These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: Tier3 Battlecruisers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#701 - 2011-11-17 11:24:26 UTC
People are forgetting that the only original complaint about the Torpedo Naga was that it has difficulties applying the damage, i.e. torpedoes are slow. This is easy to fix with role bonuses that makes torpedoes reach their max range quicker rather than chugging along at the same speed as a MWDing Naga.

The only people who are excited for the Naga losing its missiles are pilots who prefer guns and hybrids, never really trained missiles, and are excited by the prospect of having 2 completely different ships with different tanks to choose from for their new Hybrid Gank Platform in the new expansion.

Meanwhile, everyone who's actually tried and enjoyed Torpedoes in PVP is left out in the cold, as are the majority of Caldari pilots who have simply trained for missiles.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#702 - 2011-11-17 11:53:18 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
People are forgetting that the only original complaint about the Torpedo Naga was that it has difficulties applying the damage, i.e. torpedoes are slow. This is easy to fix with role bonuses that makes torpedoes reach their max range quicker rather than chugging along at the same speed as a MWDing Naga.


No, it's nothing to do with the torp velocity.

The problem was the explosion radius of 450 m and the explosion velocity of ~108 m/s, requiring usage of a painter and web to apply good damage to its tier 3 counterparts, and the lack of a torp damage bonus which meant that it has less raw damage than any other tier 3 BC.

On the proper BS scale, torps are basically okay, because they work well against fat, slow BS bricks. But these tier 3 BCs are intended to be used more as skirmish platforms - if they go head to head with a BS then they'll just die horribly. As such, torpedos are a terrible weapon for the Naga - a torp Naga can't survive a close-range engagement against a BS, and it can't apply much torp DPS to smaller targets.

Against fellow t3 BCs, the torp Naga was hopeless. It had the lowest raw DPS of any, lacking a torp damage bonus. It needed to get into web range to apply that poor DPS, which it found difficult being the slowest. It needed at least one painter to apply its poor raw DPS too. The result was a slow ship that was only effective inside web range and had relatively poor DPS even when it somehow managed to apply its EFT maximum.

It was a nonsense, a pointless ship, one utterly outclassed by every other t3 BC at close range and at long range. It made the Talos look good, that's how bad it was. It was also terrible at PVE, for the same reasons of poor application of damage against elite frigates and cruisers. I am astonished that there is so much misinformed, clueless carebear whinging - it sounds like that idiotic missile whine thread after the QR missile boost, dozens of pages full of carebears whinging that they'd had to change their L4 fit, unable to comprehend that missile PVP had just been massively boosted.

The rail Naga has a substantial DPS advantage over every other t3 BC beyond ~80 km. It is a useful ship that will be flown; the torp Naga was a pointless embarrassment.
Phantomania
Lonely Trek
#703 - 2011-11-17 12:02:21 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:


No, it's nothing to do with the torp velocity.

The problem was the explosion radius of 450 m and the explosion velocity of ~108 m/s, requiring usage of a painter and web to apply good damage to its tier 3 counterparts, and the lack of a torp damage bonus which meant that it has less raw damage than any other tier 3 BC.

On the proper BS scale, torps are basically okay, because they work well against fat, slow BS bricks. But these tier 3 BCs are intended to be used more as skirmish platforms - if they go head to head with a BS then they'll just die horribly. As such, torpedos are a terrible weapon for the Naga - a torp Naga can't survive a close-range engagement against a BS, and it can't apply much torp DPS to smaller targets.

Against fellow t3 BCs, the torp Naga was hopeless. It had the lowest raw DPS of any, lacking a torp damage bonus. It needed to get into web range to apply that poor DPS, which it found difficult being the slowest. It needed at least one painter to apply its poor raw DPS too. The result was a slow ship that was only effective inside web range and had relatively poor DPS even when it somehow managed to apply its EFT maximum.

It was a nonsense, a pointless ship, one utterly outclassed by every other t3 BC at close range and at long range. It made the Talos look good, that's how bad it was. It was also terrible at PVE, for the same reasons of poor application of damage against elite frigates and cruisers. I am astonished that there is so much misinformed, clueless carebear whinging - it sounds like that idiotic missile whine thread after the QR missile boost, dozens of pages full of carebears whinging that they'd had to change their L4 fit, unable to comprehend that missile PVP had just been massively boosted.

