These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

The naval arms race

Author
Precentor Saggitus
Planet Express Transport
#1 - 2011-11-30 20:36:25 UTC
First I have to say I like the direction things have went with the new BC that have appeared. I'm hoping it will translate into some interesting pvp dynamic.

I can't help but notice how the new Battlecruisers have mirrored, in role, the appearance of Battlecruisers during the interwar years. Where previously a ship termed a battlecruiser was largely an uparmored cruiser class vessel, but still mounted cruiser class weapons, but later (if you haven't cought on yet this is a thread for history buffs) the role of Battlecruiser became less that of armor and became that of weapons, focusing on firepower and speed in a battleship sized vessel - the same as the new tier3 Battlecruisers -the older vessels of the more armor category often were termed as heavy cruisers - the tier 1 and tier 2 vessels in EVE.

Now historically that set up of Battlecruisers didn't work out well since they often got into entanglements with Battleships which they were originally supposed to avoid. The big gun battlecruisers were supposed to move fast to engage smaller vessels at range, their speed allowing them to avoid engaging slower battleships. The battle of the Denmark strait was what would happen if one of these battlecruisers engaged a battleship.

Now with that all said, I think since obviously the EVE universe will have a larger capacity than the belligerent naval nations of the early part of the twentieth century for producing ships and a greater prediliction for sending them into battle, the interesting part of the pvp dynamic I think will be revitalized. With the appearance of the big-gun battlecruisers, will we see more Battleships returning to PvP roles to counter them? It would seem that the new battlecruisers are the perfect hunters of the old battlecruisers which currently dominate small action PvP, is this going to play out so we will see a greater variety of fleets deployed. Notably the tier 3 BC also don't have much capability to deal with smaller ships - only the talos has a drone bay - so will frigate fleets be a danger to these big gun battlecruisers?

Intersting stuff!

Few people understand the psycology of a highway traffic cop. Your average speeder will panic and immediately pull over to the side. This is wrong. It arouses contempt in the cop heart. Make the bastard chase you. He will follow.

Karadion
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#2 - 2011-11-30 20:37:41 UTC
I see you highlighted the interesting and most important stuff.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#3 - 2011-11-30 20:40:20 UTC
Ahem.

Software and warfighting and fleet refits are reflected in ship balances.

IE the defense software that operated super capital defenses had some defensesive kinks in the algorithms and all ship computers updated to take advantge of the newer vunerability.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.

Pavel Bidermann
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2011-11-30 20:49:10 UTC
Good post with some interesting points. I hope it does create more diversified fleet formations since EVE has become more than a little boring. Not that there are any wars going on. The giant NAP/NIP in null sec has too much botting to do.

I too am a fan of history. I wouldn't worry about negative feedback from a Goon . He just copied those words from another post. He has no idea what they mean. Poor, sad monkey.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#5 - 2011-11-30 21:02:14 UTC
Pavel Bidermann wrote:
The giant NAP/NIP in null sec has too much botting to do.


please keep parroting bullshit that you have absolutely no clue about

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar

Vyl Vit
#6 - 2011-11-30 21:09:19 UTC
Oh. My bad. I thought it was navel arms race. I could get into that.

Do go on.

Paradise is like where you are right now, only much, much better.

IM0001
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2011-11-30 22:41:37 UTC
Could the refreshed Destroyers finally have a possible roll and be a danger to the new T3 BC's? Hmm..

I have a lot of interest in seeing how I can get those salvager ships into combat again.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#8 - 2011-11-30 22:55:36 UTC
To be honest I like to see more ships get thier retrofits to help counter the ever changing landscape.

Like the destroyer has. maybe one day they can remove the abritary tier system in terms of cost and performance of said roles. But let the ships' functional uniqueness speak for itself overall.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.

Ilany
Nightingale Enterprises
#9 - 2011-11-30 23:46:31 UTC
I think your historical comparison is a bit off...

Fisher's battlecruiser was a heavy hitting, fast moving capital ship with relatively weak armour. They were designed to work independently or on the edges of the battle fleet and destroy smaller ships (i.e. cruisers and below) and avoid larger ships (i.e. battleships). They worked well when used as designed, and not so well when employed in line of battle (as at Jutland). The Germans designed and built their ships to last a bit longer - they could and were used successfully in the fleet as a sort of auxilliary battleship.

The British didn't change their designs after the First World War, although they didn't build any more. The Japanese heavily modified their ships, originally built on the British pattern, and developed 'fast battleships' which had heavy armament, high speed and comparatively good armour (though not quite as good as contemporary all-or-nothing battleship designs). The French built new 'fast battleships', and then the Americans, Italians and Germans. The German designs of the 1930s reflected some of the World War I lessons, but also had to take account of Treaty limitations... leading to odd ships like the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau which had piddly weapons with battleship grade armour.

Up until now EVE's Tier 2 battlecruisers most closely resembled inter-war German battlecruisers because they had relatively good protection, but couldn't take out a properly fitted battleship 1-on-1 because they could only pack cruiser-sized weapons. The new Tier 3 battlecruisers much more closely resemble the original British concept. I think this is good and may change the PvP dynamic, but it begs the question: where do the original Tier 1 battlecruisers fit into the fleet line up? What purpose do they serve?
(A question some of us have been asking since they were introduced back in whenever it was... 2005?)
SpaceSquirrels
#10 - 2011-12-01 00:47:25 UTC  |  Edited by: SpaceSquirrels
Vyl Vit wrote:
Oh. My bad. I thought it was navel arms race. I could get into that.

Do go on.


Your belly button grew arms too? Damn they must have poured fourloco into the water.

Also wasn't the dreadnaught the king around the time of "The battle at Jutland? Everything else was made to chance down torpedo boats that got under their big guns...Thus destroyers came about. (Full name was torpedo destroyers. At least initially. Which them and frigates later also took the role of anti sub....and way later anti air screening.)
Precentor Saggitus
Planet Express Transport
#11 - 2011-12-01 01:22:25 UTC
Ilany wrote:
I think your historical comparison is a bit off...

Fisher's battlecruiser was a heavy hitting, fast moving capital ship with relatively weak armour. They were designed to work independently or on the edges of the battle fleet and destroy smaller ships (i.e. cruisers and below) and avoid larger ships (i.e. battleships). They worked well when used as designed, and not so well when employed in line of battle (as at Jutland). The Germans designed and built their ships to last a bit longer - they could and were used successfully in the fleet as a sort of auxilliary battleship.

The British didn't change their designs after the First World War, although they didn't build any more. The Japanese heavily modified their ships, originally built on the British pattern, and developed 'fast battleships' which had heavy armament, high speed and comparatively good armour (though not quite as good as contemporary all-or-nothing battleship designs). The French built new 'fast battleships', and then the Americans, Italians and Germans. The German designs of the 1930s reflected some of the World War I lessons, but also had to take account of Treaty limitations... leading to odd ships like the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau which had piddly weapons with battleship grade armour.


Sorry, I was trying to avoid rambling too long on the history side of things, but you got my idea exactly. The neat thing is how EVE now reflects the variety of ship building ideas as occured then. While yes the British gave up on the Battle cruiser plan, they still had many in service at the start of the Second World War. The Hood being a prime example of a design, which at her sailing had big guns, but poor armor. Sharhorst and Gneisau almost reflect the types of ships that the Tier 1 and 2 BCs represent in game, excellent tank, but poor firepower. The term "battlecruiser" not being a defining one, we now have ships in game that reflect the old days of battlecruisers with a variety of ships that fall into a wide description. EVE of course lacking a "heavy cruiser" class.

