EVE Search - Make Battle Ships more versitile

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Make Battle Ships more versitile

» 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)
Wrangler Al Caldari Shadow's Hunters Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.10.23 12:56:00 - [1] Edited by: Wrangler Al on 23/10/2008 12:59:35 To illustrate my point please watch this short clip from Stargate Atlantis http://youtube.com/watch?v=9TUhwYTM16g The Ancients are so like the Caldari with their shields and missiles And the Wraith ships are like Galente with their armour tanking and close range blaster style weapons (wouldn't it be nice to see those explosions on armour tankers) My main point however is, the one thing Eve ships are missing is LOTS of weapons like on the Deadalus, in the movie it shows loads of railguns firing all over... (it also has 2 main Heavy beam weapons and 2 support missile batteries) It would be so much more realistic and tactically interesting if CCP upped its max weapons for big ships from 8... or even added a section for small secondary weapons (Maby BS could fit 2 large/heavy weapons 4 medium batteries and 8 small point defence batteries) This would meen battles would be more tactical as you have a small heavy arsonal for ships of equivilant size so the battles would last longer (as they should) you could also defend against smaller ships tackling you. For most people good pvp is hard to find and when you do find it, its over too fast Other times you find a camp and die quick (as ships carry such high dps these days) or you sit locked down by fast small ships and get nibbled to death (eg. 23 Intys v 1 Rokh.. Rokh will die and cant even defend itself) Please give us more tactical flexability in our weapon layouts and make Eve more fun and more challenging
Dalai Dan	Posted - 2008.10.23 13:02:00 - [2] This is pretty stupid. BS are already the most "versatile" ships, in that they can do a vast range of roles by changing fits. What you are asking for is not versatility, but omnipresence. You want them to be able to do anti-everything, all at the same time. What exactly would be the point of flying a frigate, when everyone has potent anti-frig weapons? What would be the point of flying an antifrig ship (e.g.destroyer, huginn, eagle, zealot, muninn) when you could be a BS at the same time?
ThaDollaGenerale The Priory	Posted - 2008.10.23 13:02:00 - [3] I stopped reading when I got to "Watch this clip from an unrelated show."
Sir Substance Minmatar Sub Standard Industries	Posted - 2008.10.23 13:13:00 - [4] Originally by: ThaDollaGenerale I stopped reading when I got to "Watch this clip from an unrelated show." me too. eve isnt stargate, or firefly, or star trek, or star wars or whatever your favorite sci-fi is. in eve, BS's have a max of 8 weapons. the end. - PvPers always say "GB2WoW". the message is that EVE is hard, and people just need to deal with it. wasn't it funny how when nano's started making it hard for them, that all went out the window?
Astria Tiphareth Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.10.23 13:27:00 - [5] Your link doesn't work properly, but it's a cool battle I'll give you that. I'd kill for the Trinity engine to look that good, especially over planets. Now onto the idea... Hmm where to begin... Part of the problem in this notion is that the premise of EVE is flexibility and therefore so far we've been allowed to fit anything we like in high-slots. However, even assuming all of the above changed and we have primary and secondary highs with different sizes and purposes, cruisers, battleships, these are strictly sub-capitals. What you're really asking for are motherships with guns, because that sort of scale is big enough to fit various gun batteries and not look stupid. You look at that battle and the really big ships are (ironically enough) classed as motherships, with cruisers and battleships manoeuvring between them. From a realism perspective: Big ships can fit anything from small point defense guns, fighters, up to huge cannons, if so desired. WW2 battleships had a variety of weaponry other than their main guns. However, a compromise must be made somewhere; you can't fit every type of gun onto your hull, both due to lack of space, and a need to specialise in at least one area. The Stargate universe has in essence quite the same system EVE has: large guns with poor tracking, missiles, shields, armour, it's all very sci-fi. However... From an EVE perspective: Balance is the key. Big ships that can do anything negate the need for smaller ships. In fact, if you look at that battle, you'll note smaller ships doing their job too; defending the larger ships, strikes, and so on. Put simply, the current roles are such that battleships fit heavy guns for other battleships, or they could in theory fit other modules for taking on smaller ships, but not both at the same time, thus requiring other ships to participate. That said, we do have a minority who are busy over in Game Development complaining that a solo battleship can't kill several smaller ships, so it's a tough area to balance correctly, since some pull it towards a team focus, and others pull it towards a solo-kill-anything focus. Short version: Gameplay balance does not a great filmclip make. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... Environmental Effects
Adaera	Posted - 2008.10.23 13:39:00 - [6] There's a fine balance between realism and gameplay that has to be taken into account. Of course it's plausible for battleships to carry that kind of weaponry - but then it would obsolete every other smaller ship. There is a very good reason for the current system being how it is.
Wrangler Al Caldari Shadow's Hunters Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.10.23 13:42:00 - [7] I agree, balance is the key here. and at presant we dont really have it. we have specialized roles that people must fill and that is all they can do... present a new tactical challenge and your screwed. we need some flexability and the only way to get it into the game is to FORCE it in, as players will always go for the top dps the best of the best... but then as you say they specialize In a reall navy (Eve does seem to work on fluid mechanics...lol) each ship will have a main role but be able to cope with targets large and small. The largest will need support, but the battle ships and battle cruisers are prety much safe to opperate solo, its the frigets that patrol in packs. Diversify or die someone once said Eve is full of specialists, you read it all the time.. give me more specialization so I can be even better in my one chosen role. I dont want to be pigion holed.. Do you??
Kiki Arnolds Caldari Allied Caprican Heavy Industries	Posted - 2008.10.23 14:44:00 - [8] Originally by: Wrangler Al Now this would not make the BS a solopawn mobile as it would have limitations on large medium and small fittings, it would however make it more versitile. Versitility is exactly what would make a BS a solo pwn mobile. At the moment a battleship is usually fit to kill other battleships. Fit that way they are not good at killing frigates and some cruisers. That is thier weakness. How would removing thier principle weakness not make them solo pwn mobiles? ç¦
Wrangler Al Caldari Shadow's Hunters Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.10.23 17:43:00 - [9] no versitility makes it multi purpose but actually reduces the effective dps across the board if you only have 2 large guns rather than 8 you do less dps to large targets if you only have 4 medium gun slots your mid range dps is equivolent to a cruiser for medium targets And if you have 8 small guns you have the firepower of a destroyer for small targets
Tarron Sarek Gallente Biotronics Inc. Alternative Realities	Posted - 2008.10.23 17:51:00 - [10] You would have to redefine all the other ship classes, too => balancing nightmare. ___________________________________ Balance is power, ~~guard~~ hide it well "Ceterum censeo Polycarbonem esse delendam"

Wrangler Al Caldari Shadow's Hunters Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.10.27 22:26:00 - [11] Edited by: Wrangler Al on 27/10/2008 22:28:19 Why would the other ships need to change??? Making the bs more flexable and not an easy target for an elite frig pilot is how it should be. A mouse dosnt hunt a cat, but a swarm of wasps can kill a man. If the BS can defend itself to a degree, against small fast ships why would that make them useless.. it wouldnt, but it would meen the BS was more of a believable war machine than it is.. It goes the same for Dreadnoughts also... they should have point defence weapons aswell as the 3 heavy guns, as something that BIG that can only splat other capitals or a POS is stupid... no one would build such a ship. they would be bristling with weaponry. now eve may not currently show this, but it could be so easily added and stop these ships being so limited/liniar in their roles
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2008.10.28 00:07:00 - [12] Originally by: Wrangler Al no one would build such a ship. they would be bristling with weaponry. now eve may not currently show this, but it could be so easily added and stop these ships being so limited/liniar in their roles gameplay vs realism. The day realism wins, EVE will go back to 10k subscribers. Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Crewman Jenkins	Posted - 2008.10.28 01:22:00 - [13] heh, 10k subs would bring back small gangs.
