These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Gordon Esil
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#721 - 2013-04-10 17:23:26 UTC
LuisWu wrote:
So now the faction with the strongest (lore-wise) armor tank has lost the only 8 low bs in the game, I guess its because this thread doesn´t had enough ragequit, insults and all that stuff compared with gallente´s one.

It's that the way this it's gonna work from now?

Maybe nothing now, but if this goes as it is now, it will be really bad
Arya Greywolf
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#722 - 2013-04-10 17:26:15 UTC
CCP Rise please think for a moment and explain why not a single amarr battleship has an 8th low slot.

Amarr have huge difficulties with cap, this is known. The fact that they are limited in mids makes that more difficult because they must use one for cap boosters.

You rightly saw that the Gallente BS boates might have difficulties filling their new roles without changing around some slots and bonuses.

To me, the Armageddon pre tiercide was close to what an Amarr brawler BS should have been. Now, in its place you have the Abaddon. However, being Amarr laser armor boat (THE laser armor BS of EVE), with all the other changes, --it's just OK.

I understand that you wanted to buff other boats and maybe leave some ones that were in a good spot the way they were but you have to remember you still are buffing other ships, so the Abaddon needs a boost as well. Don't neglect it (or the Rokh for that matter - even though I haven't had the time to look it over) because it was "fine" before.

Please consider removing 2 highs, making the bonus 10% damage to lasers, and finally giving it the 8th low that THE Amarr laser/armor BS needs.

This will do several things: 1) help cap issues 2) make it that armor brick it's supposed to be and 3) bring it in line with the other BS buffs.
Ashlar Vellum
Esquire Armaments
#723 - 2013-04-10 17:31:52 UTC
Well ok, my feelings for this changes are mixed so far.

Armageddon:
Interesting concept, but geddon had his niche. I would prefer to see this new geddon concept on a new hull maybe, and old geddon tweaked a bit and set in place between new apoc and new baddon.

apoc and baddon: will need to test them first on sisi. Blink

Ou and will new baddon have this armor resists now at lvl5 bs?
em ther kin exp
60 48 40 36

btw why all minmatar battleships have 19 slots and all other races have one with 18 slots ?
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#724 - 2013-04-10 17:38:31 UTC
They are pretty much gambling that players will cross train over into the other races, once they see that the Amarrians are producing battleships that are as combat effective as the Minmatar are architecturally sound (i.e, shoddy)

"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57
Zhephell
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#725 - 2013-04-10 17:44:20 UTC
@CCP Rise

That´s what i would like to see

Abaddon:

It is fine like now, I think it is better to have a 5% armor resistances like the cruisers or BC that were balanced, but i can live with the 4% armor bonus.

Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+5% to Large Energy Turret damage
+5% Armor resistances

Slot layout: 8H, 4M, 7L; 8 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 21000 PWG, 560 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 7000 / 8500 / 8000
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / recharge per second) : 6375 / 1250s / 5.1
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 89 / .14 / 125000000 / 20.03s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 75 / 75
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km(-5k) / 85 / 7
Sensor strength: 22 Radar Sensor Strength
Signature radius: 470

Apocalypse:

The apoc has many issues now, it ll need to work, 1st a much better capacitor.
Yes if you only put +0,49 recharge per second using pulses and mwd or using large beams = capacitor issues ALWAYS, no matter if you use a cap booster (Energy weapons are not like blasters, give +0,49 to compensate the chage of bonus is not enough) , but with +2,59 cap recharge per second it ll be worst in capacitor that now in the game, but it ll have some stability, and the large beams ll continue having cap problems, but at last it ll be much better.

I think that it ll need a 5% damage bonus and not a tracking bonus, and much more if it ll be an attack/sniper ship, if you don't do that, many nagas or oracles that have a higher dps being snipers, and being faster and cheaper an easier to fit, ll continue being much more used at long range. Every battleship has a Dmg bonus too, only the apoc and the Rokh don't have that, a blaster don't need that to have a lot of DPS, but lasers need one to be fine, I know that Beams have a good DPS but the oracle has that, and it is much easier to fit that ship with tachyions, that can compensate the 7,5% optimal range bonus easy.

It needs a better PWG too, large beams needs a lot of PWG, a little help ll be welcome.

