Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
PavlikX
Rezeda Core Rezeda Regnum
132
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 08:31:56 -
[31] - Quote
Battleships are not capitals. I quess it's wrong to make such compares. I agree that "few" friends can help, but sorry, i have not seen small gang with BS and few smaller assist ships, only single BS (Hyperion or Typhon, Golem with missiles) or a lot of BSs with support, but this is absoluttly different story. Probably BS's warp speed is a reason of this. And more possibilities, nothing more. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2387
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 08:38:48 -
[32] - Quote
PavlikX wrote:Battleships are not capitals. I quess it's wrong to make such compares. I agree that "few" friends can help, but sorry, i have not seen small gang with BS and few smaller assist ships, only single BS (Hyperion or Typhon, Golem with missiles) or a lot of BSs with support, but this is absoluttly different story. Probably BS's warp speed is a reason of this. And more possibilities, nothing more.
Could it be that not all ships are meant for all fleet types?
Edit:
And comparing capitals and BBs in regards to both of them benefiting greatly from support is not fair how?
Citadel worm hole tax
|
PavlikX
Rezeda Core Rezeda Regnum
132
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 11:19:22 -
[33] - Quote
Here is my position - i want the Battleships to be less dependable on support, making them closer in this aspect to the other subcapitals. There is a clear "border line" between two groups of ships in the game - capitals and subcapitals. Battleships must be subcapitals at first place, not limited demo-version version of capitals.
I sure that BS small buff will be fair to those, who spended a lot of time to train those long skills. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2394
|
Posted - 2016.05.03 15:07:34 -
[34] - Quote
PavlikX wrote:Here is my position - i want the Battleships to be less dependable on support, making them closer in this aspect to the other subcapitals. There is a clear "border line" between two groups of ships in the game - capitals and subcapitals. Battleships must be subcapitals at first place, not limited demo-version version of capitals.
I sure that BS small buff will be fair to those, who've spended a lot of time to train those long skills.
every ship benefits from having smaller support ships with them and those benefits grow as ships grow. This is not a capital vs sub capital thing its a very good game design thing
Citadel worm hole tax
|
Johng Kahn
We're Happy In Wormhole Space
12
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 14:40:07 -
[35] - Quote
PavlicX I am a little confused as to what it is you would like to see for battleships. Are you wanting them to have bonuses to small turents and launchers?
I rarely even fit scrams or points to my battleships. Webs outside of a bonused hull were also almost a wasted mid slot on a shield ship until grapplers and even then the limited effective ability at range makes them questionable at best under most engagements i have had in battleships.
Good example from me dropping a solo battleship on a small fleet before I took a 4 month break. 2 hull tanked brutix, 2 stratios, and a hic. My ship, a passive bait rattle.
During the engagement if i had webs and points there was no use for them against the strats, they just kite out of range. But i'm in a battleship and can engage them farther then they can engage me with offensive weapons.
As for the 2 brutix they are most always blaster boats and almost as slow as I am. I could have had point for them but that would have defeated the massive tank i had stacked to keep them in play. The Hic I did not care about cause I needed him to keep his buddies in the bubble for me so I did not have to bring my own Hic :P
Even being totally filled with tank in all the rattles low and mid slots I still commanded a solid 800 dps with rapid heavies and drone.
All i had for help was a single tengu to drop in on my command and start pointing and shooting the primaries as i pealed them down. This fight went on for quite a while and in the end no one lost any ships due to they were able to jump the wormhole and warp out and we only had 2 people on.
For a 2v5 that one battleship was the game changer for that fight to even be possible. I feel that this is sort of the traditional role that battleships are supposed to fill. They act as dps anchors and at the same time can deliver very respectable offensive dps. Now depending on the fit this balance of tank vs dps can lean to one side or the other but still fill that same basic role in small gang.
It would be interesting if CCP did an ewar re-balance on basic t1 hulls for battleships. A mega with bonus to damps would be interesting and force some ships to come in closer. Bonus to grapplers on a Nado would be funny. But even with those changes the basic use of these ships would still remain the same.
I know that you are also trying to compare the non missile ships and other t1 hulls as well but it really is the same as all other t1 classed ships when you speak of slot layout. Some Minmatar are horrible for having the lack of enough mid or lows to get those over powered fits so your forced to fly the ships in very specific ways.
I can see where ccp would be cautious to make any radical changes to t1 battleship hulls considering how some of them are very OP currently when used in specific ways. Adding extra slots you would start seeing ravens that can tank 20 man fleets.
|
PavlikX
Rezeda Core Rezeda Regnum
134
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 17:08:51 -
[36] - Quote
Johng Kahn You see, you have answered to your own question. In your example your's missile BS was fitted with rapid heavy launchers, this weapon bring ratl, golem, even raven to the rank of PvP ship. Now, can you imagen the same situation with abadon?
My suggestions not about creating uber subcapital ship in BS hulls. Obviously they need buff. What it can be? A lot of options can be implemented, and for sure there must be one of them, not all together. For example If CCP will bring fast tracking turrets to balance rapid launchers, then additional slots unneccessary. If they will bring roles with tracking bonus and +1 warp str. to the large turrets, then fast tracking turrets unnecessary. And so on.
I doubt that such small improovement will make BSs OP, like pack T3 desroyers with logi frigs. CCP greatly boosted small size, it is time to counter balance it. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
2419
|
Posted - 2016.05.04 17:23:54 -
[37] - Quote
fast tracking turrets would be much more powerful than fast tracking missiles. just look at the situation with HAW the phoenix is just sad in comparison :/
they have plenty of slots and the ships do see use.
battle ships don't need a buff T3s need a nerf right now they are all of the pros of a BB with none of the cons so why use a bb over a t3
Citadel worm hole tax
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |