These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Streamlining BC's BS's

Author
Kesthely
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1 - 2017-06-21 14:42:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Kesthely
Hello Everyone

While i currently are quite pleased with the state of most BC's and BS's i still feel there is something missing in the lines.

What i would love to see implemented is BattleCruiser versions of the Disruption cruisers and a cohesive line of Disruption Battleships For me the introduction of 1 additional battlecruiser for each race, and the rework of 2 of the battleships into disruption battleships would stream out the line.

I'm thinking something in the line of:

Amarr

Battlecruiser
Combat: Harbinger
Combat: Prophecy
Attack: Oracle
Disruption: Bishop (Holy title) (Details See Below)

Battleship
Combat: Abaddon
Attack: Apocallypse
Disruption: Armageddon

Bishop:
Slot Layout: 4 High, 3 Turret, 3 Missile, 5 mid, 7 low, 3 rig (50 mbit, 150 m3)

Amarr battlecruiser bonuses (Per skill level):
7.5% Tracking disrupter effectiveness
10% bonus to drone damage, hit points and mining yield

Role Bonuses:
Can use one Command burst Module
1% bonus to Information command burst strength and duration

Caldari

Battlecruiser
Combat Drake
Combat Ferox
Attack Naga
Disruption Peregrine (a type of falcon) (Details see below)

Battleship
Combat Rokh
Attack Raven
Disruption Scorpion

Peregrine
Slot Layout: 4 High, 3 Turret, 3 Missile, 7 mid, 5 low, 3 rig (25 mbit, 50 m3)

Caldari battlecruiser bonuses (Per skill level):
15% bonus to ECM Target Jammer Strength
12.5% bonus to ECM Target Jammer optimal range and falloff

Role Bonuses:
Can use one Command burst Module
1% bonus to Information command burst strength and duration

Gallente

Battlecruiser
Combat Brutix
Combat Myrmidon
Attack Talos
Disruption: Cuneus (4th century roman unit)(Details See Below)

Battleship
Combat: Hyperion
Attack: Megathron
Disruption: Dominix

Cuneus:
Slot Layout: 4 High, 3 Turret, 5 mid, 7 low, 3 rig (75 mbit, 225 m3)

Gallente battlecruiser bonuses (Per skill level):
10% bonus to drone damage, hit points and mining yield
7.5% bonus to remote sensordampener effectiveness, Optimal Range and Falloff

Role Bonuses:
Can use one Command burst Module
1% bonus to Information command burst strength and duration

Dominix
New bonuses:
10% to Drone Hit point and Damage
7.5% bonus to remote sensordampener effectiveness, Optimal Range and Falloff

Minmater

Battlecruiser
Combat Hurricane
Combat Cyclone
Attack Tornado
Disruption: Derecho (Fastmoveing group of severe thunderstorms) (Details see below)

Battleship
Combat: Maelstrom
Attack: Tempest
Disruption: Typhoon


Derecho
Slot Layout: 5 High, 1 Turret, 4 Missile, 6 mid, 5 low, 3 rig (40 mbit, 80 m3)

Minmater battlecruiser bonuses (Per skill level):
5% bonus to Rapid Light missile, Heavy missile and Heavy assault missile launcher rate of Fire
7.5% Bonus to Target Painter Effectiveness

Role Bonuses:
Can use one Command burst Module
1% bonus to Information command burst strength and duration

Typhoon
New Bonuses
5% bonus to Rapid Heavy missile, Cruise missile and Torpedo launcher Rate of Fire
7.5% bonus to Target Painter Effectiveness
Cade Windstalker
#2 - 2017-06-21 16:18:46 UTC
Why? What does this add, why is it needed, and what sort of niche does it fill that isn't already better filled by a T1 Cruiser, Recon, or Battleship?

Creating more ships just for the sake of creating more ships is pretty much just a waste of time.

If you want to run a BC fleet with EWar support it would be more cost effective to bring a Cruiser or Recon hull than one of these BCs. The added HP of a BC doesn't make up for the loss of speed in survivability and stats wise they don't gain enough over a T1 or Recon to make up for the deficiencies of a BC class hull.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#3 - 2017-06-21 17:02:37 UTC
Not against disruptor battleships but don't you dare make the domi one. The hyp is the battleship thats barely used that was shoe horned into a role with the last balance pass.

Disruption bc's are meh. Not much difference between them and cruisers (some of them are copies with just a bigger drone bay). Not feeling it.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Kesthely
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2017-06-21 20:52:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Kesthely
Problem is that theres no T1 progression line, we have attack, combat, disruption, and logistics T1 frigates and cruisers, each with unique role uses.