Quote:

Up until now EVE's Tier 2 battlecruisers most closely resembled inter-war German battlecruisers because they had relatively good protection, but couldn't take out a properly fitted battleship 1-on-1 because they could only pack cruiser-sized weapons. The new Tier 3 battlecruisers much more closely resemble the original British concept. I think this is good and may change the PvP dynamic, but it begs the question: where do the original Tier 1 battlecruisers fit into the fleet line up? What purpose do they serve?
(A question some of us have been asking since they were introduced back in whenever it was... 2005?)


They do serve a purpose, but like their historical battlecruiser counterparts, operationally they are few and far between. Ideally a BC would act as a command ship for a frigate gang, though with the rock-paper-scissors model of combat in EVE that would only happen if said frigate gang was hunting other frigate gangs where the BC would be king. Hopefully the new dynamic might make them more useful, it will be interesting to see how the three tiers of BC fare against one another.

Few people understand the psycology of a highway traffic cop. Your average speeder will panic and immediately pull over to the side. This is wrong. It arouses contempt in the cop heart. Make the bastard chase you. He will follow.

Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#12 - 2011-12-01 01:49:17 UTC
Andski wrote:
Pavel Bidermann wrote:
The giant NAP/NIP in null sec has too much botting to do.


please keep parroting bullshit that you have absolutely no clue about



Looks like somebody touched a nerve.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#13 - 2011-12-01 01:54:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
Nova Fox wrote:
To be honest I like to see more ships get thier retrofits to help counter the ever changing landscape.

Like the destroyer has. maybe one day they can remove the abritary tier system in terms of cost and performance of said roles. But let the ships' functional uniqueness speak for itself overall.



Hmm, perhaps the route for reworking Assault Frigates should be similar to the route taken by the new BC's. It might be interesting to see them reworked as tough to hit but sporting cruiser weaponry.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Krios Ahzek
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2011-12-01 02:00:55 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
To be honest I like to see more ships get thier retrofits to help counter the ever changing landscape.

Like the destroyer has. maybe one day they can remove the abritary tier system in terms of cost and performance of said roles. But let the ships' functional uniqueness speak for itself overall.



Hmm, perhaps the route for reworking Assault Frigates should be similar to the route taken by the new BC's. It might be interesting to see them reworked as tough to hit but sporting cruiser weaponry.


It would make more sense to have destroyers with cruiser weapons, though I can't see why we would want that as cruiser weapons aren't that better than frigate weapons.

 Though All Men Do Despise Us

Andreus Ixiris
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2011-12-01 02:05:00 UTC
Precentor Saggitus,

A historical buff such as yourself will no doubt notice the historical similarities in another recent change made by CCP to ship dynamics - notice that the destroyer has now been made into an exceptionally powerful anti-frigate platform that nonetheless has no tackling capability. This puts it into prime position to act as the destroyers of real-world naval fleets do - provide a screen to larger naval vessels. Destroyers in EVE can - and I hope, will - now serve the purpose of destroying or driving off smaller ships when they threaten larger ones. A small cluster of destroyers would act as an excellent shield to the new Tier 3 battlecruisers against interceptors and fragile cruisers.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#16 - 2011-12-01 02:05:09 UTC
Krios Ahzek wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
To be honest I like to see more ships get thier retrofits to help counter the ever changing landscape.

Like the destroyer has. maybe one day they can remove the abritary tier system in terms of cost and performance of said roles. But let the ships' functional uniqueness speak for itself overall.



Hmm, perhaps the route for reworking Assault Frigates should be similar to the route taken by the new BC's. It might be interesting to see them reworked as tough to hit but sporting cruiser weaponry.


It would make more sense to have destroyers with cruiser weapons, though I can't see why we would want that as cruiser weapons aren't that better than frigate weapons.


Fair point, but I rather like the option of one platform having a metric ton of small weapons, and another platform having the normal number for a frigate but of larger size. Plus the larger gun sizes fit many peoples preconception of an "assault" craft.

Medium weapons are very, very effective against appropriately sized targets... and with the advantages to mobility and lock time that a frigate hull could provide it would be "interesting".

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.