These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#1481 - 2013-01-22 06:36:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Iyacia Cyric'ai
Roosevelt Coltrane wrote:
Now that we have seen the armor tanking changes, let me just say that active rep bonus is horrible, and likely wasted on anything above frig size.

Myrm might as well be a Minmatar ship, because it is still best with shields and projectiles.

The only reason some people are OK with keeping the active bonus on the Myrm is because a very small segment of players like triple rep solo/small gang PvP with that ship. Seems like catering to a very small segment of the player base (sorry 3MAR Myrm lovers), get rid of actve rep bonus on both Gallente hulls IMO.

I get that the new mod will free up a mid and lows, but even with the new mod the bonus is still much worse than the resist bonus. The Myrm will still be a ship with a very small niche.

You do realise that 1 load of charges from a single Medium Ancillary Armor Repper will provide more HP than a T2 1600mm Plate even without overheat or rigs right?

Add in overheating, some nano pump rigs and one of those new rigs that benefit OH reps and you have an insane amount of burst rep. Add in the fact that armor already has higher base resists than shields and you have a very decent armor buff. I think you just dismissed everything because the buff didn't happen exactly the way you wanted it to.
Unezka Turigahl
Det Som Engang Var
#1482 - 2013-01-22 07:52:59 UTC
I don't like how some BCs don't have a utility high. What are Caldari explorers supposed to use between the Heron and the Tengu? To fit a probe launcher you have to sacrifice a turret/launcher for all Caldari cruisers and battlecruisers now. On top of that, new players who use cruisers and battlecruisers for exploration are also more likely to bother with salvaging mag sites and overseer wrecks. So wheres the salvager go? Take off another turret/launcher for that? Use salvaging drones? I don't wanna know how long it will take them to salvage an overseer wreck... and can't use them on the cans.

I hope that the Gnosis is part of a new exploration line-up of ships and not a once-off gift... though that would homogenize things a bit.
Sigras
Conglomo
#1483 - 2013-01-22 08:29:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigras
ok, after getting on the test server and trying some of the fittings out, i have no idea what your guys' problem is . . .

The following are the stats I got with my skills, (all weapon specialization 4, acceleration control 4 and BC 5)

The Harbinger
Fits fine and has great damage projection, though it is quite a bit slower than the other ships. I chose valkyeries so I could be doing 3 damage types.

903 m/s (with MWD) (will be faster with new armor upgrades skill and buff to 800mm RRTP)
47,835 EHP (in eve fitting screen)
719 DPS (conflag + valkyeries in eve fitting screen)
547 DPS (scorch + valkyeries in eve fitting screen)
+ gets a medium cap booster to keep its guns and MWD running
+ web and LR point.

The Hurricane
still a great ship though it did slow down a bit with the patch, the only modification I had to make was to drop a neut; i choose hobgoblins instead of warriors so I would be doing 3 damage types.

1249 m/s (with MWD was 1311 before patch, so it lost 62 m/s)
39,938 EHP (in eve fitting screen)
576 DPS (barrage + hobgoblins in eve fitting screen)
(Sorry they didnt have RF EMP on the test server)
+ 1 medium neut to deal with small tackle that gets in close.
+ LR point

The Brutix
This ship might actually be viable after the patch . . . i cant believe it . . . I cant remember the last time I actually said that i might consider flying a brutix. Again I chose valkyeries because of the damage type.

Active Tanking
1204 m/s (with MWD no rigs simulating the rig changes)
34,199 EHP (in eve fitting screen, tank stats below estimated)
789 DPS (void + valkyeries in eve fitting screen)
+ 321 DPS tank** (see below)
+ web and scramble
+ cap booster

Buffer Tanking
1012 m/s (with MWD will be faster with new armor upgrades skill but using a 1600mm RRTP so no buff there)
50,805 EHP (in eve fitting screen)
830 DPS (void + valkyeries in eve fitting screen)
+ web and scramble
+ cap booster


I estimated the tank using a Medium Innefficient Armor Repair Unit and a Medium Automated Carapace Restoration because they should rep the exact amount that a boosted AAR will also used an auxiliary nano pump and a nanobot accelerator, but I didnt want to go through the math to simulate the new rig overloading

I got the tank numbers by averaging the resist numbers together and dividing the average HP repaired per second by that number.

TL;DR
I did some testing on the test server, I dont think the hurricane or harbinger are sufficiently gimped, nor do I believe the brutix was over buffed.

My review of the drone ships will be coming up next, sry dont have caldari or missile skills . . .
Roosevelt Coltrane
Rupakaya
#1484 - 2013-01-22 08:43:22 UTC
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
Roosevelt Coltrane wrote:
Now that we have seen the armor tanking changes, let me just say that active rep bonus is horrible, and likely wasted on anything above frig size.

Myrm might as well be a Minmatar ship, because it is still best with shields and projectiles.

The only reason some people are OK with keeping the active bonus on the Myrm is because a very small segment of players like triple rep solo/small gang PvP with that ship. Seems like catering to a very small segment of the player base (sorry 3MAR Myrm lovers), get rid of actve rep bonus on both Gallente hulls IMO.

I get that the new mod will free up a mid and lows, but even with the new mod the bonus is still much worse than the resist bonus. The Myrm will still be a ship with a very small niche.

You do realise that 1 load of charges from a single Medium Ancillary Armor Repper will provide more HP than a T2 1600mm Plate even without overheat or rigs right?

Add in overheating, some nano pump rigs and one of those new rigs that benefit OH reps and you have an insane amount of burst rep. Add in the fact that armor already has higher base resists than shields and you have a very decent armor buff. I think you just dismissed everything because the buff didn't happen exactly the way you wanted it to.


Actually I dismissed it because the rep bonus is of limited use. Unlike the Prophecy bonus, the rep bonus is useless with remote reps or buffer tanks. I had zero complaints about the new mods. New mods are great. Armor rep bonus is not. It continues to shoehorn the Myrm into a very small niche.
Apostrof Ahashion
Doomheim
#1485 - 2013-01-22 10:41:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Apostrof Ahashion
Sigras wrote:


The Harbinger
Fits fine and has great damage projection, though it is quite a bit slower than the other ships. I chose valkyeries so I could be doing 3 damage types.

903 m/s (with MWD) (will be faster with new armor upgrades skill and buff to 800mm RRTP)
47,835 EHP (in eve fitting screen)
719 DPS (conflag + valkyeries in eve fitting screen)
547 DPS (scorch + valkyeries in eve fitting screen)
+ gets a medium cap booster to keep its guns and MWD running
+ web and LR point.


Harbinger CPU - 437,5 after Electronics V
Internal Force Field Array I - 17cpu
800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I - 23cpu
Heat Sink II - 30cpu x 2 = 60 cpu
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II - 36 cpu x 2 = 72 cpu
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I - 50cpu
Medium Capacitor Booster II - 25 cpu
Patterned Stasis Web I - 23 cpu
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Distruptor I - 34 cpu
Heavy Pulse Laser II - 26.3 cpu x 6 = 157,8 cpu

Grand total = 466,8 cpu, you need 6% implant to fit it, even with 800plate and downgrading every module to save cpu. And an empty high slot. Not what i call easy to fit. Even if i put something wrong and this is not your exact fit its still incredibly tight. And it need AWU 5 or it will break pg limit as well. And cruisers now can squeeze in a 1600plate.
Julius Foederatus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1486 - 2013-01-22 11:51:23 UTC
Why don't we give the Brutix a +10% armor HP per level bonus instead of forcing both Gallente BCs to active tank or waste a bonus?
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1487 - 2013-01-22 12:34:48 UTC
Julius Foederatus wrote:
Why don't we give the Brutix a +10% armor HP per level bonus instead of forcing both Gallente BCs to active tank or waste a bonus?



Because as it is it will be ******* win with AAR's?


Massive reppage, decent cap, facemelt dps and SPEED TO CATCH CANES

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Reppyk
The Black Shell
#1488 - 2013-01-22 12:58:34 UTC
Apostrof Ahashion wrote:
Harbinger CPU - 437,5 after Electronics V
Internal Force Field Array I - 17cpu
800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I - 23cpu
Heat Sink II - 30cpu x 2 = 60 cpu
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II - 36 cpu x 2 = 72 cpu
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I - 50cpu
Medium Capacitor Booster II - 25 cpu
Patterned Stasis Web I - 23 cpu
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Distruptor I - 34 cpu
Heavy Pulse Laser II - 26.3 cpu x 6 = 157,8 cpu

Grand total = 466,8 cpu, you need 6% implant to fit it, even with 800plate and downgrading every module to save cpu. And an empty high slot. Not what i call easy to fit. Even if i put something wrong and this is not your exact fit its still incredibly tight. And it need AWU 5 or it will break pg limit as well. And cruisers now can squeeze in a 1600plate.
Sup.

I AM SPACE CAPTAIN REPPYK. BEWARE.

Proud co-admin of frugu.net, a French fansite about EVE !
Apostrof Ahashion
Doomheim
#1489 - 2013-01-22 13:35:26 UTC
Reppyk wrote:
Sup.


Yeah im ********. But still 800mm plate and you cant fit tracking computer or tech2 distruptor without an implant is a big deal. And there is no way to fit that utility high.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#1490 - 2013-01-22 13:36:27 UTC
Lack of utility highs sort of demotivates from using gang links on many of these BCs.

Not sure if good or bad.

.
SMT008
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1491 - 2013-01-22 14:14:54 UTC
Reppyk wrote:
Apostrof Ahashion wrote:
Harbinger CPU - 437,5 after Electronics V
Internal Force Field Array I - 17cpu
800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I - 23cpu
Heat Sink II - 30cpu x 2 = 60 cpu
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II - 36 cpu x 2 = 72 cpu
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I - 50cpu
Medium Capacitor Booster II - 25 cpu
Patterned Stasis Web I - 23 cpu
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Distruptor I - 34 cpu
Heavy Pulse Laser II - 26.3 cpu x 6 = 157,8 cpu

Grand total = 466,8 cpu, you need 6% implant to fit it, even with 800plate and downgrading every module to save cpu. And an empty high slot. Not what i call easy to fit. Even if i put something wrong and this is not your exact fit its still incredibly tight. And it need AWU 5 or it will break pg limit as well. And cruisers now can squeeze in a 1600plate.
Sup.


Nothing to argue about. The fitting requirements of the new Harbinger are bad and should be fixed. Period.
DJ P0N-3
Table Flippendeavors
#1492 - 2013-01-22 14:37:02 UTC  |  Edited by: DJ P0N-3
Fitted out a Harbinger on Sisi the same way as I have mine on TQ minus one HPL II. Sighed deeply. Awaiting Fozzie update. The FMPL Harbinger was a dark time in my life. Please don't send me back there now that I have emerged into the light.
Unkind Omen
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1493 - 2013-01-22 15:57:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Unkind Omen
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Sorry for not getting this post up sooner, been pretty busy here at CCP.

Why are you removing so many empty high slots from BCs when they keep the Gang link bonus?

This is a very legitimate concern, and I'm going to be working to see if we can ensure that each race has at least one T1 BC that can fit a gang mod without giving up too much from the highslot. Even though gang links on T1 BCs are not incredibly common at the moment, it would be great if it became more common so we'll see what we can do to help.


Can you make a role bonus for BC so they can fit T1 links without having a respective racial warfare skills(Skirmish Warfare Specialist ie) and have a flat bonus of 200-300% of the base value(equvalent to levels 3-4 of that skill) so that they will be able to provide 5-10% bonuses after 3-4 days of character training giving a nice newbie command ships?

I suggest that training chain for command ships should look like this:

BC -> Leadership V -> xxx Warfare V -> xxx Warfare Specialist IV, Warfare Link Specialist IV -> Command ships -> Link specialist V -> Cybernetics V
Moonaura
The Dead Rabbit Society
#1494 - 2013-01-22 16:07:54 UTC
Unkind Omen wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Hey everyone. Sorry for not getting this post up sooner, been pretty busy here at CCP.

Why are you removing so many empty high slots from BCs when they keep the Gang link bonus?

This is a very legitimate concern, and I'm going to be working to see if we can ensure that each race has at least one T1 BC that can fit a gang mod without giving up too much from the highslot. Even though gang links on T1 BCs are not incredibly common at the moment, it would be great if it became more common so we'll see what we can do to help.


Can you make a role bonus for BC so they can fit T1 links without having a respective racial warfare skills(Skirmish Warfare Specialist ie) and have a flat bonus of 200-300% of the base value(equvalent to levels 3-4 of that skill) so that they will be able to provide 5-10% bonuses after 3-4 days of character training giving a nice newbie command ships?

I suggest that training chain for command ships should look like this:

BC -> Leadership V -> xxx Warfare V -> xxx Warfare Specialist IV, Warfare Link Specialist IV -> Command ships -> Link specialist V -> Cybernetics V


This would make it very hard to see who was a gang bonus ship in a T1 battlecruiser gang, something that can add significant numbers to a gang tank or abilities. Its important to know what ships may be giving the bonuses. The Gang Link visual effect is limited and identical to the Sensor Booster visual effect, making finding it, next to impossible.

"The game is mostly played by men - 97%. But 40% of them play as women... so thats fine."  - CCP t0rfifrans 
Unkind Omen
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#1495 - 2013-01-22 16:14:35 UTC
Moonaura wrote:

This would make it very hard to see who was a gang bonus ship in a T1 battlecruiser gang, something that can add significant numbers to a gang tank or abilities. Its important to know what ships may be giving the bonuses. The Gang Link visual effect is limited and identical to the Sensor Booster visual effect, making finding it, next to impossible.


Does not that makes a perfect disguise for field command ships?
Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#1496 - 2013-01-22 16:20:00 UTC
I played around on testserver again last night with a friend...
Not much changed from ealier opinions, but still many of the ships felt surprisingly close to being good ships.

Ferox : I love it ! !
Drake : Still awesome, but seems to lack just a little more cpu (about 10 cpu)

- only thing bothering me is Drake not only having 1 more medslot but also share the resist bonus. It would make more sense to me if one had 6 medslots and no resist bonusm while the other had 5 and a tank bonus. And ofcourse the lacking warfare link options...

Prophecy : I love it ! ! It's sweet...
Harbinger : Seems to tank worse than the other battlecruisers with only decent dps? Need to test more...

- Again like the Caldari ships it bothers me to see a 7 lowslot prophecy with a resist bonus and the harbinger with 6 lowslots and no tank bonus. The Prophecy should give the resist bonus to the Harbinger and get a laser bonus to reward players using lasers instead of autocannons...

Hurricane : Still awesome as always.
Cyclone : I kind of really like it, but it's not easy to get a proper tank with limited cpu and only 5 medslots. I made it work but would not be easy to find a good setup with warfare links. I think it's alright if given a bit more cpu? Single ASB setups really need a helping hand though after the last nerf...

Brutix : Didn't get to try it yet
Myrmidon : Seemed to work okay but wasn't performing as well as I thought. I only got to try it once though but I always feel like I have a medslot too much. More testing required for me...
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1497 - 2013-01-22 16:21:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Sergeant Acht Scultz
Julius Foederatus wrote:
Why don't we give the Brutix a +10% armor HP per level bonus instead of forcing both Gallente BCs to active tank or waste a bonus?


Why would you want to make your ship even slower than already is? Shocked
As far as armor modules/rigs drawbacks go a +10% armor per level means you're adding mass, decreasing even further it's agility and speed.

You don't want any of these drawbacks when flying blaster ships except some Serpentis ones (because bonus and base ship stats) or limited edition snowflakes (Adrestria).
With a 28km point+off grid links on a missile or autos ship you get a hell of pointing distance, speed and agility. All you'll be able to do is watch your ship melt and insult EFT dps numbers "but...but..."


EDIT: woopadidou ! Just took a look at those armor changes proposal, this might as well give some help to active tanking ships, in some cases PG might become a problem and require downgrading weapons, but it might help.

Waiting to get some time and final mods description to "craft" a couple "things" and see what happens but, this could be of some help already.

removed inappropriate ASCII art signature - CCP Eterne
Sigras
Conglomo
#1498 - 2013-01-22 16:43:08 UTC
Apostrof Ahashion wrote:
Sigras wrote:


The Harbinger
Fits fine and has great damage projection, though it is quite a bit slower than the other ships. I chose valkyeries so I could be doing 3 damage types.

903 m/s (with MWD) (will be faster with new armor upgrades skill and buff to 800mm RRTP)
47,835 EHP (in eve fitting screen)
719 DPS (conflag + valkyeries in eve fitting screen)
547 DPS (scorch + valkyeries in eve fitting screen)
+ gets a medium cap booster to keep its guns and MWD running
+ web and LR point.


Harbinger CPU - 437,5 after Electronics V
Internal Force Field Array I - 17cpu
800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I - 23cpu
Heat Sink II - 30cpu x 2 = 60 cpu
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II - 36 cpu x 2 = 72 cpu
Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I - 50cpu
Medium Capacitor Booster II - 25 cpu
Patterned Stasis Web I - 23 cpu
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Distruptor I - 34 cpu
Heavy Pulse Laser II - 26.3 cpu x 6 = 157,8 cpu

Grand total = 466,8 cpu, you need 6% implant to fit it, even with 800plate and downgrading every module to save cpu. And an empty high slot. Not what i call easy to fit. Even if i put something wrong and this is not your exact fit its still incredibly tight. And it need AWU 5 or it will break pg limit as well. And cruisers now can squeeze in a 1600plate.

They have this new thing now called an adaptive nano plating that you can use instead of a EANM; it takes no CPU at all . . . you should check it out!
Apostrof Ahashion
Doomheim
#1499 - 2013-01-22 16:55:56 UTC
Sigras wrote:

They have this new thing now called an adaptive nano plating that you can use instead of a EANM; it takes no CPU at all . . . you should check it out!


Someone already pointed out that i am stupid, but that still does not change the fact that the ship is a ***** to fit. I already downgraded every other module on it. And also if you downgrade EANM you wont get ehp the op reported. And its a fit that uses 800mm plate. Even cruisers now can fit 1600.
Prisoner No14
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1500 - 2013-01-22 17:14:37 UTC
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.



They are buffing its armor?