Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ariko Gunaris
Office of Ganking and Commerce
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 06:30:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Ariko Gunaris on 26/05/2008 06:31:58 I've noticed that tech 1 cruisers have become increasingly rarer in PvP, usually superseded by tech 1 battlecruisers.
Aside from a few specialty cruisers such as Blackbird, tech 1 cruisers just aren't that effective anymore compared to battlecruisers.
I believe this situation is mainly the culprit of the skewed hitpoint boosts introduced in Revelations 1 that gave battlecruisers 50% more hitpoint whereas all other ships got +25% and the addition of Tier 2 battlecruisers that gained an additional slot.
Nevermind the significant agility boost battlecruisers also got in Revelations 1.
Some points:
(1) The effective normalized hit points of battlecruisers is simply out of line compared to battleships and tech 1 cruisers. Combined with the extra fitting room battlecruisers have, it turns out that typically a battlecruiser will have anywhere from four to six times the effective hitpoints of a tech 1 cruiser, while having significantly more damage output.
What's the point of flying a non-specialty cruiser when one can pilot a battlecruiser?
(2) For shield tankers, you essentially have two free large shield extenders built in with no fitting penalty compared to a tech 1 cruiser. For armor tankers, the hitpoints is equivalent to more than a 1600mm plate, again with no fitting penalty.
(3) This is especially pertinent to a comparison between, say, a Maller and a Harbinger. Even with the tanking bonus of the Maller and fitted a 1600mm plate eating up half of its powergrid and ruining its agility, a Harbinger will still have more normalized hitpoints without anything fitted.
You essentially have the hitpoints of a battleship with cruiser sized bonused weaponry -- it totally ruins balance and obviates the role of many tech 1 cruisers.
|
Ariko Gunaris
Office of Ganking and Commerce
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 06:30:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Ariko Gunaris on 26/05/2008 06:43:03 Tech 1 cruisers have become increasingly rarer in PvP, usually superseded by tech 1 battlecruisers.
Aside from a few specialty cruisers such as Blackbird, tech 1 cruisers just aren't that effective anymore compared to battlecruisers. I believe this situation is mainly the culprit of the skewed hitpoint boosts introduced in Revelations 1 that gave battlecruisers 50% more hitpoint whereas all other ships got +25% and the addition of Tier 2 battlecruisers that gained an additional slot.
Never mind the significant agility boost battlecruisers also got in Revelations 1.
Some points:
(1) The effective normalized hit points of battlecruisers is simply out of line compared to battleships and tech 1 cruisers. Combined with the extra fitting room battlecruisers have, it turns out that typically a battlecruiser will have anywhere from four to six times the effective hitpoints of a tech 1 cruiser, while having significantly more damage output.
What's the point of flying a non-specialty cruiser when one can pilot a battlecruiser?
(2) For shield tankers, you essentially have two free large shield extenders built in with no fitting penalty compared to a tech 1 cruiser. For armor tankers, the hitpoints is equivalent to more than a 1600mm plate, again with no fitting penalty.
(3) This is especially pertinent to a comparison between, say, a Maller and a Harbinger. Even with the tanking bonus of the Maller and fitted a 1600mm plate eating up half of its powergrid and ruining its agility, a Harbinger will still have more normalized hitpoints without anything fitted.
You essentially have the hitpoints of a battleship with cruiser sized bonused weaponry -- it totally ruins balance and obviates the role of many tech 1 cruisers.
|
Nikita Alterana
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 06:36:00 -
[3]
I can't speak for the majority but I fly a thorax in PvP over a BC and I'll continue to do so.
why? well in terms of pure dps the bc is well..lacking. Battlecruisers are tanking gods, you can tank multiple battleships in a rigged drake, but its DPS isn't very high at all. Then factor in the cost 5 mil vs 30, I'll stick with the disposable T1 cruisers over the sightly more powerful and tankable BCs.
__________________________________________________ |
Ariko Gunaris
Office of Ganking and Commerce
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 06:41:00 -
[4]
Edited by: Ariko Gunaris on 26/05/2008 06:41:45 Well, a Brutix's damage output is higher than a thorax and it has more hit points unplated than a plated thorax.
You are right about cost, but cost should not be a factor in game balance as cost is only a ISK(time) sink.
I have a beautiful Maller sitting in my station. With Trinity graphics, it's really a beautiful ship. I want to fly it...
...but it makes me sad that a Harbinger has more damage output from drones alone, nevermind the hitpoint imbalance. I see no reason to fly a Maller over a Harbinger.
|
Ral Ulgur
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 07:59:00 -
[5]
Cruisers are generally more maneuverable. In particular align faster resulting in quicker taveling or roaming.
|
Ishina Fel
Synergy. Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 08:12:00 -
[6]
Flying battlecruiser in roaming gangs is a pain in the behind. You're always the last to warp, the last to get back on a gate, the last to get out of a bubble, and the last to lock a target.
You'd probably be better looking at Recons. More and more people can fly these, so more and more people stop flying tech1 cruisers. Especially the cloaking variants - I'd wager they're the most popular tech2 cruisers ingame. Add to that the amount of HACs, and most recently, heavy interdictors, you have a great lot of ships which do everything a cruiser does, just better... without the disadvantages of the flying bricks that are battlecruisers.
|
Guns nButter
The Nietzian Way Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 08:14:00 -
[7]
battlecruisers are expensive. i'll fly a rupture over a hurricane if i can't get a cane for cheap.
|
Farrah Jun
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 10:48:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Nikita Alterana I can't speak for the majority but I fly a thorax in PvP over a BC and I'll continue to do so.
why? well in terms of pure dps the bc is well..lacking. Battlecruisers are tanking gods, you can tank multiple battleships in a rigged drake, but its DPS isn't very high at all. Then factor in the cost 5 mil vs 30, I'll stick with the disposable T1 cruisers over the sightly more powerful and tankable BCs.
The Thorax is an exception to the rule, in my opinion. It, and all its variants are really the "bread'n'buttah" of PvP gank cruisers.
But in repsonse to the original topic, ever got your BC to fly so fast nothing could hit it? I bet not... Cruisers have their place.
|
Belial Tempter
Twisted Inc.
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 10:50:00 -
[9]
"lol" is all I have to say to that really
Sig radius? Speed? Agility?
|
Shadowsword
COLSUP Tau Ceti Federation
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 11:03:00 -
[10]
Most battlecruisers cost almost as much as a tier1 BS, and don't have all that much more dps than T1 cruisers. Is it surprising then, that they have almost the HP of tier1 battleships?
If there's less T1 cruisers in pvp, that's good. That means players are ready to risk losing a bit more isks, and are more skilled. ------------------------------------------
|
|
Redbad
TSL Wolfpack
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 11:07:00 -
[11]
A passive plate-tanked Rupture with some pretty gyrostabs in the low's can pack a nice punch; has enough speed to keep targets at range and enough range to actually hit decent outside webbing range. In combo with some nice advanced dronery its a cost-effective ship.
I like my Ruppy.
And as bonus with flying a Rupture you'll give your opponent a chance to look at a ships design full of piratey coolness.
RB
BTW: Stabber is even better ... /me hides
|
Koyama Ise
State War Academy
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 11:16:00 -
[12]
As far as I'm concerned one of the main reasons is Ewar, not a single BC will do Ewar as good as a certain cruiser of each race. -------- Yes, I know I'm an alt, what are you going to do about it? |
achoura
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 11:28:00 -
[13]
If the statement in this threads title is true please explain to the world why ti cruiser are and have always been the most used ship class in eve ***The EVE servers and their patches*** |
Rhodera
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 11:32:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Shadowsword and are more skilled.
Eh? Cos they fly a BC as opposed to a cruiser? I'd say a cruiser requires more personal skill to fly, and if there's less of them that's bad, as it means newer players are either not bothering, or waiting till they're in expensive ships till they try PvP, which scares them off due to high cost.
|
Ariko Gunaris
Office of Ganking and Commerce
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 01:48:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Ariko Gunaris on 27/05/2008 01:48:22 Speed... agility...
Actually, if people actually tanked their ships instead of nanofaggotry you'd realize the agility argument is moot -- the agility and mass of a plated cruiser is comparable to an unplated battlecruiser.
Furthermore, battlecruisers have more slots and it's easy for them to match the agility of cruisers with a similar number of slots remaining.
Similarly, the signature radius of many cruisers with shield extenders (eg. Moa) is comparable to the unextended sig radius of battlecruisers (eg. Cyclone).
Battlecruisers simply have too much HP.
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong FOUNDATI0N
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 02:29:00 -
[16]
Quote: but cost should not be a factor in game balance
people think there is no grind in eve.
there is a grind it just happens to not be exp. it's isk. Thus isk is the largest balancing factor in the whole game.
it's why more expensive modules are better.
|
Helios Hyperion
Federal Navy Academy
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 16:47:00 -
[17]
this topic phails
sig radius, speed, locktime, agility and... cost
really... if all you want is gank or tank or w/e a t1 bc is better than it's related HAC as well. brut= far more dps than a deimos harbinger= far more dps than a zealot
that's all there is too it.. but people pay 200+ mil isk of non-refundable isk to fly in a HAC over a BC...
so now their paying for that damage potential in a maneuverable cruiser body... but then we have everybody /crying that they can be nano'd and that's just not right! if they were supposed to be tanked like "real men" why the heck do we have battlecruisers? quit crying and play the game
|
BugxEarl
Izanagi Orbital Fleet Izanagi Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.05.27 19:07:00 -
[18]
Every BC (tier 1 or 2) can be fitted with very economical fit (no poly and stuff like that) to match rup/rax/omen/maller/caracal/moa with maybe a difference in ship cost and slightly longer lock time.
30mm~50mm scan resolution difference is not very much btw!
With the said CL mimic setup, each BC have better buffer(some even active), better firepower, more drones, and they have more cap. Ho-hum:) |
Ariko Gunaris
Office of Ganking and Commerce
|
Posted - 2008.05.28 16:20:00 -
[19]
Not all tech 1 cruisers are meant to be nanod.
In fact, except for the stabber, none should be for a game design standpoint.
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |