These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

get rid of the tier 3 bc !!!!!!!!!!!
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kate stark
#21 - 2013-10-19 21:18:55 UTC
General Jack Cosmo wrote:
i know some one that lost his 2.6bil golem to tornados
but you're right on the miner gank i saw some one get blown up by a bunch of destroyers!


and? if you put enough shiny **** on your ships some one will gank you. it's not the tier 3 battlecruiser ship's fault he turned his golem in to a loot pinata.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Ghost Phius
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2013-10-19 23:58:41 UTC
Additional player interaction is "exact;y" what CCP intended and things are WAI.

Just because you are not in the profession that uses this tool does not mean the tool is bad or needs to leave the game.
Sarah Stallman
Pen2 Logistics
#23 - 2013-10-20 00:17:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Sarah Stallman
I've never seen or heard of a T3 cruiser ganking in high-sec, outside of wars. I've taken a few rounds from them in low-sec, but even when I was running badgers through low-sec pipes it was never the lone thrashers that worried me, it was these guys and these guys. Not once did a Thrasher ever do more than 40% shield damage before I warped out & cloaked up. (The fit is the same on both kills, one doesn't seem to show it for some reason.)
HardRockLife
Diabolically Sexy Eureka-Secret Science R Us
#24 - 2013-10-20 00:24:22 UTC
Sarah Stallman wrote:
I've never seen or heard of a T3 cruiser ganking in high-sec, outside of wars. I've taken a few rounds from them in low-sec, but even when I was running badgers through low-sec pipes it was never the lone thrashers that worried me, it was these guys and these guys. Not once did a Thrasher ever do more than 40% shield damage before I warped out & cloaked up. (The fit is the same on both kills, one doesn't seem to show it for some reason.)

Ive seen several in fact I think I have some on my kb
Aside from arty loki, they kinda suck at it really

Also I agree that abcs should be made t2, they to me, fall in the too good for to cheap category.
Especially now that we have reached the point of reps work or your dead, host ehp doesnt matter.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#25 - 2013-10-20 00:36:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Nevyn Auscent
Kate stark wrote:
General Jack Cosmo wrote:
i know some one that lost his 2.6bil golem to tornados
but you're right on the miner gank i saw some one get blown up by a bunch of destroyers!


and? if you put enough shiny **** on your ships some one will gank you. it's not the tier 3 battlecruiser ship's fault he turned his golem in to a loot pinata.

Actually a 2.6 bil Golem is not particularly blingy. Nearly half that cost is in the pure hull.
In terms of isk lost, you can gank a brick fitted Golem (or any Marauder) and win all day long on your isk boards. Since the hull itself costs far more to buy than the Tornados to gank it do.
You might not make a profit, but I'd be highly surprised if they made a profit on a 2.6 Bil Golem also. They would have had to get better than average loot drops to do that. Slim profit if they did.

My complaint with the ABC's is that they put out the same DPS/Alpha as a BS. And strongly feel they would be more balanced at only 6 base turret slots rather than the 8 they do have. So you get the same ranges as a BS. Same sort of weapons. But slightly less DPS per ship. This would help BS keep relevant roles in the game outside of the mega blob, as often BS are getting overshadowed & edged out.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#26 - 2013-10-20 03:24:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Kate stark wrote:
General Jack Cosmo wrote:
i know some one that lost his 2.6bil golem to tornados
but you're right on the miner gank i saw some one get blown up by a bunch of destroyers!


and? if you put enough shiny **** on your ships some one will gank you. it's not the tier 3 battlecruiser ship's fault he turned his golem in to a loot pinata.
This.

