These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Skyler Hawk
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#41 - 2015-09-11 17:39:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Skyler Hawk
The increased volley damage and projection on the fleet cane are nice, but the loss of raw dps (due to going from 5% damage and rof bonuses to a single 10% damage bonus) doesn't really seem justified on a middle-of-the-road member of an underused ship class.

e: whoops, missed the fact that it's getting a larger drone bay/bandwidth as well, which would probably go some way to making up for the loss of turret dps.
Kismeteer
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#42 - 2015-09-11 17:40:51 UTC
Thank you thank you thank you for using usage to dictate who gets buffs.

I know there are tons of ships out there that are just completely unused (QuestionSentinelQuestion) or underused (AttentionRorqualAttention). Using their actual usage to figure out what to buff is a great way to improve the game and show off more variety in ship types.

Love this direction.
Mizhir
Devara Biotech
#43 - 2015-09-11 17:43:45 UTC
Any changes on their lockrange / MMJD so they can actually use their MMJD offensively without having to use slots for targeting range modules?

Still awesome changes.

❤️️💛💚💙💜
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2015-09-11 17:44:08 UTC
I would echo the sentiments to trade the missile hull bonuses to an expl radius buff rather than range.

Range works on guns as application, but not missiles.
Dreiden Kisada
State War Academy
Caldari State
#45 - 2015-09-11 17:46:02 UTC
"The Cyclone is probably the most underestimated of the T1 BCs."

lol wat.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#46 - 2015-09-11 17:46:19 UTC
Skyler Hawk wrote:
The increased volley damage and projection on the fleet cane are nice, but the loss of raw dps (due to going from 5% damage and rof bonuses to a single 10% damage bonus) doesn't really seem justified on a middle-of-the-road member of an underused ship class.

e: whoops, missed the fact that it's getting a larger drone bay/bandwidth as well, which would probably go some way to making up for the loss of turret dps.


Also, it will be a beast with artillery. It will track better than the muninn and have more alpha. This is a ship that will ruin an orthrus' day, and im happy about that. Maybe less dps than before, but it will mulch anything in scram range, especially with 2 neuts, tracking bonus and extra drones.

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

Make the Muninn great again!
Luscius Uta
#47 - 2015-09-11 17:52:38 UTC
Finally, we'll have ships with falloff bonus to energy turrets that I trollishly suggested long time ago!

On a more serious note, why not give a slight increase in targeting range and scan resolution to Navy ships when compared to T1? Also not sure if I like the new Ferox, shield resist bonus is what makes Moa/Ferox/Rokh different from Gallente Hybrid lineup.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Samira Kernher
Cail Avetatu
#48 - 2015-09-11 17:52:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Samira Kernher
Looks awesome. Glad I'll be having Amarr BC V finish before the patch!

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Thank Bob. The fleet cane is different than the t1 cane in a significant way. Range bonuses should be good enough for the longer range weapons and ok for shorter range weapons. I guess scram kiting blaster brutix is no longer a thing.

My fleet arty cane will be a force to be reckoned with now. Arthrillery 3 incoming.


I'm scared about fighting you once these hit.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#49 - 2015-09-11 17:54:12 UTC
.... Good tweaks. I'm guessing the projection buffs are going into the battleships also.

But ... Good buffs. These almost wind up dropping a brick onto cruisers (it was needed to be honest).

Now reclassify all t3's into battlecruisers and we'll be in business.

Yaay!!!!
Quesa
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#50 - 2015-09-11 17:54:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Quesa
For the love of everything that is holy and right in this world, can we please, PLEASE, PLEASE stop pigeonholing Caldari to Kinetic damage?


Also, have you thought of making the Ferox into a HAM boat with appropriate bonuses?


Another, off the wall, thought, is it worthwhile to give a ship dual weapon system bonuses, for instance, the Ferox having both Hybrid and Missile damage bonuses. If you did this, it might allow for more variation of fits for the tier 1 BC's. Even the Cyclone could be a HAM and AC boat or a mix. Is this too difficult to balance?

