Player Features and Ideas Discussion

This is something i've been thinking about and have made a few comments about in other threads. Figured i'd see if it had any merit and make its own thread.

Proposal
I'd like to see Battlecruisers receive a weapon range (projection) role bonus. This would not remove the link bonus (As i think having multiple roles on the BC would not be bad, allows variety in fits/uses).

The Reasoning
Battlecruisers are intended as anti-cruiser platforms, or gang support/cheap links (to a lesser extent). The same way that destroyers serve as anti-frigate platforms. Destroyers are often used to shoot long ranges to destroy frigates in small-medium gang settings to provide cover for larger ships. Sometimes its just a roaming blob of cheap T1 Destroyers creating a trail of frigate destruction through low sec.

Destroyer Comparison
Look at the use destroyers have in FW, or just roaming small gangs. I see Thrashers/corm/coercers/catalyst used in all manner daily. Thrasher takes advantage of 300+ dps in a/c fit, or project out to 25km+ and alpha small targets with arty no problem. Corm is very common and is often sniper fit sitting 100km+ being a huge annoyance to anyone in a frig and even some kite cruisers. Kite coercers and gank catalysts (or cata's supported by frigs for giant killers against bigger ships)are fairly common. Every destroyer has multiple roles for the most part and are GOOD at it, without being overpowered.

What does every destroyer have? Projection and application. Every destroyer has a range bonus and tracking bonus, to help them be flexible in filling their intended role as anti-frigate.

What cost did they pay for this added role? Well, tthe main one is that they're slower. But just because they're slower doesn't mean they can't still pick a frigate off at 20km+ (depending on fit).

Details
Coming back to battlecruisers, if we look at them in the same light as destroyers, they should function similarly. They're already much slower than their cruiser counterparts, but lack any projection minus the ferox.

Here is what I feel would be the best variety and keeping with the racial flavors.

Ferox = optimal bonus
Hurricane = falloff bonus
brutix = falloff bonus (this keeps it different from the ferox, and matches gallente fall-off bonused hulls)
harbinger = optimal bonus
drake/cyclone = missile velocity bonus
Prophecy/Myrm = Drone velocity bonus

I'm open to ideas to the Myrm/Prophecy, but i think these would work and compliment them for heavier drones chasing cruisers down.

For the Ferox the 10% optimal per level trait would be removed in favor of a different trait (perhaps 5% dmg or RoF per level). This would help it to drop 1 turret, helping fitting (which could be tuned slightly with the change as well to reduce a little PG).

Coupled with the MMJD, this could allow BC to be more viable in small gangs and with fozsov coming up, would make a great, cheap fleet doctrines for the smaller corps/alliances that may try to invade null to fight with.

Faction Battlecruisers
I also am not opposed to adding these to the fleet variations of BC's as well. This would actually give a reason to buy fleet BC's, or even consider them in fleet settings. *Side note* Change fleet hurricane to 10% dmg bonus and 7.5% tracking. Give us a reason to actually want one, other than "hey its the old cane".

This would mean a few things.

-Navy drake gets one of its traits put into a role. Meaning it can get a relevant trait added. Maybe RoF, lose a couple launchers and solves fitting issues, or allows fitting a neut (which i find way more important, and still fly T1 drakes because of that).

-Navy harb/brutix/drake/Cane (with proposed changes) all immediately become great possible doctrine ships. As they all share tracking/projection bonuses. Not to mention higher base EHP compared to the t1's.

-I keep hearing about cruisers:online, or how cruisers are everywhere. Well, i'm pretty sure a few fleet BC's would counter cruiser/HAC blobs, like destroyers counter frigate-blobs.

-If a resurgence of BC's happens due to these changes, this also means that Battleships will start to have a role again. To kill the new flood of BC's. Meaning we can start dusting these guys off, and having a healthier ship food chain. Instead of being stuck in Frigate/Cruisers all the time.

I think those are the key points. Let me know what you think.

i just start too think this would push us back towards bc's online.
i suggest the better option is too reduce the top level of power on cruisers.
things like:
- cap dps at under bc levels 650 ish
- cap EHP under bc levels
- reduce the top level resists on cruisers too partial T2 resists, leave top level too command ships

Ok im not sure where you got this false premise that BCs online existed because of their damage or their tank or w/e. The primary reason that BCs online existed is because you could get more money back in insurance than the hulls cost. In the case of the drake you could get 5-10 mil more from insurance than the hull cost (in some cases more).

Drakes for example were never really that strong. HACs could out perform them, and some HACs (armor variants) could even out tank and out DPS them at the same time. The Cane was a bit stronger, in the sense it could do quite a lot of damage, and tank really well, and had awesome speed.

