You'd be crazy not to use them, particularly considering the fact that the ISK cost is trivial for a lot of players.

There are lots of things you'd be crazy not to use that people still won't use. Good example: I do my PI in an Epithal with 4 warp stabs. It would be easy for a gang of two campers in strategic cruisers to fit +5 warp jam strength even if they had to use scramblers to do it because that thing doesn't warp all that fast, but they never do it. Often the gates of Naguton are camped, never have they caught me, but I see other industrial wrecks there. Multiple times they have locked and warp disrupted me. But apparently they get enough kills without fitting that many points because the prey doesn't know how to use warp stabs and fly defensively. There's two cases of people being crazy.

My brother brought up another: after seeing the +2 scram strength on the Navy Maulus, he couldn't understand why anyone would tackle with anything else. While he was giving the still weak scramble range too much credit, he did have a good point--if people actually used warp stabs properly then Navy Mauluses would be the way to fly lowsec gate camp. If the tacklers all used Navy Mauluses (wouldn't hurt their market price significantly) then the use of warp stabs for lowsec travel would be next to invalidated yet still the best fitting choice. This would result in a scenario in which lowsec gate campers all fly navy mauluses, and people just don't go through lowsec alone anymore because it doesn't work.

But that won't happen. People will continue not using warp stabs, and tacklers will continue fitting just one warp disruptor, and all the warp stabbers will get away but there will still be plenty of catches. Tacklers would serve to benefit from fitting more points but they won't do it. Why? Because people think a certain way, and true nonconformists are rare. You can notice a discrepancy in people's chain of thought and point it out to them, but they will continue in it.

Something that always struck me as a little odd, is that while optimal ranges from small to large guns increase, and neut ranges increase, point and web ranges are still the same. Sure, a 10km web is generous enough for a frigate. Not so much on a practically immobile battleship.

Also on topic: it'd sure be nice to be able to actually lock a target before it burns 60km off.

HICs will become FOTM and then it will be the norm. With fitting multiple scrams you are making a big trade off with the loss of a valuable mid which is why people won't often do it just to catch the occasional stabbed ship, although with the HIC you make no compromise to fit the 37km+ scram.

Something that always struck me as a little odd, is that while optimal ranges from small to large guns increase, and neut ranges increase, point and web ranges are still the same. Sure, a 10km web is generous enough for a frigate. Not so much on a practically immobile battleship.

Obviously not a dealbreaker, but some badass points/webs seem appropriate for ships their size. Not to mention targeting range in general seems on the short side; I need a sebo to be able to target as far as I can shoot?

Why not just introduce optimal and falloff to webs?

While we're at it, let's give warp disruptors and scramblers a %-based chance like ECM.

You keep telling me BS don't have to fill every role in EVE, but you never tell me what role the actually do fill is.

It gives them ONE role, and that's to kill other ships.

It's simple.


Here's what we see:


Battlecruiser attributes:
1 ##################
2 ##########
3 ######################
4 #############
5 ###
6 ################

Battleship attributes:
1 ######################
2 ##############
3 #########
4 ##
5 #######
6 ####################

People notice that some battleship attributes are slightly better than battlecruisers, while others are far worse.



Here's how most people respond:
"We should buff the far worse attributes so that battleships are no longer marginalized by battlecruisers"


But here's how you actually solve the problem:
"We should buff the things the battleship does well, because it doesn't do these things well enough to justify its drawbacks."

... IE, the Raven now receives a rate of fire bonus to torpedoes, cruise missiles, rapid heavies, HAMs, heavy missiles, rapid lights, lights, and rockets, as well as a velocity bonus to all of the same. The Raven is now literally king of the missiles....

It's not going to affect battleships much because almost nobody flies HICs. Before MJDs came out, HICs could easily have been tackling battleships but they weren't. We know from experience that all the HIC buffs simply are not enough to make people want to fly HICs, because they would rather pay 1/3rd less for a HAC which has the same combat power but lacks an attribute they'll almost never use.

How about a % based chance in falloff, but they always work in optimal?

While we're at it, let's give warp disruptors and scramblers a %-based chance like ECM.

Shooting BSs, BCs, Cruise, capitals, you name it. Just not tiny fast frigs. That's their weakness unless you gimp your fit against all other targets.

seriously? you mean kill ALL other ship-classes? That's no role, that's just OP.

