These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Test Server Feedback

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Balancing Feedback: Tier3 Battlecruisers

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nemesor
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#301 - 2011-11-08 11:26:30 UTC
Iam Widdershins wrote:
[quote=Nemesor][quote=CCP Ytterbium]NAGA:

Dual bonuses: what you have to consider here, is that in its default configuration, the Naga has 8 launchers AND 8 turrets, which means:
[list]
  • Why removing the torpedo explosion velocity? It was removed as it was making this ship too useful against smaller targets, which again defeats the purpose of this class. You also have to consider in your play testing that torpedoes cannot deliver full damage output in 1v1 scenarios against other tier3 battlecruisers.

    • TORNADO:

    Is it overpowered? Well, that's tied to the comments made on the Talos. Considering swapping the falloff bonus to tracking (but it could hit smaller targets even more easily) or just reducing the falloff bonus to 5-7.5%. Again, nothing is fixed yet.



    Lets switch the split bonuses on the Naga and give them to the Tornado... which as I am sure you know belongs to the race who traditionally has split weapons bonuses.

    How about a ROF for Large Turrets and a ROF for torps for example. ( I can already hear the whines of Minmatar pilots everywhere)

    The funny thing is... even if they did implement that, the Tornado would still be the best new BC simply because atm projectiles are grossly overpowered.
    Pinky Denmark
    The Cursed Navy
    #302 - 2011-11-08 11:31:58 UTC
    So CCP want to make the tier 3 BCs a special role to kill battleships.
    - They give them battleship weapons
    - They make them faster than cruisers
    - They make them 2/3 the signature of tier 2 BCs (about half the sig of battleships)
    - They give them very little hitpoints (40% of tier 2 BC) with no tank bonuses

    The problem with having these ships faster than cruisers is people will use them as near uncatchable ships kiting down HAC's and battlecruiser using the increased range (where tracking doesn't matter much) and superior firepower to their advantage.
    It might not be easy but this is what people already do with HACs, Faction cruisers and similar. At range you rarely need any tank whatsoever and usually a few logistics can easily keep up the shields of unresisted Cynabals and single extender fitted zealots...

    The role for these ships shold be to slip under the radar on battleships getting under their guns. This means the ships have to be fast, small and agile while being able to track better than the battleships.

    I have no trouble having these ships being fast to close the range on battleships and get under their guns, however they must not be able to outrun cruisers and they shouldn't be much faster than their tier 1 and 2 sisterclasses...

    I will strongly suggest to reduce the current sisi speeds with 40-50m/s base speed.

    The battleship weaponry is super cool. A very nice idea and a seemingly balanced way of making the dps work well on big targets and not so much on anything smaller. This said I would be carefull allowing the ships to fit the biggest of guns with ease. I would rather use the bonuses to to balance the guns instead of having them fit the biggest tiers.

    Giving these ships a 25% tracking role bonus makes a lot of sense and at the same time they should have a bonus that makes them faster than battleships but not faster than cruisers. By giving these babies a 100% Afterburner Speed role bonus you can allow the ships to close up on battleships while maintaining their small signature AND even if webbed they will be able to orbit battleships without taking a lot of damage.

    The blasters and autocannons might need one of their bonus to be towards tracking or the AB orbit will make them hit too much, where the caldari and amarr can orbit further out having a optimal bonus for the caldari ship and the laser cap bonus for the Oracle...

    This leaves 2nd bonuses open and with no tank bonuses I would suggest a damage 5% pr level bonus (25% more damage @ lv5) for the NAGA & ORACLE while the TALOS & TORNADO getting a ROF 5% pr level bonus (33% more damage @ lv5)

    The much faster afterburner speed should make it very favourable with the bonus of not being scrambled. On top it prevents the super fast pvp kiting techniques wich I'm sure wasn't meant to be how these should fight battleships...
    Also the signature doesn't bloom while chasing (which could otherwise easily cause a undesirable explosion)
    The role bonus for tracking on top of the extra tracking bonus on 2 of the ships should certainly make them outtrack a battleship as they will be orbiting much faster than a BS would be able to.

    Also depending on how they will handle against other battlecruisers and the battleships they are designed to engage CCP will easily be able to upscale the amount of hitpoints to increase survivability without ever being afraid of having the ships perform as flying invinsibility.

    DPS will easily be adjustable by the number of guns. I am a big fan of only fitting 3,4 or 6 guns on the ships and regulating on a role ROF like marauders... If one ship is overpowered just take a gun away from it or if the Talos ends up underpowered just give it an extra gun.

    Plz do not unleash these ships with their game breaking stats and mismatch of role vs bonus..

    Pinky
    Pattern Clarc
    Citeregis
    #303 - 2011-11-08 12:39:45 UTC
    I don't think these things can be *anti-battleship* platforms. Even if they kite, they are still subject to the full wrath of battleship turrets. Infact, battleships and frigs are really the only thing that stand up to them.

    Some observations:
    It's possible to fit dual plates, +dual heavy pulses 10mn and tackle. Bug or feature? If the latter, could the talos have this ability (grid and cpu) too please?

    Overloading on these ships seems to last way too long. Bug or feature?

    The max speed of each of these ships needs to be closer together, there's almost 300m/s difference between the tornado and Naga, this should be less imo.

    When these ships scale up to large gang sizes, you may find some problems, chiefly, AC's and pulses being too good at taking out support.

    FOTM rating 8/10

    Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction
    Iam Widdershins
    Project Nemesis
    #304 - 2011-11-08 12:39:57 UTC
    Pinky Denmark wrote:
    TL;DR I want awesome unhittable BS/BC killers that can't be scrammed!

    lol no

    Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
    VeloxMors
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #305 - 2011-11-08 13:03:20 UTC  |  Edited by: VeloxMors
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    NAGA:


    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Dual bonuses:


    Are a rubbish idea. It's an intangible advantage in unpredictability. If this ship is truly meant to be pvp-worthy, pilots are going to want to be able to use all of a ship's bonuses (not half of them). Ditch the rail bonuses, make it good with torps, because...

    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    ...natural targets...battleships/capitals


    This is the only thing torps are good at. Meanwhile... rails? Against a cap? It was a funny joke and all, but you can stop now... drop the rails.

    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Torpedo projection smiliar to Raven: even with one bonus to torpedoes, it does the same amount of damage/projection than a Raven. Adding another bonus to missile damage would make this ship greatly outperform its battleship equivalent


    And the Raven's an OP pvp ship Roll. Realistically only a handful of ships from each race are regularly used in pvp. These new BCs are being made to make that cut, so comparing the Naga to a raven isn't helping its cause.

    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    ...cruise missiles are still being considered. However, it they are introduced into the Naga, hybrid bonuses most likely will be removed from it


    This could work, but the concerns you mentioned are mine as well. One option is limit their default targeting range so the mid slots/rigs will require sebos/range rigs... basically make them have a nerfed tank if they want to cruise missile snipe. As for their use against smaller ships being a concern, I'd argue any pilot willing to hang around for a cruise missile coming in from 200km away deserves to die. They can't be any worse than the Cerberus, and I don't see anyone emoraging over that.

    Still, while I like cruise missiles more than rails, I still don't see the DPS being so absurd that it'll be a threat to caps.
    Torei Dutalis
    IceBox Inc.
    Rogue Caldari Union
    #306 - 2011-11-08 13:14:00 UTC
    This may have been suggested already, but anyone else thinking 8/5/4 on the talos instead of the current 8/4/5? I mean, with the (relative) speed the ship has, it just calls out to me that it wants to be a shield tank. That and it might be the right way to be moving gallente.
    Gecko O'Bac
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #307 - 2011-11-08 13:43:59 UTC
    VeloxMors wrote:

    This could work, but the concerns you mentioned are mine as well. One option is limit their default targeting range so the mid slots/rigs will require sebos/range rigs... basically make them have a nerfed tank if they want to cruise missile snipe. As for their use against smaller ships being a concern, I'd argue any pilot willing to hang around for a cruise missile coming in from 200km away deserves to die. They can't be any worse than the Cerberus, and I don't see anyone emoraging over that.

    Still, while I like cruise missiles more than rails, I still don't see the DPS being so absurd that it'll be a threat to caps.


    Really? Are you SERIOUSLY proposing CRUISE SNIPING as a viable tactic?
    Iam Widdershins
    Project Nemesis
    #308 - 2011-11-08 13:59:25 UTC
    Gecko O'Bac wrote:
    VeloxMors wrote:

    This could work, but the concerns you mentioned are mine as well. One option is limit their default targeting range so the mid slots/rigs will require sebos/range rigs... basically make them have a nerfed tank if they want to cruise missile snipe. As for their use against smaller ships being a concern, I'd argue any pilot willing to hang around for a cruise missile coming in from 200km away deserves to die. They can't be any worse than the Cerberus, and I don't see anyone emoraging over that.

    Still, while I like cruise missiles more than rails, I still don't see the DPS being so absurd that it'll be a threat to caps.


    Really? Are you SERIOUSLY proposing CRUISE SNIPING as a viable tactic?

    Yeah, seriously. The DPS projection and kiting ability of a blob of nano-nagas with Cruise Missiles would be PREPOSTEROUS. If you think Drakes are bad, have a taste of 460 DPS of Rigor'd Cruise Missiles at 160km. It would be bloody overpowered, and CCP knows it.

    I still think that rails should be a viable option on the Naga. Even as it stands it should now be the big man at long ranges; or at least, really long range. I'd really like to see more bonuses for the poor thing, or please please that fourth lowslot back. I hope to see a re-boost to the Naga before release.

    Lobbying for your right to delete your signature
    Pinky Denmark
    The Cursed Navy
    #309 - 2011-11-08 14:03:00 UTC
    Iam Widdershins wrote:
    Pinky Denmark wrote:
    TL;DR I want awesome unhittable BS/BC killers that can't be scrammed!

    lol no


    If the base speed gets reduced to not be faster than cruisers and only slightly faster than other battlecruisers these tier 3 battlecruisers will easily be caught and webbed by anything smaller than a battleship that has a microwarpdrive...

    (I guesstimate the max velocity with afterburner being about 1.000m/s for the fast Tornado and Talos without speed modules)

    They will be difficult hitting with battleship weapons, however any small and medium weapons will ignore any attempts to dodge the bullet. If Im wrong it will clearly show, but how will we know if it doesn't get considered and tested...
    Avernus Ravenwing
    State War Academy
    Caldari State
    #310 - 2011-11-08 14:18:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Avernus Ravenwing
    Lol = when i heard caldari was getting a decent pvp ship finally

    Evil = when i head ccp ruined that ship,,,

    seriously... fix the naga.

    torps or railguns, not half of both.
    Gripen
    #311 - 2011-11-08 14:24:31 UTC
    I'm wondering if new battlecruisers meant to replace sniper hac role? If not why not to add some significant tracking penalty to them because just using large weapons don't pose much of a problem with all those rapiers in every fleet.
    Ganthrithor
    School of Applied Knowledge
    Caldari State
    #312 - 2011-11-08 14:27:48 UTC
    I can't believe how many people are howling for the nerfbat on the Tornado-- CCP finally puts a useful T1 ship in the game and people go bonkers about how it should be nerfed down to have an engagement range that it can't even track within? Really? The Oracle also shines right now, noone's whining about that. Just find ways to fix the Talos / Naga so they rise to the same standards of usefulness.

    I, for one, am super pleased with the Tornado (and Oracle) as is-- finally there's a T1 ship I can buy for less than 200m that might actually be useful for PvP outside weird niche roles. The Naga and Talos are just a little bit terrible in comparison, but I'm sure CCP can figure something out in that department.
    Gecko O'Bac
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #313 - 2011-11-08 14:35:39 UTC
    Iam Widdershins wrote:

    Yeah, seriously. The DPS projection and kiting ability of a blob of nano-nagas with Cruise Missiles would be PREPOSTEROUS. If you think Drakes are bad, have a taste of 460 DPS of Rigor'd Cruise Missiles at 160km. It would be bloody overpowered, and CCP knows it.


    I don't have time to bring out the calculator but... 460 dps cruise missile dps doesn't seem that crazy to me. Worst case, we'll see more use of smartbombs or (LOL) defender missiles.

    Plus, Nanoing a Naga seems quite ineffective... Low base speed, high mass, few low slots...
    The problem with drakes isn't their dps. It's that they have a boatload of ehp, easy to deploy, though quite easy to outrun/outmaneuver.
    Even with rigors, if you don't add specific bonuses to EV/ER I doubt they'll be much of a threat for smaller crafts...


    Still, I'd rather have a WORKING hybrid Naga myself. It's just that "cruise missiles" and "overpowered" in the same sentence sounds quite strange.
    Pinky Denmark
    The Cursed Navy
    #314 - 2011-11-08 14:39:44 UTC
    Ganthrithor wrote:
    finally there's a T1 ship I can buy for less than 200m that might actually be useful for PvP outside weird niche roles.


    Dude, you should look into Ruptures, Hurricanes, Typhoons and Tempests all very versatile being amongst the most versatile and usefull ships for pvp...
    Gecko O'Bac
    Deep Core Mining Inc.
    Caldari State
    #315 - 2011-11-08 14:43:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Gecko O'Bac
    Pinky Denmark wrote:
    Ganthrithor wrote:
    finally there's a T1 ship I can buy for less than 200m that might actually be useful for PvP outside weird niche roles.


    Dude, you should look into Ruptures, Hurricanes, Typhoons and Tempests all very versatile being amongst the most versatile and usefull ships for pvp...


    Uh or... you know? The drake? The ship everybody and their dogs and their dog's friends is flying? Which cost less than what I find under my shoes?

    (Though yeah it's not minmatar)
    VeloxMors
    Native Freshfood
    Minmatar Republic
    #316 - 2011-11-08 14:44:12 UTC
    Iam Widdershins wrote:
    The DPS projection and kiting ability of a blob of nano-nagas with Cruise Missiles would be PREPOSTEROUS. If you think Drakes are bad, have a taste of 460 DPS of Rigor'd Cruise Missiles at 160km. It would be bloody overpowered, and CCP knows it.


    I'm not convinced. The long range cerberus didn't see much action, despite being able to crank out 400dps with heavy missiles from max range (and still be somewhat quick, to boot). The problem is when you're 200+km from a fight, anyone aggressed will just warp off. Where the cruise Naga would bring it a step further is it's cheaper, and it would likely see use in larger fights (i.e. against bs blobs or caps) where people are less likely to warp off on their own.
    Ganthrithor
    School of Applied Knowledge
    Caldari State
    #317 - 2011-11-08 14:57:16 UTC
    Pinky Denmark wrote:
    Ganthrithor wrote:
    finally there's a T1 ship I can buy for less than 200m that might actually be useful for PvP outside weird niche roles.


    Dude, you should look into Ruptures, Hurricanes, Typhoons and Tempests all very versatile being amongst the most versatile and usefull ships for pvp...


    They're ok for fooling around, and canes are pretty good, but usually I prefer things that are quicker and have some range. Tempests are really nice for working near home, but they don't lend themselves very well to working in hostile space because they're slow and fat. Same with Typhoons. Ruptures are fun for killing baddies who underestimate you, but they're a gimmick and don't have the range or speed to engage the BC blobs people tend to fly with any degree of safety.

    Usually I end up flying expensive stuff that can kite, since mixing it up with a bunch of hostile drakes and canes in scram range isn't my idea of fun.
    Mariner6
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #318 - 2011-11-08 15:06:19 UTC
    Wylee Coyote wrote:
    Mariner6 wrote:
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    TALOS




    Thanks for responding and staying engaged in your thread. It really make a difference, at least to me, to see some kind of CCP feedback regularly in the threads. After 50 so pages in the Hybrid thread with no response makes one start to feel people are just talking to a wall.


    https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=29692&p=10
    Currently at ten pages only (four less than this thread as of this post), an a good three of those pages have nothing to do with hybrids, the point of the thread.


    Ok, take that 10 pages and it it to this post: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=28157&find=unread
    Pinky Denmark
    The Cursed Navy
    #319 - 2011-11-08 15:11:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Pinky Denmark
    Ganth I mentioned some of the fastest and hardest hitting ships around with great possibilities of solo pvp in hostile territory and you still want something much faster and harder hitting? These are in my opinion proof that you have no objectivity and grasp of consequences. Good luck m8
    Phantomania
    Lonely Trek
    #320 - 2011-11-08 15:46:00 UTC


    SiSi being updated now, lets see if the new BC's get sorted! Lol