These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Faction Battlecruisers - Would they work?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Historical Research Advocate
Doomheim
#41 - 2012-09-06 18:57:50 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line. It doesn't necessarily means nerfing them to oblivion and beyond, but making sure that each subsystem configuration has a use and they don't overlap on other ships by making them different in role and purpose.
    • if you're looking for the best way to kick the most players in the nuts at one time, this would be it. Fair warning: people who get kicked in the nuts usually fight back. Expect untold levels of drama.
    Liang Nuren
    No Salvation
    Divine Damnation
    #42 - 2012-09-06 19:01:30 UTC
    Historical Research Advocate wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line. It doesn't necessarily means nerfing them to oblivion and beyond, but making sure that each subsystem configuration has a use and they don't overlap on other ships by making them different in role and purpose.
    • if you're looking for the best way to kick the most players in the nuts at one time, this would be it. Fair warning: people who get kicked in the nuts usually fight back. Expect untold levels of drama.


    Three comments:
    - That will pale in comparison to Summer of Rage 1 and Summer of Rage 2.
    - Players are always short sighted in their balancing requests and they never have the long term good of the game in mind.
    - Think of it like pruning a tree - yes it may hurt and suck for a while but you and the game will be better off in the end.

    -Liang

    I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
    Gabrielle Lamb
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #43 - 2012-09-06 19:19:08 UTC
    Liang Nuren wrote:

    Three comments:
    - That will pale in comparison to Summer of Rage 1 and Summer of Rage 2.
    - Players are always short sighted in their balancing requests and they never have the long term good of the game in mind.
    - Think of it like pruning a tree - yes it may hurt and suck for a while but you and the game will be better off in the end.

    -Liang


    I don't really agree, T3's is balanced very well around risk / reward. They're not overly powerful except when combined with offgrid boosting. The only thing that isn't balanced properly is training time, which is made up by SP loss upon death.
    Liang Nuren
    No Salvation
    Divine Damnation
    #44 - 2012-09-06 19:21:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
    Gabrielle Lamb wrote:
    Liang Nuren wrote:

    Three comments:
    - That will pale in comparison to Summer of Rage 1 and Summer of Rage 2.
    - Players are always short sighted in their balancing requests and they never have the long term good of the game in mind.
    - Think of it like pruning a tree - yes it may hurt and suck for a while but you and the game will be better off in the end.

    -Liang


    I don't really agree, T3's is balanced very well around risk / reward. They're not overly powerful except when combined with offgrid boosting. The only thing that isn't balanced properly is training time, which is made up by SP loss upon death.


    I have only this to respond to that: LOL.

    -Liang

    Ed: Also, you didn't actually respond to anything in my post. You may as well have responded directly to Ytterbium. I was commenting on general balancing and e-rage surrounding it. But your commentary is 100% in line with what I said. :)

    I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
    Kahega Amielden
    Rifterlings
    #45 - 2012-09-06 19:23:01 UTC
    Quote:
    if you're looking for the best way to kick the most players in the nuts at one time, this would be it. Fair warning: people who get kicked in the nuts usually fight back. Expect untold levels of drama.


    I will be sure to stock up on popcorn.
    Fon Revedhort
    Monks of War
    #46 - 2012-09-06 19:26:56 UTC
    Liang Nuren wrote:


    I have only this to respond to that: LOL.

    Gonna second this.

    "Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
    MotherMoon
    Tribal Liberation Force
    Minmatar Republic
    #47 - 2012-09-06 19:45:09 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    This come once in a while. As some people mentioned before:


    • Tier 2 Battlecruisers already are extremely versatile and popular. Introducing yet improved hulls based on them without looking at tech1 battlecruisers first is in direct contradiction with the tiericide initiative.

    • We already have troubles having diverse, interesting hulls roles on this particular level. HACs, tech3 cruisers, battlecruisers and command ships currently are very close of each other on that field. Introducing a Navy Battlecruiser would aggravate the issue even further.

      • What needs to be done before having Navy Battlecruisers, in no particular order:

    • Have a look at tech1 cruisers and bring tiericide to their sorry little sad faces.
    • Fix tech1 battlecruisers as a whole. Most tier1 BCs are not good enough, some tier2 are just too good. You know we know you know which ones we are talking about Twisted
    • Make sure Command Ships have a viable role next to Battlecruisers (Nighthawk versus drake for example). Look at gang links. Eos. Eos. Eoseoseoseoseos.
    • HACs, they need love too.
    • Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line. It doesn't necessarily means nerfing them to oblivion and beyond, but making sure that each subsystem configuration has a use and they don't overlap on other ships by making them different in role and purpose.


