These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Second pass at 'Tier 3' BC rebalance?

Author
Jada Maroo
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2011-11-02 06:53:40 UTC
I don't see how you could think the first leak was balanced, seeing as those ships alone (as they were) would have forced a reduction in freight values by about half. No one ship should have that sort of effect. I don't want to see them made useless though either.
Nikollai Tesla
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2011-11-02 06:55:54 UTC
Talos completly blows, it should get to get its drone bay and web bonus. That made the ship actually useful. Explain to me to why use a Talos over a Tornado now.
Whiteknight03
Trilon Industries and Exploration
#23 - 2011-11-02 07:09:23 UTC
The torp explosion bonus would have been quite useful and probably necessary on the Naga. I can see the reduction in low slots and all, but why reduce the torp equivalent to tracking when giving other ships in the new lineup a tracking bonus?
Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
#24 - 2011-11-02 07:16:26 UTC
I really don't understand what these ships are supposed to be used for. Some have said anti-cap platforms but with the nerf caps are getting I wont be surprised if you see caps with sub-cap support more often and then the tier 3 BC's will be horribly out performed by whatever is fielded which is usually hell-cats, ahacs, drake blob etc etc. Cant run missions that are worth running in them do to the paper thin tank. A tier 2 BC will outperform it in every way. Take the Oracle and Harbinger for example, Harby has a base armor HP of 5,469 while Oracle has(as it is now which I'm sure will change but by how much I'm not certain) a base armor HP of 2,160. Seriously? Harby has 375 CPU, Oracle has 345. WTF?

It really doesn't matter how big the guns you can fit on there, your going to die very quickly with as it stands a very thin tank. I really don't know what direction CCP is going with these ships but from my perspective it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. These ships are purely 'shinies' and eye candy for all the folks that have been crying 'we need more FIS' Which I totally get and agree with, we do need more FIS content but this is a desperate reach to pacify those crying all over this forum. These ships have no role whatsoever and are pointless.

Oderint Dum Metuant

Evelgrivion
State War Academy
Caldari State
#25 - 2011-11-02 07:20:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Evelgrivion
Daniel L'Siata wrote:
I honestly thought the first run of stats was very well balanced. Less than impressed with this now.


They out-DPSed essentially everything that wasn't bigger than a tier 3 battleship while having high mobility and buffer tanks more or less on par with a normal battlecruiser; they weren't balanced, they were hilariously overpowered.

That being said, there is room to tweak them further. They need to be useful as a glass cannon ship which necessitates a degree of dictating the terms of engagement, but they also need to be capable of being killed. This isn't going to be an easy balance to strike. The Naga probably needs the full bonuses for hybrids and missiles back, though, if not necessarily to the same level.

Perhaps a damage penalty in the form of reduced rate of fire is in order?
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#26 - 2011-11-02 10:44:39 UTC
Aralieus wrote:

It really doesn't matter how big the guns you can fit on there, your going to die very quickly with as it stands a very thin tank.... These ships have no role whatsoever and are pointless.


I'll hold judgement until I can try them out. Stealthbombers w/bombs suffers from a lack of HP too, anything can kill them. That doesnt stop alliances from employing them en masse against large sub-capital blobs. Likewise, a smallish gang of T1 frigates can easily kill a battlehip or three if they are lucky enough to catch them unsupported by smaller vessels. I see the new Tier 3 BCs in pretty much the same circumstances, only scaled up.
Super Chair
Project Cerberus
Templis CALSF
#27 - 2011-11-02 12:23:33 UTC
Whiteknight03 wrote:
The torp explosion bonus would have been quite useful and probably necessary on the Naga. I can see the reduction in low slots and all, but why reduce the torp equivalent to tracking when giving other ships in the new lineup a tracking bonus?



^ This ^

I'd honestly rather see the Hybrid Range bonus and a torp explosion velocity bonus if they had to tone down its bonuses (id really like to see both tracking/range bonuses for both systems, I don't like it when caldari boats are pidgeonholed into can use misilles and can use guns, but another boat does them 2x better...)
Shadowsword
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2011-11-02 13:09:47 UTC
Kaede Kimura wrote:
If by interesting you mean overpowered, then yeah.


With the Naga having for all intends and purposes only one bonus (you won't mix missiles and rails because damage mods won't affect both), the only tier 3 BC that (will probably) retain the capability to fit a dual large shield extender + damage mods + MWD + disruptor is the Tornado. It's going to be OP in a very blatant way. It's so obvious, I wonder what CCP Tallest is thinking...
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
#29 - 2011-11-02 13:51:49 UTC
They should make them into oversized destroyers .. huge dps and tracking with really flimsy tanks (read: tier1 cruiser tanks). Would be ideal as fire-support or in swarms just like destroyers are and be a hard counter to anything cruiser sized (including Fighters/F.Bombers).

And no, 90% webs on a "free" ship is not balanced .. one down payment and insurance keeps the webs active ad infinitum. Dumbest idea CCP has had in quite a while.
Smoking Blunts
ZC Omega
#30 - 2011-11-02 13:53:39 UTC
these ships needed to come out prenerf'd, just like the black ops did, so ccp can fix them at a later date same as with the black ops....oh wait

OMG when can i get a pic here

Aralieus
Shadowbane Syndicate
#31 - 2011-11-02 21:10:11 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:
Aralieus wrote:

It really doesn't matter how big the guns you can fit on there, your going to die very quickly with as it stands a very thin tank.... These ships have no role whatsoever and are pointless.


I'll hold judgement until I can try them out. Stealthbombers w/bombs suffers from a lack of HP too, anything can kill them. That doesnt stop alliances from employing them en masse against large sub-capital blobs. Likewise, a smallish gang of T1 frigates can easily kill a battlehip or three if they are lucky enough to catch them unsupported by smaller vessels. I see the new Tier 3 BCs in pretty much the same circumstances, only scaled up.


SB can use Cov-op cloak and use covert cyno to hot drop you out of nowhere, frigs can get by with that scenario purely based on the facts that they have low sigs and and usually more speed and can keep transversal high. In comparison caps cost way more than BS's so most cap pilots will steer away from pulling them out unless they have the support ships to back them up. BS's however are relatively cheap and can be flown solo w/out much economic loss to ones personnel wallet. Jus sayin

Oderint Dum Metuant

Soporo
#32 - 2011-11-02 21:24:09 UTC
Super Chair wrote:
Whiteknight03 wrote:
The torp explosion bonus would have been quite useful and probably necessary on the Naga. I can see the reduction in low slots and all, but why reduce the torp equivalent to tracking when giving other ships in the new lineup a tracking bonus?



^ This ^

I'd honestly rather see the Hybrid Range bonus and a torp explosion velocity bonus if they had to tone down its bonuses (id really like to see both tracking/range bonuses for both systems, I don't like it when caldari boats are pidgeonholed into can use misilles and can use guns, but another boat does them 2x better...)


^ This and this ^

Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. - H.L. Mencken

Borun Tal
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2011-11-02 21:26:44 UTC
Kalot Sakaar wrote:
HIlarious. No drones to the Talos and loses its ability to control range in a fight with the web. Now its completely worthless. Just shows how lost CCP is with Gallente ships. Might as well rename it cannon fodder.


Hey, Gallente ships make GREAT gank fodder... what the heck are you whining about? Blink
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
#34 - 2011-11-03 02:02:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Reilly Duvolle
Aralieus wrote:


SB can use Cov-op cloak and use covert cyno to hot drop you out of nowhere, frigs can get by with that scenario purely based on the facts that they have low sigs and and usually more speed and can keep transversal high. In comparison caps cost way more than BS's so most cap pilots will steer away from pulling them out unless they have the support ships to back them up. BS's however are relatively cheap and can be flown solo w/out much economic loss to ones personnel wallet. Jus sayin



Invariably though, the stealthbombers will either be in system or be bridged in by Titan. They sometimes even dont bother with the cloak as they warp in on the blob. Depends on the specific tactics in question.

Yes frigs can get by with that scenario purely based on the facts that they have low sigs and and usually more speed and can keep transversal high. Just as the Tier 3 BCs will be able to to do just the same vs capital ships. As for viable targets, sure there is fewer gankable capital targets around than battleships, but speaking from years of 0.0 experience I'd say that capital pilots sometimes do the stupidest things :) Further, for the largest alliances, mere carriers and dreads are pure expendable assets.
Zelphinine
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#35 - 2011-11-03 02:17:05 UTC
For a moment when I saw that the Naga had 8/8 gun and missile slots and two sets of double weapon bonuses, I thought CCP finally 'got' split weapon hulls.

And now they've removed that and it's ****. Don't even bother releasing it.
Nimrod Nemesis
Doomheim
#36 - 2011-11-03 02:24:44 UTC
Zelphinine wrote:
For a moment when I saw that the Naga had 8/8 gun and missile slots and two sets of double weapon bonuses, I thought CCP finally 'got' split weapon hulls.

And now they've removed that and it's ****. Don't even bother releasing it.


I actually want them to release it as an awful split-weapon platform. The more horrific and useless ships caused by hyrbid and non-heavy-missile shortcomings, the more likely CCP is to take notice of just how bad they are.
Soporo
#37 - 2011-11-04 00:59:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Soporo
Quote:
The more horrific and useless ships caused by hyrbid and non-heavy-missile shortcomings, the more likely CCP is to take notice of just how bad they are.


Like they paid any attention to the Eagle over the years? One was for sale in Jita the other day, ONE.
PvP and PvE's worst, most unused and unpopular HAC since inception remains unchanged, for years, but that's normal here.

People have to understand, there is no "ballance team", I guess when they test it's just a matter of how they feel at the time or how drunk they are, what comes out of it. I get the feeling they all never use missile boats beyond Heavies for pvp or they just have a gang of Huggins painting for them wherever they go.

I wish all the Devs had to PvP in Feroxs (non Projectile fit), Hawks, Eagles, Cruise and Torp Ravens, Rokhs and whatever fail new improperly bonused split bonus Torp boats they create.

Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats. - H.L. Mencken

DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#38 - 2011-11-04 01:11:10 UTC
The Naga is now loltastic with its split weaponry bonuses.
Previous page12