These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

Discussion - The Fall of Battlecruisers ?

First post
Author
Denson022
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2014-02-03 22:22:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Denson022
Hello everyone, i just landed on this interesting article :

http://www.lowseclifestyle.com/2013/12/the-abandonment-of-battlecruisers.html

After reading it i feel like there's a lot of true facts but still, i can't drop BC class hulls myself.
Indeed last year could be called " Battlecruisers online" and i like em very much, even after cruiser rebalance.
The warp changes also added some burden on those ships.
The Cyclone was my trainer BC and when the "underdog" found a nice niche - being faster than most plated cruisers - the warp speed took away some of it's Fast response role.

The standard shield booster buff made me switch from ASB, still ASB still has the advantage to be almost neut immune.
But being able to permarun the MWD is a nice asset to have.

I recently used it with a Skirmish Link in a small gang of frigates, and i began to think why i dont see them used that way more often?
A cheap command ship - 50M isk - the boost is appreciated by all fleetmates and has big influence on the result of the fight.
The only issue i see is that you need to gimp your tank or DPS in order to fit one link.

And maybe you will agree with me that there's the problem of them all after ship rebalance.
Cruisers now can take on BC thus making the latter less attractive. Maybe finding a way to fit the links without gimping tank and DPS is the solution? This way they can still be nice solo roaming ships AND find an automatic (staple) place in gang of those cruisers.


For long years those ships were Sledgehammers - more tank, more Deeeeeps, kill faster once the target pop rince and repeat.
Maybe it is time to give them more strategic appeal to really use em.
Command ships are way better, but T1 BC are expendable.

Maybe i dream too much but i'd like to see the links with less PG/CPU requirement.


Please feel free to comment and give your feeling where you'd see the BC fit in the actual meta.
Degnar Oskold
Moira.
#2 - 2014-02-03 22:32:47 UTC
I think that BCs are fine where they are. They are more like Heavy Cruisers - 1 v 1 most BCs will beat most cruisers, but now will handily lose a 2v1 against almost any 2 cruisers.
Thermopylaee
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#3 - 2014-02-03 22:38:08 UTC
Denson022 wrote:
Hello everyone, i just landed on this interesting article :

http://www.lowseclifestyle.com/2013/12/the-abandonment-of-battlecruisers.html

After reading it i feel like there's a lot of true facts but still, i can't drop BC class hulls myself.
Indeed last year could be called " Battlecruisers online" and i like em very much, even after cruiser rebalance.
The warp changes also added some burden on those ships.
The Cyclone was my trainer BC and when the "underdog" found a nice niche - being faster than most plated cruisers - the warp speed took away some of it's Fast response role.

The standard shield booster buff made me switch from ASB, still ASB still has the advantage to be almost neut immune.
But being able to permarun the MWD is a nice asset to have.

I recently used it with a Skirmish Link in a small gang of frigates, and i began to think why i dont see them used that way more often?
A cheap command ship - 50M isk - the boost is appreciated by all fleetmates and has big influence on the result of the fight.
The only issue i see is that you need to gimp your tank or DPS in order to fit one link.

And maybe you will agree with me that there's the problem of them all after ship rebalance.
Cruisers now can take on BC thus making the latter less attractive. Maybe finding a way to fit the links without gimping tank and DPS is the solution? This way they can still be nice solo roaming ships AND find an automatic (staple) place in gang of those cruisers.


For long years those ships were Sledgehammers - more tank, more Deeeeeps, kill faster once the target pop rince and repeat.
Maybe it is time to give them more strategic appeal to really use em.
Command ships are way better, but T1 BC are expendable.

Maybe i dream too much but i'd like to see the links with less PG/CPU requirement.


Please feel free to comment and give your feeling where you'd see the BC fit in the actual meta.


Interesting thoughts. I used to fly a Hurricane almost exclusively (with another char) from my "first" time in Eve. I didn't realize its incredible value in low/null gangs until I had basically decided to quit at the time ;-)

I used to run Hurc with shield tank and 425mm's, kept it nice and light with great damage application. I have not tried any warfare links as I was just one of the DPS appliers and not a commander of our little group. However, you propose an interesting new use, given the changes. I would think you would want to keep your tank when using the links, and letting your friends apply their firepower. Perhaps that is what CCP intends? Otherwise, what's the advantage of a command ship?

I've been reading a lot of posts lately about how people are frustrated that their ship class got "gimped" during re-balance, or can't do such and such... in my mind these fears are unfounded though, as it's all about choice. If every ship did the same thing, then why bother having all these different choices, racial class options, weapon choices, tank choices, speed/agility, drones, etc.

Thanks for a thoughtful post, I'll keep this in mind as I skill up this char and look to get back into PvP!
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#4 - 2014-02-03 23:22:05 UTC
BC's have been marginal since their inception.

The only notable ones, being the cane but more notably the drake. Cane was never really that good, as it lacks any type of damage projection or application. This is mostly due in part to the fact that it uses AC's- which are a horrible weapon system. The drake on the other hand, had some decent projection, decent application, a nice tank and ok speed. The thing that made BC's actually viable for PvP at the time was simply a symptom of them having the largest engagement profile of ships at the time. Cruisers were easy pickings (they were quite slow, had no DPS, or tank, not nearly enough slots to be a threat) and BS had nowhere near the moblity needed to catch the BC's. Because of the large engagement profile, BC's (ie. Cane but mostly Drake) were supreme.

Then the ABC's came out. And the day they did, all of the BC's were immediately made useless. ABC's do everything the BC's do but better. They have jaw dropping DPS, amazing mobility, and a great speed tank. It was them that now posessed the large engagement profile. They chewed t1 frigs, dessies, cruisers up with 1/2 volleys- and could easily kite and kill BC's and BS much more readily. The Oracle being the leader by far (Talos a close second) in this regard. After the ABC's BCs could be relegated to some types of super brawl / heavy point duties, but the hay day was over at this point.

Cue the HML nerf, and the drake falls off the face of the planet (as do all missile ships) because it now becomes impossible to apply any noticable DPS from a missile platform. That was the BC's last hurrah.

Then the new cruiser buff happened and that really threw the nail in the coffin for the BC's. Now the ABC's had a ship that could keep up with them providing anti tackle / additonal points in fleet. Cruiesrs had the agility to avoid ABC's and the ability to kite and kill the now neutered BC's. No BC could match the speed / damage projection of the Omen / RLM 3X LSE caracal- so they were killed quite easily.

After that the TE nerf happened, throwing the already sub par AC boats even further into obscurity. Hurricane, and navy cane useless. Along with all of the AC cruiser boats. At that point- ABCs cruisers really had a nice time because again- BC's had even less projection, coupled with their abysmal speed.

Cue the meta of today, post RLM nerf- and TD buff, EAF buff, and warp speed changes and you are looking at an environment that is very hostile to smaller gangs, and solo players- and even more so to large hulls. BS/ BC don't have nearly the warp speed, or the lock speed to deal with a larger gang employing fast movers (read intys, frigs, EAFs) So what are you left wth? ABC's got hit hard from the TE nerf, which knocks out the talos as a viable choice. The oracle, linked, snaked, quafed and dual nano'd is not nearly fast enough to keep up with Navy cruisers / HAC's and it now lacks the ability to warp from dangeroius fast movers. So that too is relegated to MEH

The BC's are an even worse position, because they have horrible warp speed, horrible sub warp speed, no projection. They can't run from anything, and if they are found by a roaming blob- will die.

So that basically leaves the cruisers. Nomen, Omen, Rail Rax, Rail Diemos, Rail Vigilant, Navy Aug, Zealot, Pulse legion. Excluding those- the Dictors also recieved a nice buff, and post RLM nerf the heretic currently resides as the 'most optimal' solo / small gang ship. It provides the best package of speed (in and sub warp) with DPS and projection. Of course, frigs are still fine for PvP especially the intys.

So that about wraps it up. BC's are a symptom of power creep. They have been eclipsed by the ABCs, hampered by the TE nerf, and completely outclassed as support ships in the wake of the cruisers buffs.

And that pretty much wraps it up.

No- Gang links on a BC is a waste. Get a T3, so you can probe, scout, and quad like with bonuses for your fleet. I promise your fleet mates will like it much, much better.
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#5 - 2014-02-04 00:07:39 UTC
Chessur wrote:
Stuff
While I think you are dead on about BCs being easier to tackle now, and hence their decline, you're more than a bit off on a number of other points. ACs terrible? Even after the TE nerf they are still great. HML Drakes were supreme? Only in blobs, otherwise they were comedy killmails. Oracle was the king of ABCs? Again, maybe in blobs.

