These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey] Navy Battlecruisers

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Draqone an'Alreigh
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#481 - 2013-05-15 19:53:59 UTC
I dislike the 1800 sec shield recharge time on those ships. Straight

Inducing the proliferation of common sense throughout EVE Official forums since April 27th, 2013.
Mariner6
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#482 - 2013-05-16 18:12:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Mariner6
Flew the Navy Harbi last night, shield fit. Absolutely fantastic. Easily dominated an armor Navy Brutix taking little to no damage from it. Then did the same to a shield tanked Navy Brutix, even easier. Did a 1 v 1 vs a corp mate in a Ham Navy Drake...very close run fight, I lost but was down to 10% structure left on the Drake when I popped. Frankly with some different decisions on our parts it could have gone either way. Easy to fit, no cap problems with some solid management which makes it fun. GREAT Boat CCP!.

So then I tried the Navy Brutix.....well, I'm just not very happy with the boat, but its the same old song and dance. I tried it armor tanked buffer w/ scram dual web. Of course catching anything always a pain. As usual with 1600's you have to use Ion's which is just depressing because of the loss of already poor damage projection. And armor tanked the dps is really not impressive and the reality is applying that damage is mitigated so much by inability to dictate range unless you can guarantee arriving at zero or have tackle support. Even with the dual webbed, as always you are counter scrammed/webbed so your slow boating in while taking it in the face. Overall not impressed.

Recommendation that will be completely ignored: The Navy Brutix needs the fitting space to carry neutrons while also buffered with a 1600 plate. I mean, its not really that much to ask and then it can apply damage out to at least web range (albeit not much.) I don't know, I just can't see spending the isk on this boat when I know it will just die. I need to go try the shield navy brutix but as I know the shield navy harbi already outperforms it so much that I really see little reason to. The Harbi can maintain distance and apply full damage well inside its optimals with lolscorch.
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#483 - 2013-05-16 18:15:57 UTC
any particular reason drake is has the best agility stat?

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Seleucus Ontuas
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#484 - 2013-05-16 18:22:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Seleucus Ontuas
It's still based off mass. Considering the Brutix's align time is shorter than the Drake, the Brutix is the one that is actually the most agile. It's probably to offset the fact the Drake can't fit as many nanos as any of the other BCs because it has fewer low slots.
Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#485 - 2013-05-16 18:29:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonas Sukarala
Seleucus Ontuas wrote:
It's still based off mass. Considering the Brutix's align time is shorter than the Drake, the Brutix is the one that is actually the most agile. It's probably to offset the fact the Drake can't fit as many nanos as any of the other BCs because it has fewer low slots.


but then you consider the rest of the navy bc's are armour based .... so it makes no sense they should switch its agility with the brutix and reduce the mass of the harbinger

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#486 - 2013-05-16 18:38:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • The Navy Battlecruiser prices are a bit too high and seem comparable with Command Ships.

    • Good point, I had CCP Fozzie come to my desk with puppy eyes asking for a price reduction as well. We'll probably decrease overall price by 20-25%.


    Question is, if a Navy battlecruiser is as expensive as a T1 Battleship that will be much better, and they should, then there's no point on having those than as furniture or Queen of our hangars?


    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • The Drake Navy Issue fittings are a bit short, especially on the powergrid side.

    • We discussed increasing this a bit, not much though, as we are scared of the sheer potential of this ship. Let's start around 5% and see where it gets us.


    Well better run off if there's a large fleet of those announced on intell chans or spotted, of course those should be able to entirely fit their highs but need some drawback either in tank or mobility or you guys are not ready to see posts popping about Drake OP


    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • The Hurricane Fleet Issue feels bland for the price tag and doesn't bring anything new to the table.

    • We thought bringing the old 'Cane versatility role was appropriate as a Navy hull - we are considering increasing its powergrid to 1350.


    YES !! -and another hard point please Twisted


    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • Why choosing the Brutix instead of the Myrmidon as a Navy hull?

    • Internal discussion resulted in favor of the Brutix since we felt it represented the Gallente combat doctrine more accurately with close range hybrids. A Myrmidon Navy Issue could also have been problematic to balance without overstepping on the Dominix, Vexor Navy Issue or even turret ships.


    Nothing to add here except needs to become faster and tougher tank wise but this is an armor tanking issue...

    removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
    Jonas Sukarala
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #487 - 2013-05-16 18:56:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Jonas Sukarala
    Quote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Why choosing the Brutix instead of the Myrmidon as a Navy hull?