The BringerofOrder	Posted - 2008.10.28 04:27:00 - [14] I get that to setup a battleship or anything really closer to what you would have in the real world...IE. A battleship with few Anti-BS weapons, loads of medium weaponary and numerous smaller weaponary would be a nightmare to configure, not balance, merely a nightmare to setup. So i wont even bother discussing that. BUT! What would be so wrong with the idea of giving larger ships, say BS and up, Flak Guns. I'm talking permanent weapons that are always attached and have to be stocked on ammo. So on a BS you have 2 and only ever 2 flak guns. Effective out to say 25KM's.....Extremely effective against frigates and about 85% of the same efficiency against destroyers. But only bout 10-30% efficiency on a cruiser. This would not make them overpowered, merely able to survive against smaller ships. Then on larger ships, say a frieghter you have 4 flaks, so exactly the same frieghter but with 4 flak guns. Then on a dreadie say still only 4 flaks as dreads in this game are really just mobile batteries of big guns so they need alot more support than others. But on a carrier have 6 flak guns only effective out to 20KM's with abit less DPS than that of a BS's. This wouldn't completely enable a truly offensive carrier bout would most definately help it. Same deal on the mothership as a carrier. On a titan. Well i would have no idea, maybe ten? But what would be so wrong with this? Large ships still wouldnt be solo win mobiles, but they would be able to be used as a solo vehicle whilst at the same time still being completely vulnerable to a gang, or fleet. Or even large groups of frigs/inties/AF's but not a small group of frigs/inties/AF's.
Cpt Cosmic	Posted - 2008.10.28 09:56:00 - [15] you are already superior to smaller targets in any way (dps, tank, ehp, slots) and you want more? btw you have weapons against smaller targets, called drones and neuts.
The BringerofOrder	Posted - 2008.10.28 12:39:00 - [16] Originally by: Cpt Cosmic you are already superior to smaller targets in any way (dps, tank, ehp, slots) and you want more? btw you have weapons against smaller targets, called drones and neuts. For the specific situation i stated above, small amounts of frigates/interceptors/assualt frigates. Currently they can lock down a BS and ever so slowly pick away at it. Yes i can use drones, which get blown to hell very quickly by any competant small ship gang. Yes i can use nuets, if i want to drop a gun or 2, but if i was going to do that, why not just fit a small gun? The suggestion i made is so that when your in a BS you dont have to compromise your main weapons to take out smaller ships. But at the same time, not become a weapon of death to everything on the field. This will give larger class ships light defense against smaller ships, enough to kill a few or make them run away/realise numbers are to small and not engage the target.
Wrangler Al Caldari Shadow's Hunters Vanguard.	Posted - 2008.10.28 15:52:00 - [17] Exactly... A bit of defence to stop a very small group of 5mil ships being able to take out a 150mil ship, 10 times their size with ease.
Nekopyat	Posted - 2008.10.28 18:22:00 - [18] Originally by: The BringerofOrder I get that to setup a battleship or anything really closer to what you would have in the real world...IE. A battleship with few Anti-BS weapons, loads of medium weaponary and numerous smaller weaponary would be a nightmare to configure, not balance, merely a nightmare to setup. So i wont even bother discussing that. This has not been the case since WWI. Mixed gun sized battleships didn't last long, they were a nightmare to operate effectively even with a good crew. In the real world a battleship is a sitting target for a couple of torpedo boats or other small craft. Which is why battleships have a screen of smaller vessels and NEVER travel alone. EvE battleships are already WAY to versatile. The closest you get to a realistic setup would be something like a Maelstorm with 1400s... lots of damage but can only hit big slow things (which is exactly what a battleship or dreadnaught are designd to do)
Tarron Sarek Gallente Biotronics Inc. Alternative Realities	Posted - 2008.10.28 18:36:00 - [19] Originally by: Wrangler Al Exactly... A bit of defence to stop a very small group of 5mil ships being able to take out a 150mil ship, 10 times their size with ease. This is an MMOG and what you describe is perfectly within EVE game design. Teamwork and group effort should be rewarded. It's the 150mio ship pilot's fault if he travels alone. Apart from that battleships have more than a bit of defense. As has been mentioned a heavy neutralizer will instantly render any frigate pretty much helpless and light drones will eat it alive. And it takes a very small group of frigates a very long time to kill a battleship with a decent setup.
Wrangler Al Caldari Shadow's Hunters Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.03 14:19:00 - [20] True teamwork should be rewarded... But atm it is too easy to take out battle ships and not everyone can afford to take them into pvp with their high mortality rate and cost. if they can defend themselves in small skirmishes against a small gang of 2 or 3 frigs without having to gimp their loadout (heavy neuts work well for some but not all), then my argument is you will have more low level pvp promoted rather than gang or blob warfare. I have pvp'ed in 0.0 and so many people wont respond to reds in their sector, they are scared to take out battleships unless they have a big gang - it shouldnt be that way...