Pilots intrested in those roles have limited options after cruisers. Its intended to be a median between cruisers and T2/3 cruisers And although there T1, Battlecruisers and Battleships already get a few unique extra abilities wich other disruption ships don't get. the Micro Jump Drive, Links, Target Spectrum Breaker, a better tank for example

Theres going to be lots of engagement scenarios or even Fleet doctrines that could benefit with these changes. There not going to be the next OP i win ship, but i certainly see options for every ship.

EG. The dominix could use its damps to force people to get closer to him and get into neut or blaster range, a Typhoon in a fleet with tripple paint will greatly increase the fleets damage application. a Perigrine could microjump into a better location for ECM ing. And a Bishop could reduce the dps of a ship to such extend it posses a lot less problems in solo or small gang fights.

Additionally there T1 ships, wich means that if your NOT a specialist and eg can't or don't want to fly a recon ship, a T3 Cruiser, or don't like to fly smal(ler) ships you can get one for a reasonable cheap price at reasonable effectiveness
Tiberius NoVegas
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#5 - 2017-06-21 21:45:43 UTC
the only way i could see this working is if the cruisers were made as sub-cap disrupters and BC made to be capital disrupters. but under the current mechanic both sub-caps and capitals can be disrupted by cruisers.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#6 - 2017-06-22 01:28:45 UTC
Kesthely wrote:
Problem is that theres no T1 progression line, we have attack, combat, disruption, and logistics T1 frigates and cruisers, each with unique role uses.

Do you need progression?

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#7 - 2017-06-22 07:44:23 UTC
You have t2 to progress to. You don't beed progression of everything to infinity, like there is no tackling battleship and there doesn't need to be.

Bear in mind scorps don't see huge use. This is because e-war does not scale with size. A griffins e-war is as strong as a scorps e-war. Like wise a maulus' damps would be as strong as damps on a damp bonused hyp. It's generally more effective to use smaller ships in e-war because they can avoid fire for longer. There isn't a lot if scenarios where these will be useful otherwise scorps would be everywhere already (the most useful e-war with massive range). And doing both bc's and battleships is overkill.

The exception is the geddon, because neuts do scale with size.

When the bs's were rebalanced and people expressed a desire for more disruption battleships, ccp rise mentioned that they'd sooner release new bs's for disruption bs's than transform existing ones into disruption. I don't agree myself.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#8 - 2017-06-22 08:38:51 UTC
Destroyers & BC's are not direct continuations of the line.

Your line goes Frigate > Cruiser . Battleship.
With Destroyer & Battlecruiser as side shoots along the way that add some abilities not fielded by the standard class size, but aren't a size step.

So trying to shoehorn BC's into the standard hull splits is always doomed.
Gregorius Goldstein
Queens of the Drone Age
#9 - 2017-06-22 09:05:55 UTC
If people wanted to fly big E-War ships we would see more Scorpions around?
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#10 - 2017-06-22 09:17:13 UTC
^^^
But you don't because they aren't that useful where you get almost as many mids with the same str e-war in a cruiser for a fraction of the cost.

What maybe interesting however is aoe e-war like super carriers get but scaled down to bs size.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#11 - 2017-06-22 09:40:33 UTC
Gregorius Goldstein wrote:
If people wanted to fly big E-War ships we would see more Scorpions around?

If we saw more BS fleets you actually might.
It's hard to say if that's 'people don't want BS sized ewar' or 'People don't fly BS fleets' when BS fleets are so unpopular in the meta for most things (Citadel sieges in Null are a different affair to most things obviously).
Kesthely
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#12 - 2017-06-22 12:36:38 UTC
Heres a quirky tought, maybe with more options for t1 bc and bs, you actually can make a better well rounded fleet and actually see more bc and bs fleets?
Kesthely
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#13 - 2017-06-22 14:04:23 UTC
Gregorius Goldstein wrote:
If people wanted to fly big E-War ships we would see more Scorpions around?


Currently people misconcept that scorpion is the only disruption class bs, the armageddon, and Bhaalgorn are also "disruption" how many of those do you see flying around?

So yes, i do think that with more choices you would see more of them
Cade Windstalker
#14 - 2017-06-22 14:28:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Cade Windstalker
Kesthely wrote:
Problem is that theres no T1 progression line, we have attack, combat, disruption, and logistics T1 frigates and cruisers, each with unique role uses.

