| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Aizhan Ushrakhan
The Sword and The Shield
   |
Posted - 2007.02.27 14:10:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Aizhan Ushrakhan on 27/02/2007 14:11:09
Having trained for HACs and Command Ships, i know the skill path to these ships is very demanding. In the beginning before the introduction of Tier 2 BCs, HACs and Command Ships can still be considered a threat to anything lower than a BS.
With the introduction of Tier 2 BCs, HACs especially have become very vulnerable to less-skilled path Tier 2 BCs. My point is having trained quite a number of 'V' skills to fly this ship, a HAC ship/pilot should be able to take on a standard Tier 2 BC easily.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. Let's take for example, the Myrmidon vs. the Ishtar. Though the Myrmidon is tech 1, and skills wise is very low to get into one, the chances that are 50/50% dependent on tactics. HACs are suppose to be the elite, but the chances that Ishtar get kaboom is actually higher. This is because of the cap, armor, and guns/nos the Myrmidon gets compared to the HAC.
Another example, Zealot vs Harbinger. In my opinion, with 2 additional points and tons of armor/cap..the zealot doesnt have a chance in hell.
HACs used to mean something but now it has been relegated to what we term as 'luxury toys'. Let's list them down and see their survivability against any of the new tier 2 BCs.
Zealot . Very Slim (No counters)
Sacrilege. Slim (extra turrets and mid slots)
Deimos. Slim..DPS is still not enough before its runs out of capa and boosters)
Ishtar. 50/50
Munin. Slim (the Hurricane would eat alive)
Cereberus. (.....)
Eagle. Slim
Vagabond. High (thx to its speed its the only viable hac out there)
Skills required: High
ISK required to buy: Cutthroat.
So HACs are generally not very useful in handling a Tech 1 Tier 2 BCs anymore.
BC Tier 2
Skills required: Cruiser 4, BC 3 meh
ISK: BYOM or abt 38-50m
Whats made things worse, is that even Command Ships (HAC skill path) Eos, Abso etc. also do not fare much better. Odds are again 50/50 for most of the command ships. Yes, I know they have a role to play esp the Fleet Command Ships but seriously a Drake with about 20K of passive shield tanking can seriously take on a Abso/astarte/sleipnir/NH.
So question is why do CS have less armour/shields (ofc better resists) than their Tier 2 BCs? More drones. More cap.More slots. I can understand the common player who have a lower skill set wants to have some kind of chance, but I TRAINED for these skills, it should side me more.
It is sad after testing and testing, both my HAC and Command Ships just cant measure up to lower-req skill ships of Tier 2 BCs. And let's not mention rigs...three rigs on Tier 2 BCs can pwn any HAC with just 2 rigs on board.
You might say, meh..resists man.. so what of resists? With Rigs and more low/mid slots than some Command Ships and way more than HACs, you get seriously BBQed.
Make the HAC and Command Ships reflect how much SP pilots of these ships have put in them. Atm, I'm reduced to flying Tier 2BCs because most of them pwn any of my current stable of BCs with the sleipnir barely making it.
The BS are meant to be the flagship models of each race. With very extensive skill sets, they rule. But they don't have any Tech 2 variant. Imagine if you have a BS Tier 1/2/3 that is technically superior in every way than your uber Tech 2 BS.
Tier 2 BCs are cruisers. HACs are Heavy Assault Ships, essentially cruisers. CS are Command ships are also essentially cruiser. A majority of the HACs are bummed..and Command Ships well seriously...
But consider their role/skills. I dont mind the isk, but these Tier 2 BCs outclass their specialised brethen to such an extent (technical superiorty, tactics etc), it makes me wonder why i trained for them (HACs/Command Ships) in the 1st place. P
Oh please don't flame. this isn't a whine. it's just an observation.
My suggestion: Beef them up CCP so that they are more in-line with Tier 2 BCs.
Don't leave us HAC/Command ships pilots out to dry. 
|
Pinky Denmark
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 14:27:00 -
[2]
It might not be immediate but it'll be looked upon after Kali (or between if you're lucky).
I guess NOSFERATU is what often ruins it for the HACs due to the small capacitor...
|
Lyzander
Caldari
BIG Advanced Assault
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 14:38:00 -
[3]
You seem to be completely forgetting the fact that the resistances on all the HACs are geared towards the opposing faction's damage types... Which will make them godly for faction warfare.
At the very least, to see their true strength, cross-compare across factions.
|
AlphaM
Doom Guard
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 14:40:00 -
[4]
HACs shouldnt be able to solopwn all BC,
Firstly BC are a heavier class so should be have a great chance against the smaller cruiser class of ships, more cap more armor.
HACs were an elitist choice prior to kali, With the high price comes high expectations of performace, Bear in mind the HACs cost 20ish mil isk. An equivelent skilled player in a BC always had a great chance when set up well against a HAC.
