EVE Search - large ships vs smaller ships

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

large ships vs smaller ships

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Goatman NotMyFault Lubrication Industries Fortis Et Certus 220	Posted - 2016.01.04 23:32:20 - [1] - Quote One thing is baffling me, is that in this game, a battleship can be taken Down by a gang of frigs. Ive even been part of taking Down a battleship With 6 T2 frigs. Just the huge size of the battleship, would suggest that it should wear a armor that would refuse any frig, destroyer or some crusers, since they couldnt be able to fit large enough guns to even penetrate a battleship. Also, due to the size, Battleship should be able to have, in addition to their large hislots, have a large array of med and small gunslots... If this was "humans" from Earth that colonized New Eden, they would bring some "history" from Earth, which indicated that battlleship didnt only pack large guns, but a Collection og smaller guns to. This should also apply to battlecruisers that couldnt be penetrated by frigs or some destroyers (T1)... and cruisers would have better protection against frigs... ect ect Tho Electronic warfare should all ships be vunerable to... So... make battleships what they should be... a allround battleship...
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 4065	Posted - 2016.01.04 23:51:29 - [2] - Quote
Celthric Kanerian Ascendance Of New Eden Workers Trade Federation 600	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:07:55 - [3] - Quote Oh honey...
Goatman NotMyFault Lubrication Industries Fortis Et Certus 220	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:11:22 - [4] - Quote and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here.
Bobb Bobbington The Cult of the Rare Pepes 183	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:21:21 - [5] - Quote Yea, and what about "bigger isn't always better?" Don't pull the "that's what everybody says", because they're right. You can't just **** with game balance because it's not "realistic". This is a signature. It has a 25m signature. No it's not a cosmic signature. Probably. Btw my corp's recruiting.
Iain Cariaba 2280	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:24:27 - [6] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here. Ok, try this: Even during the height of the Naval Battleship era they understood that ships of that size needed support ships. Today's modern carriers, the ship that ended the age of the battleship, have multiple aircraft types, multiple defensive weapon emplacements, and are always at the middle of thier battle group. So: Quote: If this was "humans" from Earth that colonized New Eden, they would bring some "history" from Earth, which indicated that battlleship needs a *** escort. Why is this so hard for people to figure out? EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 4066	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:25:21 - [7] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here. Please explain why we should return to a game where you win by dropping supers, and can only be fought by a larger number of supers.
Goatman NotMyFault Lubrication Industries Fortis Et Certus 220	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:33:24 - [8] - Quote Bobb Bobbington wrote: Yea, and what about "bigger isn't always better?" Don't pull the "that's what everybody says", because they're right. You can't just **** with game balance because it's not "realistic". Well the game Balance aint right when u rarely see any battleships in pvp Battles..... as now, battleships aint much in use in null... sometimes u can see them in low
SurrenderMonkey Space Llama Industries 1450	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:33:38 - [9] - Quote Oh dear lord, another, "BUT REAL LIFE! WORLD WAR II!!!1!" thread. If you want to go with that model, fine... So about how many stealth bomber torps to end a battleship under this bold new "Because real life!" game design? One volley? "Help, I'm bored with missions!" http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Goatman NotMyFault Lubrication Industries Fortis Et Certus 220	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:40:22 - [10] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Goatman NotMyFault wrote: and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here. Ok, try this: Even during the height of the Naval Battleship era they understood that ships of that size needed support ships. Today's modern carriers, the ship that ended the age of the battleship, have multiple aircraft types, multiple defensive weapon emplacements, and are always at the middle of thier battle group. So: Quote: If this was "humans" from Earth that colonized New Eden, they would bring some "history" from Earth, which indicated that battlleship needs a *** escort. Why is this so hard for people to figure out? well.... the battleships.... from ww1 to present time, are fitted to deal With attacks from big and small ships... and from planes. They dont use their main guns to shoot down planes...... and yes, they had and they have, support ships.... But they rarely was sunk by small ships... lets dive into history abit.... in the Lifetime of the MTB's, they have only managed to sink 1 battleship... all nations togheter that had MTB's. Destroyers, might had a better chance, but when they came to Close, the was at big risk by being hit by both large and small guns on the defending battleship.