Astria Tiphareth Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.11.03 15:04:00 - [21] Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 03/11/2008 15:06:27 Apologies for editing people's quotes but I wanted to try and keep this condensed. The following are from either this thread or one over in game development decrying the supposed death of solo BS's killing smaller ships. I think it nicely illustrates the real source of the problem. Originally by: Xenomorphea The new patch severely limits the viability of a BS (especially with blasters) for solo vs. multi PvP. ...edited... Honeslty, is this the way it is supposed to work? If you fly a BS, you cannot kill ANYTHING except another BS? Are you kidding me, CCP? Is this what you get for training close to 40 mil SPs in pure PvP? ...more editing... ...do not render BS useless to the point you cannot kill ANY smaller ship - this is not how it is supposed to work...A small ship caught within webber range of a close range weapon BS is supposed to die, and fast. Originally by: Nekopyat EvE battleships are already WAY to versatile. ... lots of damage but can only hit big slow things (which is exactly what a battleship or dreadnaught are designd to do) Originally by: Wrayeth This makes no sense. If battleships are only supposed to fight ships of the same class or larger, then why even use them? If you follow this logic down the train and apply it to cruisers, that means they are supposed to shoot ships of equal or larger size, meaning that they shouldn't be able to effectively engage frigates, thus making frigates the ultimate ship class (i.e. invulnerable to cruisers and BS). Originally by: Tarron Sarek ...is perfectly within EVE game design. Teamwork and group effort should be rewarded. It's the 150mio ship pilot's fault if he travels alone. Originally by: Wrangler Al But atm it is too easy to take out battle ships and not everyone can afford to take them into pvp with their high mortality rate and cost. This is why balance is hard. This is why balancing EVE is impossible. It's hard enough to balance a set of modules and ships with a combinatorial set of combinations, without a playerbase that has different desires on what 'balance' is! Some want to go out in a BS and get solo kills on smaller gangs. Others want a BS to require smaller-ship support, in much the same way a carrier probably should (but doesn't seem to, at least when within sneezing distance of a station). This debate about versatility really comes down to this: should battleships, or indeed any ships, require other ships to fulfill all necessary combat roles? I would argue yes, but it's quite clear some disagree. Secondly, should they only be able to engage ships equal to their size? I'd say no, but they equally shouldn't be instant death to smaller ships. To help inform this debate, the following quote from CCP Nozh is interesting: Originally by: CCP Nozh Battleships will yes have a harder time hitting smaller targets, that is how we (game design) intend it to be. So are battleships useless in solo combat? Far from it, being the larger ship still has many benefits: The ability to actually fit smaller weapons to fend of smaller targets Drones High HP, which gives you time to assess the situation and make appropriate actions More cap which allows them to neutralize smaller targets pretty easily More slots that allow you to take EW counter measures etc. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... Environmental Effects
Wrangler Al Caldari Shadow's Hunters Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.03 19:36:00 - [22] Originally by: CCP Nozh Battleships will yes have a harder time hitting smaller targets, that is how we (game design) intend it to be. So are battleships useless in solo combat? Far from it, being the larger ship still has many benefits: The ability to actually fit smaller weapons to fend of smaller targets Drones High HP, which gives you time to assess the situation and make appropriate actions More cap which allows them to neutralize smaller targets pretty easily More slots that allow you to take EW counter measures etc. This is an acceptable guideline... However with the current dps available and the potent neutralizing ships, a Battle Ship's supposedly high HP dosnt count for enough to ofset the fact that it is now greatly outclassed. Instead of being a versatile combat platform allowing you to see off ruffians invaiding your space, it's been left behind the curve and its weighty vulnerabilities have restricted it to Missions, ratting or fleet Ops/POS bashing. With all the pirana (versitile, fast and dangerious ship classes) in the sea, this old whales teath are now too blunt to save it
Straight Chillen Gallente Solar Wind	Posted - 2008.11.03 21:09:00 - [23] Theres absolutely nothing stopping you from fitting your ship however you want. I mean you could fit your mega with 3x large 2x med 2x smalls if you wanted, and fend off cruisers and frigs all day. just dont be suprised when you get laughed at tho Please resize image to a maximum of 400 x 120, not exceeding 24000 bytes. If you would like further details please mail [email protected] ~Saint
Baaldor Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2008.11.03 22:46:00 - [24] From what I am gathering is you want a ship that can counter anything that is thrown at you. BS's are fully capable to solo pvp in. Its done quite often. And considering its done quite often, these players don't seem to be to concerned too much about smaller "Pirana" and learned how to deal with them. Now the ones I notice is very concerned are the ratting bears that are fairly clueless as to how to deal with these small fast ships. And as knowledgeable as Nozh might be, mixing weapon types and sizes is actually pretty frigging stupid. When I saw that post of his it was quite clear he: a) does not play the game as often as he should. or b) does not play the game as often as he should.
