These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Andre Coeurl
Embers Children
#1041 - 2013-01-13 01:47:10 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:
Andre Coeurl wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

There are several frigates that can win solo fights vs a destroyer.... that doesn't mean the destroyers are underpowered vs frigates.


I'm not sure many would agree with this, especially since destroyers are meant to be the natural counter to frigates, but if you put a Rifter up against a Thrasher, both with short range fittings, I don't think that would happen.
The Thrasher is meant to tear down frigates, and it does just that, but I don't hear people saying it's overpowered.


I've ganked thrashers with blaster atrons by getting under it's guns. I've ganked thrashers with condors by kiting out of its tackle/dps range. I've ganked thrashers with other frigates by negating it's dps with TDs, range, etc.... that doesn't make those frigates OP, nor the thrasher under powered.... It means there are vulnerabilities that can be exploited, and doing so wins you the fight.

Andre Coeurl wrote:
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

The truth is... tier 2 BC's are much closer to BS's in terms of tank and firepower.... and bringing them down a notch actually puts BS's in a better place on the power scale. So far, I have a lot of faith in Frozzie.. and none of the proposed changes are alarming. They are more along the lines of... interesting, how will it fit into the power spectrum now...


Well, some BS aren't as good as they could be but in general BSs are still tankier and have more DPS than their BC counterpart. And don't make your assumptions on how BCs were, but on the current state. If you fit a Hurricane for kiting now, you'll have around 47k EHP tank and 600 DPS @3.5+23km without a neut, while a kiting Tempest has 75k EHP doing 880 DPS @ 4+42km with faction EMP and 2 large neuts.
In comparison a Stabber can have 30k EHp and can do 300 DPS @ same range as a Hurricane but goes a lot faster with a 40% smaller radius.
I have tried the new cruisers in combat and I think the current power scale when you compare minmatar ships, namely Stabber/Rupture, Hurricane and Tempest is quite right, possibly with the Tempest needing a small tank buff if there's any change to be made at all.
If the same correlation would be made true to other races too, all the game would be a lot more fun for everyone.


In a straight up punch to punch fight... A frigate simply loses to a dessie, a cruiser simply loses to a BC, and a BC simply loses to a BS. I don't think frozzies changes are altering this template... Furthermore, how much vulnerability does a BC currently have to a cruiser? In my opinion, many of the tricks and techniques to gank a dessie with a frigate should also apply to ganking a BC with a cruiser, but BC's are typically so vastly more potent that this is very unusual.


I never said it shouldn't be possible to kill a dessie with a frig, as much as a BC with a Cruiser, but that if a destroyer usually kills frigs that doesn't mean it's overpowered, and you proved there are ways to single out the enemy weaknesses.
And so you also poitn out basically that it was possible to kill a BC with a cruiser but it took a while because of the superior tank so that made it often impractical... but did you try the new cruisers, already?
I am just pointing out that if some Battlecruisers were considered "overpowered" by comparison before Retribution, the combination of increased efficiency in the Cruiser class and the nerfing done to Hurricane and Drake already has leveled the difference well enough so that the proposed changes now are very much over the top.
What we would all benefit more would be a review of the tier1 & 2s in a way that actually has a meaning, not just as a way to dumb some fun ships, and half-bake a few others still keeping them in a no-man land.
Midori Tsu
Evolution
Northern Coalition.
#1042 - 2013-01-13 02:06:55 UTC
Am i the only one who has noticed how ridiculous the fitting ability cyclone will be?

it has the ability to use dual X-L ASB, full rack of hams, mwd and 2 BCUs, while still maintaining the ability to tackle.

And if we went the passive route it can fit a bigger tank than the hurricane (that's fine) while being able to go the same speed and having the ability to use 2 neuts. not mention still having a full rack and 3 BCUs

I'm not sure if this was intended or not, but being able to fit dual X-L ASB on sub battleship without sacrificing minimal dps seems a bit broken.

Maybe lower the grid to 1000?
Malcorian Vandsteidt
Alpha Trades
Solyaris Chtonium
#1043 - 2013-01-13 02:11:13 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
Malcorian Vandsteidt wrote:
I apologize for my attitude, but it is within reason:


I am rather upset that my favorite ship the Hurricane is being nerfed into uselessness. It was balanced and fine the way it was there was no need or reason to even touch it buff or nerf wise, it was a perfect ship.

And now as if if nerfing its PG and CPU was not enough (which basically crippled it), your throwing it off the cliff and into the space Junk yard by taking its shields, its armor, its hull and one of its high slots.

I mean really, enough is enough. Stop, put it back the way it was and leave it alone, instead of nerfing the ONLY balanced and worthwhile BC's (The Cane The Myrm, and the Drake) why dont you buff the others to put them in line with them? I mean seriously.

Breaking **** is not fixing ****. Its the exact opposite.

If you continue along this line of development you should refund the skillpoints player spent months and years putting into the Cane. Some people focused specifically on this ship and it is the only one they fly for pvp. By nerfing it like you continue to do you are basically forcing a player to retrain for months in order to get into a ship that is as effective as the one they have already trained for.

For example, I now fly battlships, simply because BC's are no longer worth my time with all the nerfs your giving them and I dont feel like retraining for months in order to "specialize" the others like I was in the cane.

If the above is out of the question, then I seriously suggest you add a function to EvE which allows the player to reset their skill points or to reallocate them. That way when you do stupid **** like this, your decisions do not cripple the player.


u wont get ur SP's refunded unless they remove such ships from the game. can i have ur stuff?

edit- btw, when they nerfed heavy missiles and the canes grid, i actually said the cane pilots weren't whining because they tended to have a better perception of balance and the rugged maturity to adapt...so thanks for this ^^ lol just make me out to be a right liar.



We do, and we usualy don't complain, I have an adapted cane. This is simply me expressing my frustration with the whole thing. I agree the BC's needed an overhaul, but it wasnt the ones they are nerfing that needed the overhauls it was the others that needed buffs.
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1044 - 2013-01-13 02:18:10 UTC
Malcorian Vandsteidt wrote:
I agree the BC's needed an overhaul, but it wasnt the ones they are nerfing that needed the overhauls it was the others that needed buffs.


Power creep.
Andre Coeurl
Embers Children
#1045 - 2013-01-13 02:25:49 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
Andre Coeurl wrote:
This is a way to think about Battlecruisers as a class which has a meaning in game and not just an intermediate ship between Cruisers and Battleships.
Fozzie and CCP, please consider something along these lines, or come up with some other solid concept before you start doing your changes.
Designating one as command (definetly neither combat nor attack) would be rough though.
Each ship has (should have) it's fans, imagine how you'd feel if the one you like gets picked to be command and you can no longer efficiently hunt solo in it.
Taking a wild guess, former tier 1 and the myrm would be it.
Not that I want the Myrm to become even more of a brick, and the Cyclone to loose dps as well.
And they would need to be a brick, because once they are designated as "command", seeing one on grid would make it highly likely that it IS a booster. And such, a primary canidate.

Would be better, if the Myrm had an extra non-hardpoint high, one of the caldari ones (or both) loose a hardpoint and gain a RoF or damage bonus, each ship could mount one (except the Brutix, that one would need the Harbringer's magic to be eligible).
And perhaps a minor incentive to use it as well, a role bonus somewhat like the T1 logi's, let's say 5% bonus to all, or 10% bonus to the racial prefered (which is as much as 1-2% would be for a hull/subsystem) links. For all BCs that have the 99% reduction.


You're quite right, if there will be just a group of T1 BCs able to be boosters, they should just become "the bricks", and that's not so much fun if you liked to fly them.

I think that there's a way to avoid this by giving all ex-tier1 & 2 BCs a specialized bonus allowing them to fit 2/3 unbonused links, and then you could have one group meant to be fast and agile as cruisers, with comparable (if slightly stronger) tanks and just the same kind of weaponry cruisers have with 2/3 more hardpoints, and another with BS-like tank and speed (if slightly faster), and a set of weapons meant to counter smaller ships (drones, tracking bonused turrets or explosion-speed bonused missiles, etc).
This way everyone will have a choice with the ship, you can fit it for more DPS so you use the extra slots for more guns, or you fit it for boosting and you put the links in.