Rowells ANZAC ALLIANCE Fidelas Constans 2876	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:40:45 - [11] - Quote Consider for a moment, that current real-world militaries no longer depend on battleships as the mainstay of their power. After WWI, battleships no longer were the re premier powerhouse of a navy. Considerably, the American Navy switched focus to carriers using fighter planes and other smaller ships packing high-impact weaponry as their primary anti-ship weapons. Battleships became relegated to escort missions and used as seaborne artillery platforms. A more recent example, is the Iranian Navy's doctrine of using multiple, smaller attack craft, loaded with torpedoes and bombs in order to combat the larger ships used by the US. It's fair to say that EVE is much more lenient on BS defenses against smaller craft. Mostly in the form of tank and electronic warfare.
Goatman NotMyFault Lubrication Industries Fortis Et Certus 220	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:43:16 - [12] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: Goatman NotMyFault wrote: and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here. Please explain why we should return to a game where you win by dropping supers, and can only be fought by a larger number of supers. Why shouldnt it... as now, most supers and caps are useless, since systems and station can be taken out With frigs... EVE is now, in nullsec a frigate game.... nothing else
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 4067	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:46:47 - [13] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Goatman NotMyFault wrote: and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here. Please explain why we should return to a game where you win by dropping supers, and can only be fought by a larger number of supers. Why shouldnt it... as now, most supers and caps are useless, since systems and station can be taken out With frigs... EVE is now, in nullsec a frigate game.... nothing else Answer the question. Why should we go back to the bad old days of a nullsec with all of two groups in it.
Goatman NotMyFault Lubrication Industries Fortis Et Certus 220	Posted - 2016.01.05 00:58:37 - [14] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: Goatman NotMyFault wrote: Danika Princip wrote: Goatman NotMyFault wrote: and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here. Please explain why we should return to a game where you win by dropping supers, and can only be fought by a larger number of supers. Why shouldnt it... as now, most supers and caps are useless, since systems and station can be taken out With frigs... EVE is now, in nullsec a frigate game.... nothing else Answer the question. Why should we go back to the bad old days of a nullsec with all of two groups in it. Those days are gone anyways, players from the big assosiations are scatterd around, in New alliances, New corps and the old strings are fading away. And not to forget the decline in playerbase.... null is pretty desolate.... you can fly thru many regions off null in a T1 frig and not be taken by a gatecamp or a bubble.... 2 years ago, all bordergates was guarded... now they owners dont bother, cuz there are no threats... and no inhabitant. So.... its to late to go back to the old days, even if CCP changed the game back, there aint enogh players to make null alive again.
Sigras Conglomo 1105	Posted - 2016.01.05 08:34:51 - [15] - Quote Here's the problem... When "Bigger" = "Better" then "Biggest" = "Best" In a PvP game there should not be a "best" because if there is then everyone just does that and the game stagnates. I understand that's probably what is best for you, but I would rather have what's best for the game instead of what's best for you.
Goatman NotMyFault Lubrication Industries Fortis Et Certus 220	Posted - 2016.01.05 09:15:05 - [16] - Quote Sigras wrote: Here's the problem... When "Bigger" = "Better" then "Biggest" = "Best" In a PvP game there should not be a "best" because if there is then everyone just does that and the game stagnates. I understand that's probably what is best for you, but I would rather have what's best for the game instead of what's best for you. Refere to sizeable Battles the last year where that is the issue.... where battleship was the major force.... I havent found a big Battle in null which include a majority of battleships. In a set situsation, following EVE rules of Battle, a little frigate can take Down a battleship, lets say Hyperion, 1,5km long... (With a moron fit and moron player)... its like wrecking a car With a peagun...