    Internal discussion resulted in favor of the Brutix since we felt it represented the Gallente combat doctrine more accurately with close range hybrids. A Myrmidon Navy Issue could also have been problematic to balance without overstepping on the Dominix, Vexor Navy Issue or even turret ships.


    no the brutix just oversteps on the megathron .. hard

    'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

    Mister Tuggles
    Dickhead Corner
    #488 - 2013-05-17 09:18:12 UTC
    Schmata Bastanold wrote:
    I am terrible at this game but... dat FI cane... is it our old beloved cane we used to cause whine threads with in the past? :)



    Yes, yes it is, but it now will come with a 100m price tag :-/
    Perihelion Olenard
    #489 - 2013-05-17 11:23:41 UTC
    Mister Tuggles wrote:
    Schmata Bastanold wrote:
    I am terrible at this game but... dat FI cane... is it our old beloved cane we used to cause whine threads with in the past? :)



    Yes, yes it is, but it now will come with a 100m price tag :-/

    More like double that.
    Jerick Ludhowe
    Internet Tuff Guys
    #490 - 2013-05-17 11:44:47 UTC
    Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:


    YES !! -and another hard point please Twisted




    **** no, ship is already a small scale beast, last thing we need is for it to be the overall dps king as well....

    There is no way in hell that the cane is getting a 7th turret slot.
    Drunken Bum
    #491 - 2013-05-17 14:04:56 UTC
    So whens the announcement to just delete t1 battleships?

    After the patch we're giving the market some gentle supply restriction, like tying one wrist to the bedpost loosely with soft silk rope. Just enough to make things a bit more exciting for the market, not enough to make a safeword necessary.  -Fozzie
    Theia Matova
    Dominance Theory
    #492 - 2013-05-17 14:21:50 UTC
    Drunken Bum wrote:
    So whens the announcement to just delete t1 battleships?


    Glad that people finally realize whats happening :p
    Drunken Bum
    #493 - 2013-05-17 15:21:17 UTC
    Theia Matova wrote:
    Drunken Bum wrote:
    So whens the announcement to just delete t1 battleships?


    Glad that people finally realize whats happening :p

    Ive said it since they announced them. These arent needed. Specially with dumb ass things like the navy brutix having MORE armor then the regular mega. Thats crap. Unfortunately voices of reason (oh god am i one of those?!) are drowned out by screams of

    "OMG NEW SHINY SPACESHIPS. Repercussions are what"

    I need to compare the other navy bcs against t1 bs hp. Currently sitting in a bulldozer typing on my phone.

    After the patch we're giving the market some gentle supply restriction, like tying one wrist to the bedpost loosely with soft silk rope. Just enough to make things a bit more exciting for the market, not enough to make a safeword necessary.  -Fozzie
    Arajo Taranian
    Holding Corp 118
    #494 - 2013-05-18 10:14:41 UTC
    As a regular BC pilot, I'm glad to see FI in the game. They are available to many other class of ship, and this change now allows me to further my specialization as a BC pilot. Those of us who would pay for a FI BC, think it adds more options for players who are dedicated to this class of ship, who would like to go deeper then the normal BC pilot. Should be available for all, allows more options in price and function for a pilot who really enjoys one class of ship

    Hope this makes some sort of sense, one of those nights....
    Askulf Joringer
    Sebiestor Tribe
    Minmatar Republic
    #495 - 2013-05-18 12:42:38 UTC
    Drunken Bum wrote:
    So whens the announcement to just delete t1 battleships?


    I just don't understand this line of thinking... Lots of people keep posting this point however it's nothing more than speculative bull ****.

    BS have more ehp, comparing base values (especially on armor) is moot because a BS can fit and do fit multiple plates instead of just 1 which the navy versions of these bcs are able to fit. Also, BS are able to push more dps at a much greater range while ALSO have larger drone bays, and much more cap.

    Navy BCs are nothing "Special" simply just beefier versions of thier tech 1 counterparts...
    Nolak Ataru
    Hedion University
    Amarr Empire
    #496 - 2013-05-18 16:49:03 UTC
    Askulf Joringer wrote:
    Drunken Bum wrote:
    So whens the announcement to just delete t1 battleships?


    I just don't understand this line of thinking... Lots of people keep posting this point however it's nothing more than speculative bull ****.

    BS have more ehp, comparing base values (especially on armor) is moot because a BS can fit and do fit multiple plates instead of just 1 which the navy versions of these bcs are able to fit. Also, BS are able to push more dps at a much greater range while ALSO have larger drone bays, and much more cap.

