Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Please don't remove a turret.

I am so sick and tired of seeing ships with more visual places for turrets than the ship can ever actually fit.

Drake and Corax come to mind. All variations of the Tempest too.

Try applying a penalty instead of a bonus, like negative something percent damage.

It's so ******* annoying to my obsessiveness.

Great try - I agree strongly with Fon Revedhort and others that this change is not enough to bring this ship class into a balanced order. These ships still have way too much gank and too much speed. Other battlecruisers and shiptypes will keep to suffer without any realistic counter measures. When a DEV claims you need fleets of bombers or support ships to counter the ships something is wrong!!

The speed on the attack cruiser are still far greater than other battlecruisers even though they sport LARGE guns with more dps than most BATTLESHIPS.

About 50% more velocity than other battlecruisers?
Actually even faster than some of the Combat Cruisers?

Why do these ships even need this? 5-10 ms faster than any ship of the same class should be more than enough... When people use these ships they will try to keep their distance and warp out if anything threatens them. These ships fill into a super nice sniper niche because they can warp in/out faster than battleships and doesn't cost as much. Why don't CCP build on this making them faster in warp instead of capable of outrunning most other ship classes while hammering them with insane dps?

8 Large guns and a damage bonus?
Most battleships cannot even compete with that and they are still pricey, slow and takes longer to train for

The gank on these ships are far too great. If you want sheer dps these battlecruisers provide not only a better alpha but also better dps than any subcapital primary weapon system. For a cheap and fast/agile shipclass compared to battleships these ships would still provide a cheap and stable weapon platform with huge amounts of alpha and dps with only 7 guns.
The ship class is so easy to bring in position and get away with that dps will have to be limited if you want a balanced ship.

The bigger signature will only help in certain situations. The lockspeed is finally fair. But the speed and dps will still be 2 very unfair attributes that hurt any destroyer, combat cruiser or combat battlecruiser unfortunate enough to run into one. I don't care how they die from massive bomb runs - If I cannot compete reasonably against Attack Battlecruisers they are NOT BALANCED!!

And seriously that drone bay on the Talos has to go. People complained about Naga outperforming the Talos with blasters and you gave the Talos a drone bay. Now everybody go around blabbing people with the Talos and when ships are too fast to run away from they spam ecm drones and get away more often than they should. If peiople used combat drones it would not be an issue, but players are smarter than the best of intentions.

Pinky

I enjoy reading how the oracle's cap bonus is "useless." Bunch of idiots, it's probably one of the major downfalls of the oracle. lol

Please do something about these pesky insta-locking - cloaking sniping tornados that are nearly impossible to catch.

Disagree.

Some of us still like to fly solo, and don't use attack BCs just for ganking. The Talos is the only attack BC which has any sort of defense against smaller ships which can't be hit by the large guns.

I'd like to see the other attack BCs get some sort of defense against smaller ships, too, although I'm opposed to just adding drones to every ship.

Perhaps, adding a bonus to small guns, too, so they can be used more effectively as point defense (although I admit to a dislike of sacrificing high slots just to fit the small guns)? Or maybe a new mid/low-slot point defense module that can only be used on BCs and larger ships?

- The mass increase for the Talos and Tornado means that they can no longer be flown through a C1 WH with a 10MN prop mod active. This makes me sad...I liked using Talosi to close wormholes. Would be nice if it was 15mil or under, but I guess I'll just need to switch to another ship :(

- There's still no missile attack BC. Missiles are finally starting to be treated as a first-class option for primary weapon up there with the three types of guns; there needs to be an attack BC that can use missiles. Due to the inherent problems of missiles hitting smaller targets, a missile ABC will by its nature not be as OP against smaller targets as the gun ones currently are.

If the DPS of an attack BC is really an issue, then consider reducing PG rather than removing a high slot, so that attack BCs can no longer fit a full rack of T2 large guns, along with a MWD/AB. Players can then opt to fit fewer T2 guns, or to fit a full rack of T1/meta guns (which can't use T2 ammo), or fly without a prop module.

This should be enough of a nerf to differentiate them from the low-end BS, and yet not so much of a nerf as removing a high slot.

You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

I'll pull up the numbers tonight after GDC.

-Liang

That "the Talos is the only ABC which has any sort of defense against smaller ships" is precisely why it should have them removed. As Grath already noted:


This was stated very clearly when they were introduced and as I recall the Talos first made it to the test server without a drone bay but it was added against better judgement in response to the "It's gallente, it should have drones" argument without regard to the impact on balance.