    When that's done, and if the need for it is true, righteous in the divine gospel of the ship balancing light, then let's have Navy Battlecruisers, maybe. Pirate and new tech2 battlecruisers though are less of a problem if the roles aren't overlapping. Hmmmm spiky bikini Sansha battlecruiser with lazors pewpewnomnomnomnom. But errrr drifting out of topic here, we'd need to make sure current Sansha ships are tiericidead before that happens - we've heard horror stories about the Succubus and Phantasm being left to rot for all eternity in station hangars. That is not right.


    ok ok hear me out

    AT Battle Cruisers for next years prize

    come on, doooooooo itttttttt

    http://dl.eve-files.com/media/1206/scimi.jpg
    Roime
    Mea Culpa.
    Shadow Cartel
    #48 - 2012-09-06 20:19:01 UTC
    Gabrielle Lamb wrote:
    Liang Nuren wrote:

    Three comments:
    - That will pale in comparison to Summer of Rage 1 and Summer of Rage 2.
    - Players are always short sighted in their balancing requests and they never have the long term good of the game in mind.
    - Think of it like pruning a tree - yes it may hurt and suck for a while but you and the game will be better off in the end.

    -Liang


    I don't really agree, T3's is balanced very well around risk / reward. They're not overly powerful except when combined with offgrid boosting. The only thing that isn't balanced properly is training time, which is made up by SP loss upon death.


    I don't they give T3s to NPC corp members

    That said not all T3s are OP, just one.

    Rest have their niches where they are really good, and isn't that sort of their purpose?

    .
    Suleiman Shouaa
    The Tuskers
    The Tuskers Co.
    #49 - 2012-09-06 20:32:11 UTC
    Compare a Proteus to a Deimos. Just do it.
    Liang Nuren
    No Salvation
    Divine Damnation
    #50 - 2012-09-06 20:43:14 UTC
    Suleiman Shouaa wrote:
    Compare a Proteus to a Deimos. Just do it.


    Heh, that's such a sad comparison. The Vigilant is slightly better but still falls horrifically short.

    -Liang

    I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
    Lili Lu
    #51 - 2012-09-06 20:50:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
    Dear Ytterbium,

    Thank you for your post. Glad to see that you are as disgusted with the player impulse for new even sweeter tooth-rotting candy. Smile But I would like to let you know I had a thread in Test Server forum addressed to you about this issue (BC imbalances). You didn't respond What? So, I will repost a link to it. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=122188&find=unread I wish the original eve-kill top twentys for those months would open with the links, oh well.

    Basically, here we are again facing another month of . . well I would link the eve-kill top twenty again. But they appear to be undergoing repairs on the site. Oh hey it finally loaded. http://eve-kill.net/?a=top20

    Last month's final day totals were the most extreme I've ever seen. This month it looks like a couple armor ships are breaking in for trials with the newly respecced tech II 1600 plates (Zealots and Navy Apocs). But other that that it is shield and missile boat heaven once again (or mid-slot blessed ships that can fit a TD, which still don't affect missiles, and no working anti-missile ewar in sight still).

    Anyway, how many more months must we endure? Sad And if the current mindset is to buff Tier 1 BCs to tier 2 levels, and not somewhat the other way around as I suggest, how will cruisers gain in utility? I've also posted my concerns about ewar boat imbalances, emerging TD usage as the new multispec of doom, and unevenly applied racial bonus and fitting restriction straightjacketing particularly with destroyers, in the frig and destroyer rebalancing threads on the fatures and ideas subforum. I hope those patterns get reevaluated.

    Getting back on track with BCs, I do not think it is being unreasonably impatient to ask for some interim adjustments. Afterall these BC problems have been very obvious for 3 or more years, for pve basically since the Drake was introduced, and in pvp a couple years later when sniping BSs were nerfed and people started marrying Drakes to logis for fleets and for smaller scale stopped thinking their purger rigs would operate there as in pve.

    Do we really have to endure another year and a half or more of Drakes and Tengus Online?

    Sincerely,

    LiLu
    Malcanis
    Vanishing Point.
    The Initiative.
    #52 - 2012-09-06 20:52:57 UTC
    Hi Kell.

    I had a quick look, but I can't seem to find your posts complaining about the days when armour RR BS, AHACs and sniper HACs were the only viable doctrines, and people trying to bring shield ships to fleets were routinely kicked. Can you assist me with some keywords for my google search?

    "Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

    Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
    Liang Nuren
    No Salvation
    Divine Damnation
    #53 - 2012-09-06 20:54:32 UTC
    Lili Lu wrote:
    And if the current mindset is to buff Tier 1 BCs to tier 2 levels, and not somewhat the other way around as I suggest, how will cruisers gain in utility?


    If the new frigates are any example of how the balancing is going to happen, BCs may be what becomes obsolete.

    Yes, really.

    -Liang

    I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
    Lili Lu
    #54 - 2012-09-06 23:09:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
    Malcanis wrote:
    Hi Kell.

    I had a quick look, but I can't seem to find your posts complaining about the days when armour RR BS, AHACs and sniper HACs were the only viable doctrines, and people trying to bring shield ships to fleets were routinely kicked. Can you assist me with some keywords for my google search?