The command BC should be a great counter to tier 3 BC, But the fleet ones are for a specific purpous.
|
Vidar Kentoran
Minmatar
Provenance.
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 15:22:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Vidar Kentoran on 27/02/2007 15:21:12
Edited by: Vidar Kentoran on 27/02/2007 15:18:43
 Quote:
My point is having trained quite a number of 'V' skills to fly this ship, a HAC ship/pilot should be able to take on a standard Tier 2 BC easily.
No? Training skills doesn't mean winning easily. Eliminating that brokenness is one of the PURPOSES of the BCs.
Quote:
The BS are meant to be the flagship models of each race. With very extensive skill sets, they rule. But they don't have any Tech 2 variant. Imagine if you have a BS Tier 1/2/3 that is technically superior in every way than your uber Tech 2 BS.
Um, this is exactly why everyone is worried about the implementation of T2 BS. SP aren't supposed to be a win button, and it's clear that CCP doesn't want them to be.
Your entire post is based on you wanting to win fights for no other reason than that you have more SP than your target. That is stupid, and not what EVE is about.
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
MASS HOMICIDE
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 15:40:00 -
[6]
This won't be an issue with T2 Battleshgips beceuse there won't be any BPO for them, only invention. That will limit their supply to very very very very low levels. Probably as expensive as a dreadnaught.
If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!! |
Antarus Lars
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 15:49:00 -
[7]
erm, zealot with 30km scramb -> harbringer
Or zealot + beam sniping -> harbringer
You forget the zealot is alot faster and has much better range with the +10% opt per level.....
With skillfull flying a zealot will toast a harbringer, just need to stay out web range.
|
Segmentor
Hunters Agency
Firmus Ixion
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 15:58:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Segmentor on 27/02/2007 15:55:30
Originally by: Kagura Nikon
This won't be an issue with T2 Battleshgips beceuse there won't be any BPO for them, only invention. That will limit their supply to very very very very low levels. Probably as expensive as a dreadnaught.
High price won't solve the problems the implementation of t2 BS would bring. There are allready enough people able to afford 2-3 capital ships from their wallet easily.
-----
|
Gunner Cid
The Carebear Stare
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 15:59:00 -
[9]
I agree with some points you made, however there are a few things I would like to point out.
HACs should not be balanced to BCs at all, BCs are a heavier class. HACs are fine (for the most part) as is. Not too many t1 cruisers stand a chance vs a HAC.
The issue IMO is that CSs are getting outclassed by t1 BCs. The reason for this is that when HACs were released the tier 3 cruisers were already out so HACs were improved off of those ships. BCs have been a 1 tier class for a while, so when the t2 variant was released it was improved off of what was currently released.
People ****ed and moaned for more BCs, so now tier 2 BCs are released and are in turn improved from the tier 1 BCs bringing them very close to CSs since they were both improved off of the same ship.
What needs to happen is nerf tier 2 BCs (not a public favorite), release a 2nd CS variant based off the tier 2 BCs (easiest to do IMO), or buff CSs (need to be careful here). This turned out much longer than anticipated hopefully the problem is resolved soonÖ.
|
Sokratesz
Guardians of Hell's Gate
Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 16:01:00 -
[10]
myrmidon, drake, harbinger, hurricane
theyre all overpowered IMO...seems like the devs went a little over the top in designing new toys
Suicide is bad, hmkay? (clickety clickety) |
|
|
Riho
Red Wrath
Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 16:04:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Antarus Lars
erm, zealot with 30km scramb -> harbringer
Or zealot + beam sniping -> harbringer
You forget the zealot is alot faster and has much better range with the +10% opt per level.....
With skillfull flying a zealot will toast a harbringer, just need to stay out web range.
or buy a faction web ... i bought one and it helps quite a bit.
keeps the cruiser size stuff out of web/nos range while i can web them :)
Great being Gallente... aint it ?
-----------------
<------ Hijack free space :)
----------------- |
Alowishus
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 16:04:00 -
[12]
In the case of HACs, you don't get what you pay for. It's a market/BPO problem, not a HAC problem. Dictors are the new HACs. Dunno how many Sabre pilots, thinking they had the latest SOLOWTFPWN-Mobile, died horribly to my all T1 Rupture because they got in web range and couldn't take two medium Nos. Look, you just lost a 50 mil ship to a 10 mil one.
First off, don't expect to get what you pay for with any T2 ship. They are expensive toys for the experienced.
Secondly, don't try to use a ship for that which it is not intended. Virtually no ship in Eve is balanced with a 1 on 1 confrontation in mind, because they rarely ever happen, and when they do it's usually an unfair fight. Ships are balanced loosely within their own class across factions. The determining factor in combat is supposed to be tactics. And combat in Eve was geared toward group combat a long long time ago. This term "balance" is silly because in a diverse group of 10+ ships vs. 10+ other diverse ships, race and ship type mean nothing.
People who are always discussing balance are the forum junkies who buy into every flavor-of-the-month ship and setup they learned from "t3h stickes" and can't PvP their way out of a wet paper bag.
|
Bronson Hughes
Caldari
Knights of the Wild
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 16:05:00 -
[13]
By your reasoning, a Manticore should be able to beat a Kestrel or a Cormorant all the time because it's Tech II and requires way more SP than either of those puny Tech I ships.
Oh wait....
Tech II ships are simply highly specialized Tech I ships. They fill a very specific role better than their base ship, but they are not better in every way. Interceptors/Interdictors tackle, Covops/recon cause EW havoc, (Heavy) Assault ships tank.
Are they worth the price you pay? That's left for you to decide.
|
Almarez
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 16:07:00 -
[14]
Edited by: Almarez on 27/02/2007 16:05:15
Edited by: Almarez on 27/02/2007 16:03:48
Although I agree with you to an extent, I don't think you can make either type ship the winner 90% of the time. If that is the case then everyone will train for that type of ship and everything else will suck.
Here is how I look at it, the Amarr ones are garbage 1 vs 1. The Zealot has cap issues and the Sac has the dps of um...well let's just say I'd rather have a blind old man standing on the hull with a rubber band and some paper clips.
That being said, the other races HAC's will probably have 50/50 chance versus the tier 2 BC. Here is why, yes the BC's have more slots, HP, powergrid, and CPU but HAC's have better base resists and 4 bonuses vs the 2 for the BC's. Give me a tier 2 BC setup and I bet I can come up with setups for the HAC's (not Amarr) that can take it out or tie. Or give me a HAC setup and I bet I can come up with setups for the tier 2 BC's that can beat it or tie.
|
madaluap
Gallente
Mercenary Forces
Exquisite Malevolence
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 16:10:00 -
[15]
Thats the problem with peeps these days: you allways need reward versus SP.
Some people actually trained bs lvl 5, large gunnery lvl 5, surgical strike lvl 5 when T2 large guns didnt even exist.
Just because you spend like what 60 days into hacs you want to beat my maxed out lvl 5 bc, lvl 5 drone interface, lvl 5 heavy drone myrmidom?
Serieusly SP is no argument for balance.
_________________________________________________
Breetime
A killmail!11!1 omgrawr: BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA |
n0thing
A Black Knight Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 16:43:00 -
[16]
looking at old game screens on various forums Tier 2 BC hp amounts look very close to the early stages tier 1 BS before all hp upgrades that were done(i have no idea how much there were tho).
tnx, |
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 17:11:00 -
[17]
Edited by: LUKEC on 27/02/2007 17:08:56
Megathron used to have 4250 base armor.
Drake now has 5469 shield and nighthawk has 4805.
Problem is also that battlecruisers have too many slots and don't really have to sacrifice dmg for tank. Myrmidon easily outdamages domi, drake comes close to cruise raven and amarr one still gets owned by heavy nosf.
--------
..... |
Dr Fighter
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 17:15:00 -
[18]
you mean a BC designed for killing cruisers can kill heavy assult cruisers too?
omg hax
|
Kay Rissa
Sabre Inc
Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 17:29:00 -
[19]
my point of view:
there is no problem with tier 2 bc. CS easily kill tier 1 and tier 2 BC. If u cant do this, u shouldnt fly those ships.
Tier 2 BC should kill HAC, if they have skills and idea how to fight. This part depents a lot on setup and skills.
Please stop moaning about nerfing tier 2 BC, better realese tier 2 CS.
Proud member of the Sabre
ps: i dont like to kill innocent ppl, so if i killed u, u rnt innocent |
Imhotep Khem
Shinra
Lotka Volterra
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 17:33:00 -
[20]
HAC always had trouble with tier 1 BC, let alone tier 2. Whats new?
Nothing should be easy.
_________
If your not dyin' your not tryin'.
It does not matter how badly I'm playing, we all know when Sharkbait has the black ball left he will **** it up. - Tuxford |
|
|
Miranda Ceres
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 18:06:00 -
[21]
Originally by: LUKEC
Edited by: LUKEC on 27/02/2007 17:08:56
Myrmidon easily outdamages domi
No it doesn't. 
|
Elain Reverse
Caldari
Shokei
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 18:20:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Elain Reverse on 27/02/2007 18:16:28
Originally by: LUKEC
Edited by: LUKEC on 27/02/2007 17:08:56
Megathron used to have 4250 base armor.
Drake now has 5469 shield and nighthawk has 4805.
Problem is also that battlecruisers have too many slots and don't really have to sacrifice dmg for tank. Myrmidon easily outdamages domi, drake comes close to cruise raven and amarr one still gets owned by heavy nosf.
Are you joking ? Drake use heavy missiles and can dealt about 300 dmg with each missile when cruise have far better range and do like 500. Also raven can fit Torps and they dealth even more dmg (3 times dmg of drake ?). So for killing frigs drake is better, but for BS it take 15minutes to kill some better BS.
Also Nighthawk have 2 times bigger cargo, better targeting range, more bonuses for missiles, more resistances on shields and armor. Also 1 more Lowslot for BCU count.
|
Thor Xian
Vertigo One
E.A.R.T.H. Federation
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 18:30:00 -
[23]
If Assault Frigates can beat a typical PvP Cruiser by simply loading the same grid...the OP might have a point about HACs and HBCs.
_________________________
~Thor Xian, Material Defender
Got Corp? |
Budz Fergie
Caldari
Caldari Deep Space Ventures
Caldari Deep Space Industral
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 18:31:00 -
[24]
Hmm, a drake can beat a commandship? What are you smoking?
Last pvp fight I had was when 2 drakes and a harbinger jumped my damnation. Results were the drakes running and harbinger getting popped because it was close enough to warp scramble.
Unless the commandship pilot is clueless, there is no way a tier 2 bc can fight a commandship solo and expect to live.
|
n0thing
A Black Knight Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 19:41:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Thor Xian
If Assault Frigates can beat a typical PvP Cruiser by simply loading the same grid...the OP might have a point about HACs and HBCs.
to my fresh view Tech 2 BCs should be a counter to Tech 2 Cruiser while tech 1 counterparts should be down one step from their Tech 2 ones. Like Tech 2 BC > Tech 1 BC(all of em) >< Tech 2 Cruiser > Tech 1 Cruiser >< Tech 2 Frigate > Tech 1 Frigate. > means better, < means worse, while >< id say should mean having equal chances dependings on tactics used and personal pilot skills.
again sry if posting wrong stuff.
tnx, |
The RepoMan
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 20:59:00 -
[26]
lol so basically you should be the one sitting in the front seat since you're older. Yeah, right.
|
Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
Riggers Incorporated
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:10:00 -
[27]
Let cruisers fight cruisres and battlecruisers fight battlecruisers.
Should i cry if i lose a commandship to a battleship
? Has happend a few times allready.
|
Graalum
Foundation
R0ADKILL
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:14:00 -
[28]
I think elite bc's need a boost to put them in line with tier 2 bc's, but otherwise its not bad. Also, i'd like to know what af can beat any decent cruiser setup. AF's have a tough time with destroyers.
|
sr blackout
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 21:46:00 -
[29]
i think hacs and cs should have gotten the same boost as the other t1 ships... esp they needed the cap :/ unless nosf/neut gets changed in future they should have had more hp/cap
|
Mogrin
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:06:00 -
[30]
Ok, so the Astarte should beat the Hyperion?
And the Enyo should be the Thorax?
Gotcha.
|
|
|
LUKEC
Destructive Influence
Band of Brothers
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:16:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Elain Reverse
Edited by: Elain Reverse on 27/02/2007 18:16:28
Originally by: LUKEC
Edited by: LUKEC on 27/02/2007 17:08:56
Megathron used to have 4250 base armor.
Drake now has 5469 shield and nighthawk has 4805.
Problem is also that battlecruisers have too many slots and don't really have to sacrifice dmg for tank. Myrmidon easily outdamages domi, drake comes close to cruise raven and amarr one still gets owned by heavy nosf.
Are you joking ? Drake use heavy missiles and can dealt about 300 dmg with each missile when cruise have far better range and do like 500. Also raven can fit Torps and they dealth even more dmg (3 times dmg of drake ?). So for killing frigs drake is better, but for BS it take 15minutes to kill some better BS.
Also Nighthawk have 2 times bigger cargo, better targeting range, more bonuses for missiles, more resistances on shields and armor. Also 1 more Lowslot for BCU count.
Ugh... too many smart people on forums these days. Sorry, read, think, post.
And tell me how exactly 5th low benefit damage? 
--------
..... |
Alowishus
Shadows of the Dead
Aftermath Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 22:40:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Mogrin
Ok, so the Astarte should beat the Hyperion?
And the Enyo should be the Thorax?
Gotcha.
Compare apples to apples. There's a whole class of ships between Frigate and Cruiser.
|
Mogrin
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 23:06:00 -
[33]
You consider the destroyer a ship class?
I consider it a freak of nature.
But if you wanna compare apples to apples...
So you want battlecruisers to have the dps of a HAC, the tank of a tech1 cruiser, and the signiture radius of a battleship.
|
Katrina Coreli
Soar Angelic
|
Posted - 2007.02.27 23:38:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Mogrin
You consider the destroyer a ship class?
I consider it a freak of nature.
But if you wanna compare apples to apples...
So you want battlecruisers to have the dps of a HAC, the tank of a tech1 cruiser, and the signiture radius of a battleship.
Stop putting words into peoples mouths
|
n0thing
A Black Knight Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 12:59:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Mogrin
You consider the destroyer a ship class?
I consider it a freak of nature.
But if you wanna compare apples to apples...
So you want battlecruisers to have the dps of a HAC, the tank of a tech1 cruiser, and the signiture radius of a battleship.
I think what people mean here that, fine, BCs supposed to be HACs pain, but Command Ships should be the ones between BC class and BS class, and now they are between HAC and BC class.
tnx, |
Master OlavPancrazio
Einherjar Rising
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 13:40:00 -
[36]
The op is suggesting assault frigates should be able to wtfpwn tech 1 cruisers too.
|
Nian Banks
Minmatar
Sebiestor tribe
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 14:04:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Nian Banks on 28/02/2007 14:04:25
As I unserstand it, a tech2 ship should be on equal terms to the tech1 ship one size above it. With a little difference here and there. One thing to remember is that all ship types should be equal to their same type. t2 frigate = t2 frigate, 50/50 win within reason but ofcourse racial differences can make it a bit fuzzy. Other than that I see it like this-
For t1 ships the hierarchy is easy
Frigates <- Destroyer <- Cruiser <- Battlecruiser <- Battleship <- Captitals.
For t2 mixed in its not so easy but still not hard.
Frigates t2 is greather than frigate is equal to destroyer, destroyer t2 and cruiser, is less than cruiser t2, battlecruiser, battlecruiser t2, battleship and capital ships. (The destroyer just does too good a frig killing job)
Cruiser t2 is greater than frigate, frigate t2, destroyer, destroyer t2 and cruiser and is equal to battlecruiser, is less than battlecruiser t2, battleship and capital ships.
Destroyer t2 is greater than frigate and is equal to frigate t2 and destroyer, is less than cruiser, cruiser t2, battlecruiser, battlecruiser t2, battleship and capital ships.
Cruiser t2 is greater than frigate, frigate t2, destroyer, destroyer t2 and cruiser, is equal to battlecruiser and less than battlecruiser t2, battleship and capital ships.
Battlecruiser t2 is greater than frigate, frigate t2, destroyer, destroyer t2, cruiser, cruiser t2 and battlecruiser, is equal to battleship and is less than capital ships.
Fair enough guys? Seems simple to me and makes it all nice and fair. T2 isn't an "I win" button but it should be what it is, tech2 as in better than tech1, If I fit a tech2 shield on a ship I expect more shield hitpoints and better resists not less, when I buy a tech2 ship I expect it to be 99.99% tech 2, not tech2 sensors with tech1 for everything else. Otherwise you may aswell give all ships 20 rig slots and let us all make our own custom so called tech 2 ships.
For the arguement about skill points equaling pawnage, well... We may aswell all stop training skills right now if those who moan and cry and stamp their feet about people with high skill points wanting a higher chance to win in pvp are in the right. I want to think that when I specialise in a direction and spent months on it that I am somehow better in the field of skills and can pawn some 2 month old account.
So back to the problem, when we had a last big patch and there was a hitpoints increase, tech1 ships got far more than tech2 and now its not right, infact its out of wack. allot of tech1 ships have more hitpoints than their tech2 versions. Thats not right and should be fixed damned right immediately.
|
smallgreenblur
Minmatar
Wreckless Abandon
The UnAssociated
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 14:10:00 -
[38]
A nice boost to CS to bring them halfway between the new BCs and the hypothetical T2 BS would be nice. These ships cost a lot in isk and training time but rarely bring more to the battlefield than their t1 counterparts.
sgb
|
n0thing
A Black Knight Corp
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 16:12:00 -
[39]
CS should not be better then BS imo. That will lead to serious balance hit since CS is smaller thus more agile, thus easier to move around with.
Maybe decrease tier 2 BC capabilities to give CS advantage, maybe less hp, maybe slots, maybe grid to limit weaponary.
tnx, |
Porklett
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 17:08:00 -
[40]
Are you kidding my Nighthawk eats Tier2 BC's for breakfast. I have killed so many bc's and shield doesn't even go lower 85% i agree heavy assault cruisers should be boosted a little but Command ships are not underpowered they are awesome.
|
|
|
Nerogk Shorn
Caldari
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 18:26:00 -
[41]
I have had some serious trouble with tier 2 bc's on the test forum flying my command ships. I have lost 1v1 vrs a particular myrmadon several times. Couldn't beat him in a nighthawk, vulture, or sleipnir, though i generally handle other command ships. I suppose i was in range of the myrma so i was playing into his hands but neverthe less he could tank as well and spit out tons more damage than i could tank. I believe he was setup with an Xlarge shield tank, blasters, ogres and several damage mods. Well tanked tier 2 bc's definetly pos a challenge to command ships. That myrma was teh only tier 2 bc that has defeated one of my command ships, but tbh one is too much. = P
Tier 2 bc's are in my opinion overpowered. I don't even compare the tier 2 to tier 1 anymore but think of them as a completely new class of ship. They are easy to fit, deal tons of damage (hurricane has 1 less turret than a sliepnir and the same damage bonus's) and have nasty overpowered tanks.
