These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Retribution 1.1] Combat Battlecruisers

First post First post First post
Author
Skotykus
Griffin Capsuleers
Ad-Astra
#221 - 2013-01-09 03:14:21 UTC
Why not just remove the Drake, already? You seem to be whittling away at it each stupid patch. How can you think it's still OP with the missile changes?
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#222 - 2013-01-09 03:15:31 UTC
Jean Leaner wrote:
Hans Jagerblitzen wrote:
4LeafClover wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

Right now Gallente is the ONLY race that has mulutple ships with split weapon systems.

You're kidding right?


List some.



Minmatar - Typhoon, Cyclone, Naglfar,

You're on the CSM and you don't even know which ships have split weapons systems?
You should perhaps spend a bit more time reading about upcoming changes. If you did, you'd already know that Typhoon is slated to become a dedicated missile boat just like the Cyclone is. And we don't really know about what'll come of the Naglfar yet, but its a capital ship, and those are in a special class anyway, with their Siege modules...

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Mund Richard
#223 - 2013-01-09 03:19:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Or looking at the ships another way, will be a screwed view due to not taking the weapon systems themselves into account.

Extradamage, Capacitor, 6 bonused + non-hardpoint high. <-- The only one with such
Passivetank, SecondaryDamage, +4 unbonused high "+1 more" unbonused.
Damage, PassiveTank, 7 "bonused" highs.
SecondaryRange, PassiveTank, 7 "bonused" highs.
Damage, Activetank, 7 bonused highs.
SecondaryDamage, AcitveTank, + 5 hardpoint highs.
PrimaryDamage, PrimaryDamage, 6 double-bonused highs +hardpoint high.
SecondaryDamage, ActiveTank, 5 bonused highs, +2 hardpoint highs.
<- The only one with two


Racial Primary damage system ships summary:
Damage: 6 double bonused +off-hardpoint> 6 extra bonused > 7 bonused > 7 limited bonused.
Secondary: PassiveTank > ActiveTank > Cap Usage (why keping those still), 4th ship included a line above.

Racial Secondary weapon-type Ships:
Secondary: PassiveTank = PassiveTank > ActiveShield > ActiveArmor. 4 tank-bonused ships
Damage: 5*Bonused+2hardpoint > 100*Drone+ 5 hardpoints > 7*RangeBonused > 75*Drone+4/1 hardpoints


Primary lineup:
Two tank-bonused, one Cap, one Double damage.
If the secondary-line is the tankier, why not make all of these non-tanked?
Would justify the Drake getting a proper damage bonus, always found "missiles = selectable damage, Caldari = Kinetic" silly. And the Harbringer with it's cap bonus... Still the most lackluster bonus, even with me hating active armor tanking ones.

Second lineup:
Tanky ones, hopefully there's a trick in the bag for armor rep.
Balance between drones and hardpoint weapons too much hassle to find, so leaving these somewhat alone. Roll
Keeping the Myrm as the only armor tanker with 5 mids is an interesting choice though, why Question
One ship having bonused hardpoints and yet two unbonused is unusual after tiericide (Cyclone, even the Rupture lost the second).
And the Ferox, medium railguns with range bonus but nothing else... the only thing it offers over a Naga is staying power, in return for 1 size smaller, 1 less turret, with no damage bonus (on the same size it would be 10 against 7 turret's dps, by the virtue of using larger ones Naga is already more-or-less where the Ferox gets with the bonus). Worth it?

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

fukier
Brave Collective
#224 - 2013-01-09 03:20:20 UTC
Skotykus wrote:
Why not just remove the Drake, already? You seem to be whittling away at it each stupid patch. How can you think it's still OP with the missile changes?


because they are waiting to see how bad it gets before they make TC/TE affect missiles...

thats why...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Misha M'Liena
Rui Freelance Mining
#225 - 2013-01-09 03:26:57 UTC
Your nerfing the harby when it needed a buffing? ShockedShocked Why in gods name?