This way we could have T1 bonus ships for armor and shield fleets, for cruiser an battleship fleets, and you can use those also solo if you want but they won't be even remotely overpowered, being either cruisers with more punch or battleships able to take on smaller ships.
So for example, Brutix, Ferox, Harbinger and Hurricane would become "fast booster" and Myrmidon, Drake, Prophecy and Cyclone would become "heavy booster".

Mind you, this isn't meant as a "finished" proposal, but a rough concept to further the discussion...
Arathella
Corpus Hermeticum Inc
#1046 - 2013-01-13 03:02:44 UTC
What is the reason Myrmidon has one slot less than other BCs?
fukier
Gallente Federation
#1047 - 2013-01-13 03:24:28 UTC
Arathella wrote:
What is the reason Myrmidon has one slot less than other BCs?



the same reason why you choose to not read the thread first...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Arathella
Corpus Hermeticum Inc
#1048 - 2013-01-13 03:47:18 UTC
fukier wrote:
Arathella wrote:
What is the reason Myrmidon has one slot less than other BCs?



the same reason why you choose to not read the thread first...


Which is what? I humbly beg to enlighten me.
auraofblade
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1049 - 2013-01-13 04:05:33 UTC
Well, I'm a bit of a noob on the topic, but I'd like to throw a crazed Ferox idea into the mix.

What if you split the 10% Optimal into 5% Optimal and 5% Tracking? Or whatever balanced numbers would be.

The problem I see with the Ferox is this: there's no reason to take it as a sniper over anybody else (eg: Naga), it isn't the best Shield tank (eg: Drake), and it's outclassed at using Rails/Blasters (eg: Everything Gallente). So, what I'm suggesting is to create an odd niche for it as a midrange Railgun boat, or at the very least an off-sniper that has a better time with more mobile targets.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1050 - 2013-01-13 07:03:18 UTC
Arathella wrote:
fukier wrote:
Arathella wrote:
What is the reason Myrmidon has one slot less than other BCs?



the same reason why you choose to not read the thread first...


Which is what? I humbly beg to enlighten me.

It was asked earlier and it is because of the "utility" and "versatility" of drone ships.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#1051 - 2013-01-13 07:21:37 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Arathella wrote:
fukier wrote:
Arathella wrote:
What is the reason Myrmidon has one slot less than other BCs?



the same reason why you choose to not read the thread first...


Which is what? I humbly beg to enlighten me.

It was asked earlier and it is because of the "utility" and "versatility" of drone ships.

Because drone bay itself is effectively a slot (or several) till its size reaches a certain point.

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1052 - 2013-01-13 08:12:36 UTC
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Because drone bay itself is effectively a slot (or several) till its size reaches a certain point.

Because drone ships have to give up half there DPS to gain the effects of 1 ewar module using drones?

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Mund Richard
#1053 - 2013-01-13 09:11:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Because drone bay itself is effectively a slot (or several) till its size reaches a certain point.

Because drone ships have to give up half there DPS to gain the effects of 1 ewar module using drones?
Yes.
Had the same thing with the Vexor as well for instance, only there you still get one bonused gun less than it's gunship counterpart the Thorax, so in fact you came out on top in dps comparison.
Here you get an extra mid, two guns less, all are unbonused, and unless you get a scram on your target, every last kiting BC will evade every drone of yours with it's MWD on, since drones getting in orbit turn theirs off.
And Ogres don't get in range in the first place anyways.

And it cannot sustain two flights of drones. Roll
Utility indeed.

"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.
Dewgong
Order of the Black Dagger
#1054 - 2013-01-13 09:16:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Dewgong
The new Proph isn't even remotely useful tbh. You'd practically get more use out of the current one than this new one, even if the concept of a drone boat is nice. Simply said, it doesn't work for the Dragoon, it wont work for the Proph. ****, if I really want to use a Dragoon, might as well use a Sentinel instead, ya know?

If you're going to be essentially completely redoing ships so drastically, you're better off only tweaking them and just introducing another tier 1 BC for the ideas you have.

As Rodensteiner said, just give the Proph another mid and it's instantly usable for the most part.

Also, please, for the love of god, don't touch the Harb. It's fine as is (or at least give it a little more CPU, don't take that **** away, it's tight on the fitting as is)

As far as the idea of making a dedicated boosting ship, we already have that in Command Ships (and to a growing extent, T3s) It's nice to have the ability on BCs, but honestly, who does it these days? Just give them a singular combat role and leave it at that <_<

Wouldn't mind an amarr BC (non Tier 3) that has a range bonus (I'm looking at you Proph) though. And while drone boat does fit Amarr (considering Crucifier and Arbitrator hulls, the Dragoon now, and in a sense, the Magnate) it's just a big mess with what you did with the Dragoon and are considering for the Proph. God help us if you even try this **** on the Curse and Pilgrim.

With the number of BCs that can field a full flight of medium drones or lights, a drone boat has to be able to field Heavies to really stand out, or have enough of a 'something else' to make them stand out. The default '10% more damage per level' just doesn't really cut it when you're at the BC level. Sure you can send like, two heavies and some mediums, but seriously, that's just not really a great move, it's why mixed damage/weapon platforms don't preform well (minus the Typhoon, but :Battleship: happens with that)

Edit: Also, if you can give a role bonus to the drone boats of like can use up to 7 drones at once, the Myrm and the Proph (moreso the proph) instantly become decent and worth the time to actually bother fitting up. Sure they can't use heavies, and the non-bonused turrets/launchers become less of an embarrassment. Sure they can't use heavies, but I think it's a fair substitute.
Mund Richard
#1055 - 2013-01-13 09:26:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Dewgong wrote:
With the number of BCs that can field a full flight of medium drones or lights, a drone boat has to be able to field Heavies to really stand out, or have enough of a 'something else' to make them stand out. The default '10% more damage per level' just doesn't really cut it when you're at the BC level. Sure you can send like, two heavies and some mediums, but seriously, that's just not really a great move, it's why mixed damage/weapon platforms don't preform well (minus the Typhoon, but :Battleship: happens with that)

Edit: Also, if you can give a role bonus to the drone boats of like can use up to 7 drones at once, the Myrm and the Proph (moreso the proph) instantly become decent and worth the time to actually bother fitting up. Sure they can't use heavies, and the non-bonused turrets/launchers become less of an embarrassment. Sure they can't use heavies, but I think it's a fair substitute.
Earlier in this thread, I tried to suggest getting the silly bandwidths down to 5 equal-sized drones and buff drone damage in return to fix drone tracking, speed, and mix-matched spares.
Totally messed up the numbers, someone was kind enough to correct it for me instead of laughing.
Corrected numbers here.
They are quite high.

+1 drone launchable each level (like the Guardian Vexor and carriers) for the Prophecy after BC level 3, and for the Myrm after level 1 (or even there for full bandwidth) usage would be fun, but unlikely.

"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.
rodyas
Tie Fighters Inc
#1056 - 2013-01-13 10:00:47 UTC
Inkarr Hashur wrote:
Freighdee Katt wrote:
Heribeck Weathers wrote:
Thats the name of the game man, its actualy quite silly to have trained up for one ship and only put your SP into one ship.

It's actually quite what CCP is forcing people to do now by making cross-training even harder with the skills change. This problem will only get worse for new people who train into one race for months, only to find out down the line that it's only good at one thing, or sucks at everything. They are at the same time making more willy nilly changes to break things people relied on, while making it harder to walk away and train into something different when they screw it up.


I see no problem with people dumping skills into perfecting one hull in a game with dozens and dozens of possible hulls, due to a power imbalance, suddenly being left in the cold when that balance shifts. That's the risk you take when you specialize. Maybe they shouldn't have gone for medium AC spec V. Well, they still have all the new and better Minnie cruisers to apply their perfect proj turret skills to.

And frankly, anyone who starts before April 2013 will be able to have all the racial BC Vs as well for minimal training time. There's your crosstraining. Its time to harden up, right?



Its time for them to harden up. We won't have to since, we were given the easy way out.

Suppose it will be like finally making senior level in high school and we get to raze all the new freshman.

But like the guy said, read the balancing BC dev blog. CCP wants you to pick just one ship or one race to train to lvl 5. That way new players are kind of like vets. CCP always mentions, that they don't ever expect new players to catch up to vets, and they will always be kind of shafted, unless they get lucky with the one ship or race they choose to train. So far with me choosing gallente then drone boats, I have not been so lucky.

Also a quick question to CCP Fozzie, do you really support those ideas, considering you put minmitar guns on your proteus in the CCP player event? I mean that is pretty much the opposite of specializing to combat vets.

Signature removed for inappropriate language - CCP Eterne
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1057 - 2013-01-13 10:24:35 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
Dewgong wrote:
With the number of BCs that can field a full flight of medium drones or lights, a drone boat has to be able to field Heavies to really stand out, or have enough of a 'something else' to make them stand out. The default '10% more damage per level' just doesn't really cut it when you're at the BC level. Sure you can send like, two heavies and some mediums, but seriously, that's just not really a great move, it's why mixed damage/weapon platforms don't preform well (minus the Typhoon, but :Battleship: happens with that)

Edit: Also, if you can give a role bonus to the drone boats of like can use up to 7 drones at once, the Myrm and the Proph (moreso the proph) instantly become decent and worth the time to actually bother fitting up. Sure they can't use heavies, and the non-bonused turrets/launchers become less of an embarrassment. Sure they can't use heavies, but I think it's a fair substitute.
Earlier in this thread, I tried to suggest getting the silly bandwidths down to 5 equal-sized drones and buff drone damage in return to fix drone tracking, speed, and mix-matched spares.
Totally messed up the numbers, someone was kind enough to correct it for me instead of laughing.
Corrected numbers here.
They are quite high.

+1 drone launchable each level (like the Guardian Vexor and carriers) for the Prophecy after BC level 3, and for the Myrm after level 1 (or even there for full bandwidth) usage would be fun, but unlikely.

I as well like the idea of a 5+ drone ship, but on anything bigger than light drones is would be a waste, as such 2med=1large but 2 light =/= 1 med.
As has been said before we need a complete drone overhaul. I think maybe the method behind fighters DPS may be correct, each drone does the same amount of DPS but with different ROF, alpha, HP, velocity, optimum range ect

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1058 - 2013-01-13 11:03:41 UTC  |  Edited by: James Amril-Kesh
Liang Nuren wrote:
Fozzie, I'm glad to see that you addressed the general concerns around the Brutix, Cyclone, and Ferox... but there's been quite a lot of angst over the Prophecy/Myrm appearing dominant and the Harbinger getting quad nerfed (likely worse than the other Tier 2s) when it was already the worst Tier 2 BC.

I know your goal is to make Tier 2 BCs much less attractive than they currently are, but I'm not sure why you want to make the Harbinger go from exceedingly rare to almost wholly nonexistent. Making the ship even more of a whale, nerfing fittings, and nerfing tank all at the same time makes it trivially the worst option of all the BCs.

-Liang

Liang, I'm not sure if you noticed, but the fitting nerf is to compensate for the loss of the 7th turret.
You actually get slightly more fitting if you were using Heavy Pulse IIs, even if you do have all fitting skills at V.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Fon Revedhort
Monks of War
#1059 - 2013-01-13 11:05:22 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Because drone bay itself is effectively a slot (or several) till its size reaches a certain point.

Because drone ships have to give up half there DPS to gain the effects of 1 ewar module using drones?

How about you stick to your drone DPS and gain ewar effects via regular modules, like the rest of us? My hi-slots don't allow me to gain EW effects at all, so what?

Simply put, drones in your case replace guns - so why wonder that you have less turret hardpoints?

"Being supporters of free speech and free and open [CSM] elections... we removed Fon Revedhort from eligibility". CCP, April 2013.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1060 - 2013-01-13 11:17:59 UTC
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Fon Revedhort wrote:
Because drone bay itself is effectively a slot (or several) till its size reaches a certain point.

Because drone ships have to give up half there DPS to gain the effects of 1 ewar module using drones?

How about you stick to your drone DPS and gain ewar effects via regular modules, like the rest of us? My hi-slots don't allow me to gain EW effects at all, so what?

Simply put, drones in your case replace guns - so why wonder that you have less turret hardpoints?

i know why i have less turret hardpoints, less slot lay out is the question.
And if drones are supposed to be used only for damage then where is the "versatility" that they are supposed to have?

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.