These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
adopt
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1721 - 2013-01-26 02:07:35 UTC
An idea to make T1 booster ships viable, allow them to fit 3 links simultaneously, without any sort of gang link bonus. This makes them cheap disposable Leadership ships while not being as powerful as the CS/T3s.
Mund Richard
#1722 - 2013-01-26 03:06:29 UTC
Edward Pierce wrote:
So Ogre iis can track and shoot cruisers pretty well, might need it to get it tackled to actually hit it, but that applies to your ship's guns most of the times as well.

Also lets not forget the 3x sentry option.

I stand corrected, used sentries (that do have a BS gun resolution) for so long, that was the only 25mbps data I acknowledge.

3 sentry for the Proph, 4 for the Myrm.
Though I must say, only sentries I saw lately in PvP were the NPC ones.

"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.
Sigras
Conglomo
#1723 - 2013-01-26 03:07:12 UTC
Qaidan Alenko wrote:
Moonaura wrote:
Ragnar D IX wrote:

I see the fact that that empty highslot was meant for the Warfare Link in the Drake occured to someone.

Unfortunately, the Drake will now lose a launcher, handicapping its DPS in a significant way. Ugh


Its getting 5% more DPS per level than before to make up for it. Technically a DPS increase...

The new drake will lag behind the old one, until lvl IV where they will break even.... at V will the new drake get a nominal increase (just under 3%) over the old hull.

which is why things are balanced around max skills like they should be . . .

Have you ever flown a logistics ship with logistics 3? theyre all TERRIBLE, and logistics 4 only makes them kinda ok; it isnt until you get to logistics 5 that theyre really quite awesome . . .

The same thing with the recon ships . . .

If I were balancing around level 4 skills I would actually say that both of those ships need a buff but then they'd be totally overpowered at level 5.

The fact that they break even at level 4 is perfect
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#1724 - 2013-01-26 03:45:47 UTC
Sigras wrote:
which is why things are balanced around max skills like they should be . . .

Have you ever flown a logistics ship with logistics 3? theyre all TERRIBLE, and logistics 4 only makes them kinda ok; it isnt until you get to logistics 5 that theyre really quite awesome . . .

The same thing with the recon ships . . .

If I were balancing around level 4 skills I would actually say that both of those ships need a buff but then they'd be totally overpowered at level 5.

The fact that they break even at level 4 is perfect
While I'd agree the Drake is in a good place. Can't say I do in regards to your idea of balancing. Should be poor at level 1, mediocre at II, decent at III, good at IV, and awesome at V. Having a ship that is useless at level II skill is pretty bad game design (ie. Recons and the crippling Cloak fit - fortunately being fixed). Higher level should be better, but low level skill shouldn't mean unusable.
Sigras
Conglomo
#1725 - 2013-01-26 06:22:46 UTC
oh thats not what i meant at all . . .

i just meant that if you have the option of either:
1. making a ship balanced at level 4 and totally OP at level 5
2. making the ship balanced at level 5 and not so great at level 4

you should pick #2 every time.
Marcus Walkuris
Aww yeahhh
#1726 - 2013-01-26 11:15:15 UTC
I might post more in-depth later.

But something more important right now is what seems to be lost in translation.

PLEASE DO NOT name Battlecruisers "Combat Battlecruisers".

That would be the equivalent of referring to "feline cats".
A cat is a feline and a feline is a cat, there are no "feline cats" as a "definition" because there are no other kinds of cats they are all feline.
So no "battle combat-knife", ergo no "combat battlecruisers".
Please don't use the same meaning twice.

Definition of battle. bat·tle
/ˈbatl/
Noun
A sustained fight between large, organized armed forces.
Verb
Fight or struggle tenaciously to achieve or resist something: "he has been battling against the illness".
Synonyms
noun. fight - combat - action - war - fighting - struggle
verb. fight - combat - struggle - contend - war - wrestle


Definition of Combat. com·bat
/ˈkämˌbat/
Noun
Fighting between armed forces.
Verb
Take action to reduce, destroy, or prevent (something undesirable).
Synonyms
noun. battle - fight - action - fighting - struggle
verb. fight - struggle - battle - wrestle - contend - war


Please don't put make the ship class a funny Engrish Pun.
Ty. P.S. no my first language is Dutch not English :P.
Caitlyn Tufy
Perkone
Caldari State
#1727 - 2013-01-26 11:56:15 UTC
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Caitlyn Tufy wrote:
Naomi Anthar wrote:
Atm 75 bandwitch ain't better than 50 to be honest. And 80 is obviously a upgrade over Arbitrator(2 heavy and 3 medium). Or care to explain me what you are sending from your droneboat with 75 bandwitch.


