These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

battlecruiser role addition
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#41 - 2014-08-27 20:58:53 UTC
The only thing recently that I've seen from CCP was part of the Ishtar-HAC rebalance thread, where they mentioned that they feel that battleships were 'in a pretty good place.' Later in the thread CCP Rise commented that this statement was a reflection of how battleships were balanced against each other rather than other classes. I don't recall anything being posted about CBCs after the MMJD was introduced.
Netan MalDoran
Cathedral.
Shadow Cartel
#42 - 2014-08-27 23:55:32 UTC
I like, definitely feel like BC's got left out.

"Your security status has been lowered." - Hell yeah it was!

Falcon's truth
Psianh Auvyander
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2014-09-17 03:19:09 UTC
I apologize for the long delay, but I've finished this series with The Current State of Battlecruisers: Part Three.

I had a lot of fun with this topic overall. It was really interesting to see the stats in part two especially, and while I am not a fan of math, it was somewhat invigorating to see the results (albeit results achieved with a lot of help!)

My Blog

@wsethbrown
Luwc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#44 - 2014-09-17 07:42:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Luwc
lol wat
"Drake and hurricane are garbage imo."

Troll post ?

edit : BCs are fine you just dont know how to fly / fit them.

http://hugelolcdn.com/i/267520.gif
Director Blackflame
Voidspace Solutions
#45 - 2014-09-17 07:56:13 UTC
I think a range role bonus would fit well with the mmjd.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#46 - 2014-09-17 18:01:59 UTC
Psianh Auvyander wrote:
I apologize for the long delay, but I've finished this series with The Current State of Battlecruisers: Part Three.

I had a lot of fun with this topic overall. It was really interesting to see the stats in part two especially, and while I am not a fan of math, it was somewhat invigorating to see the results (albeit results achieved with a lot of help!)


Thanks for doing all the maths. though, i agree that a triple rep myrm with OH bonus would be borderline OP. So what about for tank bonus, while OH, cap consumption is reduced for boosters/reppers. Just a thought anyway.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Kell Braugh
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#47 - 2014-09-17 18:29:19 UTC
Please, stop trying to balance a T1 BC's stats with T2 HACs.

BCs already have a role which is unique to the ship class, a T1 ship that can fit links for bonuses.
Psianh Auvyander
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#48 - 2014-09-17 23:11:01 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Psianh Auvyander wrote:
I apologize for the long delay, but I've finished this series with The Current State of Battlecruisers: Part Three.

I had a lot of fun with this topic overall. It was really interesting to see the stats in part two especially, and while I am not a fan of math, it was somewhat invigorating to see the results (albeit results achieved with a lot of help!)


Thanks for doing all the maths. though, i agree that a triple rep myrm with OH bonus would be borderline OP. So what about for tank bonus, while OH, cap consumption is reduced for boosters/reppers. Just a thought anyway.


I kept it pretty simple as I feel that when you try to make things too complicated it leads to bad consequences. There are certainly more things you could add on, but I don't think I'd be a supporter of anything additional.

My Blog

@wsethbrown
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#49 - 2014-09-18 05:41:06 UTC
How about this: All combat battlecruisers get a 25% role bonus increase to module HP, and they all get a very strong capacitor; along the same lines in terms of recharge to HACs.

Previous page123