    Who's Kell?

    Anyway, armor RR BSs, AHACs, and Sniper HACs (which are shield tanked btw) collectively did not account for the number of months at the top position on eve-kill that the Drake has. And even had they, notice that all those are ship class doctrines, not single ship doctrines. Additionally, you and I both discovered the fact that over the 150-200 size Drakes + Logi > AHACs + Logi.

    As for shield ships getting kicked, Malc, you surprise me. Are you still harboring some resentment for being told at one point as a noob to go home with a purger rigged Drake? Say it ain't so Malc, say it ain't so Sad

    Liang Nuren wrote:
    If the new frigates are any example of how the balancing is going to happen, BCs may be what becomes obsolete.

    Yes, really.

    -Liang


    When did I disagree with that possiblity? Yes they are buffing tech I frigs rather massivley. One could say overdoing it. Tech II ships like EAF are being left further in the dust.

    However, I think you are engaging in some hyperbole. There is still a fair amount of room between the hp and dps stats on present cruisers and those on tier 1 BCs. It would take some massive buffs, probably more than we are seeing with frigs atm to obsolete BCs. Besides, all I was asking for was hp reduction to tier 1, not for slot or fitting loss (and thus dps loss) on tier 2s. Slot and fitting could be buffed to tier 2 and hp nerfed to tier 1 rather easily as part of rebalancing. And that would still leave BCs with some advantages over buffed tech I cruisers.

    Historical Research Advocate wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
  • Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line. It doesn't necessarily means nerfing them to oblivion and beyond, but making sure that each subsystem configuration has a use and they don't overlap on other ships by making them different in role and purpose.
    • if you're looking for the best way to kick the most players in the nuts at one time, this would be it. Fair warning: people who get kicked in the nuts usually fight back. Expect untold levels of drama.

    The gnashing of hair and pulling of teeth, when it comes, will be glorious. Big smile
    Lin-Young Borovskova
    Doomheim
    #55 - 2012-09-06 23:35:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Lin-Young Borovskova
    Gabrielle Lamb wrote:
    Liang Nuren wrote:

    Three comments:
    - That will pale in comparison to Summer of Rage 1 and Summer of Rage 2.
    - Players are always short sighted in their balancing requests and they never have the long term good of the game in mind.
    - Think of it like pruning a tree - yes it may hurt and suck for a while but you and the game will be better off in the end.

    -Liang


    I don't really agree, T3's is balanced very well around risk / reward. They're not overly powerful except when combined with offgrid boosting. The only thing that isn't balanced properly is training time, which is made up by SP loss upon death.


    This

    If a ship requiring:
    -same skill effort than T2 to be effective
    -requires specific training ship type + subs on top
    -does just as good or even less than T2 specialised ship when both T2 fitted
    -can perform well above T2 specialised ship but requires extreme fittings, implants and OGB
    -brings you heavy penalties when you are killed with on top of isk loss

    Then where's the real problem?-maybe ship bonus/ammo some people are telling for months is a "bit" OP?
    If T3's are OP then frigates are completely out of whack, most BC's "I win" buttons, Angel ships are "God Mode :on: " Roll
    Yes they need some balance, Command subs are ridiculous because "bonus" and generous slots/fittings on those ships.
    Yes some of them are in need of balance to be on pair of Tengu and Loki, but not the other way around.

    But welp, lets wait and see how much the nerf will hit (chances they become worthless are high)

    brb
    Liang Nuren
    No Salvation
    Divine Damnation
    #56 - 2012-09-07 00:01:02 UTC
    A T2 fit T3 is much better than a T2 fit T2, and a faction/deadspace fit T3 is arbitrarily better than a faction/deadspace fit T2. Seriously, T3s utterly obsolete HACs and pirate cruisers.

    -Liang

    I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
    Omnathious Deninard
    University of Caille
    Gallente Federation
    #57 - 2012-09-07 00:07:49 UTC
    Liang Nuren wrote:
    A T2 fit T3 is much better than a T2 fit T2, and a faction/deadspace fit T3 is arbitrarily better than a faction/deadspace fit T2. Seriously, T3s utterly obsolete HACs and pirate cruisers.

    -Liang

    I confirm this, my tengu alt can solo level 4 missions, only t2 fit and will not fall below. 75% shields.

    If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
    Jude Lloyd
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #58 - 2012-09-07 01:09:12 UTC
    Id rather have T2 Drakes, Canes, Myrms, and Harbys first. Big smile

    I'm back!
    Jude Lloyd
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #59 - 2012-09-07 01:11:01 UTC
    Although I'm perfectly happy playing "Eve Online:Frigates" for the next year tbh.

    I'm back!
    Jerick Ludhowe
    Internet Tuff Guys
    #60 - 2012-09-07 05:33:23 UTC
    t3 Nerf, and a field command buff? **** yeah (about time). Been "yelling" about this with other oldies like Liang and Fon for so many years now P