The nerf to BCs was never done to facilitate the usage of other hull classes, the nerfs (primarily to Drake and Cane) were done to balance the BC line of ships, as these 2 specifically just shat all over the capabilities of the other 6 BCs, to a lesser extent the Harby and Brutix also shat over the other 4 (Myrm, Ferox, Proph, Cyclone).

The only reason that we now have cruisers online, and not BCs online, is because they offer you the most bang for the buck, you can get solid tanks (40-50K) with solid DPS (300-500DPS) great speed (AB or MWD fit) for a fully fit cost of around 30-40M (less than the cost of a BC Hull). More over, Crusiers were designed to be balanced against other hull types, not specifically against just their hull size like BCs were.


Now with the amount of changes to weapons systems, addition of drones as a weapons platform, and revamps to mineral cost/insurance payouts. BCs themselves could use with a rework of their role. Which should be effectively similar to that of the Destroyers and Frigs relationship.

BCs should **** all over Cruisers. But they don't, so they go underused simply because Cruisers are better at shitting on each other for the price point.

Ideally you would have a system like this.

BS > BC
BS should eat BCs (they do)
BC > C
BC should eat C (they don't)
C > D
C should eat D (they do)
D > F
D should eat F (they do)

With

F > BC
F should eat BC with time (they do)
C > BS
C should eat BS with time (they do)

These of course are without any additional flavors such as someone webbing the Frigs down so BCs can eat them, similarly with Cruisers being webbed down vs BS. This is just a basic food chain...and when one link is missing you get left with which ever ship has the least predators above it...in this case. Cruisers, and is partially why we see limited use of BS.


In regards to OP....I like the idea of making the BC/C relationship more like Dessies/Frigs...this is how it used to be before CCP started Tiericide, and then kind of stopped halfway through the balance act in 2013.

Arbitrary caps are stupid though. If I want to fit an 800 DPS Thorax that is paper thin I should be able to, alternatively if I want to fit a 100K EHP Maller with little DPS, I should be able to do that too.


and again the ONLY reason folks flew drakes in the numbers they did is because they cost practically nothing to buy and fit. Insurance paid 100% of the hull cost and put isk into your wallet on the loss. In fact you could buy a drake, insure it, destroy it and make money (insurance fraud). In terms of combat HML drakes were, and always were ****. HAM Drakes on the other hand were pretty damn awesome (up to 700DPS, with 65K EHP, 1200m/s Dual Webs...mmm mmm.)

Everything killed drakes, Cruisers, HACs, BS, Carriers, Dreads, Titans. They were a garbage ship then, and are a garbage ship now...speaking of course in pure cost efficiency though they were the best. About the only thing they were (and are) good for was PVE.

Ya its called fitting limitations which exist. The only exception to this rule at present is Drone based ships...which is why they have been Flavor of the past 2 years.

I learn something new every time I read something as competent as this. Without been aware of this fact I conscientiously focused on medium turrets and cruiser hulls for their versatility & survivability. Also I now know the reason I cringed at the thought of training for the Absolution. The t1 BC hulls were one thing but CS's absolutely need another Role Bonus like a -75% micro warp drive energy consumption or 50% weapon damage bonus in addition to the 3 warfare link bonus. They're also the only ships that don't have pirate faction variants which puts BC's in the most needed help column atm. I really liked the T1 & T2 BC's 3 years ago, but now they're completely without purpose other than maybe C2/C3's which can also be done with HAC's & T3's. SO i totally agree that they need a complete rework to regain the niche they once had that's now dominated by HAC's and T3's.

What would really spice up CS is forcing on grid boosting, since this ship line is really the only one capable of fitting a combat effective tank while maintaining max boosts. T3's can go diaf.

What Role bonus are Battleships going to get then? Or are Battleships akin to frigates and cruisers in your world?

Supported because of this - http://i.imgur.com/z4ynWV9.png

DEATH TO ALL CRUISERS AND CAPITALS

Na, BS don't need a role bonus. They just need a role. Killing BC's would be a good role when BC's are actually out and about in the same numbers cruisers/frigates are.

BS get used in fleets, and as camper crashers at least. When was the last time BC's were used en masse` in a fleet? When did we have small gang comps running around with BC's in their midst? Its very rare.

BS also can fit large weapons. BC's fit medium weapons, and move slower. I'd classify things that use smaller guns/launchers on larger hulls have a role bonus. Since they're inherently slower due to the added weight, but gain no range from their weapon systems.

The explanation of the food chain was very nice. Thank you, Mario. There are many people who should read that.

This is a good thread. The OP deserves credit for posting something thoughtful and well-argued, rather than the standard whiny sputum we see so often.