These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

[Odyssey] Attack Battlecruiser balance pass

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#161 - 2013-03-28 22:42:51 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

Design flaws are meant to be fixed eventually.

The idea that a solitary battlecruiser should be vulnerable to a small gang of frigates is indeed reasonable, but it is not reasonable for a BC to be vulnerable to a single frigate. That is just absurd.

A single flight of light drones is a reasonable defense for a BC, against 1-2 frigates. Against 3+ frigates, the unbonused drones are more than likely to be quickly cleared from the field.

The fact that the other attack BCs do not have a similar defense against small ships is not a good reason to remove the drones from the Talos. Rather, it would make more sense to figure out a way to add some sort of option for a point defense system to these other ships, as well.
Chris Winter
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#162 - 2013-03-28 23:08:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Chris Winter
Mariner6 wrote:
Chris Winter wrote:
- 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 :(


That is really interesting and well, kind of ridiculous. Either all of them should be able to get in or none of them no?

They can still get into the C1 just fine, they just can't have the 10MN prop mod active when they do it, so they can't be used as variable-mass hole closers anymore. I suspect that's something of a less common use for them, though, so I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't get factored into the balancing equation.

It *does* mean that you have to deactivate the prop mod before you can get through the WH, which might mean the difference between living and dying if you're trying to make a run for it and have to sit and wait for the cycle to complete before you can go through, though...

Edit for those who might not know what I'm talking about w.r.t. closing holes: Previously at 14.4, they could go through as either 14.4 OR 19.4, which was rather useful since 19.4 is close to the max trip mass for a C1. Oracles/Nagas are the only ABCs that will be able to do that after Odyssey if the Talos/Tornado mass change sticks, and they're not as versatile at close range as the Talos.

I'll probably just switch to HAMDrakes for it, at 14.9/19.9, so I guess that works...
Havegun Willtravel
Mobile Alcohol Processing Units
#163 - 2013-03-28 23:40:32 UTC
Hi Rise.

Interesting first pass but I'm not sure this is hitting the target yet.

When Tier 3 BC's were first announced I guessed that a Talos with good skills would be able to fit a full rack of 5 or 6 Electrons. With perfect skills maybe Ion's with a single acr.

When the stats were released i was very surprised to see that they'd be able to fit Neutrons and not require a single fitting mod or rig, and a Full rack would be 8.

That's firepower that some BS's have trouble fielding. Yes they are very squishy, but only if you catch/target them before they rip your guts out.

While your proposed changes do take a bit off them in terms of mobility it's the firepower disparity that still needs to be addressed.

I'm guessing that inevitably they need to loose 1 high. -1 gun they become a choice vs other bc's. As is, they remain a bit to much of a '' go to '' option in alot of circumstances. In a null fleet with 50 or 70 on a primary -1 gun won't mean a thing. But in low sec -1 gun means that a well tanked cyclone, myrm or proph has at least a 50/50 chance which is better than almost none atm.

As to the Talos's drone bay. Leave it alone.

Talos is the only one of the 4 that needs to get up close to deal dps, Even when it has boosts .
Nado + Barrage, Naga + Null have the falloff or optimal to deal heavy dps at OGB'ed T2 point range. Talos doesn't.

And with the frig buff, 5 unbonus'ed smalls aren't that hard to kill, or at least tank till your gang shows up.

If/when the boost nerf happens you want to re-evaluate the Talos's drone bay fine. But until that happens there's a very good reason it has drones and no one else does. They don't need it, they're way out. Talos does cause ' in your face' is what it's meant for.


Thanks for listening and looking forward to updates.



Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#164 - 2013-03-28 23:41:23 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

Design flaws are meant to be fixed eventually.


I dont think you get it, its an intentional design flaw they want it to have forever. Its the trade off they make for the firepower they carry.

Have you not been following the entire process that was their creation or are you trolling me?

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Beaver Retriever
Reality Sequence
#165 - 2013-03-28 23:47:21 UTC
Sizeof Void wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

Design flaws are meant to be fixed eventually.