Dristra Amarr Shadows of the Dead Elitist Cowards	Posted - 2008.11.03 23:42:00 - [25] The core systems in eve does not support this idea. Simple as that. Originally by: CCP Atropos the physics engine has balls I believe rats should avoid you if you have high standing with them.
Washell Olivaw	Posted - 2008.11.03 23:43:00 - [26] Originally by: Baaldor 's are fully capable to solo pvp in. Its done quite often. And considering its done quite often, these players don't seem to be to concerned too much about smaller "Pirana" and learned how to deal with them. Half this thread is about the changes currently being tested on Sisi. Where BS's have a lot more problems dealing with the small fish. CCP Nozh comments are related to this. Originally by: Signature Everybody has a photographic memory, some people just don't have film.
Astria Tiphareth Caldari 24th Imperial Crusade	Posted - 2008.11.04 13:38:00 - [27] Originally by: Washell Olivaw Half this thread is about the changes currently being tested on Sisi. Where BS's have a lot more problems dealing with the small fish. CCP Nozh comments are related to this. My apologies, I should have made this more clear; I'll edit the post to make it clearer. It is indeed in relation to changes on Sisi (which are coming so we might as well get used to the notions they support). My intent was not to highlight the specific changes, more the attitudes. Game design (Nozh) clearly have a set of goals. One or more groups in EVE clearly have a set of (different) goals. That was all I was attempting to illustrate, to help inform a debate about battleship versatility, which was the original topic of the thread. ___ My views may not represent those of my corporation, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... Environmental Effects
Wrangler Al Arcane Alliance	Posted - 2008.11.08 16:11:00 - [28] Any more positive comments
Sir Substance Minmatar MagiTech Alliance Inc. MagiTech Corp	Posted - 2008.11.09 01:45:00 - [29] having read through all this, i am seeing two groups. the group that believes that BS's should be capable of owning the ships below them, and the group that believes in fleet ops. each has a point, so here is my take. Should teamplay be rewarded? YES. Should it be impossible to play without a team? NO. Should a small team of inferior ships be able to take out a single superior ship? NO. Should a large team of inferior ships be able to take out a superior ship? YES. i see people equating combat to raw DPS, and thats the problem.a BS should be able to put enough DPS on a group to trash frigs and cruisers, if you have a small frig/cruiser group with limited ewar. if they ahve a larger group, with lots of tracking distruptors., anti-sensor gear etc, it should be a different matter. this balance is hard to get, but i do not believe the solution is to make a BS impotent against anything less then a BC without forcing it to use a loadout that makes it impotent against another BS. the BS is the top ship in the t1 ladder. it should b viable to make a loadout that is effective against both. not as effective as a pure anti-BS is against BS's or a pure anti-cruiser is against cruisers, but effective nonetheless. currently this is not possible, and its only going to get worse with the SiSi changes. more and more we see BS's being use only for missions. after all, why use a BS in PvP when a cerebrus costs about the same, and can kill BS's, cruisers AND frigs. the BS is becoming a carebear relic, and despite being a carebear, thats not what i want to see it become. i trained for BS's with the idea in my head that i could go out, and have some PvP fun every once in a while. - PvPers always say "GB2WoW". the message is that EVE is hard, and people just need to deal with it. wasn't it funny how when nano's started making it hard for them, that all went out the window?
Nos Gainah	Posted - 2008.11.09 03:12:00 - [30] Ever fly a dominix? Use T2 light drones? Smartbombs? ECM/EW? Energy Neutralizers? Calling for help in the 10 minutes it takes for a swarm of frigates to kill you? And yes, I believe that the larger a ship is the more it should require support to be maximally effective. The slots and capacities of almost every battleship supports some or all of these, and any of them has the potential to give a battleship an overwhelming advantage against smaller targets without necessarily neutering it against other battleships.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.