Otherwise, generally agree with your basic premise - BCs fit a situational role. They are no longer the "go to" ship for PvP. They are definitely in a much better place now as far as game balance goes. BCs fill a nice niche in-between cruisers and BSs, while being cheaper than HACs. They provide decent DPS and retain enough mobility to move around the battlefield to apply it (unlike say a BS). But you're not going to use them as primary tacklers anymore. And that's a good thing.
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#6 - 2014-02-04 00:12:38 UTC
Can't quite deny the above, wouldn't see battlecruisers that strongly obsoleted. Artycane is still nice, a bunch of rookies are still probably better off with feroxes as compared to moas or railraxes in a wormholebrawl and a lot of other situations will occur where a battlecruiser can actually shine. Like a Gnosis, no one knows what this one will do.

I can't see anything wrong with using BCs as ganglinks. Not everyone is particularily keen on managing/caring about an OGB. If the ships at your proposal are two ruptures and a hurricane, would totally get me a rapid deployment in that 7th high. Same reasoning you'd pop a blue pill for, 20% more.

Tried a triplelink-Gnosis aswell. Was crap.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#7 - 2014-02-04 01:09:23 UTC
Vladimir Norkoff wrote:
Chessur wrote:
Stuff
While I think you are dead on about BCs being easier to tackle now, and hence their decline, you're more than a bit off on a number of other points. ACs terrible? Even after the TE nerf they are still great. HML Drakes were supreme? Only in blobs, otherwise they were comedy killmails. Oracle was the king of ABCs? Again, maybe in blobs.

Otherwise, generally agree with your basic premise - BCs fit a situational role. They are no longer the "go to" ship for PvP. They are definitely in a much better place now as far as game balance goes. BCs fill a nice niche in-between cruisers and BSs, while being cheaper than HACs. They provide decent DPS and retain enough mobility to move around the battlefield to apply it (unlike say a BS). But you're not going to use them as primary tacklers anymore. And that's a good thing.


I disagree with your argument that AC"s are somehow not ****. On the Nado / Mach / TFI I will make an exception. However on any other hull, AC"s are simply outclassed by Pulse lasers / old RLMs / Railguns and in the close range category- Blasters reign supreme.

HML drakes were supreme. I can show you a number of videos / killmails proving my point. HML drakes > AC canes in any situation.

Yes Oracle is the king of ABCs, for solo / small gang / blobs even. It can produce 800+ DPS from 80+ K with amazing pulse laser levels of tracking. The ship is disgustingly good, and does way more DPS than a mach from range- with great tracking. Talos, being second place- can never match the oracle DPS in a kiting situation. Hence its second place finish.

But we can agree to disagree here :)

Glad you can find a use for the BCs- still nice to see that sexy hurricane model flying around once and awhile :)
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#8 - 2014-02-04 04:49:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Bullet Therapist
Chessur wrote:
BC's have been marginal since their inception.

The only notable ones, being the cane but more notably the drake. Cane was never really that good, as it lacks any type of damage projection or application. This is mostly due in part to the fact that it uses AC's- which are a horrible weapon system. The drake on the other hand, had some decent projection, decent application, a nice tank and ok speed. The thing that made BC's actually viable for PvP at the time was simply a symptom of them having the largest engagement profile of ships at the time. Cruisers were easy pickings (they were quite slow, had no DPS, or tank, not nearly enough slots to be a threat) and BS had nowhere near the moblity needed to catch the BC's. Because of the large engagement profile, BC's (ie. Cane but mostly Drake) were supreme.

Then the ABC's came out. And the day they did, all of the BC's were immediately made useless. ABC's do everything the BC's do but better. They have jaw dropping DPS, amazing mobility, and a great speed tank. It was them that now posessed the large engagement profile. They chewed t1 frigs, dessies, cruisers up with 1/2 volleys- and could easily kite and kill BC's and BS much more readily. The Oracle being the leader by far (Talos a close second) in this regard. After the ABC's BCs could be relegated to some types of super brawl / heavy point duties, but the hay day was over at this point.

Cue the HML nerf, and the drake falls off the face of the planet (as do all missile ships) because it now becomes impossible to apply any noticable DPS from a missile platform. That was the BC's last hurrah.