The rail Naga has a substantial DPS advantage over every other t3 BC beyond ~80 km. It is a useful ship that will be flown; the torp Naga was a pointless embarrassment.



Your right, it should have 8 Cruise Missile Launchers! If Caldari Pilots want to boast 8 BS size Hybrids, they have the Rokh! Unlike the Missile skilled Caldari Pilots, who have no Ship that can carry 8 BS size Launchers!
Bomberlocks
Bombercorp
#704 - 2011-11-17 12:04:43 UTC
King Solomon solution to all the bickering: Make the Tier 3 Bcs what they were originally supposed to be: Cap killers. Drop all turrets and give them a racial Citadel Torp fitting, range and damage bonus and covert cloak

That way they'll be good at what they were supposed to be good at, like Stealth bombers are, and not good at what they weren't supposed to good at, like being so totally OP that they make cruisers, HACs, BCs and BS obsolete.
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#705 - 2011-11-17 12:29:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Iam Widdershins
Gypsio III wrote:
Iam Widdershins wrote:
People are forgetting that the only original complaint about the Torpedo Naga was that it has difficulties applying the damage, i.e. torpedoes are slow. This is easy to fix with role bonuses that makes torpedoes reach their max range quicker rather than chugging along at the same speed as a MWDing Naga.


No, it's nothing to do with the torp velocity.

The problem was the explosion radius of 450 m and the explosion velocity of ~108 m/s, requiring usage of a painter and web to apply good damage to its tier 3 counterparts, and the lack of a torp damage bonus which meant that it has less raw damage than any other tier 3 BC.

On the proper BS scale, torps are basically okay, because they work well against fat, slow BS bricks. But these tier 3 BCs are intended to be used more as skirmish platforms - if they go head to head with a BS then they'll just die horribly. As such, torpedos are a terrible weapon for the Naga - a torp Naga can't survive a close-range engagement against a BS, and it can't apply much torp DPS to smaller targets.

Against fellow t3 BCs, the torp Naga was hopeless. It had the lowest raw DPS of any, lacking a torp damage bonus. It needed to get into web range to apply that poor DPS, which it found difficult being the slowest. It needed at least one painter to apply its poor raw DPS too. The result was a slow ship that was only effective inside web range and had relatively poor DPS even when it somehow managed to apply its EFT maximum.

It was a nonsense, a pointless ship, one utterly outclassed by every other t3 BC at close range and at long range. It made the Talos look good, that's how bad it was. It was also terrible at PVE, for the same reasons of poor application of damage against elite frigates and cruisers. I am astonished that there is so much misinformed, clueless carebear whinging - it sounds like that idiotic missile whine thread after the QR missile boost, dozens of pages full of carebears whinging that they'd had to change their L4 fit, unable to comprehend that missile PVP had just been massively boosted.

The rail Naga has a substantial DPS advantage over every other t3 BC beyond ~80 km. It is a useful ship that will be flown; the torp Naga was a pointless embarrassment.

I completely disagree with you here.

Torpedoes have their problems applying damage, sure. Big explosion radius, low explosion velocity, yada yada. They are Battleship weapons, what do you expect.

The raw damage output was not lacking at all: Even with faction torpedoes, you could crack 900 DPS without breaking a sweat. Against capitals, Rage torpedoes would do just sick damage. This might not seem like a lot in comparison to, say, the Talos, but the Talos has major issues with projection, whereas the Naga does basically the same damage to a target as long as the missile actually gets there: This is what is known as "missiles."

You mention raw damage several times, so I will too. You apparently haven't seen a torpedo Raven properly put into action in PVP: I can tell you that it is a wondrous sight to behold. Properly deployed, ships with the same damage projection as the Raven have absolutely no issue dealing tons and tons of damage.

Maybe you didn't try the torpedo Naga against battleships, but it was bloody fantastic. Flown correctly it would take very little damage, and afterburner fit (or oversize afterburner fit) it was nigh invulnerable to damage from Battleships, while dealing wondrous amounts of damage. Its main disadvantage was the fact that, yes, it was faster than its missiles, which is a huge problem for any missile ship. edit: i can only imagine how good it would be against capital ships

Your complaints about its disadvantages completely fail to take into account any of the correct applications or any innovations to overcome these difficulties; it works great in PVE with heavy missiles fit, doing more damage than the Drake in all but Kinetic, while it makes a fantastic DPS support ship against larger targets in PVE as well when fit with torpedoes.