Pilots intrested in those roles have limited options after cruisers. Its intended to be a median between cruisers and T2/3 cruisers And although there T1, Battlecruisers and Battleships already get a few unique extra abilities wich other disruption ships don't get. the Micro Jump Drive, Links, Target Spectrum Breaker, a better tank for example

Theres going to be lots of engagement scenarios or even Fleet doctrines that could benefit with these changes. There not going to be the next OP i win ship, but i certainly see options for every ship.

EG. The dominix could use its damps to force people to get closer to him and get into neut or blaster range, a Typhoon in a fleet with tripple paint will greatly increase the fleets damage application. a Perigrine could microjump into a better location for ECM ing. And a Bishop could reduce the dps of a ship to such extend it posses a lot less problems in solo or small gang fights.

Additionally there T1 ships, wich means that if your NOT a specialist and eg can't or don't want to fly a recon ship, a T3 Cruiser, or don't like to fly smal(ler) ships you can get one for a reasonable cheap price at reasonable effectiveness


The lack of options in EWar hulls after Cruisers is, I think, intentional because contrary to what you're suggesting here the actual utility of Battleship class support hulls is pretty limited. Battleships are slow, they have poor targeting systems as a rule, and they tend to end up using quite a bit of their available slots and fittings on damage and tank rather than utility. This makes them less flexible as a class than Cruisers and thus makes them unsuited to a support role like EWar which, more or less by necessity, requires flexibility and the ability to react quickly.

Battlecruisers have a lot of the same issues and in many cases could be considered as bringing the weaknesses of both Cruisers and Battleships together into one hull. The reason they don't completely fall apart is because this gets balanced out by raw tank, firepower, and cost-effectiveness. If you threw them into an EWar role, especially as a T1 hull, they would be too fragile to be effective since EWar generally gets focused first.

For example look at the Scorpion class Battleship. It's probably the most well known EWar hull larger than a Cruiser but its role in the game is still extremely niche. It sees less than half the use that even the Rokh, Raven, or Hyperion sees, and none of those are high on the list of PvP Battleships. On top of that quite a lot of the use it *does* see is as a dedicated ECM-Burst ship, something that doesn't have an equivalent for other classes of EWar.

In short there just isn't enough use for a larger T1 EWar hull to be justified. Bigger isn't always better, and if a hull isn't going to be used there's little reason for CCP to spend the time and effort creating it.

Kesthely wrote:
Gregorius Goldstein wrote:
If people wanted to fly big E-War ships we would see more Scorpions around?


Currently people misconcept that scorpion is the only disruption class bs, the armageddon, and Bhaalgorn are also "disruption" how many of those do you see flying around?

So yes, i do think that with more choices you would see more of them


The Armageddon is a drone-boat first and an EWar boat second, and it still doesn't see a ton of use. Out of the available Pirate Battleships the Bhaalgorn sees less use than almost any other hull, and quite a lot of that is niche use that relies on its completely over the top neuting power, *AND* on top of that it only has that because it's a Pirate hull rather than being a straight T1 ship.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#15 - 2017-06-22 18:15:08 UTC
Kesthely wrote:
Gregorius Goldstein wrote:
If people wanted to fly big E-War ships we would see more Scorpions around?


Currently people misconcept that scorpion is the only disruption class bs, the armageddon, and Bhaalgorn are also "disruption" how many of those do you see flying around?

So yes, i do think that with more choices you would see more of them



You see them (scorp/geddon/bhaal) get a lot of use in WH space and to a slightly lesser extent in HS. They don't get extensive use in LS and null because they get blapped by capital ships. No cyno's in wh space means they are free to do their thing w/out the worry of being blapped off the field. HS doesn't often have the organized pvp on a scale where they are relevant, so they don't get used there.

BS are on the pvp back burner because capitals wonk them like bon bons at a sorority sleepover. BC suffer the same signature issues. Just big enough that a capital and wonk them and not quite big enough to do anything of value to a capital fleet.

How useful is a target painter being applied to a capital ship? Webs? LS/null will never be good proving grounds for a BC/BS sized signature that has webbing and painting as their super powers unless you get rid of cynos (which isn't going to happen).

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#16 - 2017-06-22 21:47:59 UTC
Just an fyi, the geddon is a combat bs.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Aeryn Maricadie
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2017-06-23 23:12:42 UTC
Kesthely wrote:
Gregorius Goldstein wrote:
If people wanted to fly big E-War ships we would see more Scorpions around?


Currently people misconcept that scorpion is the only disruption class bs, the armageddon, and Bhaalgorn are also "disruption" how many of those do you see flying around?

So yes, i do think that with more choices you would see more of them

As someone already pointed out, that is because neuts and cap reservoir scale with size, other ewar does not.