Then the new cruiser buff happened and that really threw the nail in the coffin for the BC's. Now the ABC's had a ship that could keep up with them providing anti tackle / additonal points in fleet. Cruiesrs had the agility to avoid ABC's and the ability to kite and kill the now neutered BC's. No BC could match the speed / damage projection of the Omen / RLM 3X LSE caracal- so they were killed quite easily.

After that the TE nerf happened, throwing the already sub par AC boats even further into obscurity. Hurricane, and navy cane useless. Along with all of the AC cruiser boats. At that point- ABCs cruisers really had a nice time because again- BC's had even less projection, coupled with their abysmal speed.

Cue the meta of today, post RLM nerf- and TD buff, EAF buff, and warp speed changes and you are looking at an environment that is very hostile to smaller gangs, and solo players- and even more so to large hulls. BS/ BC don't have nearly the warp speed, or the lock speed to deal with a larger gang employing fast movers (read intys, frigs, EAFs) So what are you left wth? ABC's got hit hard from the TE nerf, which knocks out the talos as a viable choice. The oracle, linked, snaked, quafed and dual nano'd is not nearly fast enough to keep up with Navy cruisers / HAC's and it now lacks the ability to warp from dangeroius fast movers. So that too is relegated to MEH

The BC's are an even worse position, because they have horrible warp speed, horrible sub warp speed, no projection. They can't run from anything, and if they are found by a roaming blob- will die.

So that basically leaves the cruisers. Nomen, Omen, Rail Rax, Rail Diemos, Rail Vigilant, Navy Aug, Zealot, Pulse legion. Excluding those- the Dictors also recieved a nice buff, and post RLM nerf the heretic currently resides as the 'most optimal' solo / small gang ship. It provides the best package of speed (in and sub warp) with DPS and projection. Of course, frigs are still fine for PvP especially the intys.

So that about wraps it up. BC's are a symptom of power creep. They have been eclipsed by the ABCs, hampered by the TE nerf, and completely outclassed as support ships in the wake of the cruisers buffs.

And that pretty much wraps it up.

No- Gang links on a BC is a waste. Get a T3, so you can probe, scout, and quad like with bonuses for your fleet. I promise your fleet mates will like it much, much better.


I wish CCP would read this. Too bad they probably don't read this forum.
Liam Inkuras
Furnace
#9 - 2014-02-04 05:01:39 UTC
I was talking with a friend about this very "issue" the other day and we came to the conclusion that is the circle of life in EvE's current meta. You have 3 main ship types utilizing medium weapons. Your fast nano cruisers/HACs, which are countered by fast brawling cruisers/HACs. Your fast brawling cruisers and HACs are countered by slow, brawling BCs. Your slow, brawling BCs are in turn countered by your fast nano cruisers and HACs.

Also, regarding Rail Deimos/Vigilant; they really aren't that spectacular. Sure, they've got incredible damage, but they have trouble applying their maximum damage due to horrid tracking, and relatively poor ranges. For anti-support roles, they are outperformed in almost every way by Navy Omens and Zealots, which can apply their damage far better and out to 45km with little issue. The Rail Rax is OK in some niche situations, but only because of its tracking bonus.

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone

Incindir Mauser
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2014-02-04 05:15:19 UTC

Chessur hit the nail on the head.

Cruisers are now the go-to workhorse for most small-gang and soloists. Before the tiericide holocaust the mantra for just about every new pilot (myself included) was to train HML II's and a Drake or AC's and a 'Cane. Re-Sebo Insta-lock Hurricane gate-camps were dumb as hell. Up until the HML nerf, Drakes were pretty much used by everyone, everywhere, to do everything. CCP nerfed HML's instead of addressing the Drake's real problem which was it's battleship sized tank.

So HML's got the nerfbat... "to bring them in line with other long range weapons...". And then CCP buffed Beams, Rails, and Arty just a couple months after they gutted HML's damage and projection.

So the Drake was neutered via weapons nerf. The Hurricane PG/CPU was nerfed several times on top of the TE nerf.

Tier 3 ABC's now the jobs that CBC's used to do, only better and for a little more ISK per hull.

T1 CBC's pretty much exist as training wheels for new pilots.


Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#11 - 2014-02-04 05:19:00 UTC
Something here I posted in another thread earlier, but I believe its relevant to this discussion.

I know its a little annoying when people whine about a ship or another that they might have used and loved, only now its been changed and its not exactly what they want. The noise people are making though, at least in my belief, is symptomatic of a problem that CCP has created with the rebalancing of warpspeed, HACs, t1 cruisers, interceptors and AFs. CCP has deliberately kept the power of BCs and BSs low relative to smaller ship classes in order to avoid what they call power creep, but the buffs that the smaller ship classes have received and the nerfs of the larger ship classes (and indeed nerfs to some modules) have an aggregate effect.

People whine that the hurricane or the drake feels weak not just because tracking enhancers were nerfed, or that heavy missiles were nerfed, but because other ships were buffed at the same time, making the gap much wider than it would have otherwise been. In this game the balance changes all interact with each other, and its easy to get caught up with EFT numbers, but they don't tell the whole story of how powerful a ship is going to be in a particular meta.

Combat battlecruisers look powerful, in terms of EHP, active tank, dps, and the flexibility that a higher number of slots imparts, but many of these advantages are mitigated by their lack of agility, warpspeed, and locking speed, especially when compared to smaller ship classes in these fields. EHP and active tank raw numbers only tell half of the story of a ships survivability. A pilots ability to react to a threat and work to mitigate his incoming DPS by increasing transversal or moving outside of another ships effective range is just as important as raw tank.

Responding to threats often means being able to lock new targets, apply a web quickly, destroy drones, or warp to another location in system or some other foolishness. Ship agility, locking speed etc all have an impact on the meta.

The problem that I see is that CCP balances these factors, at least on some hulls, as though they were exactly in proportion with one another, as if a battlecruisers EHP were to increase in proportion to its ability to speed/sig tank decreased. This is not the case. I guess this is the central point I've been trying to make all along, that if you take away things as a ship gets bigger, that the things you replace them with are worth what you've paid for, so to speak. I don't think it is, to be honest, and though bigger shouldn't always mean better, BCs and BSs deserve their role in pvp too, even small gang and solo. It feels to me, right now, that the advantages that BCs and BSs bring to the field, at least outside of a few specific scenarios, don't offset their disadvantages.

I think that there's more to the story than just the occasional person crying about a beloved ship being nerfed. The meta has changed and things are going to be out of whack until they get corrected, and until then, were going to see people complain about the state of balance.
Chessur
Full Broadside
Deepwater Hooligans
#12 - 2014-02-04 07:05:02 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:
Something here I posted in another thread earlier, but I believe its relevant to this discussion.

I know its a little annoying when people whine about a ship or another that they might have used and loved, only now its been changed and its not exactly what they want. The noise people are making though, at least in my belief, is symptomatic of a problem that CCP has created with the rebalancing of warpspeed, HACs, t1 cruisers, interceptors and AFs. CCP has deliberately kept the power of BCs and BSs low relative to smaller ship classes in order to avoid what they call power creep, but the buffs that the smaller ship classes have received and the nerfs of the larger ship classes (and indeed nerfs to some modules) have an aggregate effect.

People whine that the hurricane or the drake feels weak not just because tracking enhancers were nerfed, or that heavy missiles were nerfed, but because other ships were buffed at the same time, making the gap much wider than it would have otherwise been. In this game the balance changes all interact with each other, and its easy to get caught up with EFT numbers, but they don't tell the whole story of how powerful a ship is going to be in a particular meta.

Combat battlecruisers look powerful, in terms of EHP, active tank, dps, and the flexibility that a higher number of slots imparts, but many of these advantages are mitigated by their lack of agility, warpspeed, and locking speed, especially when compared to smaller ship classes in these fields. EHP and active tank raw numbers only tell half of the story of a ships survivability. A pilots ability to react to a threat and work to mitigate his incoming DPS by increasing transversal or moving outside of another ships effective range is just as important as raw tank.

Responding to threats often means being able to lock new targets, apply a web quickly, destroy drones, or warp to another location in system or some other foolishness. Ship agility, locking speed etc all have an impact on the meta.