Bomberlocks wrote:
King Solomon solution to all the bickering: Make the Tier 3 Bcs what they were originally supposed to be: Cap killers. Drop all turrets and give them a racial Citadel Torp fitting, range and damage bonus and covert cloak

That way they'll be good at what they were supposed to be good at, like Stealth bombers are, and not good at what they weren't supposed to good at, like being so totally OP that they make cruisers, HACs, BCs and BS obsolete.

The problem with this is nobody would be able to fly them day to day. They would be useless for all but 1 thing, completely worthless against any subcapital targets (except maybe Marauders hahaha) and require a bizarre amount of training to even fit the weapons (which cost more than the ship hull...each). Believe it or not, most people never get to kill a capital ship.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#706 - 2011-11-17 13:22:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Knight
900dps oh noo that must be something , especially when my new naga can do 1000+ with 2 magstabs with void 10+6km opt/falloff
and has less fitting issues ,no missile lag etc.
The best part was about torp naga it couldnt fit t2 launchers + tackler gear due to horribly low cpu.

"Against capitals, Rage torpedoes would do just sick damage."
hmm 940dps all lvl 5 with 2 bcs yeah totally sick dmg not in a good way thou

"Torpedoes have their problems applying damage, sure. Big explosion radius, low explosion velocity, yada yada. They are Battleship weapons, what do you expect."
strange other battle ship weapons (guns) have much less problem applying dmg


here is what i love the most:
"it works great in PVE with heavy missiles fit, doing more damage than the Drake in all but Kinetic, while it makes a fantastic DPS support ship against larger targets in PVE as well when fit with torpedoes."
so basically you wanted another pve missile ship, thx to say the truth even if it was burried between lots of false assumptions
Phantomania
Lonely Trek
#707 - 2011-11-17 13:40:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Phantomania
Still, there isn't even 1 Ship ingame that can boast 8 launchers bar the Raven State Issue!

CCP nearly fixed this, now we're back to square 1!
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#708 - 2011-11-17 13:45:32 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:

I completely disagree with you here.

Torpedoes have their problems applying damage, sure. Big explosion radius, low explosion velocity, yada yada. They are Battleship weapons, what do you expect.

The raw damage output was not lacking at all: Even with faction torpedoes, you could crack 900 DPS without breaking a sweat. Against capitals, Rage torpedoes would do just sick damage. This might not seem like a lot in comparison to, say, the Talos, but the Talos has major issues with projection, whereas the Naga does basically the same damage to a target as long as the missile actually gets there: This is what is known as "missiles."


900 DPS is nothing special relative to the others, not just the Talos.

Quote:
You mention raw damage several times, so I will too. You apparently haven't seen a torpedo Raven properly put into action in PVP: I can tell you that it is a wondrous sight to behold. Properly deployed, ships with the same damage projection as the Raven have absolutely no issue dealing tons and tons of damage.


Up until about 80 mill SP I was completely specialised in missile spamming in solo/small-gang environments. I know full what the torp Raven is capable of. And, more importantly, why it is capable of it. The torp Raven has the EHP to be able to go toe-to-toe with another BS and give a very good account of itself. The torp Naga cannot, because it cannot survive a slugging match with another BS and cannot apply a useful amount of DPS, to smaller ships. In either situation, any other t3 BC was a better choice.

AB? Come on, it's not a frigate.

Quote:
Maybe you didn't try the torpedo Naga against battleships, but it was bloody fantastic. Flown correctly it would take very little damage, and afterburner fit (or oversize afterburner fit) it was nigh invulnerable to damage from Battleships, while dealing wondrous amounts of damage. Its main disadvantage was the fact that, yes, it was faster than its missiles, which is a huge problem for any missile ship. edit: i can only imagine how good it would be against capital ships


It was the worst of all four t3 BCs against BS, having the least damage that was most difficult to apply. It was most vulnerable to damage from other BS, being the slowest and having the fattest sig. Being faster than its missiles is no big deal; it's only a problem when the target can outrun the missiles.