The price of that pilots ship is completely irrelevant, as to if it should be allowed to be ganked. But it may be relevant is to whether it may or may not be. As always, don't fly what you cannot afford to lose.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#27 - 2013-10-20 03:43:03 UTC
Ah, let's just make every ship the same. We abhor choices...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Qaidan Alenko
Eezo-Lution Inc.
#28 - 2013-10-20 04:06:25 UTC
Exclamation marks... the new Caps Lock.
Go ahead... Get your Wham on!!!
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2013-10-20 04:32:31 UTC
I think that if the Attack Battlecruisers were built to use medium guns instead of large, with powergrid and CPU reduction adjusted to make fitting otherwise identical, that would balance them perfectly without the need for any other changes.

And tell me seriously, would you not fly an Oracle with 310 beam laser DPS at 60km? (aurora ammo, tech 2 heavy beam lasers, 2x heat sink II) It's honestly not a bad setup at all. Compare to a Harbinger dealing 279 beam laser DPS at 60km while also being much less mobile, though being able to use drones and having a significantly better tank, I'd say it makes the two fairly even and both would be seen a lot on the field.

But having large weapons on the attack battlecruisers is just way too much: with Tachyon Beam Lasers, that Oracle deals 446 DPS at 120km. Why, then, would you ever bother flying a Harbinger, except to save some ISK on the hull, or because you need the superior tracking of medium beam lasers?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Kate stark
#30 - 2013-10-20 07:46:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Kate stark
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
General Jack Cosmo wrote:
i know some one that lost his 2.6bil golem to tornados
but you're right on the miner gank i saw some one get blown up by a bunch of destroyers!


and? if you put enough shiny **** on your ships some one will gank you. it's not the tier 3 battlecruiser ship's fault he turned his golem in to a loot pinata.

Actually a 2.6 bil Golem is not particularly blingy. Nearly half that cost is in the pure hull.
In terms of isk lost, you can gank a brick fitted Golem (or any Marauder) and win all day long on your isk boards. Since the hull itself costs far more to buy than the Tornados to gank it do.
You might not make a profit, but I'd be highly surprised if they made a profit on a 2.6 Bil Golem also. They would have had to get better than average loot drops to do that. Slim profit if they did.

My complaint with the ABC's is that they put out the same DPS/Alpha as a BS. And strongly feel they would be more balanced at only 6 base turret slots rather than the 8 they do have. So you get the same ranges as a BS. Same sort of weapons. But slightly less DPS per ship. This would help BS keep relevant roles in the game outside of the mega blob, as often BS are getting overshadowed & edged out.


actually, the hull is about a third, not a half.

that means you've got 1.7bn isk of loot on that ship. consider the rule of thumb for freighters being "don't carry more than 1bn isk of cargo" and you can easily see why he was ganked.
850m would be the expected loot drops, which would easily pay to gank a marauder which is going to be active tanked for missions and have a lower buffer than something like an incursion ship fit for passive tank.

BS still have a relevant role because they're not made from paper. have you seen the EHP on a gank fit talos or tornado? it's laughably low. not all ships have to be good at suicide ganking in the same way not all ships have to be good at exploration.

edit: EFT says a 6 turret talos gets outdpsed by a brutix. bad idea.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2013-10-20 07:55:30 UTC
Just saying there was a 62Billion Isk Kill that involved more catalyst than any thing else.

Just goes to show, it is not what your are flying or what is ganking you. If it is shiny it will be destroyed.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Kate stark
#32 - 2013-10-20 08:05:08 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Just saying there was a 62Billion Isk Kill that involved more catalyst than any thing else.

Just goes to show, it is not what your are flying or what is ganking you. If it is shiny it will be destroyed.


at the end of the day, bigger more expensive ships are just a compensation for low player count. when you get more players interested in doing something then you can use smaller cheaper ships.

ganking was done in talos, or tornados. then it got popular and now it's done in destroyers because there are enough players to make it work.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#33 - 2013-10-20 09:46:03 UTC
I love tier 3 BCs.

They rock.

Can't say the same for you though. You cheapen my Eve experience. Be gone with you!

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!
General Jack Cosmo
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2013-10-20 13:52:34 UTC
"Just saying there was a 62Billion Isk Kill that involved more catalyst than any thing else.

Just goes to show, it is not what your are flying or what is ganking you. If it is shiny it will be destroyed.
Novis Initiis is Recruting - Ideas for Drone Improvement"



do you know how rare that kinda kill that is 33 ships would never hit that if there wasn't that much bling bling !!!!

With lord Xanex by my side I can do anything (Atleast with a smile) !!!!
Kate stark
#35 - 2013-10-20 14:20:50 UTC
General Jack Cosmo wrote:
"Just saying there was a 62Billion Isk Kill that involved more catalyst than any thing else.

Just goes to show, it is not what your are flying or what is ganking you. If it is shiny it will be destroyed.
Novis Initiis is Recruting - Ideas for Drone Improvement"



do you know how rare that kinda kill that is 33 ships would never hit that if there wasn't that much bling bling !!!!


great, so you agree being ganked is due to turning your ship into a pinata rather than the use of tier 3 battlecruisers.

now the thread can be closed as the OP has seen sense.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#36 - 2013-10-20 15:36:34 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Where is my Destroyer that can mount eight Cruiser-sized guns?

Let's add those too.


notsureifserious...


but +1 anyway Cool

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
Ghost Phius
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#37 - 2013-10-20 15:45:27 UTC
In conclusion WAI.

Everyone FINALLY understands ganking is good for the EVE economy.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#38 - 2013-10-20 18:11:48 UTC
Ghost Phius wrote:
In conclusion WAI.

Everyone FINALLY understands ganking is good for the EVE economy.



i agree.

but i think tornados are a bit to cheap
before tornadoes there was the tempset which was quite expensive but cheap enough to get some valuable ganks in highsec.
ganks aside the tornado stole every role the tempest still had from the hull.

thats why i think the tempest should adapt launchers instead of turrets cause it wont steal all the roles from the typhoon and tempest would get back some of its use whil the highsec gankiing will get more expensive but can be profitable still
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#39 - 2013-10-20 21:05:29 UTC
Kane Fenris wrote:
Ghost Phius wrote:
In conclusion WAI.

Everyone FINALLY understands ganking is good for the EVE economy.



i agree.

but i think tornados are a bit to cheap
before tornadoes there was the tempset which was quite expensive but cheap enough to get some valuable ganks in highsec.
ganks aside the tornado stole every role the tempest still had from the hull.

thats why i think the tempest should adapt launchers instead of turrets cause it wont steal all the roles from the typhoon and tempest would get back some of its use whil the highsec gankiing will get more expensive but can be profitable still



But the old tempest got insurance payments every time they ganked. Tornados don't.

And people would just use talos/naga/oracles/whatever.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#40 - 2013-10-20 22:06:33 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Kane Fenris wrote:
Ghost Phius wrote:
In conclusion WAI.

Everyone FINALLY understands ganking is good for the EVE economy.



i agree.

but i think tornados are a bit to cheap
before tornadoes there was the tempset which was quite expensive but cheap enough to get some valuable ganks in highsec.
ganks aside the tornado stole every role the tempest still had from the hull.

thats why i think the tempest should adapt launchers instead of turrets cause it wont steal all the roles from the typhoon and tempest would get back some of its use whil the highsec gankiing will get more expensive but can be profitable still



But the old tempest got insurance payments every time they ganked. Tornados don't.

And people would just use talos/naga/oracles/whatever.



no and ....no(but partly yes).

still with insurance payments included tempest ganks were more expensive its the same % on the resource value thus makes no difference in relative cost....

tonadoes can gank in 1.0-0.7? cause of alpha. and there ppl could not swap to taloses etc.
where they could swap to taloses (i didnt do the math but im pretty certain this is right) talosses are already more eficcient.
so the point is i should have been clearer on this:
-i should have said high highsec ganks are to cheap.
cause the difference in cost between 1.0 and 0.5 ganks is to narrow cause tornadoes are to cheap