The problem that I see is that CCP balances these factors, at least on some hulls, as though they were exactly in proportion with one another, as if a battlecruisers EHP were to increase in proportion to its ability to speed/sig tank decreased. This is not the case. I guess this is the central point I've been trying to make all along, that if you take away things as a ship gets bigger, that the things you replace them with are worth what you've paid for, so to speak. I don't think it is, to be honest, and though bigger shouldn't always mean better, BCs and BSs deserve their role in pvp too, even small gang and solo. It feels to me, right now, that the advantages that BCs and BSs bring to the field, at least outside of a few specific scenarios, don't offset their disadvantages.

I think that there's more to the story than just the occasional person crying about a beloved ship being nerfed. The meta has changed and things are going to be out of whack until they get corrected, and until then, were going to see people complain about the state of balance.


Im sorry but you can't suddenly 'imagine' or 'come up with' some new and brazen idea for a class of ships that are horrible. Numbers don't lie, and you can't cheat them. When you load up ships into EFT BC's fall behind in every single aspect when compared to other Ships. They have no redeeming qualities, or ability other than their cost (which is quite cheap now) but that is hardly worth discussing, and certainly not worth another thread. To most of the Meta level PvPers in game, BC's have been dead for a LONG, LONG time now. This has been nothing new to us. As I said before, the day ABC"s came out- I never flew another CBC. Dust in the wind.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#13 - 2014-02-04 08:51:33 UTC
That's quite some hilarious bullshit there Chessur.

BC are right in between Cruiser and BS, HP, speed, firepower. Just like they should be. BC are FINE, they're actually more than fine now and just because people stopped blobbing in them doesn't mean they're now somehow bad, all that means is that HML got the nerf it needed and the meta moved on.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#14 - 2014-02-04 11:01:30 UTC
People seem to forget that the cruisers in eve were ALWAYS designed to be the most numerous, most used and most useful class of ships.

This has been stated in eve lore and dev posts since the closing of the eve gate. But for a while there they were just outclassed by other ship classes (i.e BC) so now they once again have been transformed into what is the most useful class in game.

Balance is once again achieved. P

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#15 - 2014-02-04 11:24:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Riot Girl
Gregor Parud wrote:
BC are right in between Cruiser and BS, HP, speed, firepower. Just like they should be. BC are FINE
That doesn't mean they're fine. They're not even BCs in my opinion, they're just really slow cruisers. I don't even understand why they are so slow. A number of battleships can outpace a lot of them.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#16 - 2014-02-04 11:32:33 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
Gregor Parud wrote:
BC are right in between Cruiser and BS, HP, speed, firepower. Just like they should be. BC are FINE
That doesn't mean they're fine. They're not even BCs in my opinion. They're just really slow cruisers.


double or triple the EHP, 30-50% more fire power, about twice the cap, 50-70% of the speed. They're fine but rather than a hard counter to something they're more or less decently ok everywhere. That might make it difficult to fit it into s specific scenario or counter but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with them, all that means is that since fleets and blobs (generally) don't want versatility they don't perform there. Which is fine.
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#17 - 2014-02-04 11:45:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Riot Girl
I'm looking at a Navy Augoror and a standard Harbinger and I can't see any reason to use the BC over the Cruiser. Even the Harbinger's superior DPS can be brought into question when the Navy Augoror can overheat guns for a full minute longer.
Taoist Dragon
Okata Syndicate
#18 - 2014-02-04 11:50:14 UTC
Riot Girl wrote:
I'm looking at a Navy Augoror and a standard Harbinger and I can't see any reason to use the BC over the Cruiser.


About a third/half of the cost maybe? And the engageability??

That is the Way, the Tao.

Balance is everything.

Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#19 - 2014-02-04 11:51:02 UTC
Taoist Dragon wrote:
Riot Girl wrote:
I'm looking at a Navy Augoror and a standard Harbinger and I can't see any reason to use the BC over the Cruiser.


About a third/half of the cost maybe?


They're about the same price with fittings.
Gregor Parud
Imperial Academy
#20 - 2014-02-04 11:51:35 UTC
So you're comparing Faction vs normal T1 ships and use that as reasoning as to why said T1 ship doesn't perform? On top of that, generally, BC would still have all the advantages I mentioned but you now specifically mention ONE faction cruiser who is aimed at having massive HP so it nullifies one of the advantages :P

Faction cruisers also don't insure very well, yes they can be awesome but that doesn't somehow make BC bad or useless, also they're sluggish kiters and easily caught out.

123Next pageLast page