2 heavies, 2 mediums, 1 light drone. It's been used on 75 bandwidth ships extensively in the past.


And this combination failed since always. I can explain how. So light and medium and heavy ? 3 diffrent types of tracking. Sure send this vs dunno cruiser and heavies will miss. Send this vs frigate and maybe light will hit. And even if all hit. Let's see how much damage upgrade is that over 5 mediums(75 bandwitch) : 5 x 24 damage = 120. 2 heavy + 2 medium +1 light =96+48+15=159. Sure it's upgrade over arbitrator but it's at tremendous cost of having 3 diffrent tracking , 3 diffrent signature drones, 3 diffrent SPEED drones. Maybe you like gimmick combos like this. I'm not asking for much really. Just 5 bandwitch.


Nobody ever said you SHOULD use that, I simply pointed out what's possible to send. Alternately, you can always send 3 gardes, 1 ogre and 4 hammers, 5 hammers, 5 hobbos, whatever suits your current needs, because nobody forces you to use max bandwidth all the time. With 225 drone bay, you'll have plenty of room to get several drone combos in one package anyway (specifically, that holds my 2-2-1 combo, 3 sentries, 5 mediums and 5 lights). The 2-2-1 combo is simply the best damage output for that bandwidth - you're right, it's best on large targets, where ogres hit, but then, if you have plenty of room to send out the lights instead, I simply fail to understand why you'd want to use that against a frigate? You don't use a hammer for screwing either, do you?
pressveck
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1728 - 2013-01-26 13:36:22 UTC
Inkarr Hashur wrote:
pressveck wrote:
Please rename them to Supportcruiser, because it is not an BATTLEcruiser anymore. Thats really ridiculous.

Oh, wait got a better idea. Remove them completely from EVE, than this story will come to an end.

You have such amazing ideas, its a wonder CCP doesn't hire you.


Player Bash Post, awesome and helpful...
Zyella Stormborn
Green Seekers
#1729 - 2013-01-26 14:56:04 UTC
Ragnar D IX wrote:

I hear ya matey. I dont think the TD is that situational, however, as 3/4 races are centered on gunships... tho.. not sure you can affect the range of a BS enough to be worthwile. Dont get me wrong, I love the Drake and plan to fly it for pvp... I just dont like the bias to gunships for pvp, and since Caldari are pretty much only missile race... seems to make sense to bonus them with the TD. I have gone 1v1 with a Cane a couple times and won in a Drake... so, maybe i'm just full of it.



I may be mistaken, but didn't they just increase missile speed by 50% or so? They travel much faster to their targets now, making them much more viable than they were before.

There has been some very large rather recent changes. It will take a few months for things to shake down and real averages to come out on numbers, but I personally have seen a lot more missile boats flying around daka-daka'ing since the missile update. I'll be interested in seeing the mid-long term ramifications.

~Z

There is a special Hell for people like that, Right next to child molestors, and people that talk in the theater. ~Firefly
Shereza
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1730 - 2013-01-26 17:16:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Shereza
Marcus Walkuris wrote:
PLEASE DO NOT name Battlecruisers "Combat Battlecruisers".

That would be the equivalent of referring to "feline cats".
A cat is a feline and a feline is a cat, there are no "feline cats" as a "definition" because there are no other kinds of cats they are all feline.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panthera
Panthera leo (lion)
Panthera onca (jaguar)
Panthera pardus (leopard)
Panthera tigris (tiger)

There is precedent for what CCP is doing. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but describing sub-divisions of the battlecruiser class of ships in this fashion is at least somewhat appropriate.

Still, look on the bright side. At least it's not as bad as saying "ATM Machine" or "DmC:Devil May Cry."

Edit: Also, I think that if you're going to make a comparison "combat battlecruiser" to "feline cat" it wold work better as "cat feline." Feline is the general group while (house) cat is a sub-group. "Feline cat" is more aesthetically pleasing, and likely more correct, but it doesn't match the framework CCP is using. Blink
Mund Richard
#1731 - 2013-01-26 19:16:23 UTC
Also, it's kinda the same deal as with Battleships.
There will be Attack and Combat Battleships just as well (and the Scorpion just to mess things up, I'm ignoring it).