Mr Mieyli Hedion University Amarr Empire 142	Posted - 2016.01.05 11:08:22 - [17] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: Sigras wrote: Here's the problem... When "Bigger" = "Better" then "Biggest" = "Best" In a PvP game there should not be a "best" because if there is then everyone just does that and the game stagnates. I understand that's probably what is best for you, but I would rather have what's best for the game instead of what's best for you. Refere to sizeable Battles the last year where that is the issue.... where battleship was the major force.... I havent found a big Battle in null which include a majority of battleships. In a set situsation, following EVE rules of Battle, a little frigate can take Down a battleship, lets say Hyperion, 1,5km long... (With a moron fit and moron player)... its like wrecking a car With a peagun... If you give me enough time I could take your car to pieces with only a spanner, same thing in eve. In the several minutes it takes your whale-like beast to cry it's last breath you could have got your own backup. You died 6v1, I honestly don't know what you expect? To be a one-man wrecking ball for the low cost of 200m? A case for more AoE in EvE
Stitch Kaneland Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic 715	Posted - 2016.01.05 15:36:19 - [18] - Quote Extremely vague proposal: Check Comparing EVE gameplay to real world naval ships: Check Clueless on game balance: Check Didnt search for the same topic thats been proposed regularly: Check Congrats, you failed to use the search feature and have created another "BS should kill everything thread" As someone who uses BS fairly frequently from a solo perspective, youre wrong. They can be overwhelmed, but thats true of any ship. Id say missile BS are quite viable. Same with drone BS. Its the turret BS that are suffering, minus the vindicator and mach, but thats because they have a way control range/transversal. In terms of fleet fights, you have bombers, akin to submarines/uboats which will devastate a BS fleet. So until more counters are developed, or bombs nerfed, you will likely not see many fleets. Hears a hint, fit a BS for specific engagements and try to find those engagements as best as you can. Sometimes it means baiting, or purposely being aggressive to get the fight, but ive killed groups of t3ds with a typhoon amd wiped out 7 frigs in a 14man gang with a HAM drake. But its because i fit directly to counter smaller ships and would be at a disadvantage to bigger ships. These are the sacrifices and choices you make when flying bigger ships. Do you want max tank and dps? Ok, you will pay for it in application. Do you want max application and dps, then you sacrifice tank. Etc etc. Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS
SetSail ForEpicFail KarmaFleet Goonswarm Federation 15	Posted - 2016.01.05 16:18:45 - [19] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: [quote=Bobb Bobbington]rarely see any battleships in pvp Battles..... machariels and rattlesnakes. just saying
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 972	Posted - 2016.01.05 16:58:39 - [20] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Goatman NotMyFault wrote: and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here. Ok, try this: Even during the height of the Naval Battleship era they understood that ships of that size needed support ships. Today's modern carriers, the ship that ended the age of the battleship, have multiple aircraft types, multiple defensive weapon emplacements, and are always at the middle of thier battle group. So: Quote: If this was "humans" from Earth that colonized New Eden, they would bring some "history" from Earth, which indicated that battlleship needs a *** escort. Why is this so hard for people to figure out? well.... the battleships.... from ww1 to present time, are fitted to deal With attacks from big and small ships... and from planes. They dont use their main guns to shoot down planes...... and yes, they had and they have, support ships.... But they rarely was sunk by small ships... lets dive into history abit.... in the Lifetime of the MTB's, they have only managed to sink 1 battleship... all nations togheter that had MTB's. Destroyers, might had a better chance, but when they came to Close, the was at big risk by being hit by both large and small guns on the defending battleship. You can't compare EVE battleships to real world WW2 battleships. There is no comparison. Also, I don't know what history you are reading, but battleships were sunk and destroyed on several occasions in WW2. Sunken BS that come to mind: Bismarck, Tirpitz, Arizona, Oklahoma, Prince of Wales, & Yamato. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sunken_battleships Real world Battleships were rendered obsolete with the advances in Carrier design and missile technology.
Goatman NotMyFault Lubrication Industries Fortis Et Certus 221	Posted - 2016.01.05 17:30:15 - [21] - Quote Estella Osoka wrote: Goatman NotMyFault wrote: Iain Cariaba wrote: Goatman NotMyFault wrote: and the brassban of "no it will change my game" is here again :D Feel free to come With some tought why it is such a bad idea... or good idea for those that really want to insult the forumusers here. Ok, try this: Even during the height of the Naval Battleship era they understood that ships of that size needed support ships. Today's modern carriers, the ship that ended the age of the battleship, have multiple aircraft types, multiple defensive weapon emplacements, and are always at the middle of thier battle group. So: Quote: If this was "humans" from Earth that colonized New Eden, they would bring some "history" from Earth, which indicated that battlleship needs a *** escort. Why is this so hard for people to figure out? well.... the battleships.... from ww1 to present time, are fitted to deal With attacks from big and small ships... and from planes. They dont use their main guns to shoot down planes...... and yes, they had and they have, support ships.... But they rarely was sunk by small ships... lets dive into history abit.... in the Lifetime of the MTB's, they have only managed to sink 1 battleship... all nations togheter that had MTB's. Destroyers, might had a better chance, but when they came to Close, the was at big risk by being hit by both large and small guns on the defending battleship. You can't compare EVE battleships to real world WW2 battleships. There is no comparison. Also, I don't know what history you are reading, but battleships were sunk and destroyed on several occasions in WW2. Sunken BS that come to mind: Bismarck, Tirpitz, Arizona, Oklahoma, Prince of Wales, & Yamato. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sunken_battleships Real world Battleships were rendered obsolete with the advances in Carrier design and missile technology. i was talking about MTB that was fitted With torpedo's, but only manage to sink 1 battleship in the entire history... destroyers are a different story.... but the point is, that a small ships shouldnt be able to take Down very large ships....
