well? I'd like two thousand deeps out of my talos too please.
Yes I do.
+1
The UI update we deserve
|
Leto Aramaus
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
327
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 03:26:25 -
[8] - Quote
W0lf Crendraven wrote:t3s are fine and if anything need a buff
Funniest thing I've read in a while.
The UI update we deserve
|
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2620
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 04:21:13 -
[9] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
I thinj t3c should be treated like BC. Slow them down and sig bloom them a bit. Then at least their tank will reflect the kind of ship they are rather than just being a straight cruiser+2.
Also at Nevyn:
Maybe making battleships have a role bonus where they receive double hp bonuses from shield extenders/plates? And not for every vessel mind you. Suitable ships could include
Raven. Megathron Abaddon Tempest.
Role bonus: shield extenders and armour plates grant double the HP value listed on the module.
Think about it. Just take 5 minutes to think about it.
Doesn't promote the more active style of fits on the BS. So I'm not a fan. Also you are trying to pick very specific ships out, when it should be a class wide buff.
Base EHP changes are by far the simplest to do than trying to be too fancy and ending up missing half the BS playstyles. |
FireFrenzy
SUPREME MATHEMATICS A Band Apart.
614
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 06:51:19 -
[10] - Quote
if you want to see a sensible version of this thread search for Baboli's "making battleships worth the warp" thread... |
|
Caleb Seremshur
Gladiators of Rage RAZOR Alliance
683
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 07:12:31 -
[11] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:Caleb Seremshur wrote:
I thinj t3c should be treated like BC. Slow them down and sig bloom them a bit. Then at least their tank will reflect the kind of ship they are rather than just being a straight cruiser+2.
Also at Nevyn:
Maybe making battleships have a role bonus where they receive double hp bonuses from shield extenders/plates? And not for every vessel mind you. Suitable ships could include
Raven. Megathron Abaddon Tempest.
Role bonus: shield extenders and armour plates grant double the HP value listed on the module.
Think about it. Just take 5 minutes to think about it.
Doesn't promote the more active style of fits on the BS. So I'm not a fan. Also you are trying to pick very specific ships out, when it should be a class wide buff. Base EHP changes are by far the simplest to do than trying to be too fancy and ending up missing half the BS playstyles.
That depends on the reasons why you feel ewar ships and already dominant boats like dominix and navy apoc/vindi etc deserve the help.
No I was specific with my examples because these are ships that need something to distinguish them from other ships and are otherwise not pulling their weight.
If you feel role specific bonuses are inappropriate why does say the drake have one?
I also made sure to deliberately avoid ships that had pre existing resist bonuses (bar the abaddon which is desperately grasping at straws to live) and also kept in mind the unique playstyles already afforded to other ships in the t1 bracket like mael being active tanked or the domis drones and spare highs.
This isn't convoluted - a role bonus for these ships like doubled effect from buffer modules is a good idea because it comes at the expense of speed or signature and these things have measurable effects when large buffer counters come in to play.
A single nag could still easily dispatch an equal value or better in buffer abaddons.
Veteran and solo/small gang PVP advocate.
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2065
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 08:10:54 -
[12] - Quote
O2 jayjay wrote:Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.
As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.
Keep it simple.
I completely agree that battleships are underpowered.
I don't think they need any more tank or capacitor buffs but I think the DPS needs a big buff... Someone asked "do we need 2000 dps battleships" but you have to remember that it is harder for large weapons to apply their damage to smaller targets.
Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
|
O2 jayjay
Sickology Together We Solo
35
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 20:53:00 -
[13] - Quote
Rek Seven wrote:O2 jayjay wrote:Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.
As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.
Keep it simple.
I completely agree that battleships are underpowered. I don't think they need any more tank or capacitor buffs but I think the DPS needs a big buff... Someone asked "do we need 2000 dps battleships" but you have to remember that it is harder for large weapons to apply their damage to smaller targets. PS. t3 cruisers are fine. They are supposed to be the pinnacle of ship technology ffs! Of course they should be able to beat a T1 BC.
Exactly! Not only do you get 2 au warp speed and snail align times. They use larger gun (don't understand how med gun match them in dps) with worse tracking. They require alot more skills to properly fly one.
So why not have 2000 dps battleships. They are BATTLEships! (not directed at replied user). BC are fine where they are.
|
Leto Aramaus
Spiritus Draconis Spaceship Bebop
328
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 22:08:16 -
[14] - Quote
A problem with flat HP buffs across the board for all Battleships is that it further extends the idea that 1600mm plates and Large Shield Extenders are not "BS sized" modules.
