These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Ryomo Shimei
Galactic Brotherhood of Violence
#2101 - 2013-02-07 01:58:28 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Ryomo Shimei wrote:
marcus is right .. the heavy missiles got nerved ... and the heavy assault missiles has way to low flyrange compared to other short range weapons which can easy outrun em in range .. and since caldari ships are basicly the slowest you cant even get in range with ham + with only 6 launchers in the drake and the lowerd tank ability makes the last usefull missile boat in the cruiser level useless for caldari since in missions many npc use defender missiles but no use for example tracking desruptors ... so drake is also useless in missions now so whatfor even go for missiles since they cant be used properly .... you have way to less dps ( since if ya have you have nearly no tank ) or way to less range .. especialy since ham need nearly 5km to get at maxspeed which for example reduaces your range from 15 km down to 11 ... and if i see that an minmatar player can fire easyly 22km and is faster caldari is out of use ... i hope ccp r4econsider the missiles again ... not only in pvp case but also in pve ..... or give as much rats that use defender missiles anti turrent equipment aswell so that the turrent users know how it feals when you cant kill something

If Marcus wants to avoid confusion in the future he shouldn't say "rockets" when he apparently means heavy missiles (or all missiles).

Also adjustments are being made to missile range calculations so that what you see will pretty much be what you get... meaning if it says 15km then it means 15km. A variety of skills and rigs will also now apply to HAM's that previously had no effect on them... you did train those skills as a missile user right? If not, time to get busy.

Of course, heavy missiles are still an excellent weapons system compared with all other medium long range weapons systems but I'll stop so as not to distract you from your panic and hand wringing. Smile



you are wrong the 15 km still are not 15km ... the missiles still need time to accellerate to full speed which takes away some km from the range so basicly atm 15km resuld in an efective range of 11km on an not moving target

and besides even is you now have skills that fit they are still way to short in range compared to other short range weapon systems and is an drake lost an missile atm its an loss of 1/7 dmg ... after the patch its 1/6 which is way to easy be done and an bad increase in dmg loss and since th defender missiles always hit it is an loss ... an turrent player even under an tracking desruptor can still hit with all guns and if ya speak of ballancing thats a point which always had caldari being weak and easyly to blow there dps so for the drake an enhanced launcher and less bonus would be the fairer way to adjust the drake

and then .. against an caldari you basicly only need to give as much as possible to kinetic ress since your forced to use em due to bonus ... all other factions can change the ammo as they like and so basicly the dmg efects they do so an +dons to heavy and heavy assault missiles instead of an +to one dmg type needs to be there in my eyes ... else all will play minmatar sooner or later because it will be the only logic choice then
Jojo Jackson
Dead Red Eye
#2102 - 2013-02-07 02:16:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Jojo Jackson
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Harbinger:
Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret Damage
10% bonus Medium Energy Turret capacitor use

When do you learn, that 10% less cap usage just to fire the weapons is NO BONUS?
It just fixes an premade penalti which shouldn't be there at all!

Else the other races would need stuff like -10% PG need for Hybrid weapons just to fit the intended weapon system. Hybrid PG use must be doubled before of corse! Or -10% explosion velocity for HM and HAM just to hit BC size targets. Or +10% tracking speed for Projectil Weapons just to be able to track BC size enemys at all.

Give the Harby damage+optimal or damage+tracking. But not this bullshit of -10% cap usage for intended weapons :(.
FIX LASER CAP USAGE and don't gimp Amarr ships with 1 real bonus and 1 "we need to fix the ****" wannabe crap!

