These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
GeeBee
Backwater Redux
Tactical Narcotics Team
#61 - 2015-09-11 18:06:21 UTC
Looking forward to this, hopefully we get back to some good battlecruiser action.

When Dominion first started battlecruisers were the mainstay for my alliance, eventually everyone outgrew them, hopefully these changes help them come back a bit.

I am worried that the bombing meta is still going to take a heavy toll on battlecruiser (and battleship) usage and would like to see the numbers tweaked on bombs to reduce the number of bombs that can be detonate at once(before they destroy each other) currently the math works out to 6-8 depending on skills or racial bonuses, this is enough damage that the sig radius / ehp of a standard fit battlecruiser is about dead. I would like to see the number of bombs cut in half to allow fleets more ability to mitigate the bombers. This will allow a fleet to be less anti-bomber specific for killing bombers before the bombs go off to remove the blast and more ability to survive a bomb run and repair.
Ayiana Valerii
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2015-09-11 18:08:30 UTC
Good changes but, IMO, at least one of the BCs needs neut bonus(es).
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#63 - 2015-09-11 18:08:56 UTC
Mizhir wrote:
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.


Several did get lock range increases, though it's not universal.

You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Mr Spaxi
#64 - 2015-09-11 18:09:24 UTC
Chessur wrote:
I really like where these changes are going. However I do have one questions regarding the turret projection bonuses. For turret boats such as lasers, the falloff bonus of 25% if essentially useless. While on the other hand, the optimal bonus for AC using ships is also- complete useless. The only weapon system that somewhat benefits from a split range bonus would be hybrids. Would there be any consideration to just changing the bonuses on each ship? IE. 50% optimal on laser boats, 50% falloff bonus on AC ships?

Also, for the missile based ships, again HAM's and HMLs struggle so hard to apply damage. Cyclone and Drake are going to be feeling a little left out in their ability to apply their DPS to targets with out some type of application bonus. Any considerations on giving them one?


There is no such thing as an AC ship. They can be fit with both Arties (which benefit from optimal more) or Ac (which benefit from falloff more).
Mr Black Uchonela
State War Academy
Caldari State
#65 - 2015-09-11 18:10:14 UTC
I dont understand Fozzie

i thought BC rebalance was cancelled due to Gorskis heinous crimes against you?
(when he was jamming you on your typhoon roam with (larkin?))
please explain
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#66 - 2015-09-11 18:10:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
some nice buffs too certain ships especially harbinger, but some big overbuffs too the navy bc's i mean a drake that has more tank than a raven, smaller sig aswell, with only 25% less range on HAM's than torps, really?? .. when are HAM's getting that range nerf? and better mobility than a navy brutix WTF???? .. its either a brawler or a kiter.. pick one

Ferox changes are interesting, more of a shield brutix now .. ish, would expect it too be quicker than the drake though, tiny mass difference isnt good either, i would also expect a lower sig as it's basically an attack bc now, now you removed resist for damage, you could have simpler swapped the 50% range for the damage, does it even need 75% range bonus, which also begs the question why not just move the current ABC's too T2 and make the 4 more speedy bc's proper attack bc's.. this would open up a greater range of stats, being speed lower sig better agility etc.. more variety of sig radius is needed at least here.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Trii Seo
Goonswarm Federation
#67 - 2015-09-11 18:11:41 UTC
I now feel bad for welping all my hurricanes before that buff...

Proud pilot of the Imperium

Arek'Jaalan: Heliograph
Esnaelc Sin'led
Lonesome Capsuleer
#68 - 2015-09-11 18:11:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Esnaelc Sin'led
Arkon Olacar wrote:
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.


Why would missile boats be the only boats capable of projecting any damage type with no penalty at all ?

Lazors = EM/TH
Hybrids = KN/TH
Projo = Well ok, they have EMP / Fusion and Plasma. But it's not pure damage type and you have 50% reduced range. And if ever you want to shoot Kin you would end up with Sabot.

Kinetic has always been Caldari's damage type.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#69 - 2015-09-11 18:12:25 UTC
Altirius Saldiaro wrote:
Very good changes. I look forward to these.

Not with that hood you don't.

I'm right behind you
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#70 - 2015-09-11 18:15:02 UTC
Dr Cedric wrote:
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!

Think about it. The Ferox will be able to project over 100km without breaking a sweat (probably using mid-range ammo), do so with superior application over BS-class rails (better tracking and sig res), it will finally have enough midslots to be versatile, and it technically got a fitting boost as it now only has to support 6 turrets but didn't lose any grid (not to mentioned it gained CPU).

And it'll do all of this while finally sporting a symmetric turret layout. (Can you tell that was an issue for me?)

I for one welcome our new FeroxFleet overlords.

FeroxFleet will be the poor man's Eagle/Vulture fleet. Heck, slap on a warp speed rig and it'll warp (but not align, obviously) pretty much like an Eagle.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Sporx Utensil
Colossus Enterprises
#71 - 2015-09-11 18:15:41 UTC
I like the general direction, well done.

I would still like to see greater lock range on the missile boats, but such is life we'll continue to fit sebos i guess. -1 mid slot.

I also think we'd see a lot more of these in skirmish gangs if they had more mobility. You have added significant mobility and I applaud that but I don't think it is enough to get the T2's on the battle grid more often.

All good though, well played, I like the direction.
Buzz Kill
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#72 - 2015-09-11 18:15:52 UTC
Dont forget about the command ships
FT Cold
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2015-09-11 18:17:11 UTC
A step in the right direction, I'm very happy about these changes. Consider applying these changes to command ships as well, anything that isn't a sleip is kind of a one trick pony. Also, It'd be nice to see the cyclone get an application bonus instead of a range bonus. I know the current meta disfavors brawlers, but it would be an extremely good way to keep it differentiated from the drake hull and offset it's low DPS.
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#74 - 2015-09-11 18:17:37 UTC
This ought to breathe some new life into the whole line of battlecruisers. Now if only I had an alliance to fly them in...
twit brent
Never Not AFK
#75 - 2015-09-11 18:19:19 UTC
I think the cyclone needs a little more. At least another midslot and maybe another launcher too.
Nou Mene
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#76 - 2015-09-11 18:21:26 UTC
solon101 wrote:
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


and make laser shoot kin+explo, oh and hybrids do em + explo.....
missiles are the only weapon that can shoot one and only one dmg type... you think thats (plain) bad? t2 ammo for every dmg type, also.
Alundil
Rolled Out
#77 - 2015-09-11 18:21:57 UTC
Karti Aivo wrote:
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

Except none of these changed ships are the ones that can use Large weapons.

Combat/Navy Battlecruisers addressed in this patch = medium weapons
Attack Battlecruisers (Talos/Naga/Oracle/Tornado) = large weapons

I'm right behind you
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#78 - 2015-09-11 18:23:25 UTC
Samira Kernher wrote:
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.


*evil laugh*

Its ok, im sure someone (we know who) will just bring more rooks or curses

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

Make the Muninn great again!
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#79 - 2015-09-11 18:24:33 UTC
Alundil wrote:
Karti Aivo wrote:
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

Except none of these changed ships are the ones that can use Large weapons.

Combat/Navy Battlecruisers addressed in this patch = medium weapons
Attack Battlecruisers (Talos/Naga/Oracle/Tornado) = large weapons

I think they meant the biggest size medium guns (i.e. 250mm rails, 720mm arties, etc.), not the biggest size guns (i.e. battleship guns).

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#80 - 2015-09-11 18:24:48 UTC
Last thing I can think of just now, ferox could stand even more lock range with the scale of those range bonuses on the guns. Another 15-25 would be good.