Ok, one more thought, is it possible or out of bounds to add another hull bonus specific to MJD's, something like 25% bonus to spool up and cooldown timers?
Quesa
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#51 - 2015-09-11 17:55:54 UTC
Skyler Hawk wrote:
The increased volley damage and projection on the fleet cane are nice, but the loss of raw dps (due to going from 5% damage and rof bonuses to a single 10% damage bonus) doesn't really seem justified on a middle-of-the-road member of an underused ship class.

e: whoops, missed the fact that it's getting a larger drone bay/bandwidth as well, which would probably go some way to making up for the loss of turret dps.


It's a very viable platform in many cases and I suppose you will likely see added applied damage from the boost to optimal/falloff.
Dr Cedric
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#52 - 2015-09-11 17:55:59 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Khador Vess wrote:
return of the drakefleet... awesome

Forget Drakefleet. Welcome FeroxFleet.

EDIT: Not only FeroxFleet...but symetrically-placed turret FeroxFleet! WAHOO!



This man is the smartest eve-player I've ever seen. What he says!

Cedric
solon101
Trillium Invariant
Honorable Third Party
#53 - 2015-09-11 17:56:42 UTC
Quesa wrote:
For the love of everything that is holy and right in this world, can we please, PLEASE, PLEASE stop pigeonholing Caldari to Kinetic damage?


yes totally agreed
sytaqe violacea
Choir of morning
#54 - 2015-09-11 18:00:03 UTC
Hurricane has more effective turret than Navy Hurricane?
Interesting
Arkon Olacar
black.listed
#55 - 2015-09-11 18:00:06 UTC
Yadaryon Vondawn wrote:
Good changes!

Arkon Olacar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I know some players will be dissapointed that the damage bonus continues to be restricted to kinetic, but we do believe that damage specific bonuses are a useful tool for creating interesting distinctions between ships and we have no plans to phase them out.


I'm not sure how to make this more clearcut.

This is bad.

Stop doing this.

Please.


Could you explain why this is bad? A little reasoning might help understand your bold point


For the three non-kinetic damage types, the drake does ~5% less dps than a caracal. The raw dps increase when using kinetic is (partially) countered by the resist profiles of most of the common fits you'll see in nullsec, so the drake usually only does ~5-10% more effective dps using kinetic than a caracal selecting the correct ammo type.

It would be less of an issue if the bonus was universal across all missile based caldari ships, but right now it sticks out like a sore thumb.

Edit: Need food, but if you really care I can dig out the numbers later.
Dr Cedric
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#56 - 2015-09-11 18:01:08 UTC
Luscius Uta wrote:
Finally, we'll have ships with falloff bonus to energy turrets that I trollishly suggested long time ago!

On a more serious note, why not give a slight increase in targeting range and scan resolution to Navy ships when compared to T1? Also not sure if I like the new Ferox, shield resist bonus is what makes Moa/Ferox/Rokh different from Gallente Hybrid lineup.


Put a T2 Invuln in the new extra mid slot and you've got the very same thing with more damage and better application. I like getting the extra mid slot to add a web or more tracking depending on what I'm doing.

Cedric
Karti Aivo
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#57 - 2015-09-11 18:01:44 UTC
except of the drake / clone i dont think they get the needed projection

the turret based ones should probably get 30 or 35% to match up, or get 5-10% tracking on top to justify using the biggest tier guns

otherwise those look pretty good
Gimme Sake
State War Academy
Caldari State
#58 - 2015-09-11 18:03:21 UTC
Awesome changes!

"Never not blob!" ~ Plato
Cara Forelli
State War Academy
Caldari State
#59 - 2015-09-11 18:04:34 UTC
Some good changes here! I still think MJDs could use another looking at to help improve ship mobility. Specifically to prevent them from going on cooldown when the ship is scrambled during spool up. We discuss it in detail here.

Want to talk? Join my channel in game: House Forelli

Titan's Lament
Sho Menao
Oblivion Watch
HYDRA RELOADED
#60 - 2015-09-11 18:05:16 UTC
I like how battlecruisers are still killable with logistics compared to Tech 3s and HACs to a slightly lesser extent due to their base resists, making it engaging gameplay where people take losses. These changes don't make BCs much more viable in the fleet combat context for this reason. If they had the dps to crack high resist ships so that they function as higher dps mobile platforms they'd be a more viable alternative. The projection is cool since it can make up for the lower speeds, but increased damage would help open up the meta.

As it stands, for wealthier organizations there still is no particular reason to use these. And they still get utterly owned by most things due to their sig radius.