"Combat" in this sense shows that it's meant more for a general line of fighting instead of "Attack" which is more meant to go fast(er) and hit hard(er), raiding instead of proper siege if you will.
Like how tier 3 BCs will have the "Attack" role, and will be made closer to BC weight and speed (or so I had the impression).

Would be kinda hard to find a battlecruiser, that's not meant for attacking or doing combat, that's the realm of T3 boosters. Roll

"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.
Boris Amarr
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#1732 - 2013-01-26 20:36:10 UTC
For Punisher and Maller bonus to Medium Energy Turret capacitor use was changed to bonus to all Armor Resistances. Why you are going to keep bonus to Medium Energy Turret capacitor use for Harbinger??? Where is logic?
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1733 - 2013-01-26 20:54:02 UTC
I want the Maller to get the harb treatment =< Lose a gun, more bonus, 1 utility

Would make the cap inherently better while letting you fit a nos




Then if they buffed nos's it might even not cap out.

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Kahega Amielden
Rifterlings
#1734 - 2013-01-26 20:59:10 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
I want the Maller to get the harb treatment =< Lose a gun, more bonus, 1 utility

Would make the cap inherently better while letting you fit a nos




Then if they buffed nos's it might even not cap out.



The Maller is pretty great as it is...Don't think it needs any more buffs.
Marcus Walkuris
Aww yeahhh
#1735 - 2013-01-26 21:16:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Marcus Walkuris
Shereza wrote:
Marcus Walkuris wrote:
PLEASE DO NOT name Battlecruisers "Combat Battlecruisers".

That would be the equivalent of referring to "feline cats".
A cat is a feline and a feline is a cat, there are no "feline cats" as a "definition" because there are no other kinds of cats they are all feline.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panthera
Panthera leo (lion)
Panthera onca (jaguar)
Panthera pardus (leopard)
Panthera tigris (tiger)

There is precedent for what CCP is doing. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but describing sub-divisions of the battlecruiser class of ships in this fashion is at least somewhat appropriate.

Still, look on the bright side. At least it's not as bad as saying "ATM Machine" or "DmC:Devil May Cry."

Edit: Also, I think that if you're going to make a comparison "combat battlecruiser" to "feline cat" it wold work better as "cat feline." Feline is the general group while (house) cat is a sub-group. "Feline cat" is more aesthetically pleasing, and likely more correct, but it doesn't match the framework CCP is using. Blink


While I acknowledge you agree with me and don't want to be argumentative for the sake of being argumentative.
It is actually still inappropriate.
In Latin all the forms that you wrote there are flawless examples of proper Latin language.
In English someone may have a reason for speaking of a "dog canine" in Latin it is the other way around.
Latin= "kanine species, house=dog" English is "dog of the species kanine" "Julius Cesar" Julius Emperor= Emperor Julius.
Sorry for being pedantic, I am not trying to.... (lupus canis familiaris=dog).

However put "Combat Battlecruiser" is as non-sensical as using a word as a "garden tool rake" since a gardener in his infinite wisdom decided his rakes needed categorizing since he had several.
That said I liked your post :D
The Stifmeister Pie
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1736 - 2013-01-26 21:52:20 UTC
Why is the drake still shackled to kinetic missiles?
All ships should have a neutral bonus like the Caracal have now
All ships have bonus to their weapons but not type of armor so does the Caldari ships should have...
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#1737 - 2013-01-26 22:02:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Garviel Tarrant
Kahega Amielden wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
I want the Maller to get the harb treatment =< Lose a gun, more bonus, 1 utility

Would make the cap inherently better while letting you fit a nos




Then if they buffed nos's it might even not cap out.



The Maller is pretty great as it is...Don't think it needs any more buffs.



Confirming that you are bad.



The Maller has terrible cap and terrible tracking.. And has 3 mid slots so it has to choose between being able to hit stuff thats close to them and having enough cap to shoot their guns in the first place..


Its a T1 ship that more or less only works in armor cheepfleets. And that is only because it has a decent tank and can use scorch.


Its the worst combat cruiser by a wide margin if you look at its over all application.


If you want to keep up the "Amarr have few midslots" thing you need to make up for it somehow. And seeing how amarr are supposedly the cap warfare race i'd think a slot for nos would be great





The Stifmeister Pie wrote:
Why is the drake still shackled to kinetic missiles?
All ships should have a neutral bonus like the Caracal have now
All ships have bonus to their weapons but not type of armor so does the Caldari ships should have...



So because the Omen has a ROF bonus all amarr ships should have that? The Kestrel/caracal aren't tied to a damage type, The condor/drake are

Live with it?

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#1738 - 2013-01-26 22:33:45 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
If you want to keep up the "Amarr have few midslots" thing you need to make up for it somehow. And seeing how amarr are supposedly the cap warfare race i'd think a slot for nos would be great
If a Maller has terrible tracking wouldn't it be a bad idea to be close enough to be in Nos range? I'm asking as a legit question cuz I have ZERO experience using lasers. I would of thought that a cap booster would be almost mandatory on a laserboat, leaving only 2 slots for prop and a point.
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1739 - 2013-01-26 22:35:44 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Kahega Amielden wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
I want the Maller to get the harb treatment =< Lose a gun, more bonus, 1 utility

Would make the cap inherently better while letting you fit a nos




Then if they buffed nos's it might even not cap out.



The Maller is pretty great as it is...Don't think it needs any more buffs.



Confirming that you are bad.



The Maller has terrible cap and terrible tracking.. And has 3 mid slots so it has to choose between being able to hit stuff thats close to them and having enough cap to shoot their guns in the first place..


Its a T1 ship that more or less only works in armor cheepfleets. And that is only because it has a decent tank and can use scorch.


Its the worst combat cruiser by a wide margin if you look at its over all application.


If you want to keep up the "Amarr have few midslots" thing you need to make up for it somehow. And seeing how amarr are supposedly the cap warfare race i'd think a slot for nos would be great





The Stifmeister Pie wrote:
Why is the drake still shackled to kinetic missiles?
All ships should have a neutral bonus like the Caracal have now
All ships have bonus to their weapons but not type of armor so does the Caldari ships should have...



So because the Omen has a ROF bonus all amarr ships should have that? The Kestrel/caracal aren't tied to a damage type, The condor/drake are

Live with it?


So my corp has been under wardecs constantly and there's nothing we can do about it, not even fight back...

Me and all my corp mates are all caldari pilots and used to run L4's happily. We have decent skills for caldari ships and missiles only.

At beginning we had little success but now our enemies learned that we can only fly caldari ships and use missiles decently and very poor skills on gunnery they just slap 2 kinetic hardeners on their ships and since drakes has been the only option against them there is nothing we can really do against them now. Our other damage types dps are laughable and with their hardeners we barely tickle them with kinetic missiles too.

This proposed change to drake will make it even worse. Is it really intended that you can counter these ships so easily?
Luc Chastot
#1740 - 2013-01-26 22:53:53 UTC
Marcus Walkuris wrote:
I might post more in-depth later.

But something more important right now is what seems to be lost in translation.

PLEASE DO NOT name Battlecruisers "Combat Battlecruisers".

That would be the equivalent of referring to "feline cats".
A cat is a feline and a feline is a cat, there are no "feline cats" as a "definition" because there are no other kinds of cats they are all feline.
So no "battle combat-knife", ergo no "combat battlecruisers".
Please don't use the same meaning twice.

Definition of battle. bat·tle
/ˈbatl/
Noun
A sustained fight between large, organized armed forces.
Verb
Fight or struggle tenaciously to achieve or resist something: "he has been battling against the illness".
Synonyms
noun. fight - combat - action - war - fighting - struggle
verb. fight - combat - struggle - contend - war - wrestle


Definition of Combat. com·bat
/ˈkämˌbat/
Noun
Fighting between armed forces.
Verb
Take action to reduce, destroy, or prevent (something undesirable).
Synonyms
noun. battle - fight - action - fighting - struggle
verb. fight - struggle - battle - wrestle - contend - war


Please don't put make the ship class a funny Engrish Pun.
Ty. P.S. no my first language is Dutch not English :P.


CCP has defined the combat class of ships as high damage, high defense, low mobility ships. This means that when you read "Combat BC", you should read "high damage, high defense, low mobility battlecruiser". Again, what's your problem with calling them "combat battlecruisers"?

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.