One less weapon, less powergrid less cpu...?? Are you outa your freaking mind Fozzie???

I want whatever your drinking.

Misha.

Not as innocent as she appears.™  

Mund Richard
#226 - 2013-01-09 03:29:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Misha M'Liena wrote:
Your nerfing the harby when it needed a buffing? ShockedShocked Why in gods name?
One less weapon, less powergrid less cpu...?? Are you outa your freaking mind Fozzie???
I want whatever your drinking.
Misha.

I wonder if sooner or later everyone frequenting this thread will finish their posts with:
"And the Harbringer getting +10% damage bonus is a damage buff even with loosing a turret."

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Styledatol
Stellar Forge Industries
#227 - 2013-01-09 03:30:08 UTC
CCP logic: "We've fixed the cruisers by making them almost as good as battlecruisers.
Now, lets fix battlecruisers by making the good ones just as bad as the rarely used ones."
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#228 - 2013-01-09 03:31:40 UTC
Removed a ranting post.

I would like to remind people that while negative feedback is helpful, please do it in a constructive manner. Ranting about it while not help solve anything, but telling us why you don't like it and ways to fix it is very helpful. Thank you.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Cethion
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#229 - 2013-01-09 03:37:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Cethion
I have a lot of problems with these proposed changes, lets roll through each ship one by one.

Prophecy: Continuing this push to make drones the secondary weapon system of the Amarr just doesn't make much sense. Drone boats don't see much use in fleet actions (when was the last time the myrm had a starring role in a fleet op aside from bait?), and even solo, a drone bandwidth of 75 is insufficient. If you want this ship to see increased use, and are determined to make it a non-laser boat, give it missiles. An armor tanked BC with missile options would be a hell of a lot more useful.

Harbinger: While the ship gets a small damage boost from the higher damage bonus, and having fewer guns means less danger to capacitor, but the ship already had significant fitting problems, and while this reduction is supposed to be commiserate with the loss of a turret fitting, a smaller reduction would give the ship a little more heart. Then comes the agility nerf. This ship is already (theoretically) supposed to be an armor tank, and starting with the maneuverability of a pig is not helpful. This ship is already not all that popular, and these changes won't help things, at least remove the agility nerf to keep it somewhat competitive.

Ferox: I don't fly these ships, so I don't have a lot to say about this one, others have mentioned wanting a damage bonus instead of an optimal range, but I am glad to see some other buffs for it.

Drake: This ship is almost unchanged. More of a pig with maneuverability, but the much-vaunted tank is essentially the same. Weren't there supposed to be some nerfs coming to get this ship in line with the now-nerfed Cane?

Brutix: I like the slot changes, fitting boosts, and agility increase, but the bonuses are still odd. Both the Gallante combat BCes have bonuses to active armor tanking, which is basically useless outside of very small-scale fights. You want to see this ship used some more? Give it a different second bonus, if you want to support the damage angle, a falloff or tracking bonus is a great idea, if you want something more ganky, maybe an agility boost. Either way, this needs a change.

Myrmidon: Turrets were never this ship's strong point, and the additional bandwidth and size are amazingly helpful to this ship. Given the focus of the ship, losing some armor while gaining hull is a bit of an odd choice, but overall, it fills much the same roll as it used to, even if an active tank is harder to support with a smaller powergrid.

Cyclone: While another missile launcher hardpoint would be great, having two utility highs isn't necessarily a bad thing, and the across the board boosts get it a lot more in line. I like most of that.

Hurricane: This ship already got hit pretty hard with the nerf bat, hurting it more seems unnecessary. Others have been more vehement than I in this regard, so I'll leave it at that.

Co-host of Down the Pipe

Aliventi
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry.
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#230 - 2013-01-09 03:39:04 UTC
Why are removing all the extra high slots that are supposed to be used for the links? Like seriously? If anything you should leave those in place and give most of the BCs extra PG fitting ability so we can actually use the 99% CPU reduction bonus for links. They already don't get the command ship link effectiveness bonus. If you go through with this you may as well take the 99% CPU reduction bonus away. Hardly anyone uses it now and even fewer will after these changes go through.

