These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Wormholes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Bring back the Battleship
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Frothgar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1 - 2013-04-08 20:12:37 UTC
While I don't have much if any interest in ingame politics, I do love internet spaceships.

There are a number of fleets we tend to fly in WH space. The most common is the Tier3 BC and The Tech3 cruiser fleet. Both do their own thing, and do it well, but Sadly the lonely battship has been unloved in WH history barring the occasional Bhaalgorn (Which to date is a rarity these days due to how well Dreads smack things)

With the battleship tiericide hitting, I'd like to take a moment to ask CCP and really any WH based CSM to take up the cause to bring some love of battleships back to W-space.

What currently limits them is cold hard mass, and with the amount of mass they take up, its just not possible to have a BS oriented fleet comp of any reasonable utility. a C5-> C5 Wh (Where I live) is limited to about 10bs round trip, which due to the DPS/Utility/Speed they posess fall so far behind Tier3 BCs and T3 Cruisers that you would be crazy to bring one battleship when you could have 8 Tech 3s, or 4 Tier3 BCs.

I'm indifferent as to how this would be done so long as it doesn't increase the amount of capitals that are allowed through a wormhole (They really don't need any love)

The solution could be a module (Hic bubble's effect working on any ship save a cap) or a mechanic (Battleship mass counts as 1/3 for WH reduction)

I don't really care how its done, I just want to fly some new fleet comps and the new BS changes look fun.
Axloth Okiah
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2013-04-08 21:23:04 UTC
Arbitrary mechanic seems stupid... and any mass reducing module will just get refitted on the other side.

So maybe a mass reducing rig?

SSC Brokering Service
Frothgar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3 - 2013-04-08 21:28:31 UTC
Maybe have the HIC bubble (reduces mass on the Hic when active) might be a good choice for bringing things through the WH.

I would want to avoid making it possible to bring more caps through a WH though. Caps don't need any love in WH space.
Jack Miton
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-04-08 22:27:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack Miton
the issue with BSs in WHs is not really mass, it's that they get absolutely obliterated by dreads and T2/T3 cruiser fleets.
note that this isnt a bad thing as such, just how it is.
BSs are designed to shoot BC and larger targets which they do quite well. unfortunately for them, WHs are not the best place to find large targets to shoot.

There is no Bob.

Stuck In Here With Me:  http://sihwm.blogspot.com.au/

Down the Pipe:  http://feeds.feedburner.com/CloakyScout
Castor Troyy
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#5 - 2013-04-08 22:32:06 UTC
Not to mention their mobility..and ability to hit faster and smaller targets...you can have dedicated tacklers, but T3's and Tier3's pack the punch and are fast enough to where they can accomplish this on their own....the fact is the trade isnt worth it...you would have to bring the dps/tracking up enough to compare to 8T3 cruisers...and while it might get the BS involved more in w-space...meanwhile back in Kspace S H I * will be hitting the fan! It would be so imbalanced it wouldn't be funny.

Contrary to most of our beliefs, wspace is the best space..but it isnt the only spaceBig smile
Frothgar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-04-08 23:22:15 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
the issue with BSs in WHs is not really mass, it's that they get absolutely obliterated by dreads and T2/T3 cruiser fleets.
note that this isnt a bad thing as such, just how it is.
BSs are designed to shoot BC and larger targets which they do quite well. unfortunately for them, WHs are not the best place to find large targets to shoot.



While I agree somewhat, the drawbacks for Tech 3s are similar to BS in that The BS and Tech3s when similarly kit have similar tanks versus raw DPS numbers. However BS have greater range, and the Tech3s have greater agility and more versatility in projected effects (Bonused scrams, webs, etc), lets be honest, the mass factor is pretty major.

You can choose to bring ~80 Tier3 Cruisers + Triage carrier through a WH and still have mass enough to get it all back home. However you genuinely struggle to bring 10 BS and the same carrier. That alone puts the edge so far in the T3 cruisers court you wouldn't really even consider anything else.
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#7 - 2013-04-09 11:29:36 UTC
Battleships in EVE have tons of drawbacks and few if any advantages

mass: obvious
speed/agility: very low, except for a few battleships which are not really battleships except in name (Macha going 3 km/s lol)

Now that is not a problem as those are natural characteristics you'd expect in a battleship. But what do they have to show for it?

tank: much worse than t3 cruisers and even some bait cruiser fits
damage: only slightly higher than many smaller ships, and that only on paper

So the problem is that many small ships, defying any common sense, have ridiculous amounts of raw armor/shield hp, with better resists on top and the agility and speed of a cruiser. There is no way battleships could compete here except for pricing, which is relatively unimportant in w-space.