D-F-A-A-B-A-A-S |
Nerogk Shorn
Caldari
Royal Hiigaran Navy
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 18:26:00 -
[42]
I have had some serious trouble with tier 2 bc's on the test forum flying my command ships. I have lost 1v1 vrs a particular myrmadon several times. Couldn't beat him in a nighthawk, vulture, or sleipnir, though i generally handle other command ships. I suppose i was in range of the myrma so i was playing into his hands but neverthe less he could tank as well and spit out tons more damage than i could tank. I believe he was setup with an Xlarge shield tank, blasters, ogres and several damage mods. Well tanked tier 2 bc's definetly pos a challenge to command ships. That myrma was teh only tier 2 bc that has defeated one of my command ships, but tbh one is too much. = P
Tier 2 bc's are in my opinion overpowered. I don't even compare the tier 2 to tier 1 anymore but think of them as a completely new class of ship. They are easy to fit, deal tons of damage (hurricane has 1 less turret than a sliepnir and the same damage bonus's) and have nasty overpowered tanks.
D-F-A-A-B-A-A-S |
Angus McLean
Gallente
Divinity Trials
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 18:58:00 -
[43]
Tier 2 Battlecruisers are overpowered and we all know it. Not all of them necessarily but the fact that they cant take on Command ships is way out of place.
Now dont go ballistic when I say 'take on' command ships, I dont mean defeat. Any good CS pilot will send a Tier 2 BC pilot home in a pod and no money, but the new Tier 2 BC's can give them a nice run for play.
As for the fact that Tier 2 BC's kill HAC...whats wrong with that? To be honest I see a lot of new players that just jump in HACs and get killed by a T1 ship, they think hacs are somehow stupid and broken.
The real issue is, Battlecruisers are meant for Battle and HAC's are...cruisers...
----------------
Freedom Of Speech
Band of Brothers T-shirt |
Spenz
Gallente
FIRMA
Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 19:07:00 -
[44]
Battlecruiser and Cruiser are naval terms. They dont decide whether a ship goes into battle or not. It denotes a class of warship. A cruiser can fight, and so can a battlecruiser. If CCP did the whole thing according to how the real navy did it (dont start with this isnt RL, Im just making an example), the battlecruisers would be a little faster than they are now, would mount a full rack of large guns, but would have the armor of a cruiser.
Alas the battlecruiser idea was a complete and utter failure (RIP HMS Repulse, HMS Hood, HMS Indefatigable, HMS Princess Royal) and cruisers remained. But I digress. Do NOT categorize a ship just by its name. Thats just stupid.
If I had an Alt I would probably post with it... |
Mogrin
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 19:16:00 -
[45]
Heres my perspective:
Tech 2 = Tech 1 + extra bonus + better resists + couple more slots + mildly better other stats.
Whats all this nonsense about ship classes, really?
A HAC does BC damage but with cruiser sig radius and speed, and has some increadible resists.
Thats what they are. Its kinda like the AF-destroyer-cruiser relationship if destroyers could actually stand up to an AF. BCs can stand up to HACs, get trounced by BSs. While all BSs but a nos domi will have a heck of a time breaking a HAC.
|
Angus McLean
Gallente
Divinity Trials
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 19:30:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Angus McLean on 28/02/2007 19:28:30
Please reread my post. 
Edit: And no, most HACs dont outdamage their bc counterparts. Zealot < Harbinger. Some hacs I can think of hardly outdamage their T1 cruiser counterpart.
(Zealot out DPS's an Omen by about 50 dps if setup correctly.)
I was not classifying them by their name directly, but just using information we already know in eve. Im not bringing RL into this at all.
In EvE-
Battlecruisers are bigger, more amror, more weapons slots, better tanks (generally) and are overall generally better in 1 on 1 situations than cruisers.
Cruisers- the exact opposite of BC's.
What does this conclude? Naturally tbh cruisers shouldnt have much of a chance at all against BC's. The only real advantage HACs have is a few bonuses, high resistances, and faster.
Thus, why is it so hard to believe that a Tier 2 BC can beat a HAC? Its a cruiser thats why. Its armor is still paper thin, HACs are not meant to have amazing damage and tank in one package. They are meant to be manueverable and pack a punch.
Tier 2 bc's can kill hacs, and thats how it should be beacuse class wise, they are smaller.
----------------
Freedom Of Speech
Band of Brothers T-shirt |
Godar Marak
Amarr
Return Of Red Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 19:34:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Antarus Lars
erm, zealot with 30km scramb -> harbringer
Or zealot + beam sniping -> harbringer
You forget the zealot is alot faster and has much better range with the +10% opt per level.....
With skillfull flying a zealot will toast a harbringer, just need to stay out web range.
Zealot+mwd active+active lasers running away from mwd harbinger = ops out of cap.
If you die to a zealot in a harbinger you suck.
--------------------
'\0/\0/\0/\0/\0/'
Cant we all just get along?
|
korrey
Taurus Inc
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 19:35:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Godar Marak
Originally by: Antarus Lars
erm, zealot with 30km scramb -> harbringer
Or zealot + beam sniping -> harbringer
You forget the zealot is alot faster and has much better range with the +10% opt per level.....
With skillfull flying a zealot will toast a harbringer, just need to stay out web range.
Zealot+mwd active+active lasers running away from mwd harbinger = ops out of cap.
If you die to a zealot in a harbinger you suck.
QFT
-----------
24.01.06 Small patch that addresses some minor balancing issues
1) All minmatar pilots have been deleted |
Godar Marak
Amarr
Return Of Red Dawn
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 19:36:00 -
[49]
Originally by: madaluap
Some people actually trained bs lvl 5, large gunnery lvl 5, surgical strike lvl 5 when T2 large guns didnt even exist.
Hear hear.
--------------------
'\0/\0/\0/\0/\0/'
Cant we all just get along?
|
welsh wizard
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 20:32:00 -
[50]
Edited by: welsh wizard on 28/02/2007 20:28:53
Originally by: Spenz
Battlecruiser and Cruiser are naval terms. They dont decide whether a ship goes into battle or not. It denotes a class of warship. A cruiser can fight, and so can a battlecruiser. If CCP did the whole thing according to how the real navy did it (dont start with this isnt RL, Im just making an example), the battlecruisers would be a little faster than they are now, would mount a full rack of large guns, but would have the armor of a cruiser.
Alas the battlecruiser idea was a complete and utter failure (RIP HMS Repulse, HMS Hood, HMS Indefatigable, HMS Princess Royal) and cruisers remained. But I digress. Do NOT categorize a ship just by its name. Thats just stupid.
Completely off topic but the Hood and some of the other ships mentioned were the victim of what can only be described as incredibly bad luck/good german gunnery/lack of air cover. The Hood with its escort should have been more than a match for the Bismarck and the Prinz Eugen.
I disagree that it was a failed concept, more of an unrealised one tbh.
Sorry for off topic. :P
|
|
|
Max Hardcase
Art of War
Cult of War
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 21:04:00 -
[51]
The Hood had some design flaws in her magazine armor though.
|
welsh wizard
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 21:28:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Max Hardcase
The Hood had some design flaws in her magazine armor though.
True, still the shell that penetrated the deck in the precise vicinity of the magazine storage in the space of about 3 minutes could be described as unlucky! That or testament to German gun crew ability. :P
|
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tough Guys Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.02.28 21:33:00 -
[53]
Originally by: welsh wizard
Completely off topic but the Hood and some of the other ships mentioned were the victim of what can only be described as incredibly bad luck/good german gunnery/lack of air cover. The Hood with its escort should have been more than a match for the Bismarck and the Prinz Eugen.
I disagree that it was a failed concept, more of an unrealised one tbh.
Sorry for off topic. :P
I'm going to trail offtopic with you. I feel that if the War had carried on a few years longer and the computer/radar guided guns that were fitted on the iowa class were implemented on smaller, less expensive, faster hulls then Battle Cruisers really would have come into their own. Fast enough to stay at long ranges where a small number (4ish) of large (16 inch+) guns would still be extremely accurate/deadly (plunging fire).
Heinrich Klaus: "You need to get a leet signature you****got" |
Aizhan Ushrakhan
The Sword and The Shield
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 11:43:00 -
[54]
wow 2 pages. Can we get the CS to be more in line with tech 1 tier 2BCs. e.g. Drones, a little bit more pg? All i'm sayin is make the ships (hacs and CS) to live to their full potential (and t2 namesake). Some of these hacs are well and truly broken for pvp so they are relegated to pve. Again leme repeat..it isnt abt isk...its about potential and not all hacs bar the vaga can do it exceptionally well. Thankyou for keeping it civil..now back to Eve War I. |
Tista
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 11:56:00 -
[55]
i think a good point in this is that teir 2 BC actualy stand a chance vs t2 command ships.. which is just wrong.. look at frigates you get the incursus vs the enyo.. who will win that? you get the deimos vs thorax.. again who will win? .. myrm vs astarte... now im not certain but a high skilled myrm should stand a fairly good chance.
|
Scrutt5
Profiteers of War
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 12:04:00 -
[56]
When I tested the drake on the test server prior to its release on TQ, I have to admit I was horrified at its versatility and strength.