You can reduce a little the Defenses to compensate the changes i said. Now the apoc ll be broken

Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+7.5% to Large Energy Turret optimal range
+5% to Large Energy Turret damage

Slot layout: 8H, 4M, 7L; 8 turrets , 0 launchers
Fittings: 22000 PWG(+1500), 540 CPU(+35)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 6000(-211) / 7000(-500) / 7000(+359)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / recharge per second) : 7000(-500) / 770s(-384s) / 9.09 (+2.59)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 113(+19) / .119(-.017) / 97100000 / 16.02s (-2.29s)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50(-25) / 75
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 80km(+12.5k) / 95 / 7
Sensor strength: 20 Radar Sensor Strength
Signature radius: 400


Armageddon:

The armageddon can be fine, but the curse or other ships ll be broken if it has the Neut bonus, my idea is to have a ship that ll be 1st a drone boat, and that can have a good dps with lasers too, or use other H slots to have other uses (it hasn't Dps bonuses on lasers), doing that it ll be a ship with the capacitor stable easy and being able to be a good noob PVE ship, and being a fine PVP ship too.

Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+10% to Drone damage and Hit Points (replaced large energy turret rate of fire)
+10% large energy turret cap reduction

Slot layout: 7H(-1), 3M, 8L; 7 turrets
Fittings: 16500 PWG, 550 CPU(+65)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 6800(+1331) / 8500(+1859) / 8000(+1789)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second) : 6200(+887.5) / 1087s / 5.7
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 100(-5) / .13(+.002) / 105200000 / 18.96s (+.29)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 375(+250)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 110 / 7
Sensor strength: 21 Radar Sensor Strength (+4)
Signature radius: 450 (+80)
LuisWu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#726 - 2013-04-10 17:46:25 UTC
BTW 7cap/sec increase in the Apoc its lightyears far from solve anything. You are crippling a ship for months? years? (I never know with you guys) until the laser overhaul arrives.

F*** This Game
Catherine Laartii
Doomheim
#727 - 2013-04-10 17:51:30 UTC
I am assuming that CCP is changing lasers to have -%50 cap usage to offset relinquishing the cap usage bonuses. This is the only sensible course of action for amarr gunship balancing, as far as I can see since the only other option is to sit back and laugh as the apoc and other ships cap themselves out on their own accord, or continue to die horribly to neuts.
May Wanderdriven
The Driven
#728 - 2013-04-10 17:51:46 UTC
I don't understand why they can't remove 1 gun from the apocalypse and double the damage bonus.
CCP Rise
C C P
C C P Alliance
#729 - 2013-04-10 17:53:08 UTC
May Wanderdriven wrote:
I don't understand why they can't remove 1 gun from the apocalypse and double the damage bonus.


The biggest reason is that there isn't a damage bonus Smile

@ccp_rise
Kerdrak
Querry Moon
#730 - 2013-04-10 17:59:08 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
May Wanderdriven wrote:
I don't understand why they can't remove 1 gun from the apocalypse and double the damage bonus.


The biggest reason is that there isn't a damage bonus Smile


Please, stop reading whines and tears and make a good rebalance and revamp of battleships. You look to be on the good path but maybe trying to get it sorted in a rush making fixes here and there.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#731 - 2013-04-10 18:00:07 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
May Wanderdriven wrote:
I don't understand why they can't remove 1 gun from the apocalypse and double the damage bonus.


The biggest reason is that there isn't a damage bonus Smile



Touché :P LoL that one was owned.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Alice Katsuko
Perkone
Caldari State
#732 - 2013-04-10 18:00:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Alice Katsuko
Catherine Laartii wrote:
I am assuming that CCP is changing lasers to have -%50 cap usage to offset relinquishing the cap usage bonuses. This is the only sensible course of action for amarr gunship balancing, as far as I can see since the only other option is to sit back and laugh as the apoc and other ships cap themselves out on their own accord, or continue to die horribly to neuts.


The Abaddon does not have substantial cap issues (EFT numbers aside), assuming decent skills, and it never had a cap use bonus for lasers. The Apocalypse has a stronger capacitor than the Abaddon, and consequently cap should be even less of a concern on that hull. Giving that hull a damage bonus on top of the range bonus would make it absurdly overpowered; while I wouldn't really object to having a ship that can deal more damage than an Abaddon out to 70km or so, it probably wouldn't be healthy for the game.

If you're flying an Amarr battleship hull with anything less than near-perfect capacitor skills, you should not be flying an Amarr battleship. It's the price of having the best turret damage projection in the game.
Major Killz
inglorious bastards.
#733 - 2013-04-10 18:00:46 UTC
Shield-APOC? Why not!? v0v

Armageddon is still serious biz. I hope CCP changes the prophecy and dragoon. Drones are the Gallentes biz not Amarr. Sac , vengeance and male should be changed too. Those ships were just a hold over from times since long past. LAZORS OR GTFO.


- killz

[u]Ich bin ein Pirat ！[/u]
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#734 - 2013-04-10 18:02:00 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello Amarrian citizens

I wanted to drop a quick note to assure you that we are still here monitoring feedback. We've had several discussions about the state of the Amarr mission runner both before we released this proposal and now after we've seen some feedback. So far, we aren't convinced that changes will be necessary, but we are going to keep a close eye on it. This may be a discussion that will be more productive after these ships make it to Singularity and some actual flight testing can happen.

Please keep up the discussion Big smile


The Amarr mission runners will get by.

The problem I have with that is the fitting difficulty of the two laser battleships will just about force new Amarr mission runners into training drones for their first mission boat. The secondary weapon system is taking the spotlight from Lasers.

I don't know to what extent that would be a problem balance wise. T2 Sentries are an easier train than T2 Large lasers. It just feels wrong.

Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of its members

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38
Marlyrel
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#735 - 2013-04-10 18:05:39 UTC
Thanks a lot for changing the cap stuff. The EFT fitting allow us carebears to fit the apoc properly without losing too much.

In fact, when i replace the tracking computer (some range bonus) with a cap recharger in my apoc, i almost have the same ship.

Hope this stays this way, I'd be happy =)
wallenbergaren
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#736 - 2013-04-10 18:08:58 UTC  |  Edited by: wallenbergaren
Rise, the Apoc needs something.

Fact: you cannot make a viable Tachyon PvP fit.
Fact: the range bonus stands out as being less than every other range bonus in the game.

Let's not pretend for a second that this is a solo ship, it's is a gang ship. It tanks substantially less than the Abaddon, it does a lot less damage, it has the same cap issues and it has worse fittings with the same slot layout. It tracks better, yes, but Abaddons aren't known for their tracking issues as they often fit one or even two tracking speed scripted TCs. What we get is something that projects damage well at 20-70/80km but is a bad brawler and not a proper sniper. It's just an awkward role.

If you want it to snipe then double down on that, better range bonus and a RoF or dmg bonus. 110km Scorch range with dmg bonus, then we're talking. If you want it to brawl then distinguish it from the Abaddon somehow while making it not suck at brawling.

I'd suggest 7high/4mid/8low
10% optimal
5% RoF
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#737 - 2013-04-10 18:15:52 UTC
Not sure how to react to be honest. Because I'm somewhat emotional in this case.

I love the Geddon as it is right now. I love both the way it performs and the way it looks.

On the other side I do not like the looks of the Apoc. And that's probably an understatement. Probably even a big one. Actually there's no way I'm going to fly that thing.

These changes basically destroy the Amarr BS lineup for me. I guess my Amarr character flying BS hulls will spend extended time in stations in the future.

Remove standings and insurance.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#738 - 2013-04-10 18:25:51 UTC
May Wanderdriven wrote:
kyrieee wrote:
May Wanderdriven wrote:
The problem with this change (even with the 'fix') that still the amarr is left without ANY viable PvE ship for new L4 runners. Armageddon? I don't see how that can work, I don't even like using drones (or i'd train Gallente). I've got MAX cap skill, BS 4 and controlled burst 4 and I feel that i'm a little dry on the cap.

I understand that there are PvP balancing requirements, but please leave ONE battleship for the noobies.


They can save up for a navy geddon, they're cheap


How should new players be sure that the navy ships aren't going to get the same treatment?

So far the Navy ships have not been simply upgraded versions of their T1 hulls, they have filled a different role.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Dante KamiyaX
STARK INDUSTRIES.INCX
#739 - 2013-04-10 18:34:46 UTC
Too much nerfing, not enough advancing. Stop murdering the ships? This isn't a balance this is genocide! Roll
May Wanderdriven
The Driven
#740 - 2013-04-10 18:37:16 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
May Wanderdriven wrote:
I don't understand why they can't remove 1 gun from the apocalypse and double the damage bonus.


The biggest reason is that there isn't a damage bonus Smile



Touché :P LoL that one was owned.


hehe, sorry I got confused (english is not my prime language). I should have said that they should ADD a damage bonus.