A few random ideas for improving them:
-give BS massive buffer (like 400k+ ehp in a balanced combat fitting)
-but make it so that they are hard to support with active reps or logistics by lowering/capping their resists (think of 400k raw hitpoints with 0% resists (and low shield recharge) as an extreme example)
-give them a much larger cap reserve, but very bad regen

Result: A massive battle fortress capable of withstanding heavy punishment for a long time, but almost impossible to sustain once its reserves have been depleted in a prolonged battle.

Even then, BS would need some special capability they can bring to the battlefield which helps other, smaller ships. some kind of force-multiplying module with non-stacking effect.

.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#8 - 2013-04-09 11:50:40 UTC
Terrorfrodo wrote:
Battleships in EVE have tons of drawbacks and few if any advantages

mass: obvious
speed/agility: very low, except for a few battleships which are not really battleships except in name (Macha going 3 km/s lol)

Now that is not a problem as those are natural characteristics you'd expect in a battleship. But what do they have to show for it?

tank: much worse than t3 cruisers and even some bait cruiser fits
damage: only slightly higher than many smaller ships, and that only on paper

So the problem is that many small ships, defying any common sense, have ridiculous amounts of raw armor/shield hp, with better resists on top and the agility and speed of a cruiser. There is no way battleships could compete here except for pricing, which is relatively unimportant in w-space.

A few random ideas for improving them:
-give BS massive buffer (like 400k+ ehp in a balanced combat fitting)
-but make it so that they are hard to support with active reps or logistics by lowering/capping their resists (think of 400k raw hitpoints with 0% resists (and low shield recharge) as an extreme example)
-give them a much larger cap reserve, but very bad regen

Result: A massive battle fortress capable of withstanding heavy punishment for a long time, but almost impossible to sustain once its reserves have been depleted in a prolonged battle.

Even then, BS would need some special capability they can bring to the battlefield which helps other, smaller ships. some kind of force-multiplying module with non-stacking effect.


It's called a dreadnought with deactivated siege and offline DCU.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#9 - 2013-04-09 12:04:17 UTC
Check out the F&I forums, the battleship rebalancing plans are already out.

Their place in EVE remains niche (yes, null blobs are a niche), no changes to their basic role.

+1 anyway, it would be nice to fly battleships in wormhole pvp.



.
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#10 - 2013-04-09 12:12:24 UTC
I'm really torn on this. I like Battleships. I was really hoping they would turn the Hyperion into something useful because I really like that ship.

But so far the only BSs worth having in w-space are Bhaals, Vindis, and maybe a Navy Domi for Pulsars.

It might be easy to say to tweak the mass, but that'll affect too many other things. You don't want to change WH mass limits either, so the only option would be to make a whole new attribute to all ships across the board, some kind of technobabble like "Molecular displacement" which can now be independently modified to ALL ship classes to make sure w-space is tweaked to allow the correct shiptypes through.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#11 - 2013-04-09 14:45:19 UTC
Lloyd Roses wrote:
It's called a dreadnought with deactivated siege and offline DCU.

In fact the HMS Dreadnought was simply a new and bigger type of battleship :p

Imho it would be better if battleships moved closer to dreads than remain the more cumbersome version of battlecruiser they are now.

.
Archdaimon
Merchants of the Golden Goose
#12 - 2013-04-09 14:50:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Archdaimon
I like battleships. I don't think they need love specifically for WH's. WH is for exploring and smaller agile ships in unknown space supported by occasional bs/caps.

BS belongs in known space, in large fleet battles. The moment that other shipclasses obsoletes bs for, say, null fleet warfare, something has to be done. Other than that. No.

BS should all be about firepower/tank/cost. T3's are all about firepower/tank. Conservative guesstimte would place a normal pvp-fit t3 a som 2-3 times the price of a bs.

In general WH-space has already seen too much proliferation of large caps (bs'es). I don't think anything could really be done about it without upsetting to much. It's probably a natural development, but forcing bs into wh seems wrong kinda fix in a grander scale.

Wormholes have the best accoustics. It's known. - Sing it for me -
Terrorfrodo
Interbus Universal
#13 - 2013-04-09 14:52:29 UTC
If you think battleships should not be in w-space because they are too large, what is your opinion on capital escalations then? Big smile

.
Meytal
Doomheim
#14 - 2013-04-09 15:25:34 UTC
Frothgar wrote:
With the battleship tiericide hitting, I'd like to take a moment to ask CCP and really any WH based CSM to take up the cause to bring some love of battleships back to W-space.

Off-topic, but I wouldn't hold your breath on a W-space candidate breaking through the Null zombie-vote. The current/new voting method just makes it easier for them to pad the CSM with less chance of screwing up and too many voting for one candidate, allowing non-endorsed candidates to slip through. I hope I'm wrong, and that CCP hasn't managed to completely dummy-proof the process; but then there is the issue of a 5-way vote split for top. I'm half surprised CCP didn't add the option for alliances to specify a voting sheet: log in and one-click to vote the way your alliance dictates.