I can tell you exactly how good it would have been against capitals - the worst of all four t3 BCs, having the lowest DPS on the least survivable platform.

Quote:
Your complaints about its disadvantages completely fail to take into account any of the correct applications or any innovations to overcome these difficulties; it works great in PVE with heavy missiles fit, doing more damage than the Drake in all but Kinetic, while it makes a fantastic DPS support ship against larger targets in PVE as well when fit with torpedoes.


Heavy missiles? You're an idiot.

If you'd bothered to fly any of the other BCs, you'd have noticed that they can all do the DPS support role as an aside, and better than the torp Naga to boot. This is why it was worthless. You have analysed the torp Naga in a vacuum and are now proclaiming it to be the best ship ever. Well, this is what happens when you have a sample size of one.
Raven Ether
Doomheim
#709 - 2011-11-17 14:01:43 UTC
Fact- Caldari use both hybrids and missiles.

Ask for both.
Sam Bowein
Sense Amid Madness
#710 - 2011-11-17 14:50:52 UTC
Raven Ether wrote:
Fact- Caldari use both hybrids and missiles.

Ask for both.

My fear is that we'd get something like 5% missile velocity and 5% hybrid range, making the ship absolutely useless… I'd rather keep the current bonus P
Iam Widdershins
Project Nemesis
#711 - 2011-11-17 14:51:15 UTC
Raven Ether wrote:
Fact- Caldari use both hybrids and missiles.

Ask for both.

This. I see no reason to keep the Naga's Hybrids as they are; simply add in Torpedoes again with 2 bonuses: 1 built in to make them reach their destination sooner (this is a pain in the ass to do with per-level), and 1 based on per-level for 10% velocity per level.

Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#712 - 2011-11-17 15:32:06 UTC
Phantomania wrote:

Your right, it should have 8 Cruise Missile Launchers! If Caldari Pilots want to boast 8 BS size Hybrids, they have the Rokh! Unlike the Missile skilled Caldari Pilots, who have no Ship that can carry 8 BS size Launchers!



Oh, so now we're on to a new plea from you after someone had to hold your hand and explain barney style everything we've been telling you for pages already?

Yes, you do. It's called a Golem.

4 launchers + 100% bonus to cruise and torp damage + 10% bonus to cruise and torp velocity AND a 7.5 bonus to TP effectiveness.


It is YOUR FAULT for only training half the skill requirements for caldari ships. Quit being a spoiled ***** and whine somewhere else.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.
Vincent Gaines
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#713 - 2011-11-17 15:41:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Vincent Gaines
Iam Widdershins wrote:
Raven Ether wrote:
Fact- Caldari use both hybrids and missiles.

Ask for both.

This. I see no reason to keep the Naga's Hybrids as they are; simply add in Torpedoes again with 2 bonuses: 1 built in to make them reach their destination sooner (this is a pain in the ass to do with per-level), and 1 based on per-level for 10% velocity per level.


If you boost range AND explosion velocity per level (say, 10% velocity or flight time and -10% per level) you will have a ship that is actually too overpowered, and then eclipses the drake, raven, stealth bomber, cerberus, scorpion (sans EW), Golem and Caracal.

The reason explosion radius is what it is on large weapons is a fault just as the others have with tracking (Talos the opposite of course with range)

If you get underneath the Oracle and Tornado's guns, they are dead because they can't hit you. With your buffed Naga that's not an issue.

If you break range of the Talos, it can't hit you, again not an issue when you have a 50km (base stat) torp machine.

BUT

Even with those bonuses, The minute a Tornado sees a Naga it'll take it out before the torps can hit.








Oh, then the other Tier 3 ships will want more bonuses as well.

Not a diplo. 

The above post was edited for spelling.
Takon Orlani
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#714 - 2011-11-17 15:44:00 UTC
Phantomania wrote:
Still, there isn't even 1 Ship ingame that can boast 8 launchers bar the Raven State Issue!

CCP nearly fixed this, now we're back to square 1!


Get out.
Phantomania
Lonely Trek
#715 - 2011-11-17 15:50:54 UTC
Vincent Gaines wrote:
Phantomania wrote:

Your right, it should have 8 Cruise Missile Launchers! If Caldari Pilots want to boast 8 BS size Hybrids, they have the Rokh! Unlike the Missile skilled Caldari Pilots, who have no Ship that can carry 8 BS size Launchers!