Dr Cedric Independent Miners Corporation Care Factor 130	Posted - 2016.01.05 18:11:01 - [22] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: i was talking about MTB that was fitted With torpedo's, but only manage to sink 1 battleship in the entire history... destroyers are a different story.... but the point is, that a small ships shouldnt be able to take Down very large ships.... Then why in the (eve)world would I fly anything other than BS. Why should the game even have frigates or destroyers or cruisers if a smaller ship shouldn't be able to destroy a larger ship. Also, to bring a bit of perspective to your argument... BS are not "big" ships. Titans are big ships. And, as far as I have seen in my 10.5 year eve career... no single frigate has ever solo'd a Titan. Cedric
Valacus Streets of Fire 119	Posted - 2016.01.05 18:12:36 - [23] - Quote I'm not a huge fan of the new skewed EVE meta either. They just changed the meta from being in favor of supers and larger ships to being in favor of small, kitey ships, which is even more cancerous IMO, because kitey cancer gangs become even more ******** when you add off grid links. Now everyone has their own off grid boosting toon so they can play the cancer meta the way it's meant to be played, tumorously.
FT Diomedes The Graduates 2165	Posted - 2016.01.05 18:59:51 - [24] - Quote Valacus wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the new skewed EVE meta either. They just changed the meta from being in favor of supers and larger ships to being in favor of small, kitey ships, which is even more cancerous IMO, because kitey cancer gangs become even more ******** when you add off grid links. Now everyone has their own off grid boosting toon so they can play the cancer meta the way it's meant to be played, tumorously. I majorly disagree with you here. Don't get me wrong: I do not like kiting. It is not, however, something new. Small mobile gangs of skilled players with OGB have been around as long as I have been playing. If anything, the game is better now in that regard than it was in 2008. Anyone else remember Vagabonds going 10km/sec? Kiting can be countered. Additionally, it is not an existential threat the way totally overpowered, strategically mobile, Supercapital fleets were. Bring a Battleship, with some support, out to fight a kiting gang. If you catch one of them (tackle ship supported by aligned Battleship warping or MJDing into range), it will kill it. A properly equipped Battleship is a tough target to take down. I take great pleasure in fighting small, mobile roaming gangs. You just have to be prepared for a fight that won't always result in kills. CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.
Loradan Illstari Heretic Army I N F A M O U S 3	Posted - 2016.01.05 19:40:38 - [25] - Quote FT Diomedes wrote: Valacus wrote: I'm not a huge fan of the new skewed EVE meta either. They just changed the meta from being in favor of supers and larger ships to being in favor of small, kitey ships, which is even more cancerous IMO, because kitey cancer gangs become even more ******** when you add off grid links. Now everyone has their own off grid boosting toon so they can play the cancer meta the way it's meant to be played, tumorously. I majorly disagree with you here. Don't get me wrong: I do not like kiting. It is not, however, something new. Small mobile gangs of skilled players with OGB have been around as long as I have been playing. If anything, the game is better now in that regard than it was in 2008. Anyone else remember Vagabonds going 10km/sec? Kiting can be countered. Additionally, it is not an existential threat the way totally overpowered, strategically mobile, Supercapital fleets were. Bring a Battleship, with some support, out to fight a kiting gang. If you catch one of them (tackle ship supported by aligned Battleship warping or MJDing into range), it will kill it. A properly equipped Battleship is a tough target to take down. I take great pleasure in fighting small, mobile roaming gangs. You just have to be prepared for a fight that won't always result in kills. No way. Kitey gangs with links have always been around, but they weren't FOTM until the last two years or so. Now everyone has their own links toon. It used to be more rare. Now it's all you see. And kiting is only really counterable by avoiding them. They can disengage you whenever they wish because they're so much faster, so unless they're stupid you aren't going to catch them, especially not in something as cumbersome as a battleship. The last few expansion have been nothing but more kitey crap, with kitey crap logi to go with it and now kitey crap MJD, because allowing BCs and BSs to have one unique module to them that might have given them a leg up on small kitey crap was too much to ask.