Ah yes but this is a video game and in video games things are balanced according to gameplay first, logic second.

I'm sure your inner space knighte can come up with some ballyhoo about Gallente engineers being dumb and terrible if it's that important to you.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#166 - 2013-03-28 23:57:20 UTC
Lake wrote:
Sizeof Void wrote:
Theia Matova wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Looks ok, but I don't think the Talos needs the drones.
kind of agree, gives talos too much advantage over other attack bcs

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?

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:

Grath Telkin wrote:
You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

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.

Actually, if I recall correctly, the stated reason was more along the lines of the fact that their role as kiters and snipers left the Talos looking rather lackluster compared with the naga during their initial tests so an exception was given to the idea that they shouldn't have drones to give it both differentiation and an advantage to compensate for needing to operate in closer range.
Vladimir Norkoff
Income Redistribution Service
#167 - 2013-03-29 00:16:18 UTC
Eh... Fairly decent changes. Could probably go farther and reduce the scan rez so they don't lock as fast. Make it a bit more difficult for them to instalock and gib a cruiser/frig. Direct them a bit more towards a role of anti-BC/BS instead jack-of-all-awesome. Granted that probably wouldn't go over so well most ABC pilots, so would probably never happen.
Joe D'Trader
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#168 - 2013-03-29 01:34:37 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Looks ok, but I don't think the Talos needs the drones.



It's the one thing they said made it competitive with the Naga, leave it alone
Vayn Baxtor
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#169 - 2013-03-29 01:44:02 UTC
I like that they are being adjusted.
I'm not a real fan of those vessels though because there is too much of "greatness" even with those changes to mass. They have more or less brought a bit of imbalance to the general public too (which is normal since they are actually stil have the "new car smell").

But I will pass on this one :D.

Using tablet, typoes are common and I'm not going to fix them all.

Pinky Denmark
The Cursed Navy
#170 - 2013-03-29 02:06:32 UTC
It seems to me the Tracking bonus on the Talos really makes it blap other cruisers and battlecruisers - even smaller ships - so I cannot see why it MUST have 5 light drones. I could perhaps accept 2 or 3 but I really don't think they are required for making Talos equally usefull compared to the Naga.

Pinky
Lake
The Praxis Initiative
Gentlemen's Agreement
#171 - 2013-03-29 02:12:14 UTC
Joe D'Trader wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Looks ok, but I don't think the Talos needs the drones.

It's the one thing they said made it competitive with the Naga, leave it alone


Then I would say that something else which does not undermine the very premise of the ship class should be found to make it competitive with (but different from) the Naga. Such differentiation has gotten more difficult in an age where Caldari now have a full suite of turret boats and Gallente fly with shield tanks as much (if not more than) armor.
Mariner6
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#172 - 2013-03-29 02:38:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Mariner6
Pinky Denmark wrote:
It seems to me the Tracking bonus on the Talos really makes it blap other cruisers and battlecruisers - even smaller ships - so I cannot see why it MUST have 5 light drones. I could perhaps accept 2 or 3 but I really don't think they are required for making Talos equally usefull compared to the Naga.

Pinky


Ok, then take the drones away and give it back the original web bonus that it had originally. Oh, but how many would cry about that? The drones are fine and in no way make this boat OP.
James Arget
Future Corps
Sleeper Social Club
#173 - 2013-03-29 03:50:12 UTC
Joe D'Trader wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Looks ok, but I don't think the Talos needs the drones.



It's the one thing they said made it competitive with the Naga, leave it alone

Tracking.

CSM 8 Representative

http://csm8.org
Dez Affinity
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#174 - 2013-03-29 05:15:07 UTC
From day one the problem with Tier 3 BCs - and I said this, day one. They do everybody else's job.

*Speed of cruisers. (At that time, Tornado was = to Rupture MWD speed, Naga faster than Caracal, Talos faster equal to a Thorax, Oracle slightly faster than an Omen)

They are not BC sized interceptors so why should they go so fast? Faster than most HACs? Faster than all other BCs, BS? Faster than most T1 cruisers barring the stabber?

*Sig Radius better than all other BCs, only slightly higher than cruisers. Talos has one of the larger base sigs and it is 2/3rds the sig of a Myrm. Only 2/5ths more than a Thorax. A tornado has a sig that rivals most HACs.

So okay, they're fast kitey ships. That seems like a solid role right? What do you mean the gift doesn't stop there?

*Eight Large Turrets on a battlecruiser and a 5 percent damage bonus per level to boot. The Naga and Tornado get range nice range bonuses and Talos gets tracking bonus while Oracle - which lets be honest has lasers doesn't need a range bonus gets cap.

So you've got these ships that get damage that rivals most battleships with relative ease. And much less training time. Due to them having large guns with range bonuses you kind of push them to the kitey side of gameplay just with that and with the benefit that being further away means your chance to track goes up.

*Base Lock Range, Sensor strength both higher than HACs. (Also better than tier 2 BCs as well as scan res)

All this and they still get around the EHP of a dual damage mod HAC (but admittedly not the resistances)

Can you think of one good reason to fly a HAC over a tier 3 BC? 1/2 to a 1/3rd of the DPS, equal tank. Round about equal speeds. Only slightly higher sigs. More range. Less skill intensive. Cheaper. Same amount of slots to play with.

And if that's not all they are the perfect ganking ships, whether that be suicide ganking, station camping or gate camping. Tornados especially because their alpha is insane combined with align speed, mwd speed and range means you're going to have a fun time actually tackling one.

Then you have the DPS from the Talos making it the best ship for ganking anything in high sec that's actually tanky.

.

So yeah, just changing their align time isn't going to balance them. They are far too good at EVERYTHING for that kind of change. And no, the nerf to TEs doesn't affect them enough either, that's not the way to go about fixing them.

You have to decide what role they are intended for, because being high damage, high range, high speed, high sensor, high alpha, relatively cheap ships is not balanced.
Dez Affinity
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#175 - 2013-03-29 06:06:23 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Quote:
Well currently, if you can use large guns, there is no reason to fly a brutix over say a talos. Honestly theres no reason to fly a Vaga over a Talos the ship is (in its current form) so incredibly broken with its extreme agility and dps projection.


I think we're going to just have to agree to disagree here. In my experience you have several metrics that are all really important to what a ship is good at, and all the ships you mention have completely different allocation of those metrics. Combat BC EHP makes them a lot more ideal as tacklers/bait ships than attack BCs. So having a drake alongside your talos to hold points without getting killed is very valuable. HACs like the vaga generally are much more capable of dealing with small support. So having vaga (or deimos or zealot or even rupture) to support an attack BC by protecting it from tacklers is very valuable. Attack BC have the highest damage/projection so they are generally going to have a lot of value based on that.

The prevalence of each role shifts based on a lot of things, but I don't see a direct tension between them. You don't get read for a roam and say - which ship has the most damage, lets take only those. At least thats been my experience.


You don't need tanky tackle like a Drake or say a Brutix/Myrm. Because Talos are so fast that they can keep up with almost everything they would ever need to.

Why bring a guy who goes into web range and deeper into peoples optimals when you can sit upwards of 20km away still with warp disruptor on your target. If they MWD away you MWD after them. If you're not god awful they won't break your orbit because you're very fast and agile.

Bring 900 dps and 40k ehp at 20km. Leave yourself the chance to still run away, heck you might even just run to 50km and take pot shots, because that's on the table with Tier 3s. It is NOT on the table with a brutix or a ferox.

Sure a vaga is better at popping frigs but it isn't much more survivable than a Talos. It's just under twice as fast, has about the same EHP if not less. It has 1/3rd of the DPS and that's all the way out to 50km.

Talos can protect each other from tacklers by simply not sitting on each other.
BobFromMarketing
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#176 - 2013-03-29 06:13:03 UTC  |  Edited by: BobFromMarketing
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.


I don't think you understand the basic concept behind Tier 3 Battlecruisers so I took a pretty picture with the important bits circled to point it out.

http://i.imgur.com/ZEvCEDH.jpg

Sizeof Void wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

Design flaws are meant to be fixed eventually.

The idea that a solitary battlecruiser should be vulnerable to a small gang of frigates is indeed reasonable, but it is not reasonable for a BC to be vulnerable to a single frigate. That is just absurd.
.


Why is it bad to have a ship trivialize everything under it's size? That really what you're asking? When it happened with supercaps it was the end of the freaking world but when it's your tier 3 battlecruiser it's ok becuse it only hurts new players and people who enjoy small/fast ships?


Sizeof Void wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
You are aware that the weakness to frigates is a stated intentional design flaw?

Design flaws are meant to be fixed eventually.
.


So according to you a large ship being unable to slaughter a smaller ship is a "design flaw". I look forward to my mothership getting it's drones back, titan tracking to go back to what it was and the game to becoming supercaps online once again.

Oh wait no that isn't how game design works. The flaws exists to make other ships valid, no single vessel should be a catch all. Even one you paid a lofty 80 million for.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#177 - 2013-03-29 06:13:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Ranger 1
I'm sorry, were people actually arguing that it's bad to have a class of ship that is actually able to do long range sniping again? Big smileBig smileBig smile

Long range sniping of any type has been either impossible or completely ineffective since the changes were made to scan probe mechanics. It is a logical role in game and should have ships that support it well.

ABC's are among the most vulnerable ships in the game if attacked correctly, and are absolutely a stealth bomber pilots wet dream of a target. Slowing them down a half step is fine, but take it much further and you invalidate their intended (and very valid) purpose.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#178 - 2013-03-29 07:13:39 UTC
Theia Matova wrote:
Castellan Garran Crowe wrote:
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.


Nerf Arties? oh look your corp is Deep Core Mining Inc. Typical Carebear here complaining about a Nado poping his retriever.

Mate all jokes aside, have you seen the rate of fire on arties, thats why they alpha so hard.


Now CCP Rise, why must you nerf these ships, more mass, less scan res, they are slow and squishy enough as it is

EDIT: Please bring back Torpedo Naga!!!


Don't forget that TEs will get serious balancing. This will affect Tornado. Yes alpha remains but you will get problems getting the same falloff and even alpha to long range.


Luckily, this has absolutely no effect on my arty nados. Def a bit of a nerf though on Vaganados (800mm AC tornados).

As for the nerf, should be interesting how it plays out. Tier 1/2 battlecruisers (Yes, I know ccp tried to change the name, but this is still the easiest and most clear way to refer to them as groups) are still pretty far behind in dps. Be interesting to see how some of the changes like the prophecy and brutix buff/fix effects their pvp usage.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#179 - 2013-03-29 07:56:09 UTC
When the changes to the Prophecy was announced. Anyone with sense knew it was a armor-Drake. You just knew they would become as ubiquitous as Drakes.

Honestly, if a serious PVP entity does not have Prophecy's as a doctrine; then they better be rocking Drakes.

Funny. The Prophecy is more cost effective comparatively. So much so that its not even purchasing a armor cruiser over a Prophecy. The overall cost after fitting modules is too similar.

The Brutix is whatever. In fact, the prophecy is as good as a Mrymidon. Some have argued it is better and cost has something to do with it too. The only difference between the 2 ships is damage and defense. The Myrmidon does more damage but the Prophecy has better defense and I don't think the extra damage on the Myrm is even worth it.


- killz

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#180 - 2013-03-29 09:09:21 UTC
I was afraid for a moment that CCP would nerf mobility to hell, making them only good at being glass cannons.

But looks like the moderate changes will only prevent it from outrunning attack cruisers while still having good maneuverability.