Oh, so now we're on to a new plea from you after someone had to hold your hand and explain barney style everything we've been telling you for pages already?

Yes, you do. It's called a Golem.

4 launchers + 100% bonus to cruise and torp damage + 10% bonus to cruise and torp velocity AND a 7.5 bonus to TP effectiveness.


It is YOUR FAULT for only training half the skill requirements for caldari ships. Quit being a spoiled ***** and whine somewhere else.


OK, lets put those bonus's on the Naga, minus the 100% bonus to damage and 8 hardpoints instead. You solved it, well done!

Now YOU go back to flying the Rokh, and stop being the greedy ***** that you are! As a 2006 Pilot I'm sure you can probably fly every Hybrid boat, Caldari and Gallente!
Phantomania
Lonely Trek
#716 - 2011-11-17 15:52:03 UTC
Takon Orlani wrote:
Phantomania wrote:
Still, there isn't even 1 Ship ingame that can boast 8 launchers bar the Raven State Issue!

CCP nearly fixed this, now we're back to square 1!


Get out.



I bet that took both of your brain cells to write!
Jennifer Starling
Imperial Navy Forum Patrol
#717 - 2011-11-17 16:14:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Jennifer Starling
Bomberlocks wrote:
King Solomon solution to all the bickering: Make the Tier 3 Bcs what they were originally supposed to be: Cap killers. Drop all turrets and give them a racial Citadel Torp fitting, range and damage bonus and covert cloak

That way they'll be good at what they were supposed to be good at, like Stealth bombers are, and not good at what they weren't supposed to good at, like being so totally OP that they make cruisers, HACs, BCs and BS obsolete.

Yes i love this idea too. True, they may become a one trick pony but how many more tricks do the current ships present compared to ships that can fit the same role? They're still variations on an existing theme.

Cap killers on the other hand will turn around nulsec. But CCP is scared shitless that they will enrage the self entitled veteran cap pilots that will drown the forums in a flood of tears.

Phantomania wrote:

Its OK, a petition is being passed around atm.
Make it fair!...Make it Missiles!
Missile Pilots want Equality!
Naga needs a 100% Hybrid Turret NERF!

/signed


/signed

CCP should be able to make the torp Naga a viable alternative. Buff missile velocity, flight time, whatever. Give it a preciscion bonus like Nighthawk and Golem so it's also a viable anti-cruiser platform. Something. It's not that hard.
m0cking bird
Doomheim
#718 - 2011-11-17 16:16:47 UTC  |  Edited by: m0cking bird
I'll be using duel propulsion on certain setups for sure. Think it works very well with some of these tier 3 battle-cruisers.

I'm pretty sure siege missiles are pretty terrible @leats comparatively to large pulse lasers, large auto-cannons, large-blasters (even). So, are they useful in missions?
OT Smithers
A Farewell To Kings...
Dock Workers
#719 - 2011-11-17 16:27:58 UTC
Ganthrithor wrote:
Caldari are a split-weapons race you morons. They already have a missile BC-- its called a Drake, and you probably fly it already! If you want to stick to missiles, keep flying your Drakes. Stop whining about how you now have a viable rail platform as well (lol, it's like a Ferox except possibly useful as a spaceship!).


Minmatar are also a split weapon race, and they already have a gun boat. The Tornado should use only missiles!!!1
OT Smithers
A Farewell To Kings...
Dock Workers
#720 - 2011-11-17 16:30:55 UTC
Ganthrithor wrote:
Dude I literally just went on SiSi and flew a neutron blaster naga. It wasn't half bad-- big tank, speedy ~*enough*~, has 37km range (or somwhere in there) with null. Does decent DPS. I don't know what you guys are complaining about, especially since torpedoes are literally the most god-awful weapon system ever and won't do any damage to anything smaller than an MWDing dread.

Hell, it's even got Ferox factor-- some frigate pilot was all "hey look a terrible ship" and burned right at my Naga when I warped to a combat site at range, resulting in his immediate blapping.


Simple answer: because Caldari Pilots use missiles and would actually like something other than the freaking drake to fly.

Gallente pilots train Hybrids. Caldari Pilots train missiles.