Estella Osoka Perkone Caldari State 972	Posted - 2016.01.05 19:42:34 - [26] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: i was talking about MTB that was fitted With torpedo's, but only manage to sink 1 battleship in the entire history... destroyers are a different story.... but the point is, that a small ships shouldnt be able to take Down very large ships.... MTB = motorized torpedo boat? If so, a frigate is not comparable to a MTB. And yes, small ships can take down larger ships. The USS Cole comes to mind, and that was caused by putting a lot of explosive into a small motorboat. In fact, the US Navy is more concerned with small fast boats than they are larger ships. Small fast boats are harder to track, harder to see (especially at night), and operate in areas the navy usually cannot (or won't) go with it's large ships. Oh and MTBs were mainly used for littoral combat and were pivotal in the island hopping campaign of WW2 where they were used to disrupt enemy supply lines. Most of the big ship combat occurred out in deep water where MTBs could not operate effectively due to rough water and operating range. If one WW2 BS ever had to take on a squadron of PT Boats, I'm sure it would lose; just as one BS in EVE loses to mass frigate assaults.
Arya Regnar Darwins Right Hand 850	Posted - 2016.01.05 20:47:20 - [27] - Quote Considering stealth bombers use battleship sized weapons by your logic it should be find for 2 stealth bombers to wreck a battleship? Yeah? EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Darth Squeemus Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 9	Posted - 2016.01.05 20:50:38 - [28] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: Just the huge size of the battleship, would suggest that it should wear a armor that would refuse any frig, destroyer or some crusers, since they couldnt be able to fit large enough guns to even penetrate a battleship. Also, due to the size, Battleship should be able to have, in addition to their large hislots, have a large array of med and small gunslots... You obviously don't realize that frigates are able to critically damage, and even sink, battleships IRL. Especially if there are several frigates focusing on one battleship. Also, you're absolutely right about RL battleships being able to fit smaller weapons as well as large ones. Apparently you're also unaware that this can be done in Eve as well. If you think that fitting medium or small guns on your battleship will be helpful to you, give it a try and see what happens. What's the worst thing that could happen? You lose your ship? That shouldn't be a problem if you're following the first rule of Eve. Don't fly it if you can't afford to replace it. Another thing is that new players are very limited in what they can fly, as they haven't had enough time to accumulate very many skill points. But if they are smart enough to group together and focus their efforts into taking down a battleship, why should they have their reward taken from them? They're already at a huge disadvantage because of their limited abilities. Furthermore, why should older and more experienced players have such a steep advantage over anyone? If you're flying a battleship and you're either stupid enough or not attentive enough to avoid getting jumped by a frig gang, then you deserve the loss. And the gang deserves it's reward.
Iain Cariaba 2283	Posted - 2016.01.05 22:01:04 - [29] - Quote Darth Squeemus wrote: Also, you're absolutely right about RL battleships being able to fit smaller weapons as well as large ones. Apparently you're also unaware that this can be done in Eve as well. If you think that fitting medium or small guns on your battleship will be helpful to you, give it a try and see what happens. This actually works rather well. I've been on a lowsec roam in a frigate fleet that came across a battleship that we thought would be easy prey. Needless to say, we were quite surprised when we started dropping to guns that could track us at close range. EvE is hard. It's harder if you're stupid. I couldn't have said it better. Hello, Mr Carebear. Would you like some cheese with that whine?