Why the hell can't I fitt capital repairs or shield booster on an Orca ... it's an CAPITAL ship!
Travasty Space
Pilots of Epic
#2103 - 2013-02-07 02:37:35 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
Travasty Space wrote:
Mund Richard wrote:
Caitlyn Tufy wrote:
Roime wrote:
(Also notice that lasers are ****** over WAY more by TD's than any other ammotype due to having no falloff/bad tracking already)
Frankly, they'd need to look over how TE/TCs work (optimal vs. falloff)
And by look over how they work, do you mean reduce the falloff they give to somewhere towards x1.5 for instance?
TD not affecting falloff the way TC does would make sense if the plan would be to let brawling ships at least stand a chance against kiters by going into deep falloff.
Now how much that reflects the current state of affairs, is another thing.
Whaaaaa? I think you need to play more man, Optimal and Fall-off both get done over by TDs equally.
And was that not precisely what we were talking about?

The symmetry is that beneficial modules affect falloff twice as much (TC/TE/TL 15% optimal vs 30X% falloff scripted).

With Tracking Disruptors, this is not true, since - just as you pointed out - both are reduced at the same percentage, instead of falloff being reduced twice as much.


TDs affect falloff far more then they do optimal. Lets do a numbers comparison:

Zealot and Vaga as they both have single 10%/lvl range bonuses and largest medium short range guns are used with no TEs/TCs to start with.

Scorch - 34+5+2.5(Half way into secondary fall-off) = 41.5 km Range
Conflag - 11+5+2.5 = 18.5 km range

Barrage - 3+27+13.5 = 43.5 km
Faction EMP - 1.5+18+9 = 28.5 km
Hail - 1.5+14+7 = 22.5 km

So at this point Projectiles can put their 25% dps out a bit past what lasers can, though inside of general kiting/brawling ranges lasers win out. lets apply an unbonused TD(-47.75% to both optimal and fall-off):

Scorch - 18+2.6+1.3 = 21.9 km Range
Conflag - 5.9+2.6+1.3 = 9.8 km range

Barrage - 1.6+14+7 = 22.6 km
Faction EMP - 0.8+9.4+4.7 = 14.9 km
Hail - 0.8+7.1+3.1 = 11 km

With two TEs each and still under TD:

Scorch - 23+4.3+2.2 = 29.5 km Range
Conflag - 7.6+4.3+2.2 = 14.1 km range

Barrage - 2+23+11.5 = 36.5 km
Faction EMP - 1+15+7.5 = 23.5 km
Hail - 1+12+6 = 17 km

So over the whole course of this we see that ACs have the range advantage over Pulses they should have, now looking at actually dps figures at 25km for long range ammo and 10 for short range(2 TEs/Damage mods for each ship):

Scorch - W/o TD 406, W/ TD 318
Conflag - W/o TD 568, W/ TD 419

Barrage - W/o TD 285, W/ TD 140
Faction EMP - W/o TD 416, W/ TD 310
Hail - W/o TD 439, W/ TD 279

So assuming both ships can reach the target Pulses with their optimal range are less affected then ACs. This doesn't look at bonused TDs, but it only gets worse. The only advantage fall-off has over optimal is the one is suppose to have, reach the target and put some DPS on the target. To change how TEs and such work would be to break the balance we currently have between ACs and Pulses.
Flatiner
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2104 - 2013-02-07 02:55:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Flatiner
@ Lili Lu -- Actually the tengu works fine in combat sites but thanks for the troll
Lili Lu
#2105 - 2013-02-07 04:48:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Lili Lu
Flatiner wrote:
@ Lili Lu -- Actually the tengu works fine in combat sites but thanks for the troll


What you haven't left yet. Aren't you going to carry through on your threat to do it? Just do it.
Sigras
Conglomo
#2106 - 2013-02-07 05:19:03 UTC
Goldensaver wrote:
Sigras wrote:

Lasers are still quite a bit better than blasters at all sizes except small . . .

Blaster ships have all the drawbacks (they turn off when neuted, non-selectable damage, slow armor tanks) and they have none of the upside (instant ammo switching, damage projection)

the damage and tracking is much higher on blaster ships, but as you said, armor ships cant dictate range.

Laser ships can overcome their tracking issues by using a web, blaster ships overcome their range deficiencies by . . . going faster?

TL;DR
if you think lasers are the red headed step child of weapon systems, my blaster ships would like a word . . .


Eeh, I disagree. Blasters over small can all shoot out to long point range with Null loaded (assuming a TE or two), but don't get outrun by a close orbiting enemy ship. Also many blaster ships have enough mids to fit full tackle AND a cap booster so they aren't as susceptible to neuts. Also they don't take long to switch ammo either. So they get DPS, tracking, and don't typically suffer as far as neuting is concerned. And all large blasters and any range bonused/TE'd medium blaster ships have all the range they need. The projection at that range isn't as good as lasers, but is still sufficiently high.

WTB a thorax/brutix/deimos that can afford a low to put a TE in . . .

without the TE, the optimal + falloff of the brutix is 6.3+8.8 with perfect skills, neutron blasters and null ammo . . . that means you do half damage at 15.1 km and basically no damage at 23.9
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2107 - 2013-02-07 05:52:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Sinigr Shadowsong
Alek Row wrote:

You forgot a few things...
Lowest optimal
Low (lowest?) dps on paper
Fights in falloff, even lower dps despite the good projection
This may not be accurate, but you are only taking into account the weapon systems.

And now you can resort to other things, ships that simply work because of the slot layout, ship bonuses, ship stats, module combinations, whatever, and I agree, because taking into account weapon systems without their ships it's idiotic.
So tell me, which Minmatar ship after the balancing pass is causing you trouble?

Edited to rephrase the question
Which Minmatar ship after the balancing pass you think it's better than other races ships, in their respective class?


I have not forgot those, I posted about advantages of Minmatar, not about disadvantages.

Lowest optimal is over-compensated by great falloff and enough fitting slots for a few TE/TC in most cases.
Actually high dps, lowest is probably missiles - both on paper and projection. Here are 2 factors:
a) Selectable damage => Projectiles exploit resist holes of a target while lasers/hybrids are stuck with 1 damage pattern.
b) Minmatar ships are often have powerful RoF bonus or even double damage bonuses instead of useless placeholders like Turret Capacitor Usage.
Good damage projection on falloff range because of a good tracking via spare slots for TE/TC and ability to use close-range ammo for all situations. Other turrets force you to choose between range and dps/tracking, for Minmatar it's just always good dps/tracking/range.

I was talking about weapon systems because Fozzy stated that he likes drawbacks on weapon systems to make them more interesting. I would personally prefer to strip some power from Projectiles and build it back onto Minamatar hulls that use them.

Answer to your last question: I rarely fly T1 sub-bs ships so I cannot fully answer it.
Thrasher is still best Destroyer.
Scythe is probably best T1 "Logi".
Slasher is probably best T1 "Interceptor".
Other rebalanced ships are not best in class but still good.
X Gallentius
Black Eagle1
#2108 - 2013-02-07 06:11:24 UTC  |  Edited by: X Gallentius
Goldensaver wrote:
And they removed a gun but increased the bonus to compensate for it, increasing its PG effectively. And they reduced the PG cost of medium reps by 20%. They've done a lot to help the Brutix PG wise. And subject to bad tracking?? What? Blasters? I will agree with the mids though. It can't afford to put in the cap boosters it needs to power the reps.

Personally I'm trying to figure out what the "different roles" these two ships will fill.
Myrm - Active tanking 1v1 ship - that is good at close range and uses drones (and turrets) to kill the opponent.
Brutix - Active tanking 1v1 boat - that is good at close range and uses turrets to (and drones) kill the opponent.

Some role differentiation please.
Travasty Space
Pilots of Epic
#2109 - 2013-02-07 06:27:55 UTC
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:
Alek Row wrote:

You forgot a few things...
Lowest optimal
Low (lowest?) dps on paper
Fights in falloff, even lower dps despite the good projection
This may not be accurate, but you are only taking into account the weapon systems.

And now you can resort to other things, ships that simply work because of the slot layout, ship bonuses, ship stats, module combinations, whatever, and I agree, because taking into account weapon systems without their ships it's idiotic.
So tell me, which Minmatar ship after the balancing pass is causing you trouble?

Edited to rephrase the question
Which Minmatar ship after the balancing pass you think it's better than other races ships, in their respective class?


I have not forgot those, I posted about advantages of Minmatar, not about disadvantages.

Lowest optimal is over-compensated by great falloff and enough fitting slots for a few TE/TC in most cases.
Actually high dps, lowest is probably missiles - both on paper and projection. Here are 2 factors:
a) Selectable damage => Projectiles exploit resist holes of a target while lasers/hybrids are stuck with 1 damage pattern.
b) Minmatar ships are often have powerful RoF bonus or even double damage bonuses instead of useless placeholders like Turret Capacitor Usage.
Good damage projection on falloff range because of a good tracking via spare slots for TE/TC and ability to use close-range ammo for all situations. Other turrets force you to choose between range and dps/tracking, for Minmatar it's just always good dps/tracking/range.

I was talking about weapon systems because Fozzy stated that he likes drawbacks on weapon systems to make them more interesting. I would personally prefer to strip some power from Projectiles and build it back onto Minamatar hulls that use them.

Answer to your last question: I rarely fly T1 sub-bs ships so I cannot fully answer it.
Thrasher is still best Destroyer.
Scythe is probably best T1 "Logi".
Slasher is probably best T1 "Interceptor".
Other rebalanced ships are not best in class but still good.


Projectiles don't have the highest paper dps, that belongs to Lasers or Blasters. and for projection it is even with lasers.
As for your reasons:
Projectiles don't have true selectable damage, first off all ammo does kin and most do explosive damage as well with the T2 AC ammo being only explosive/kin which isn't going to always hit the holes.
These bonuses bring the projectiles in line with other weapons like lasers with scorch due to how fall-off works.
I'd like to see you use Hail for all situations.

Thrasher still has a role, isn't the best though.
Scythe vs osprey is just like Scimitar vs Basi and your ignoring the armor side of things.
Sinigr Shadowsong
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#2110 - 2013-02-07 06:40:42 UTC
Travasty Space wrote:

Projectiles don't have the highest paper dps, that belongs to Lasers or Blasters.


I've never said about highest dps, just high actual dps. If projectiles had higher dps than blasters they would be absurdly overpowered.
Mund Richard
#2111 - 2013-02-07 06:55:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Travasty Space wrote:
So assuming both ships can reach the target Pulses with their optimal range are less affected then ACs. This doesn't look at bonused TDs, but it only gets worse. The only advantage fall-off has over optimal is the one is suppose to have, reach the target and put some DPS on the target. To change how TEs and such work would be to break the balance we currently have between ACs and Pulses.

Is the moral of the story that TD affects falloff more...
...or that T2 ammo(+hull) serves amarr superbly?

How about a Cane vs Harbi fight with faction ammo?
*does math*
(no/double TE and no/one TD)
Interestingly, the TD does not affect how deep in falloff they are when the damage becomes equal again, so I have to take back the TD part.

On the other hand, the TE greatly improves things in the Cane's favor, not having to go as deep into falloff to outdps the Harbi.
Without it, equal damage is regained at 86% into first falloff, while with two TEs at 68%.

TE-s greatly help the ACs, and then T2 ammo helps twice as much the Amarr (Cane having to go into second falloff).

"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.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#2112 - 2013-02-07 07:03:43 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Goldensaver wrote:
And they removed a gun but increased the bonus to compensate for it, increasing its PG effectively. And they reduced the PG cost of medium reps by 20%. They've done a lot to help the Brutix PG wise. And subject to bad tracking?? What? Blasters? I will agree with the mids though. It can't afford to put in the cap boosters it needs to power the reps.

Personally I'm trying to figure out what the "different roles" these two ships will fill.
Myrm - Active tanking 1v1 ship - that is good at close range and uses drones (and turrets) to kill the opponent.
Brutix - Active tanking 1v1 boat - that is good at close range and uses turrets to (and drones) kill the opponent.

Some role differentiation please.


Isn't it enough that one is a ship and the other is a boat? Bear

Although I actually think there is a difference, Myrm is that 1vs1 active tanker (5 mids and cap free dps make it superior), and Brutix is still the shield tanked gankwagon with as limited use as a solo BC, now just with even more dps but still a wasted hull bonus.

Triple-repping Brutix makes it pretty terrible, Electrons stink.





.
Mund Richard
#2113 - 2013-02-07 07:14:24 UTC
Roime wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Personally I'm trying to figure out what the "different roles" these two ships will fill.
Myrm - Active tanking 1v1 ship - that is good at close range and uses drones (and turrets) to kill the opponent.
Brutix - Active tanking 1v1 boat - that is good at close range and uses turrets to (and drones) kill the opponent.

Some role differentiation please.
Isn't it enough that one is a ship and the other is a boat? Bear

Although I actually think there is a difference, Myrm is that 1vs1 active tanker (5 mids and cap free dps make it superior), and Brutix is still the shield tanked gankwagon with as limited use as a solo BC, now just with even more dps but still a wasted hull bonus.

Triple-repping Brutix makes it pretty terrible, Electrons stink.
Well, the Brutix receiving the best thing that can happen to an armor-tanked boat (enough mids for a shield tank and a loss of armor bonus) would have been too good to be true.

"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.
Naomi Anthar
#2114 - 2013-02-07 08:37:18 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
Roime wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Personally I'm trying to figure out what the "different roles" these two ships will fill.
Myrm - Active tanking 1v1 ship - that is good at close range and uses drones (and turrets) to kill the opponent.
Brutix - Active tanking 1v1 boat - that is good at close range and uses turrets to (and drones) kill the opponent.

Some role differentiation please.
Isn't it enough that one is a ship and the other is a boat? Bear

Although I actually think there is a difference, Myrm is that 1vs1 active tanker (5 mids and cap free dps make it superior), and Brutix is still the shield tanked gankwagon with as limited use as a solo BC, now just with even more dps but still a wasted hull bonus.

Triple-repping Brutix makes it pretty terrible, Electrons stink.
Well, the Brutix receiving the best thing that can happen to an armor-tanked boat (enough mids for a shield tank and a loss of armor bonus) would have been too good to be true.


And if it's too good it never happens ? Welcome to Eve. But on serious note i would love to armor tanking to be fixed or at least a serious attempt to fix it. As for now those changes are joke. As for changes to BC's i would not complain that much. I don't see anything being particulary bad. Sure armor rep bonus ain't most dessired, but you better be happy with it or you will get reduced cap usage on hybrid weapons...
CCP Eterne
C C P
C C P Alliance
#2115 - 2013-02-07 09:04:27 UTC
I have deleted some personal attacks from this thread. Do not crap up official threads, people.

EVE Online/DUST 514 Community Representative ※ EVE Illuminati ※ Fiction Adept

@CCP_Eterne ※ @EVE_LiveEvents
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#2116 - 2013-02-07 09:44:27 UTC
X Gallentius wrote:
Personally I'm trying to figure out what the "different roles" these two ships will fill.
Myrm - Active tanking 1v1 ship - that is good at close range and uses drones (and turrets) to kill the opponent.
Brutix - Active tanking 1v1 boat - that is good at close range and uses turrets to (and drones) kill the opponent.

Some role differentiation please.

Lot of midslot + drones (capless) make the myrm better for solo.
Railguns make the brutix better for fleet.
Mund Richard
#2117 - 2013-02-07 09:55:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
X Gallentius wrote:
Personally I'm trying to figure out what the "different roles" these two ships will fill.
Myrm - Active tanking 1v1 ship - that is good at close range and uses drones (and turrets) to kill the opponent.
Brutix - Active tanking 1v1 boat - that is good at close range and uses turrets to (and drones) kill the opponent.

Some role differentiation please.

Lot of midslot + drones (capless) make the myrm better for solo.
Railguns make the brutix better for fleet.

Rail Brutix for fleet?

Quite a narrow spot where it performs better than the other hybrid platforms in that role.
Would rather tank shields with a Ferox (all the more since it kept the optimal bonus), leaving the lows free for magstabs and TE.

"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.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#2118 - 2013-02-07 11:34:18 UTC
Travasty Space wrote:


TDs affect falloff far more then they do optimal. Lets do a numbers comparison:

Zealot and Vaga as they both have single 10%/lvl range bonuses and largest medium short range guns are used with no TEs/TCs to start with.

Scorch - 34+5+2.5(Half way into secondary fall-off) = 41.5 km Range
Conflag - 11+5+2.5 = 18.5 km range

Barrage - 3+27+13.5 = 43.5 km
Faction EMP - 1.5+18+9 = 28.5 km
Hail - 1.5+14+7 = 22.5 km

So at this point Projectiles can put their 25% dps out a bit past what lasers can, though inside of general kiting/brawling ranges lasers win out. lets apply an unbonused TD(-47.75% to both optimal and fall-off):

Scorch - 18+2.6+1.3 = 21.9 km Range
Conflag - 5.9+2.6+1.3 = 9.8 km range

Barrage - 1.6+14+7 = 22.6 km
Faction EMP - 0.8+9.4+4.7 = 14.9 km
Hail - 0.8+7.1+3.1 = 11 km

With two TEs each and still under TD:

Scorch - 23+4.3+2.2 = 29.5 km Range
Conflag - 7.6+4.3+2.2 = 14.1 km range

Barrage - 2+23+11.5 = 36.5 km
Faction EMP - 1+15+7.5 = 23.5 km
Hail - 1+12+6 = 17 km

So over the whole course of this we see that ACs have the range advantage over Pulses they should have, now looking at actually dps figures at 25km for long range ammo and 10 for short range(2 TEs/Damage mods for each ship):

Scorch - W/o TD 406, W/ TD 318
Conflag - W/o TD 568, W/ TD 419

Barrage - W/o TD 285, W/ TD 140
Faction EMP - W/o TD 416, W/ TD 310
Hail - W/o TD 439, W/ TD 279

So assuming both ships can reach the target Pulses with their optimal range are less affected then ACs. This doesn't look at bonused TDs, but it only gets worse. The only advantage fall-off has over optimal is the one is suppose to have, reach the target and put some DPS on the target. To change how TEs and such work would be to break the balance we currently have between ACs and Pulses.

so many words to just prove you dont have a clue about projected dps and the difference between shooting in optimal and shooting in falloff
Luscius Uta
#2119 - 2013-02-07 11:48:43 UTC
Sinigr Shadowsong wrote:


Alltogether they have enough advantages. Something about autocannons have to go, either it selectable damage, cap-free usage, super-easy fitting or double benefit from TE/TC.


ACs are made of win, but that doesn't mean CCP should nerf them into suckiness like they did with HMLs. My suggestion? Make them overheat faster than other guns, maybe 1 HP/cycle instead of 0.8 HP/cycle.

Also, laser turrets need to be buffed. I suggest increasing their tracking a bit (especially since most laser boats don't come with a tracking bonus) and make them drain a small amount of target's capacitor with each hit, maybe equal to 1-2% of inflicted damage (but should be restricted to T2 or sub-cap turrets only, since a cap draining effect on sieged Revelation could be game-breaking).

Workarounds are not bugfixes.
Morgred
State War Academy
Caldari State
#2120 - 2013-02-07 14:16:13 UTC
arbitrator: droneboat
curse: droneboat with ECM
pilgrim: droneboat with ECM
(makes sense)

prophecy: droneboat with half lasers and half missiles
damnation: missileboat
absolution: laserboat
harbinger: laserboat
Oracle: laserboat
(this makes no sense)

I propose the harbinger be made a droneboat, as it has no t2 variants it would conflict with, proph has a t2 laserboat and a t2 missileboat but t1 is half one, half the other and half something else entirely? this makes no sense to me.