    Navy BCs are nothing "Special" simply just beefier versions of thier tech 1 counterparts...


    and the NBC can move faster than a BS and have less mass. The BS may be able to pump out more dps but unless they fit a web, they might have a hard time applying it without supporting cruisers etc.. Also comparing base values isn't always moot since not everyone buffer fits their ships.
    Julius Foederatus
    Federal Navy Academy
    Gallente Federation
    #497 - 2013-05-18 17:40:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Julius Foederatus
    Mariner6 wrote:
    Flew the Navy Harbi last night, shield fit. Absolutely fantastic. Easily dominated an armor Navy Brutix taking little to no damage from it. Then did the same to a shield tanked Navy Brutix, even easier. Did a 1 v 1 vs a corp mate in a Ham Navy Drake...very close run fight, I lost but was down to 10% structure left on the Drake when I popped. Frankly with some different decisions on our parts it could have gone either way. Easy to fit, no cap problems with some solid management which makes it fun. GREAT Boat CCP!.

    So then I tried the Navy Brutix.....well, I'm just not very happy with the boat, but its the same old song and dance. I tried it armor tanked buffer w/ scram dual web. Of course catching anything always a pain. As usual with 1600's you have to use Ion's which is just depressing because of the loss of already poor damage projection. And armor tanked the dps is really not impressive and the reality is applying that damage is mitigated so much by inability to dictate range unless you can guarantee arriving at zero or have tackle support. Even with the dual webbed, as always you are counter scrammed/webbed so your slow boating in while taking it in the face. Overall not impressed.

    Recommendation that will be completely ignored: The Navy Brutix needs the fitting space to carry neutrons while also buffered with a 1600 plate. I mean, its not really that much to ask and then it can apply damage out to at least web range (albeit not much.) I don't know, I just can't see spending the isk on this boat when I know it will just die. I need to go try the shield navy brutix but as I know the shield navy harbi already outperforms it so much that I really see little reason to. The Harbi can maintain distance and apply full damage well inside its optimals with lolscorch.


    I bolded the reason you were probably having so much trouble. Dual web fits are ******* useless for anything except killing frigs. Anything cruiser sized has a big enough sig and a slow enough speed (when scrammed/singled webbed) to be hit by medium guns, even without the tracking bonus. The proper fit for a solo/small gang armor brutix is mwd/scram/web/TD, swapping out the TD for a damp if you have a largish group of them fit up the same way. The TD allows you to mitigate your inability to control range by forcing a longer ranged shield ship (like your harby) to play by your rules or take his ball and go home.

    This doesn't mean that armor buffer vs. shield buffer isn't still hilariously unbalanced (it is, and you put the reasons why down there rather succinctly), but the dual web fit is hardly the way to get the best from your armor brutix.
    Johnson Oramara
    Science and Trade Institute
    Caldari State
    #498 - 2013-05-18 17:54:22 UTC
    Easily won Navy Drake using a regular Drake. He complained that if he had fitted kinetic resistance instead of invus i would have no chance but, lol...

    Tested Navy Drake myself against Navy Harbringer and lost horribly, rematch in regular Drake resulted in second loss but i got him to 60% hull this time.

    Cruisers and frigs didn't want to stay in my missile range though, i felt like a big bully there Twisted

    Conclusion, Navy Harbringer will most likely be my favourite ship of these although i have still yet to test the Navy Brutix and Cane.
    Navy Drake will be filling kinda weird role with anti frig and cruiser platform as regular Drake outperforms it in other areas. It also has more difficult fitting. Is it worth the premium? Well in my personal opinion no as you could probably easily fit the regular Drake for this role too.
    Aglais
    Ice-Storm
    #499 - 2013-05-19 07:50:35 UTC
    Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • The Navy Battlecruiser prices are a bit too high and seem comparable with Command Ships.

    • Good point, I had CCP Fozzie come to my desk with puppy eyes asking for a price reduction as well. We'll probably decrease overall price by 20-25%.


    Question is, if a Navy battlecruiser is as expensive as a T1 Battleship that will be much better, and they should, then there's no point on having those than as furniture or Queen of our hangars?



    Ah, but they're not. Navy Drake thus far seems to be the superior choice compared to T1 Raven- the Raven has literally nothing going for it. No tank, poor speed, iffy DPS (hard to apply it if you're dead, you know).
    Perihelion Olenard
    #500 - 2013-05-19 15:58:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Perihelion Olenard
    Aglais wrote:
    Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • The Navy Battlecruiser prices are a bit too high and seem comparable with Command Ships.

    • Good point, I had CCP Fozzie come to my desk with puppy eyes asking for a price reduction as well. We'll probably decrease overall price by 20-25%.


    Question is, if a Navy battlecruiser is as expensive as a T1 Battleship that will be much better, and they should, then there's no point on having those than as furniture or Queen of our hangars?



    Ah, but they're not. Navy Drake thus far seems to be the superior choice compared to T1 Raven- the Raven has literally nothing going for it. No tank, poor speed, iffy DPS (hard to apply it if you're dead, you know).

    You don't get any tank with seven mids?