Also, can we get rid of this pointless Caldari Kenetic Bonus? It seems ridiculous that there are 4 flavors of missiles and Caldari are stuck using the worst of them all. "But it's Caldari's racial damage!" Yeah. Then why is explosive Minmatar's but they don't get an "Explosive damage bonus"? At least Amarr can only do EM/TRM and Gallente can only do THRM/KIN. And you already got rid of the Kinetic bonus on the Caracal and the condor. Finish the job.

And why would I use a sniper Ferox when the Naga does it better? If you get caught sniping that resist bonus isn't going to help you. At least the Naga has the Large Rails range and is fast and agile enough to run away.
Marcus Antovar
Disconnect.
#231 - 2013-01-09 03:45:10 UTC
What the **** is this ****? The hurricane is getting hit more? Man, that ship is going from awesome to ****!

And why do both the Gal BCes have active rep bonuses? Why? The brutix is bullshit right now, even with these changes.

Why is the Prophecy a droneboat? **** that noise!
Kratisto
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#232 - 2013-01-09 03:45:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Kratisto
Great ideas for the amarr and minmatar ships!


The Ferox suffers from a capacitor burden, which requires a cap booster in the mids for pvp. This and a prop mod means it has only 3 shield slots for tanking- not exactly conducive for a ship with shield resistance bonuses. The turret bonus is good, a cool +50 dps, to 350 dps or so with 200's, the guns required for fitting... but compare that to a Hurricane's 480 with shortrange ammo, with a similar range despite no range bonus (25+16 ferox, 15+28 on cane)... The cane has 60k ehp with full skills, the ferox 72k, both when shield-tanked. This hardly makes any sense. As I see it, the ferox has equivalent range to the hurricane, does 73% of a cane's dps, and a cane has 83% of a ferox's tank, making the hurricane a clear choice.

Easy solution: Give the ferox the extra midslot instead of low, and sufficient powergrid so it can fit the extra gun without needing a pds, giving it sufficiently more tank to justify its flight. It probably doesn't need any more PG than what has been modified in the suggestion of the original post. Adding the damage buff would make it too good, and here there are tradeoffs: DPS and alpha, vs tanky/fast rof, in the realm of midrange shield snipers. CCP, you like tradeoffs, right?

Other than that, I don't think the brutix repping bonus makes much sense, you should look into that!
Mund Richard
#233 - 2013-01-09 03:48:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Aliventi wrote:
Why are removing all the extra high slots that are supposed to be used for the links? Like seriously? If anything you should leave those in place and give most of the BCs extra PG fitting ability so we can actually use the 99% CPU reduction bonus for links. They already don't get the command ship link effectiveness bonus. If you go through with this you may as well take the 99% CPU reduction bonus away. Hardly anyone uses it now and even fewer will after these changes go through.

Riiight!
As it is now, only the Harbringer has a spare high with no hardpoint, making it "ideal" (before fitting issues) for a link.
Both Minmatar and the Prophecy can use a utility High for it.
The Myrm has a choice of not using one of the 5 turrets, which may be magstabbed/gyroed for a lesser bonus.
The Brutix and the Caldari ships make a choice between dropping a bonused hardpoint, or the link.

Anyone seeing a racial pattern here?

PS:
Mund Richard wrote:
"And the Harbringer getting +10% damage bonus is a damage buff even with loosing a turret."
The rest of what it got debatable.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.

Lyron-Baktos
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#234 - 2013-01-09 03:52:35 UTC
was really hoping the Harb would become viable with the changes and I'm sad to see that it won't :(

The tiny dps buff doesn't come close to evening out how very slow it is
Roosevelt Coltrane
Rupakaya
#235 - 2013-01-09 04:10:11 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:


There's something fundamentally wrong that I need to use a triple repping, dual cap injected Myrm to be able to keep up with a single XL-ASB Cyclone.



That is it in the shell of a nut.

You have been great about listening to feedback, so I will add my voice to the chorus saying please don't give the Brutix an active tank bonus.

If you keep the bonus on the Myrm, then DO give it a 10% bonus like the Incursus.

NetheranE
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2013-01-09 04:11:20 UTC
Prophecy changes are excellent, as are the Harb and Myrm.

To the Ferox, the addition of another gun is a great help, except for the difference in cap usage is rather exceptional for an already cap-close boat.
However, is is a trait of the Caldari line, so I can see why it was maintained.

Brutix, I dont see why the rep bonus remains. I can see it being an overall ok choice, however I think a tracking bonus like the thorax may find it's place safer. I think something needs to be considered in that bonus slot, as otherwise the Myrm and Brutix will constantly find themselves left behind for any amount of fleet work.
^Personally I have less of an issue with this as the Myrm and Brutix are still extremely poignant choices for small gangs, and leaving their bonuses as listed in the OP would continue to enable them this edge.

Drake and Cane, these changes effectively bring them in-line with the other BCs, which I think is an excellent choice. For too long the drake and cane have left all other BCs far behind in the dust, and pushing them back down to an even keel is an excellent balance choice.

As to those whining about the Harb changes... This is a stepping stone between the Omen/Maller and 'Geddon/Abaddon. Are these ships known for their agility? No, and it should remain so across the linear progression line of the Amarrian "Tank & Gank" philosophy.
Honestly, who needs agility when you have Scorch?

Learn to quit whining about wanting to use a ship outside of its general conceptualization. These ships have their roles, and the changes ensure that they excel in these roles exceptionally.

ALL GLORY TO THE AUG & BINGER DOCTRINE,
ALL GLORY!
Capqu
Half Empty
#237 - 2013-01-09 04:13:19 UTC
hi fozzie,

i think there is an innate problem with the armor rep bonuses in that that resist bonuses are just as effective for active tanking, while also allowing you to buffer / passive if you want (and even providing some buffer if you decide to active)

i think this puts too much disparity between the active bonused and the resist bonused ships, which i imagine are intended to be similar power level just geared towards active or passive

perhaps look at tweaking the potency of the active bonus, or reworking it all together?
CaptCommando
Infinite Improbable Industry Inc
Pandemic Horde
#238 - 2013-01-09 04:15:32 UTC
correct me if im wrong but the drake is now even more useless as it is now goin be all tank no bite. and the myrm is losing a gun and high as wells as a reduction on its tank shields armor and hull but still keeping a 7.5% armor repping bonus. and its loosing PWGRD. so with its tank and gun dps output lose its goin be relying on its drones to dump on someones day so if u dont have good drones skills u might be ******. and putting a 1600mm plate on to help the reppers is now goin to be a necessity. shoulda just left the highslot and taken the gun slot or increase the repping bonus.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#239 - 2013-01-09 04:16:28 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:

I wonder if sooner or later everyone frequenting this thread will finish their posts with:
"And the Harbringer getting +10% damage bonus is a damage buff even with loosing a turret."


Only with all skills at 5 brotatoe, and as has been pointed out if all of your skills are at 5 theres not much chance that you're flying a harbinger so for just about everybody who WILL fly a harbinger it will be slower, do less dps and even if you look at the 1 removed gun they're removing MORE cpu than that one gun used so less overall CPU fitting space.

Its mass is higher, its probable baseline dps will be lower considering the average pilot skill in the craft, and generally ALL of the other BC's will be in some way shape or form significantly better.

What did the Harby ever do that should merit a nerf? Are people roaring around somewhere in vast fleets of Harbies raping and pillaging?

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.

Mukun
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#240 - 2013-01-09 04:28:42 UTC
BRUTIX NEEDS MORE LOVE!!!!!!!!!!!