If the Megathron's armor is increased by 50% or 100%, then a 1600mm is that much less of an actual bonus, and the meta will probably shift to resist mods and (!) maybe even Layered Plating will become useful (layered plate mods give a flat % bonus to armor HP instead of resists, and you never see them used currently).
This would mean 1600mm plates, which were originally intended to be fit by Battleships and probably NOT cruisers... would exclusively be fit on cruisers. And then we'll have people calling for "BS sized" mods to be introduced.
I say BS don't need an HP buff, just a DPS and maybe range/tracking buffs.
i.e. Megathron = cant expect 2000 dps i.e. Vindicator = " 3000 dps
Why not?
The UI update we deserve
|
O2 jayjay
Sickology Together We Solo
38
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 23:05:11 -
[15] - Quote
Leto Aramaus wrote:A problem with flat HP buffs across the board for all Battleships is that it further extends the idea that 1600mm plates and Large Shield Extenders are not "BS sized" modules.
If the Megathron's armor is increased by 50% or 100%, then a 1600mm is that much less of an actual bonus, and the meta will probably shift to resist mods and (!) maybe even Layered Plating will become useful (layered plate mods give a flat % bonus to armor HP instead of resists, and you never see them used currently).
This would mean 1600mm plates, which were originally intended to be fit by Battleships and probably NOT cruisers... would exclusively be fit on cruisers. And then we'll have people calling for "BS sized" mods to be introduced.
I say BS don't need an HP buff, just a DPS and maybe range/tracking buffs.
i.e. Megathron = cant expect 2000 dps i.e. Vindicator = " 3000 dps
Why not?
1600 T2 mm plate gives 4,800 additional armor hp. T2 Energized Armor Layering Membrane (EALM) give 15% more armor hp. Which means you would need 32,000 raw armor hp for the EALM to match the 1600mm plate (.15x32000=4800). A mega only has 6,500, then you have to include your 25% skill for more armor HP=8,1250. If they received my 22% buff plus the 25% from skills the new number would be 9912.5 which is alot under the 32,000 for the EALM to replace the 1600 T2 armor plates. So not by a long shot would my suggestion make the ship more powerful to where 1600MM plates will not be considered BS armor plating. using resistance over hp amount is the difference between being buffer fit and logi fit. When you have outside reps more resist is better. When you don't have logi DPS and Buffer is better. Different meta for different game play. My suggestions Keeps both metas and separates cruisers being closer to battleships and moving its power shifts slightly to the capital side without going anywhere near their territory.
That is why I made this post for a simple non destructive way to fix the T3 and BS problem. (above comment was a armor comparison for a mega and was picked due to the 1600 mm plate discussion) |
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
206
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 23:37:09 -
[16] - Quote
O2 jayjay wrote:Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.
As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.
Keep it simple.
the gap between BS and capitals is WAY bigger then the gap between cruisers and BS and on this note only your solution is NOT a solution. T3 cruisers need a nerf it is as simple as that.
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1233
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 23:43:14 -
[17] - Quote
Leto Aramaus wrote:W0lf Crendraven wrote:t3s are fine and if anything need a buff Funniest thing I've read in a while.
indeed, sadly some people buy into the it costs more and its T3 so it should be better line, when even the devs have said cost shouldn't be a defining balancing point and that T3's are meant too be generalists rather than the pinnacle of brawlers, but do people listen??...
T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely.
ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
|
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
206
|
Posted - 2015.10.23 23:45:48 -
[18] - Quote
W0lf Crendraven wrote:t3s are fine and if anything need a buff
please pee in this cup i would like to test it for drugs
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
Reaver Glitterstim
Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore
2682
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 00:02:46 -
[19] - Quote
Danika Princip wrote:Do we really want two thousand DPS out of T1 ships though?
I mean, really?
And would you buff BCs as well? I'd like two thousand deeps out of my talos too please. Moros is a T1 ship and it can break a lot more than 2k DPS. I say this not to be facetious but to make an important point: tech level has little to do with damage, and even ship size doesn't mean that much. The most important factor is projection, which is a composite of range and tracking mostly.
Your Talos can dish out well over 1K DPS, and it's okay because it does so with weak tracking (as far as cruisers are concerned) and mediocre range. It isn't particularly effective against anything smaller than a battleship until you already have the target webbed and have closed into optimal range.