More on-topic, Battleships fill a niche role in Null that doesn't exist in W-space: cheap damage soaks with good dps where mass has no limit. The mass limitations of W-space "strongly encourages" parties to bring Cruisers and maybe Battlecruisers.

The T3 Cruisers are expensive damage soaks with great dps. While not a "cheap" replacement for the Battleships, they are more maneuverable, have much less mass, and are much smaller targets. They have comparable, or even superior, dps to Battleships, and can apply it much better to compensate for the lack of range. Battleships have a different niche role for us which has already been mentioned.

There is also the economic aspect. Anything T1 or T2 benefits Null when it explodes. T3 cruisers benefit W-space when they explode. Current prices make me think more T3s need to explode.
Inkarr Hashur
Skyline Federation
#15 - 2013-04-09 19:25:56 UTC
Meytal wrote:
Current prices make me think more T3s need to explode.

I'm just going to quote the best part of your post so it stands out.
Incindir Mauser
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#16 - 2013-04-09 20:31:08 UTC

I do like battleships. I really do.

But because of mass limits, no cyno, and the fact that T3's are typically much better than a Battleship to begin with. BS's have very limited roles and worth in W-space as it is. Although with the recent announcements to BS changes, the Armageddon could very well become a "ghetto-Bhaal". The implications of a range bonus to neuts? Interesting times we live in.

What I'd like to see is an expansion on the T3 line of modular ships to include Frigates and Battleships.


Daniel Plain
Doomheim
#17 - 2013-04-09 23:14:46 UTC
Incindir Mauser wrote:
What I'd like to see is an expansion on the T3 line of modular ships to include Frigates and Battleships.

as a guy with too much money who likes flying expensive pimpmobiles i would also be happy to see more T3 hulls. but. balancing them is an inherent disaster. let's face it: battleships are not really suitable to do anything other than, well, battle. there are only so many subsystems with specialized purpose that you can implement and expect to be used. then there is still the price issue. for some reason there are still people who don't understand how more expensive ships need to be better for people to fly them.

I should buy an Ishtar.
Incindir Mauser
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#18 - 2013-04-09 23:27:24 UTC
Daniel Plain wrote:
Incindir Mauser wrote:
What I'd like to see is an expansion on the T3 line of modular ships to include Frigates and Battleships.

as a guy with too much money who likes flying expensive pimpmobiles i would also be happy to see more T3 hulls. but. balancing them is an inherent disaster. let's face it: battleships are not really suitable to do anything other than, well, battle. there are only so many subsystems with specialized purpose that you can implement and expect to be used. then there is still the price issue. for some reason there are still people who don't understand how more expensive ships need to be better for people to fly them.



If there is anything people like in an MMO it's being able to customize something. Price notwithstanding.

Strat cruisers are in a pretty good place right now. The Tengu has fallen out of favor some since the HML nerf. But otherwise the popularity for T3's is pretty good.

T3 battleships. Mmm. More customizable goodness. Plus it would make nullsec flip a lid, and start dumping money into our pockets and invading W-space giving us more things to shoot at.
Tsobai Hashimoto
State War Academy
Caldari State
#19 - 2013-04-10 01:41:00 UTC
you might get what you want soon. but not how you want it....most devs are not too keen on the power of T3s. soon they will get nerfed and your one bs might seem decent compared to 5 tengus.


about the off topic part. i dont think t3 battleships are comming soon if ever but tech3 battlecruisers? yes.

I think that is part of the reason to split the skill up to each race. to help intertwine a tech 3 battlecruiser line.


if they are to do that and have them cost 3 to 4 times in resources as a tech 3 cruiser then they might need to expand wh space too. something id love


lets get some class7 and 8 holes!
Incindir Mauser
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#20 - 2013-04-10 12:49:16 UTC
Tsobai Hashimoto wrote:
you might get what you want soon. but not how you want it....most devs are not too keen on the power of T3s. soon they will get nerfed and your one bs might seem decent compared to 5 tengus.


about the off topic part. i dont think t3 battleships are comming soon if ever but tech3 battlecruisers? yes.

I think that is part of the reason to split the skill up to each race. to help intertwine a tech 3 battlecruiser line.


if they are to do that and have them cost 3 to 4 times in resources as a tech 3 cruiser then they might need to expand wh space too. something id love


lets get some class7 and 8 holes!


Tengus aren't as nice as they once were, but I can see your point. I certainly hope CCP Fozzie doesn't hit T3's too hard because then what would be the point?

They're good. Perhaps some variations of them tend to be a little OP, but then what is the point of living in W-space and having them if they're mediocre compared to T2 HACs and Recons? We already take a SP hit when we lose them, and in exchange for that we get a battleship in a cruiser's package.

And yes. W-space could see some love in the PvE department. Sleepers have become woefully predictable.


123Next page