When I first got into eve all I wanted too do was fly a rohk. Then I got too fly it with large tier one guns and I couldn't hit anything. When you warp into a pirate cluster and the Npc ships are all 40km awaya and then fly straight at you, you should be able to shoot them every time. In real life a tracking computer as sophisticated as the technology level the eve universe must posses should be able too hit the target every time. There is no option in eve to not fly in a straight line at your target. This has never made any logical sense to me, and the biggest problem in eve when it comes to combat. Now on the same token some of the world's mightiest ships have been destroyed by one lucky torpedo or cruise missle. Such as the German Bismarck. I'd just like to see some realism in combat nom matter the size of the ship. One 425 mm shell from on hybrid turret would decimate it's target in terms frictionless environment of space. Especially a small one like a frigate flying straight at it.
If I was driving a combine harvester down the road and 2 mIles awaya you where on a dirt bike and I had a 50 cal too shoot you I'd it you before you could even see me. Especially if I had sophisticated computer controlled targeting. Now if I didn't see you and you got to circle me you would be able to flatten my tires hit my fuel tank or engine and then have your way with me. On the same token if I did manage to hit you witg the same 50 cal, if it didn't kill you I'd be able too destroy the bike in one shot.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to get at. I just feel like all ships of any class need more realism when it comes to combat. Battleships quickly become sitting ducks when in reality they have a much better chance at winning agianst smaller ships. Before someone posted the idea of letting big ships have large guns that act like small guns I would support something like that. As agian in real life large Battleships have plenty of small guns for anti air or close range combat

When I first got into eve all I wanted too do was fly a rohk. Then I got too fly it with large tier one guns and I couldn't hit anything. When you warp into a pirate cluster and the Npc ships are all 40km awaya and then fly straight at you, you should be able to shoot them every time. In real life a tracking computer as sophisticated as the technology level the eve universe must posses should be able too hit the target every time. There is no option in eve to not fly in a straight line at your target. This has never made any logical sense to me, and the biggest problem in eve when it comes to combat. Now on the same token some of the world's mightiest ships have been destroyed by one lucky torpedo or cruise missle. Such as the German Bismarck. I'd just like to see some realism in combat nom matter the size of the ship. One 425 mm shell from on hybrid turret would decimate it's target in terms frictionless environment of space. Especially a small one like a frigate flying straight at it.
If I was driving a combine harvester down the road and 2 mIles awaya you where on a dirt bike and I had a 50 cal too shoot you I'd it you before you could even see me. Especially if I had sophisticated computer controlled targeting. Now if I didn't see you and you got to circle me you would be able to flatten my tires hit my fuel tank or engine and then have your way with me. On the same token if I did manage to hit you witg the same 50 cal, if it didn't kill you I'd be able too destroy the bike in one shot.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to get at. I just feel like all ships of any class need more realism when it comes to combat. Battleships quickly become sitting ducks when in reality they have a much better chance at winning agianst smaller ships. Before someone posted the idea of letting big ships have large guns that act like small guns I would support something like that. As agian in real life large Battleships have plenty of small guns for anti air or close range combat

Suggested changes.

1. Revoke the warp speed nerf. This was a TERRIBLE idea and has meant that those that wanted to travel with small fleets just got left behind, this needs to be changed back to 3.0 immediately. I would buff the warp speed of the Mach even further.

2. A 10% hitpoint buff across the board on all BS hulls.

Webifiers and target painters can all be circumnavigated. Target painters are a band aid for larger ships vs smaller ships, and a very limited one. They only affect signature radius, which still leaves transversal and velocity to evade your missile and gun damage. Webifiers are stupid easy to avoid. You are the faster, you control the range. Just stay out of web range. Problem solved.

I would agree that almost all battleships are viable...there's just one that I wouldn't call viable. That one is the Scorpion.

It isn't merely viable. It is extraordinarily powerful for how cheap it is. Viable is an understatement of epic proportions. Be very afraid of the armor Scorpion because it heralds a time when Caldari ships can drop their shields and still kill you harder than you've ever been killed before.

...but ultimately i think its the overperforming ships that are the main issue, things like T3 cruisers that are just plain better than battleships in every way, the HIC change is insanely OP, some pirate cruisers and ofc ABC's getting equal firepower but greater mobility.

This Viability rests solely in the pilots training though, because with poor skills, it is merely a cheaper BS coffin. And it does very poorly against BS's what it's designed to do.

BS aren't supposed to be flown in pvp with low skills

I don't wanna be a mean girl and I do agree on the hictor part but the progression of the progression of the progression was supposed to be the best and strongest you can fly as of CCP's own design goal.

I believe they hit the mark spot on - well my Gila looks really angry when I look at her. Poor thing

Only because some folks don't comprehend how turrets work.