A Naga can reach nearly 1K DPS with railguns, with plenty of range to spare. But it tracks like cold honey, so it's not all that impressive. It can hit cruisers pretty well at range when it sacrifices a lot of DPS to use longer range T1 ammo, but there's no way for the Naga to web them at that range so unless you have another partner to tackle them there's not a lot you can do.
It's all balanced out this way but it is becoming increasingly obvious that Battleships lack an edge to really put their power up there where their price and maneuverability lie. They have the projection, they sort of have the DPS but that's strained by attack battlecruisers, and they don't really have the hit points.
Pirate ship Nightmare, can you fathom
Larger but with smaller spikes than Phantasm
The Succubus looks meaner
But the Revenant cleaner
Seems as they get bigger, the smaller spikes they has'm
|
O2 jayjay
Sickology Together We Solo
38
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 00:07:00 -
[20] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:O2 jayjay wrote:Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.
As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.
Keep it simple.
the gap between BS and capitals is WAY bigger then the gap between cruisers and BS and on this note only your solution is NOT a solution. T3 cruisers need a nerf it is as simple as that.
Its a start to a solution and that start is better then nothing. Key note here is to have a filler between the T3 and caps. No need to make another ship when you have Battleships that are semi worthless against T3 and Caps. Yes i understand the gap between BS and caps is a HUGE gap and that's why I am recommending a slight shift towards caps.A shift so small and minute. The best way to compare the gap between the two (BS and Caps) would be the distance from the US and Europe. my recommended power shift is equal to the tectonics plates shifting between the two countries (change is distance from year to year). Its not a Big buff by any means. |
|
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
206
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 00:46:25 -
[21] - Quote
O2 jayjay wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote:O2 jayjay wrote:Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.
As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.
Keep it simple.
the gap between BS and capitals is WAY bigger then the gap between cruisers and BS and on this note only your solution is NOT a solution. T3 cruisers need a nerf it is as simple as that. Its a start to a solution and that start is better then nothing. Key note here is to have a filler between the T3 and caps. No need to make another ship when you have Battleships that are semi worthless against T3 and Caps. Yes i understand the gap between BS and caps is a HUGE gap and that's why I am recommending a slight power shift for Battleships towards caps. A shift so small and minute. The best way to compare the gap between the two (BS and Caps) would be the distance from the US and Europe. my recommended power shift is equal to the tectonics plates shifting between the two countries (change is distance from year to year). Its not a Big buff by any means.
so let me get this straight you know that T3s are OP and you want to fix it by nerfing capitals (which is what you are doing if you boost BS and keep T3 cruisers OP) and make BS also OP and you dare to call this a start of a solution??????
are you freaking kidding me????? the only thing that is needed is a nerf of the T3 cruisers and believe me i can fly all of them near perfect, in fact i fly T3 cruisers better then BS`s but it has to be done period.
in case you don't believe me http://eveboard.com/pilot/Ellendras_Silver
edit:
Quote: suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge.
you call this a small power shift!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????
you are insane
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
O2 jayjay
Sickology Together We Solo
40
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 01:28:38 -
[22] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:O2 jayjay wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote:O2 jayjay wrote:Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.
As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.
Keep it simple.
the gap between BS and capitals is WAY bigger then the gap between cruisers and BS and on this note only your solution is NOT a solution. T3 cruisers need a nerf it is as simple as that. Its a start to a solution and that start is better then nothing. Key note here is to have a filler between the T3 and caps. No need to make another ship when you have Battleships that are semi worthless against T3 and Caps. Yes i understand the gap between BS and caps is a HUGE gap and that's why I am recommending a slight power shift for Battleships towards caps. A shift so small and minute. The best way to compare the gap between the two (BS and Caps) would be the distance from the US and Europe. my recommended power shift is equal to the tectonics plates shifting between the two countries (change is distance from year to year). Its not a Big buff by any means. so let me get this straight you know that T3s are OP and you want to fix it by nerfing capitals (which is what you are doing if you boost BS and keep T3 cruisers OP) and make BS also OP and you dare to call this a start of a solution?????? are you freaking kidding me????? the only thing that is needed is a nerf of the T3 cruisers and believe me i can fly all of them near perfect, but it has to be done period. in case you don't believe me http://eveboard.com/pilot/Ellendras_Silver
For the cost and skill points that you lose when dying in a T3, Yes they are perfectly balanced when compared to other ships that are below a BS. But when using battleships which are more of a skill grind then T3 cruisers, T3 crusiers fleet will always win against Battleships Fleet. There should be more of a fear for T3 Cruisers and at this moment their isn't. With my change they would have to worry about going up against 2000+ BS that tank more and can easily punch thru a T3 tank with logi.
Quote: suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge.
you call this a small power shift!!!!!!!!!!!?????????????
you are insane[/quote]
Its not insane. It makes a balanced game. Its making a counter to T3 and put battleships where they properly belong in this game. |
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
206
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 02:38:06 -
[23] - Quote
i don't have a issue with a small boost to BS`s in general but what you propose is a HUGE buff that is not out of proportion it is off the scale. starting about the SP loss of a T3 cruiser that should be removed with the nerf.
but lets face it the whole problem is that T3 cruisers are OP and that can not be fixed by tearing the WHOLE balancing out of scale by boosting BS`s with the numbers you are proposing. and calling it a small power shift is the cherry on the cake my god what have you been smoking.
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
O2 jayjay
Sickology Together We Solo
40
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 03:46:21 -
[24] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:i don't have a issue with a small boost to BS`s in general but what you propose is a HUGE buff that is not out of proportion it is off the scale. starting about the SP loss of a T3 cruiser that should be removed with the nerf.
but lets face it the whole problem is that T3 cruisers are OP and that can not be fixed by tearing the WHOLE balancing out of scale by boosting BS`s with the numbers you are proposing. and calling it a small power shift is the cherry on the cake my god what have you been smoking.
well i listed the armor increase and it was not anywhere near what a t3 can get. two 1600 mm plates on a Proteus with subsystems that give 10% armor hp, with high grades gives the Proteus 53k raw armor hp. with T2 resist and 1000dps can you please explain how my buff is asking too much? Last i checked 53k raw armor hp with T2 resist is way more then my 30k raw armor hp T1 resist Mega. So what was that about me smoking some stuff?
I don't post without taking into consideration other variables in the game. with that being said. Capitals have over 100k shield, armor, hull hp in each category. Some BS have less then 10k while some have a little more the 10k. so capitals have 10x or more shield, armor, hull hp then BS but BS only have 3 time more raw hp then cruisers. Cruiser are in line with frigs with 5 time or more raw hp then a frig. but my small buff which will still leave BS having 10 times less raw hp but become 4 times more then cruisers is unreasonable? I do not see any logic in your debate. |
elitatwo
Eve Minions The-Company
880
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 11:34:37 -
[25] - Quote
Caleb Seremshur wrote:Omnathious Deninard wrote:Don't buff battleships to try to nerf T3s. If battleships need a buff then they should bet a buff. T3 cruisers should be balanced as a cruiser. I thinj t3c should be treated like BC. Slow them down and sig bloom them a bit. Then at least their tank will reflect the kind of ship they are rather than just being a straight cruiser+2. Also at Nevyn: Maybe making battleships have a role bonus where they receive double hp bonuses from shield extenders/plates? And not for every vessel mind you. Suitable ships could include Raven. Megathron Abaddon Tempest. Role bonus: shield extenders and armour plates grant double the HP value listed on the module. Think about it. Just take 5 minutes to think about it.
Hmm.. I don't know if that is the answer. Being a slow ship doesn't have to be a bad thing. When I am on SiSi I get to fly a lot of battleships that I usually wouldn't but being slow didn't really have a bitter taste.
But on one thing I hope everyone will agree with you, I do, the Abaddon - the worst laserboat in New Eden, even worse than the Punisher. Was trying to make this ship work last night but for the life of me there was no way to make it viable. The damage bonus is misplaced and should be replaced with something useful even if it's just the capacitor use bonus some Amarr ships share.
Just for my curiousity, what do you think is wrong with the Navy Apocalypse? I always liked the Apocalypse since I can fly her and the Navy Apocalypse is just a little easier to fit, so I am curious.
Why do you think that having more buffer would be a good thing on the four ships?
I really think that current trend to hull-buffer everything is terrible to say the least. It used to be an artform to active tank. Now it is racing challenge to put as much bulkhead on every boat as you can.
Btw. we need a pirate faction implant set that increases hull hp by 7 million % and 3 trillion as set bonus /sarcasm.
Tired of low and nullsec? Join Eve Minions and experience the beauty of wormholes!
|
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
207
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 11:40:39 -
[26] - Quote
O2 jayjay wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote:i don't have a issue with a small boost to BS`s in general but what you propose is a HUGE buff that is not out of proportion it is off the scale. starting about the SP loss of a T3 cruiser that should be removed with the nerf.
but lets face it the whole problem is that T3 cruisers are OP and that can not be fixed by tearing the WHOLE balancing out of scale by boosting BS`s with the numbers you are proposing. and calling it a small power shift is the cherry on the cake my god what have you been smoking. well i listed the armor increase and it was not anywhere near what a t3 can get. two 1600 mm plates on a Proteus with subsystems that give 10% armor hp, with high grades gives the Proteus 53k raw armor hp. with T2 resist and 1000dps can you please explain how my buff is asking too much? Last i checked 53k raw armor hp with T2 resist is way more then my 30k raw armor hp T1 resist Mega. So what was that about me smoking some stuff? I don't post without taking into consideration other variables in the game. with that being said. Capitals have over 100k shield, armor, hull hp in each category. Some BS have less then 10k while some have a little more the 10k. so capitals have 10x or more shield, armor, hull hp then BS but BS only have 3 time more raw hp then cruisers. Cruiser are in line with frigs with 5 time or more raw hp then a frig. but my small buff which will still leave BS having 10 times less raw hp but become 4 times more then cruisers is unreasonable? I do not see any logic in your debate.
when will you get it??? the problem is not that the BS cant match the tank of a T3 cruiser, but that a T3 cruiser can exceed a BS tank. the problem has always been with the T3 cruiser so they need a nerf again it is that simple
and again you can not compare the tank of capitals with that of a BS as there is a HUGE gap between them. It is as if you compare the tank of a frigate to a battle cruiser
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
1233
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 11:48:15 -
[27] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:O2 jayjay wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote:i don't have a issue with a small boost to BS`s in general but what you propose is a HUGE buff that is not out of proportion it is off the scale. starting about the SP loss of a T3 cruiser that should be removed with the nerf.
but lets face it the whole problem is that T3 cruisers are OP and that can not be fixed by tearing the WHOLE balancing out of scale by boosting BS`s with the numbers you are proposing. and calling it a small power shift is the cherry on the cake my god what have you been smoking. well i listed the armor increase and it was not anywhere near what a t3 can get. two 1600 mm plates on a Proteus with subsystems that give 10% armor hp, with high grades gives the Proteus 53k raw armor hp. with T2 resist and 1000dps can you please explain how my buff is asking too much? Last i checked 53k raw armor hp with T2 resist is way more then my 30k raw armor hp T1 resist Mega. So what was that about me smoking some stuff? I don't post without taking into consideration other variables in the game. with that being said. Capitals have over 100k shield, armor, hull hp in each category. Some BS have less then 10k while some have a little more the 10k. so capitals have 10x or more shield, armor, hull hp then BS but BS only have 3 time more raw hp then cruisers. Cruiser are in line with frigs with 5 time or more raw hp then a frig. but my small buff which will still leave BS having 10 times less raw hp but become 4 times more then cruisers is unreasonable? I do not see any logic in your debate. when will you get it??? the problem is not that the BS cant match the tank of a T3 cruiser, but that a T3 cruiser can exceed a BS tank. the problem has always been with the T3 cruiser so they need a nerf again it is that simple and again you can not compare the tank of capitals with that of a BS as there is a HUGE gap between them. It is as if you compare the tank of a frigate to a battle cruiser
you also seem too be leaving out the part where the T3 cruiser hull will reduce BS dps by 1/4, which means not only are T3's far more reppable (insane resists+sig+higher speed) but they are also much more mobile on top of the raw HP comparison.
T3's need to be versatile not have T2 resists, OP dps and tank obsoleting T2 ships entirely.
ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 highslots for droneboats
Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
|
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
207
|
Posted - 2015.10.24 11:54:22 -
[28] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote:O2 jayjay wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote:i don't have a issue with a small boost to BS`s in general but what you propose is a HUGE buff that is not out of proportion it is off the scale. starting about the SP loss of a T3 cruiser that should be removed with the nerf.
but lets face it the whole problem is that T3 cruisers are OP and that can not be fixed by tearing the WHOLE balancing out of scale by boosting BS`s with the numbers you are proposing. and calling it a small power shift is the cherry on the cake my god what have you been smoking. well i listed the armor increase and it was not anywhere near what a t3 can get. two 1600 mm plates on a Proteus with subsystems that give 10% armor hp, with high grades gives the Proteus 53k raw armor hp. with T2 resist and 1000dps can you please explain how my buff is asking too much? Last i checked 53k raw armor hp with T2 resist is way more then my 30k raw armor hp T1 resist Mega. So what was that about me smoking some stuff? I don't post without taking into consideration other variables in the game. with that being said. Capitals have over 100k shield, armor, hull hp in each category. Some BS have less then 10k while some have a little more the 10k. so capitals have 10x or more shield, armor, hull hp then BS but BS only have 3 time more raw hp then cruisers. Cruiser are in line with frigs with 5 time or more raw hp then a frig. but my small buff which will still leave BS having 10 times less raw hp but become 4 times more then cruisers is unreasonable? I do not see any logic in your debate. when will you get it??? the problem is not that the BS cant match the tank of a T3 cruiser, but that a T3 cruiser can exceed a BS tank. the problem has always been with the T3 cruiser so they need a nerf again it is that simple and again you can not compare the tank of capitals with that of a BS as there is a HUGE gap between them. It is as if you compare the tank of a frigate to a battle cruiser you also seem too be leaving out the part where the T3 cruiser hull will reduce BS dps by 1/4, which means not only are T3's far more reppable (insane resists+sig+higher speed) but they are also much more mobile on top of the raw HP comparison.
i thought that was logical and it only support my point T3 cruisers are OP and need a nerf. but the TS wants to give BS a HUGE buff because Tr cruisers are OP and that makes as much sense as a cat with swimming fins
[u]Carpe noctem[/u]
|
Rek Seven
Hidden Agenda Deep Space Engineering
2071
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 02:28:22 -
[29] - Quote
I hate these arguments about T3s being op with people throwing about there opinion like it's fact. I'll tell you a fact - if T3s were overpowered, CCP would have needI hate these arguments about T3s being op with people throwing about there opinion like it's fact. I'll tell you a fact - if T3s were overpowered, CCP would have nerfed them ages ago like they did with the op Ishtar! They may need slight tweaks but they are by no means OP...
Generally, PVP T3s have just over 100k ehp and around 800 dps. Buffer tanked battleships have roughly 100k EHP, 1000 dps, can fit a large utility high (neut, smartbomb), can use a MJD, have a drone bay and have better damage application range.
You can post some stupid bling fit that you made of eft but the fact is, those ships are hardly ever used... And like it or not, cost is a balancing factor.
Given their inherent weaknesses, battleships should get around 20% more dps and some more battleship only modules to make them a viable alternative to HACs, command ships and T3s.
Dear eve players, please try and use the word "content" less and instead, be specific. Thanks
|
O2 jayjay
Sickology Together We Solo
40
|
Posted - 2015.10.25 03:30:30 -
[30] - Quote
Ellendras Silver wrote:O2 jayjay wrote:Ellendras Silver wrote:i don't have a issue with a small boost to BS`s in general but what you propose is a HUGE buff that is not out of proportion it is off the scale. starting about the SP loss of a T3 cruiser that should be removed with the nerf.
but lets face it the whole problem is that T3 cruisers are OP and that can not be fixed by tearing the WHOLE balancing out of scale by boosting BS`s with the numbers you are proposing. and calling it a small power shift is the cherry on the cake my god what have you been smoking. well i listed the armor increase and it was not anywhere near what a t3 can get. two 1600 mm plates on a Proteus with subsystems that give 10% armor hp, with high grades gives the Proteus 53k raw armor hp. with T2 resist and 1000dps can you please explain how my buff is asking too much? Last i checked 53k raw armor hp with T2 resist is way more then my 30k raw armor hp T1 resist Mega. So what was that about me smoking some stuff? I don't post without taking into consideration other variables in the game. with that being said. Capitals have over 100k shield, armor, hull hp in each category. Some BS have less then 10k while some have a little more the 10k. so capitals have 10x or more shield, armor, hull hp then BS but BS only have 3 time more raw hp then cruisers. Cruiser are in line with frigs with 5 time or more raw hp then a frig. but my small buff which will still leave BS having 10 times less raw hp but become 4 times more then cruisers is unreasonable? I do not see any logic in your debate. when will you get it??? the problem is not that the BS cant match the tank of a T3 cruiser, but that a T3 cruiser can exceed a BS tank. the problem has always been with the T3 cruiser so they need a nerf again it is that simple and again you can not compare the tank of capitals with that of a BS as there is a HUGE gap between them. It is as if you compare the tank of a frigate to a battle cruiser
I get it. You want to neft T3. Nerfing them will not solve anything. Putting ships in their proper place is what will balance eve and BS are the only thing that is under power and in a awkward posistion.
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |