These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Tech 1 Battleships - Gallente

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
mine mi
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#961 - 2013-04-10 02:24:33 UTC
i like to see this ser up

Hyperion

Slot layout: 7H, 6M, 6L; 7 turrets

Bonus

Gallente Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+10% large hybrid weapon damage
+7.5% 7.5% bonus to armor repair amount of armor repair

Why so many media? because she needs to do almost everything

ECM - cap boost for local rep - micro jump - tackle - target braker to avoid focus fire.


the only way to make it viable,is to convert the fleet fight, in 1 vs 1
Helena Khan
Ministry Of Reverse Engineering
#962 - 2013-04-10 02:25:14 UTC
The mega's old proposed slot layout is 8-5-6. That is as flawed as a BS' slot layout can get - just ask today's Hyperion.

If you want to shoehorn a ship into one role, and one role only ask for bonuses which suit that one role sure. But I don't believe that you can look at the layout in isolation in any case. The other qualities of the ship come into play, as well as its fittings.

Part of the issues with the Hyperion revolved around its bonuses to AR, the lack of range of blasters and what was truly anemic damage of railguns. That, and a healthly dose of can't move very fast at all even under MWD meaning damage application was dubious at best.

So... and you're welcome to correct me if I'm wrong, you want a line battleship for Gallente. Imho the Hype would be the better ship to change for that purpose and leave the Mega in the fast attack role. Speed and high DPS at the cost of some durability.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#963 - 2013-04-10 02:28:14 UTC
Helena Khan wrote:
The mega's old proposed slot layout is 8-5-6. That is as flawed as a BS' slot layout can get - just ask today's Hyperion.

If you want to shoehorn a ship into one role, and one role only ask for bonuses which suit that one role sure. But I don't believe that you can look at the layout in isolation in any case. The other qualities of the ship come into play, as well as its fittings.

Part of the issues with the Hyperion revolved around its bonuses to AR, the lack of range of blasters and what was truly anemic damage of railguns. That, and a healthly dose of can't move very fast at all even under MWD meaning damage application was dubious at best.

So... and you're welcome to correct me if I'm wrong, you want a line battleship for Gallente. Imho the Hype would be the better ship to change for that purpose and leave the Mega in the fast attack role. Speed and high DPS at the cost of some durability.


Read this.
Tennessee Jack
Doomheim
#964 - 2013-04-10 02:35:48 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Tennessee Jack wrote:
T1 battleships please.

What is the fleet doctrine for the megathron and Hyperion. If there is none, what should it be?


Simple: Armor hybrid platform.

Right now there are 2 viable shield doctrine backbones and 1 viable armor doctrine backbone among BSes. Making either capable of line DPS balances that out.

In order to fill the role, either ship would need to be capable of hitting roughly 120k EHP with all resists around 75, using rails.

This doesn't mean specialize either ship into rails - it just means make fitting them possible.


I can see the megathron doing this. It's what it should be doing regardless.

The Hyperion..... Needs work. It should be able to hit with void ammo, at 20k optimal before mods, and out to 35 with mods.

After that, needs a way to survive in a fire too. Can't do a sensor damp bonus cause then it won't track worth a damn.

No answers atm

Range of guns is a issue
Tank is a issue
Speed is an issue
The repair bonus is a issue.

Just give the ship 3000 extra hp per armor repairer on it. Have 3 armor reps, 9000 more armor. Smaller repairers give smaller armor bonus 1500 and 400 respectively,
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#965 - 2013-04-10 02:35:55 UTC
Helena Khan wrote:
The mega's old proposed slot layout is 8-5-6. That is as flawed as a BS' slot layout can get - just ask today's Hyperion.

Doesn't the tempest also have that layout?
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#966 - 2013-04-10 02:38:03 UTC
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Here's my in depth analysis of the problem regarding Gallente Battleships.

I will focus on one of the most important roles, if not the primary role, of Battleships - Fleet Line DPS. I say this because Battleships are far too vulnerable to smaller ships to be viable solo, and are of limited use in small gang engagements, where they are outshined by Battlecruisers in most aspects. Their roles basically boil down to fleet warfare and PvE.

....
So, CCP, all I ask of you is this: let Gallente have a line DPS Battleship. Please.



On battleships, while non-droneboats are vulnerable to small ships, drone bonused ones are not.

A Dominix is presently a nightmare for an Enyo duo that would melt a Megathron in short order.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#967 - 2013-04-10 02:42:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Akirei Scytale
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Helena Khan wrote:
The mega's old proposed slot layout is 8-5-6. That is as flawed as a BS' slot layout can get - just ask today's Hyperion.

Doesn't the tempest also have that layout?


And I ask you - when is the last time you saw someone using a Tempest seriously for PvP?

The best I've seen a Tempest do is a really light artillery platform. It is absurdly niche and not even the best in that role. Freaking Muninns do it better.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#968 - 2013-04-10 02:49:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Helena Khan wrote:
The mega's old proposed slot layout is 8-5-6. That is as flawed as a BS' slot layout can get - just ask today's Hyperion.

Doesn't the tempest also have that layout?


And I ask you - when is the last time you saw someone using a Tempest seriously for PvP?

The best I've seen a Tempest do is a really light artillery platform. It is absurdly niche and not even the best in that role. Freaking Muninns do it better.

I don't PvP much so my answer wouldn't be terribly relevant, but I'm not seeing near the complaints of the ship being just plain terrible that I'm seeing of the proposed megathron or current hyperion. If the layout was such a strong contributing factor why wasn't there such strong negative feedback for it?

Was it there and I missed it?
Was it because the Maelstrom still provided a viable fleet worthy alternative?
Was it that the ship really isn't bad but isn't a fleet go to (which for being an individual ship in the BS line isn't a failure)?

Edit: Took another look in the Minmatar BS thread and still not seeing complaints about the tempest in its current form, but rather praise and requests for its enhancements to match it's current uses (which in turn means someone is using them), nor am I seeing anything near a significant number of requests to change the layout. However, I'd be willing to concede that this may be mostly due reactions to the typhoon monopolizing people's attention.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#969 - 2013-04-10 02:56:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Akirei Scytale
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Akirei Scytale wrote:
Tyberius Franklin wrote:
Helena Khan wrote:
The mega's old proposed slot layout is 8-5-6. That is as flawed as a BS' slot layout can get - just ask today's Hyperion.

Doesn't the tempest also have that layout?


And I ask you - when is the last time you saw someone using a Tempest seriously for PvP?

The best I've seen a Tempest do is a really light artillery platform. It is absurdly niche and not even the best in that role. Freaking Muninns do it better.

I don't PvP much so my answer wouldn't be terribly relevant, but I'm not seeing near the complaints of the ship being just plain terrible that I'm seeing of the proposed megathron or current hyperion. If the layout was such a strong contributing factor why wasn't there such strong negative feedback for it?

Was it there and I missed it?
Was it because the Maelstrom still provided a viable fleet worthy alternative?
Was it that the ship really isn't bad but isn't a fleet go to (which for being an individual ship in the BS line isn't a failure)?


1) The Mael was the fleet ship for Minmatar (which could also do small gangs), meaning the other two BSes could do whatever. They often found niche roles, like smartbombing platforms, were used in small gangs for whatever role, and were used in PvE. Nothing was riding on it.

2) The Hyperion is the only tier 3 Gallente BS. Because it has the **** layout, it isn't viable for any of the things every other tier 3 BS can do. The only fleet viable BS Gallente has currently is the Megathron (it has a good layout), but because of the tier system, its stats are WAY below par. Tiericide is an opportunity to fix this. They decided to make the problem worse instead, by LOWERING the relevant stats on the Megathron while simultaneously giving it the gimptastic layout. Hence page 49.
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#970 - 2013-04-10 03:05:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyberius Franklin
Akirei Scytale wrote:

1) The Mael was the fleet ship for Minmatar (which could also do small gangs), meaning the other two BSes could do whatever. They often found niche roles, like smartbombing platforms, were used in small gangs for whatever role, and were used in PvE. Nothing was riding on it.

2) The Hyperion is the only tier 3 Gallente BS. Because it has the **** layout, it wasn't viable for any of the things every other tier 3 BS could do. The only fleet viable BS Gallente has currently is the Megathron (it has a good layout), but because of the tier system, its stats were WAY below par. Tiericide is an opportunity to fix this. They decided to make the problem worse instead, by LOWERING the relevant stats on the Megathron while simultaneously giving it the gimptastic layout. Hence page 49.

I won't dispute the idea that given the envisioned roles the (current) Megathron makes the best candidate for a fleet BS, but per the original question, if the role fits why such angst about the layout? Even in your response, though you downplay it, you acknowledge the tempest found a role and still left the role of fleet BS filled by the mael. That being the case the layout is situationally workable if not benificial.

But of course that won't be the case for a line BS, but I don't think that was what they were going for on this pass with the megathron.
Sizeof Void
Ninja Suicide Squadron
#971 - 2013-04-10 03:09:13 UTC
-1 on changes to Domi.

The drone optimal and tracking bonuses are only of significant benefit to sentries, and we don't all use only sentries.

Also, we don't all fly only in fleets.

The existing hybrid bonus, plus the drone bonus, makes the Domi into one of the best multi-role solo & small gang PVE and PVP ships. Flexibility is the major advantage of this ship, and now you propose to take this away in favor of making it into a one-trick (fleet sentry) lame pony.

Bad idea.

Rather than breaking one of the few old ships that actually works in-game, why don't you use it as the model for fixing the other ships?
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#972 - 2013-04-10 03:11:37 UTC
Maybe someone else has said this, but I'll say it too.

Hyperion - Combat
Megathron - Attack
Dominix - Disruption via Sensor dampening and/or tracking disruption

At least, that's the way I see it.
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#973 - 2013-04-10 03:14:42 UTC
Tyberius Franklin wrote:

I won't dispute the idea that given the envisioned roles the (current) Megathron makes the best candidate for a fleet BS, but per the original question, if the role fits why such angst about the layout? Even in your response, though you downplay it, you acknowledge the tempest found a role and still left the role of fleet BS filled by the mael. That being the case the layout is situationally workable if not benificial.

But of course that won't be the case for a line BS, but I don't think that was what they were going for on this pass with the megathron.


That's the problem. They still don't have a line BS, and need one. Hopefully they'll have one tomorrow.

Regarding the general dislike of the layout even outside the line BS role, it is simply weak. A solid Battleship tank involves 5 modules, plus one lowslot for the damage control. This means it requires, at a minimum:

6 Mids (5 for tank, 1 for prop mod)

or

7 Lows (5 for tank, 1 for DC, at least 1 for damage mods)

Ships with resist bonuses get to cut one mod out of the equation, bringing the minimums to 5 mids or 6 lows.

Now, the 8-5-6 layout makes fleet combat impossible, meaning tackle is probably going to be needed too on any fit. This means, either the ship has NO damage mods and an armor tank, or it has a weak armor tank with damage mods, or it has an INCREDIBLY weak (1-2 module!) shield tank with tackle. None of the above are good. People would fly different ships for the roles it could fill.
Loki Vice
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#974 - 2013-04-10 03:16:50 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
I must say, you guys do have a theatrical flair.

Look its 10pm and I'm trying to keep caught up on this, but I promise tomorrow we will go back through this Gal lineup and see if we can resolve some of the frustration.

I know I tried to lay out our intentions in the OP, but I want to lay it out again, just to make sure we're on the same page. I understand that many of you here aren't satisfied so we'll go back over it tomorrow and look at our options. In the mean time maybe this will help.

In the Megathron and the Hyperion, we had two ships that more or less shared some space. They were both armor focused blaster brawlers. The mega was armor focused because of its slot layout - but it had increased utility from one extra high slot and a larger drone bay, and also had an easier time applying damage because of the tracking bonus. Then we had the Hyperion which was bonused to look more like a heavy brawler - focused completely on damage and tank, because of having no utility high, less drones, and a tank focused bonus instead of tracking.

In my personal experience, I felt both ships came up short because they didn't play to their strengths enough. The mega seemed like it wanted to be more like a tempest, less concerned with tank, more focused on utility. A heavy tackler, a hit and run ship (MJD), a ship that could move fast and gank if supported. People tended to run light armor tanks (2 plates 2eanms 1dcu 2 mag stab) as the basic setup, but sometimes tried active setups which usually used more lows for tank. The hyp on the other hand always had almost all lows dedicated to tanking because of only having 6, and so its damage struggled to compete (unless it was some kind of shield fit).

The plan here was to fill in both ships' strength. The hyp would provide more power in pure tank and dps by having an extra low for mag stab or TE or resists, and it would sacrifice some utility. The mega would have more utility, again, playing to its strength - and the increased damage from turrets would make up for the lost low somewhat.

I can see many of you don't agree, and thats fine. I want you guys to love these ships so we're going to spend some time going over feedback and see what looks like a good direction to go.

I think if at all possible, we'd like to keep the armor rep bonus on the Hyperion. Its just too late in the ship line to toss out Gallente's signature tank bonus, despite the fact that many of you might want us to.

We are willing to consider many of the suggestions so far. Rolling another bonus into the rep bonus (like rep cap use) could be possible, changing the slot allocation, and adjusting fittings to give it more room are all on the table.

Thanks for the feedback, it won't be ignored.





You're personal experience of flying talos into low-sec and dieing isn't what we need here, give the hyp a range and damage bonus, turn it into a gallente rail platform
Akirei Scytale
Okami Syndicate
#975 - 2013-04-10 03:19:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Akirei Scytale
Wait, is CCP Rise Kil2PvP?

What the ****, CCP? You put your lowsec guy on battleships? Now it makes sense that he wants to turn the Mega into a crappy shield gank boat. FFS put Fozzie on this now.
McCreary075
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#976 - 2013-04-10 03:41:39 UTC
The Dominix has been completely replaced for close-range fleet work by the Armageddon. The Armageddon gets a drone damage bonus and enough space to fit 3 full flights of heavy or sentry drones, plus it gets the neut range bonus.

For close range fleets, the Dominix was the support ship, able to do drone damage and either neut or repair (or some combination). With the Armageddon able to neut from further away, there really isn't a reason to bring a Dominix unless you haven't trained Amarr BS, which isn't really a good reason given how little time it takes to train a BS skill. (Also, you have the support skills you need if you're flying the Dominix so it really is just the Amarr BS skill.)

For sniper fleets, the Dominix can more effectively apply sentry damage now, but sentries are not mobile, so you'd have to abandon them for the standard align-out and snipe jobs, which is not optimal given the drone expense and the fact that you can do this a total of 3 times before you're out of sentries. Also, without a boost to drone control range, the dominix needs two drone link augmentors to take advantage of the longer ranged sentry drones, even without additional modules or rigs. This isn't a deal breaker, but it is something I noticed while fiddling about and doing some math.

If you are in a fleet, you should certainly take the Armageddon over the dominix, and for sniping, I think I'd still prefer the Ishtar because of the extra agility it has over the dominix (I can make it align in under 5 seconds in the Ishtar, which is usually enough time for me to scoop drones and warp out) - the drone control range bonus on the Ishtar doesn't hurt, either. If sentries could move at 100 m/s with max skills, then I think a sniper Dominix could be a great thing.

The tracking on the sentry drones at the optimal ranges they can fire at in the new Dominix is nice. I think that to take advantage of this, people would need to build a gang around this, but the ranges where the tracking/optimal/damage on the sentries is dominant is between 40 and 90 km, maybe more, I'm getting tired. (I worked a lot yesterday and today, cut me some slack!) I still need to think on this some more. The 'mobile' sentries would also be a benefit here.


For the Megathron and Hyperion - I appreciate that you guys were willing to go against the grain and completely rethink them. That kind of approach is needed, but I didn't like the results.
Yun Kuai
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#977 - 2013-04-10 03:57:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Yun Kuai
So after some cool down time to digest the information and talk logically about these proposed changes and the flaws in them, here's what I've got. I'll do the Domi first because it seems that CCP is happy with the changes
Dominix:
-Having a BS purely focused on drones is nice, but it's also disheartening. I think the main issue that people had with the Domi was a PG issue trying to fight those blasters and rails, hence why most people went neut/support domi instead. A little increase in the PG would see more people fitting blasters or rails.
-Now that we have 6 utility highs, the most gun dps we're gonna get on a Domi is about 200. This leaves the domi severly lacking in terms of BS DPS, i..e about 700. My vexor can get that much.....This is obviously a pretty glaring issue for me.
-The next problem is the sole reliance on drones. Drones get left behind, get smartbombed, popped by frig swarms, etc. If you're forcing the Domi to only rely on drone dps (and the geddon for that matter), then the drone HP bonus should be upped considerably. I would propose something like 20% per lvl to Drone HP.

The new Dominix will be interesting to fly, but I still feel the Geddon will be better in most engagements because of those ranged neuts. That being said, has anyone considered what the optimal range and tracking will do to heavy drones? Will this allow heavies to engage outside of large smartbomb range, or will heavies still be forced to orbit at 2km?

Mega: This ship for me should really be the large fleet ship that every Gallente pilot wants, but for this to happen CCP needs to change the Mega into the other direction. Giving it a 5th mid while taking a low slot is not the way to go. Instead, the Mega should lose that Utility high (I know I love it too, but sacrifices people), keep the proposed new midslot, and get back the earlier proposed loss of a lowslot. This will give the ideal slot layout for the Mega to become a viable large fleet ship. In additon to this, the Mega would need a serious buff to raw HP, PG and CPU to fit those damn railguns. CCP, get on it!

Hype: This ship should be the "attack" BS for the Gallente. A lot of broken promises and fabled lands of working active tanking could make the hype awesome (and the brutix and myrm .....Sad), but promises don't come justly or quickly from our CCP overlords. This ship has a legacy bonus that needs to be looked at, but the idea of it working has excited me for 5 years of playing this game, so maybe one day it will be fixed. That aside, the new Hype should be made faster and more agile thus giving it the ability to get in your face and melt with blasters. It would have the synergy of the new changes to active armor tanking rigs. Drop a turret if need be, but it needs the 5 mids and the additonal lows to tank effectively, especially if this ship is supposed to be used in smaller engagements where every ship having tackel is essential.

--------------------------------------------------------::::::::::::--:::-----:::---::::::::::::--------------:::----------:::----:::---:::----------------------:::::::-------:::---:::----::::::-------------------:::-----------:::--:::----:::---------------------::::::::::::----:::::::----:::::::::::::-------
Antimatter Launcher
ELVE Industries
#978 - 2013-04-10 04:04:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Antimatter Launcher
Hyperion has many Issues


its cap is crappy withouth 5 Med,s
its not able to fight in fleet fights with 4 med,s (because to less lock in range)
its tank is crappy without 7 low,s
its dmg is crappy wihout 7 low,s

general problems

for blaster setups its a bit to bulky
for rail fleet setup it has to less lock on range
bad tracking is a problem with all fittings


so i just see the extra low slot will help (without removing a med)
the 5ft med can be used too to make the tracking better with a TC
if you remove the med slot, buff the cap and make the ship faster and give it more lock in range, but i guess that will not help much.

i think the 5% dmg boni can be changed into a 5% refire rate boni. that with a cap buff and a faster ship hull with more lock in range can make the ship to a option (with 7 lows and 4 mids).


i agree that the Dominix isnt a Fleetship for gallente

and the Megathron with 6 low will fail too in fleet setups.
and think about the Tracking Enchant Nerf that will come too. that will Hurt the Mega too.

Gallente need just One fleetable ship, and why not the Hyperion ? the Rokh , Maelstrom, Abaddon, do fine in fleets.
the old megathron was the best gallente fleet option, and it was to weak in compare to the other factions. rethink that please ccp.

hyperion has atm tracking issue, tank issue (if dmg build) dmg issue (if tanky build) and cap issue (if you remove the 5 med)


BTW the Armageddon have a much more Bigger Signature Radius then the Apoc. Pretty unrealistic.
Askulf Joringer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#979 - 2013-04-10 04:13:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Askulf Joringer
Antimatter Launcher wrote:
Hyperion has many Issues


its cap is crappy withouth 5 Med,s
its not able to fight in fleet fights with 4 med,s (because to less lock in range)
its tank is crappy without 7 low,s
its dmg is crappy wihout 7 low,s

general problems

for blaster setup its to bulky and lacks of slots
for rail fleet setup it has to less lock on range
to bad tracking

so i just see the extra low slot will help (without removing a med)
or buff the cap and make the ship faster and give it more lock in range




Easy solution is to drop a gun and a high slot, and add a low and 25m3 drone bandwidth.

Mega should stay an 8-4-7 setup with 7 guns and have it's dmg bonus changed to rof and lose 25m3 bandwidth.

Domi? I dno honestly, I think the idea of double drone bonus is cool however it still does not address the issue of the geddon being broken as **** in small scale. Imo if the domi is going to lose it's turret bonus for a drone range and tracking bonus the Geddon should become essentially what the domi was, but with lasers... So 6-4-8 with a damage/hp bonus to drones, and a damage bonus (not rof) bonus to large lasers.
Askulf Joringer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#980 - 2013-04-10 04:25:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Askulf Joringer
Havegun Willtravel wrote:
Askulf Joringer / IceDe4d

PS: PLS FIX ASTARTE !!!


Please don't.

ATM Damnation & Abso will get an AOE DD bonus and Astarte/Eos will get an optimal range bonus to Fireworks and Snowballs.

Lets fix one disaster at a time before we get into another mk.


I know I know, if the current proposals are foreshadowing future changes then I agree, Leave command ships alone However! If a modest amount of logic is to be had, Command ships should at the very least have the same number of total slots as the t1 bcs (-1 rig +1 normal slot), just as the Sleipnir and Claymore do. Astarte with a 7-4-7 layout, 6 turrets, 10% dmg bonus per level (just like Brutix), 5% dmg bonus per level, 10% falloff bonus per level, and 10% rep bonus per level (like the t3s get) would be a massive improvement. If changes like this were to go live, I do not think that Commands t2 resistances should be normalized to the "Fleet Command Level" Instead they should be normalized to the field Command level which is slightly less than the t2 resistance of Hacs and AFs.