Zimmer Jones Lightspeed Enterprises Fidelas Constans 449	Posted - 2016.01.05 22:40:21 - [30] - Quote well, heres a fun article about stopping large stuff with small stuff. has an element of humor to it. https://what-if.xkcd.com/18/ no time to shiptoast like i regularly do, but BS are in use in null, but are more easily countered by Alpha doctrine, so smaller stuff isn't better, it is just easier to survive, and survival = more damage, just not DPS Use the force without consent and the court wont acquit you even if you are a card carryin', robe wearin' Jedi.
Darth Squeemus Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 9	Posted - 2016.01.05 22:53:29 - [31] - Quote Iain Cariaba wrote: Darth Squeemus wrote: Also, you're absolutely right about RL battleships being able to fit smaller weapons as well as large ones. Apparently you're also unaware that this can be done in Eve as well. If you think that fitting medium or small guns on your battleship will be helpful to you, give it a try and see what happens. This actually works rather well. I've been on a lowsec roam in a frigate fleet that came across a battleship that we thought would be easy prey. Needless to say, we were quite surprised when we started dropping to guns that could track us at close range. Case and point. Being in a BS doesn't mean that you're hopelessly vulnerable to smaller, faster ships. It just depends on what you're prepared to encounter.
oohthey ioh Republic University Minmatar Republic 33	Posted - 2016.01.06 08:28:24 - [32] - Quote If it can do damge, it will destroy it. If i shot an skyscraper with an pistol, i will eventually it will topple. Basic physics really, its why tool dull. Its realistic, and good balance, numbers kill bigger.
Sigras Conglomo 1105	Posted - 2016.01.06 08:41:30 - [33] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: Sigras wrote: Here's the problem... When "Bigger" = "Better" then "Biggest" = "Best" In a PvP game there should not be a "best" because if there is then everyone just does that and the game stagnates. I understand that's probably what is best for you, but I would rather have what's best for the game instead of what's best for you. Refere to sizeable Battles the last year where that is the issue.... where battleship was the major force.... I havent found a big Battle in null which include a majority of battleships. In a set situsation, following EVE rules of Battle, a little frigate can take Down a battleship, lets say Hyperion, 1,5km long... (With a moron fit and moron player)... its like wrecking a car With a peagun... You're too young to remember, but the game used to be as you suggest where no frigate had a chance against any larger ship. There were 90% webs on every ship and nos that would suck you to 0% cap and keep you there. The year was 2007, and you know what happened? Nobody flew frigates because they had no use! Every combat manual for the game began with "Train out of the small ships as quickly as possible because they're useless" and HACs were considered "fast tackle" Honestly the battleship does have a role, it's just overshadowed right now with T2 and T3 cruisers which do everything a battleship can do, but are faster and immune to bombs. IMHO if we had bombs that could hit cruisers and made T3 cruisers a bit more balanced we'd solve the battleship problem.
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2843	Posted - 2016.01.06 09:43:02 - [34] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: One thing is baffling me, is that in this game, a battleship can be taken Down by a gang of frigs. Ive even been part of taking Down a battleship With 6 T2 frigs. sort of like how a strategic cruiser can be taken down by an entire fleet of cruisers. FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post." Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Reaver Glitterstim Dromedaworks inc Test Alliance Please Ignore 2843	Posted - 2016.01.06 09:47:07 - [35] - Quote Sigras wrote: IMHO if we had bombs that could hit cruisers and made T3 cruisers a bit more balanced we'd solve the battleship problem. This gives me an idea: fast bombs--they travel twice as fast and detonate in half the time. They deal significantly less damage but have a smaller explosion radius. They'll still crush frigs just like the big bombs though frigs might get a warp off in time. Cruisers will be vulnerable cause they likely can't warp off in time. FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post." Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Rek Seven Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 2124	Posted - 2016.01.06 10:44:27 - [36] - Quote Contrary to their name, battle ships are unsuitable for 90% of the battles in eve. Giving them bonuses to small, medium and large guns/missiles might be interesting. The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Danika Princip GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 4076	Posted - 2016.01.06 11:03:25 - [37] - Quote Rek Seven wrote: Contrary to their name, battle ships are unsuitable for 90% of the battles in eve. Giving them bonuses to small, medium and large guns/missiles might be interesting. Like the Barghest, Rattlesnake, and every drone boat you mean?
Rek Seven Art Of Explosions 404 Hole Not Found 2124	Posted - 2016.01.06 13:22:42 - [38] - Quote Yes exactly. Drone boats and battleships that get bonuses to RHL are obviously fine as they can fight back against smaller ships. The majority of the other BS do not have an adequate method and should just go ahead and get bonuses to different size weapon IMO. The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 726	Posted - 2016.01.06 14:12:57 - [39] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: ust the huge size of the battleship, would suggest that it should wear a armor that would refuse any frig, destroyer or some crusers, since they couldnt be able to fit large enough guns to even penetrate a battleship. Also, due to the size, Battleship should be able to have, in addition to their large hislots, have a large array of med and small gunslots... Since you want to drag real life into this then you better go study history, battleships have always been easy prey for the smaller faster and more maneuverable ships, it is the presence of a fleet of smaller ships that kept them safe in relative terms. While you are correct that the shells fired from those smaller ships will not penetrate the armor of a battleship, the simple reality is that they do not have to. With each shell that hits the armor it gets a little weaker and sooner or later the death of the battleship will come. So the only thing about a group frigates being able to destroy a battleship in this game that does not make sense when looking at real life is the time factor. A group of frigates in real life may take hours to bring about the demise of the battleship not minutes, but I for one am glad CCP chooses not to adhere to that part of reality, the shortened time frame makes the whole thing more enjoyable for one side and minimize the agony on the other.
Donnachadh United Allegiance of Undesirables 726	Posted - 2016.01.06 14:15:09 - [40] - Quote Danika Princip wrote: Rek Seven wrote: Contrary to their name, battle ships are unsuitable for 90% of the battles in eve. Giving them bonuses to small, medium and large guns/missiles might be interesting. Like the Barghest, Rattlesnake, and every drone boat you mean? I have not done an exhaustive study of this but it seems to me that EVERY battleship in the game has some form of drones bay even if they do not have bonuses to those drones.
Sigras Conglomo 1106	Posted - 2016.01.07 08:45:27 - [41] - Quote Reaver Glitterstim wrote: Sigras wrote: IMHO if we had bombs that could hit cruisers and made T3 cruisers a bit more balanced we'd solve the battleship problem. This gives me an idea: fast bombs--they travel twice as fast and detonate in half the time. They deal significantly less damage but have a smaller explosion radius. They'll still crush frigs just like the big bombs though frigs might get a warp off in time. Cruisers will be vulnerable cause they likely can't warp off in time. A fantastic idea, I love it... In fact, it sounds familiar...
Zockhandra Jewish Zeppelin Mafia 24	Posted - 2016.01.07 16:49:11 - [42] - Quote Goatman NotMyFault wrote: One thing is baffling me, is that in this game, a battleship can be taken Down by a gang of frigs. Ive even been part of taking Down a battleship With 6 T2 frigs. Just the huge size of the battleship, would suggest that it should wear a armor that would refuse any frig, destroyer or some crusers, since they couldnt be able to fit large enough guns to even penetrate a battleship. Also, due to the size, Battleship should be able to have, in addition to their large hislots, have a large array of med and small gunslots... If this was "humans" from Earth that colonized New Eden, they would bring some "history" from Earth, which indicated that battlleship didnt only pack large guns, but a Collection og smaller guns to. This should also apply to battlecruisers that couldnt be penetrated by frigs or some destroyers (T1)... and cruisers would have better protection against frigs... ect ect Tho Electronic warfare should all ships be vunerable to... So... make battleships what they should be... a all-round battleship... Let me anwser this in what i think will give you a good idea of whats going on here... Lets take the Sphinx in egypt for example, shooting it with a big rocket would without a doubt leave it in pieces right? Firing a machine gun at it would scar it and ruin its features but it would still stand, even sandstorms slowly eat away at that ancient puddy cat... Now multiple the machine gun effect by x12 - same result as a rocket launcher, Muliple the density of the sandstorm by x24 same result as the rocket launcher, Nothing is impervious, everything erodes. All that matters is how long it takes. now on the note of big guns and small guns. the larger ships are dedicated to guns their size to match other ships of their class, using every bit of space>capacitor>ammo as they can.... So there is no room for small guns... BUT OH WAIT PLOT TWIST, there is. Drones are your small guns and your defense against small ships, which makes sense....why waste space and sacrifice a few turrets when you can just launch a few disposable drones.

Pages: 1 2 :: [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.