I have also invested an awful lot of time into my HAC's (HAC 5 etc) and was initialy conserned about the points you raise.
Last week I tanked 4 BC's in a HAC with no cap for over half the fight, unable to run my scram unfortunatly they all ran for cover as each hit structure.
With the addition of rigs, all you have to do is stop reading the "how to set up this ship for pvp" threads and start thinking out of the box a little.
I do however think the drake is overpowered, I'll leave it at that.
|
Tista
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 12:08:00 -
[57]
what hac were you flying?! 4 bcs? :O nooby BC or officer/ faction Hac ( unless sacre inwhich case yeah :D)
|
Jaketh Ivanes
Amarr
Riggers Incorporated
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 12:09:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Aizhan Ushrakhan
wow 2 pages. Can we get the CS to be more in line with tech 1 tier 2BCs. e.g. Drones, a little bit more pg? All i'm sayin is make the ships (hacs and CS) to live to their full potential (and t2 namesake). Some of these hacs are well and truly broken for pvp so they are relegated to pve. Again leme repeat..it isnt abt isk...its about potential and not all hacs bar the vaga can do it exceptionally well. Thankyou for keeping it civil..now back to Eve War I.
Commandships are not just improved BC's. Granted, the Absolution is a hvy hitting combat ship, but the damnation is a true command ship. It only has to relay orders and coordinate the battle (leadership bonuses).
Just like the T2 destroyers, its not excatly an improved destroyer, its an entire new role. And i like it 
|
000Hunter000
Gallente
Magners Marauders
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 12:13:00 -
[59]
Drake is pretty good if u consider it's a T1 ship, 1 vs 1 i think i would be able to beat it in my NH but 2 vs 1 i would be in trouble me thinks
Even though i have an alt flying a drake myself i must agree with the op, tier 2 BC are overpowered.
Resized tag... again... hope this pleases the tag ninjas from ccp... again :p
![]() |
n0thing
A Black Knight Corp
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 12:38:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Jaketh Ivanes
Originally by: Aizhan Ushrakhan
wow 2 pages. Can we get the CS to be more in line with tech 1 tier 2BCs. e.g. Drones, a little bit more pg? All i'm sayin is make the ships (hacs and CS) to live to their full potential (and t2 namesake). Some of these hacs are well and truly broken for pvp so they are relegated to pve. Again leme repeat..it isnt abt isk...its about potential and not all hacs bar the vaga can do it exceptionally well. Thankyou for keeping it civil..now back to Eve War I.
Commandships are not just improved BC's. Granted, the Absolution is a hvy hitting combat ship, but the damnation is a true command ship. It only has to relay orders and coordinate the battle (leadership bonuses).
Just like the T2 destroyers, its not excatly an improved destroyer, its an entire new role. And i like it
Whole idea of Command Ship imo also to be able to stay alive longer that anything else on battlefield.
tnx, |
|
|
Kagura Nikon
Minmatar
MASS HOMICIDE
FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 13:09:00 -
[61]
From where in hell people take tha idea that command ships are weaker than the new BC? This is ridiculows.
Show me a hurricane that can defeat a sleipnir...
If brute force doesn't solve your problem.. then you are not using enough!! |
Bordak
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 13:19:00 -
[62]
Even with a PvE Setup, a CS should beat a Tier 2 BC. Just be ale to hop into a ship doesnt mean you can actually fill it with purpose.
|
Dracu1a
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.03.01 16:11:00 -
[63]
I think there are some good points made here but here are a few things to keep in mind:
In terms of the whole HAC vs. BC thing. Maybe its just gallente that have it easy, but im pretty sure I wouldnt run away from any battlecruiser, in my Ishtar. Im fairly confident about that. Only thing i might have second thoughts on is a myrmidon...which i'll admit is pwn...but overall, I think the diffent hacs have different roles. Im not saying I'd wtfpwn all BC's in my Ishtar. In fact I think they would give me the best fights. Just because you have to actually pick your targets and *gasp* use some strategy to kill a ship that was MEANT to kill yours, doesnt mean something is wrong with it.
Minmitar have the vaga
Gallente have the dps (deimos/ishtar)
Caldari have the sniper (tho i admit the eagle is a bit lacking)
Now amarr....well...i think we all know the problems with amarr....
And as far as command ships go. Maybe gallente is just ftw in all of these things, but I HIGHLY doubt there is any BC and even most bs's that can tank a good, skilled Astarte pilot. I know first hand that its one of the highest dps ships in the game. Learn how to fly your command ship and i dont think you will have a problem.
I hate to admit it, but the more and more i think about it the myrmidon is....kind of....overpowered. *cry's because he loves it so much*
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |