These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why do people fly BS?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
#281 - 2014-01-04 03:43:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Riot Girl
Infinity Ziona wrote:
The interceptor can tackle the cruiser at a gate reliably. The Mega's deficiencies are just masked. The more ships you add the more deficiencies are masked.

If the Mega is at the gate by itself, it cannot engage reliably. Only the cruiser can force the engagement. If the cruiser wishes it can even kill the Mega depending on fits. In short the most powerful subcap in the game (not in actuality) is the weakest.

Smartbombs.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships.

Why do you think this is the correct method for comparing ships? You keep repeating this but you've provided no explanation for why ships must be compared 1v1.

Oh god.
Deunan Tenephais
#282 - 2014-01-04 03:43:55 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
are we just shooting structures that don't shoot back

No we are not, that's why the decreased track speed is in itself a big enough problem, no need to have a decrease or stagnation in damage to top it off.
Frankly, people take BS to L4 for the increased tank, but if all large turrets are like that I start to understand why dominel fits are so popular.


And, Zonia ?
I'm not on the BS topic here, I'm on the fact large railguns dps suck big time, large weaps are not the ships themselves.
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#283 - 2014-01-04 03:52:40 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships.

No, that's not an accurate overall comparison. That's a one-to-one comparison.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
Battleships were not designed as fleet ships. Nor intended to only be used in fleets. How do I know this? Because they were in before fleets were even considered as a game mechanic.

Which is irrelevant, because they've since been rebalanced several times.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#284 - 2014-01-04 03:58:51 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships.

No, that's not an accurate overall comparison. That's a one-to-one comparison.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
Battleships were not designed as fleet ships. Nor intended to only be used in fleets. How do I know this? Because they were in before fleets were even considered as a game mechanic.

Which is irrelevant, because they've since been rebalanced several times.

honor duels 1v1 at the sun is the only use for ships that is relevant

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#285 - 2014-01-04 04:08:09 UTC
Deunan Tenephais wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
are we just shooting structures that don't shoot back

No we are not, that's why the decreased track speed is in itself a big enough problem, no need to have a decrease or stagnation in damage to top it off.
Frankly, people take BS to L4 for the increased tank, but if all large turrets are like that I start to understand why dominel fits are so popular.


And, Zonia ?
I'm not on the BS topic here, I'm on the fact large railguns dps suck big time, large weaps are not the ships themselves.

Large guns fit on battleships (and attack battlecruisers). Tracking and sig radius are a huge part of why battleships suck so your posts are relevent. Also consider that you're posting in a thread about BS not Large Rails or perhaps rename the thread?

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Eram Fidard
Doomheim
#286 - 2014-01-04 04:11:37 UTC
Always nice to see the fire burning bright when you get home.

Infinity, I really think it's time...

for an intervention.


It's these pants. The ones you've been wearing on your head the past several months. They are starting to reek, and it's really not very stylish. At all.

Please, for us, for yourself, remove the pants from your head.

Poster is not to be held responsible for damages to keyboards and/or noses caused by hot beverages.
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#287 - 2014-01-04 04:13:42 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships.

No, that's not an accurate overall comparison. That's a one-to-one comparison.

Infinity Ziona wrote:
Battleships were not designed as fleet ships. Nor intended to only be used in fleets. How do I know this? Because they were in before fleets were even considered as a game mechanic.

Which is irrelevant, because they've since been rebalanced several times.

No its an overall comparison. You can't just make things up to make them true James. You need to try to follow at least the basic principles.

As for the rebalancing, it was terrible, they could stop hiring PL and Goons and get some actual real developers on the team, not a bunch of nerd gamers biased towards sov and blob. Rebalancing in EVE usually means changing things so they're different, not necessarily better (missiles and the LRML are good examples).

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
IDGAD
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#288 - 2014-01-04 04:16:17 UTC
Quite honestly I have to agree. It's been a long long time since I've used a T1 BS seriously. I use a typhoon for smartbombing pods and shuttles on low-> highsec gates but that's a REALLY fringe use. Pirate BS have a good use in Incursions due to their extra buffer, but otherwise they aren't that great especially in PvP. The Tier 3 battlecruisers really replaced almost everything that the BS were ever needed for, and although they are a little glass cannon, they still get the job done cheap enough and agile enough to be mostly preferred instead of T1 BS. When it comes down to it, it's a problem of large guns not being able to hit small targets as well. Small can hit small, medium and large; Medium can hit some small, medium, and large, but large guns are mostly large, and medium-large targets. The viability of BS fleets is mainly just against other BS fleets, but there are MUCH better counters to a BS fleet than other BS so...... they are relatively null and void (no hybrid pun intended).
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#289 - 2014-01-04 04:17:29 UTC
No, one niche case is not "overall". It's really that simple. Go look at a dictionary sometime.
Also, none of the developers responsible for balance were ever Goons or even affiliated with them.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#290 - 2014-01-04 04:19:25 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
No, one niche case is not "overall". It's really that simple. Go look at a dictionary sometime.
Also, none of the developers responsible for balance were ever Goons or even affiliated with them.

yeah, sure...

general discussion told me ~the shocking truth~

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#291 - 2014-01-04 04:22:53 UTC
Unless CCP Ytterbium was, but he wasn't responsible for battleship rebalancing as far as I recall and I can't find any information about his character(s) prior to joining CCP.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)
Deunan Tenephais
#292 - 2014-01-04 04:23:09 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Deunan Tenephais wrote:
Alavaria Fera wrote:
are we just shooting structures that don't shoot back

No we are not, that's why the decreased track speed is in itself a big enough problem, no need to have a decrease or stagnation in damage to top it off.
Frankly, people take BS to L4 for the increased tank, but if all large turrets are like that I start to understand why dominel fits are so popular.


And, Zonia ?
I'm not on the BS topic here, I'm on the fact large railguns dps suck big time, large weaps are not the ships themselves.

Large guns fit on battleships (and attack battlecruisers). Tracking and sig radius are a huge part of why battleships suck so your posts are relevent. Also consider that you're posting in a thread about BS not Large Rails or perhaps rename the thread?

If the problem lies with the guns then the ships themselves are not to blame.
Perhaps you should rename the thread, indeed.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#293 - 2014-01-04 04:27:26 UTC
James Amril-Kesh wrote:
Unless CCP Ytterbium was, but he wasn't responsible for battleship rebalancing as far as I recall and I can't find any information about his character(s) prior to joining CCP.

such ~goon spin~

very pretend ignorance

so general discussion


wow

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#294 - 2014-01-04 06:22:53 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:

My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships.

Battleships were not designed as fleet ships. Nor intended to only be used in fleets. How do I know this? Because they were in before fleets were even considered as a game mechanic.


Yes battleships are fleet ships. But there are some that are solo boats and some that are small gang boats. Battleships from back then also didn't have tracking to worry about or stacking penalties. Nobody wants those ships back.

We have a range of BS that have different jobs, not all of them are made with 1v1s in mind and haven't been for getting on for a decade, same with many other ships in every class.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#295 - 2014-01-04 06:24:16 UTC
Deunan Tenephais wrote:

If the problem lies with the guns then the ships themselves are not to blame.
Perhaps you should rename the thread, indeed.


Chances are the people complaining about them are trying to use these long range guns at short range and getting upset that they are not as effective.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#296 - 2014-01-04 06:52:01 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Deunan Tenephais wrote:

If the problem lies with the guns then the ships themselves are not to blame.
Perhaps you should rename the thread, indeed.


Chances are the people complaining about them are trying to use these long range guns at short range and getting upset that they are not as effective.

Oh my, that is pretty bad, then.

They could do with learning how to play eve online a bit

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#297 - 2014-01-04 07:21:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No its an overall comparison.
No, it's a niche comparison. It's as invalid as you claim that fleet comparisons are.

Quote:
My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships.
No, you look at its individual roles in the multitude of situations it can encounter — including fleets — and see how it fares across all of those situations. Individual attributes are meaningless because only come to life in a larger (and very varied) context. Hell, even if that was the way you made an overall comparison, you still fail at making one since you've not once looked at those individual attributes.

Quote:
You can't just make things up to make them true
So stop doing that. Stop making up irrelevant comparisons that only look at a minute set of characteristics that are, essentially, meaningless on their own. Try to follow at least some semblance of basic principles, such as either admitting that you're comparing a niche case (making the results impossible to generalise) or do full-spectrum comparisons: a full range of fleet sizes; a full range of fleet compositions; a full range of engagement ranges.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: your generalisations are inherently false because you generalise from a very specific and hugely biased single-case sample; your claims are factually incorrect and/or ridiculously cherry-picked and you petulantly refuse to answer simple questions or support those claims; you keep moving the goal posts when you're (consistently and inevitably) proven wrong. Now you've crossed over into dev abuse when your attempt at history revisionism fell flat on its face when it came in contact with reality.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#298 - 2014-01-04 09:17:15 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No its an overall comparison.
No, it's a niche comparison. It's as invalid as you claim that fleet comparisons are.

Quote:
My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships.
No, you look at its individual roles in the multitude of situations it can encounter — including fleets — and see how it fares across all of those situations. Individual attributes are meaningless because only come to life in a larger (and very varied) context. Hell, even if that was the way you made an overall comparison, you still fail at making one since you've not once looked at those individual attributes.

Quote:
You can't just make things up to make them true
So stop doing that. Stop making up irrelevant comparisons that only look at a minute set of characteristics that are, essentially, meaningless on their own. Try to follow at least some semblance of basic principles, such as either admitting that you're comparing a niche case (making the results impossible to generalise) or do full-spectrum comparisons: a full range of fleet sizes; a full range of fleet compositions; a full range of engagement ranges.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: your generalisations are inherently false because you generalise from a very specific and hugely biased single-case sample; your claims are factually incorrect and/or ridiculously cherry-picked and you petulantly refuse to answer simple questions or support those claims; you keep moving the goal posts when you're (consistently and inevitably) proven wrong. Now you've crossed over into dev abuse when your attempt at history revisionism fell flat on its face when it came in contact with reality.

History revisionism on general discussion

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#299 - 2014-01-04 09:29:56 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
No its an overall comparison.
No, it's a niche comparison. It's as invalid as you claim that fleet comparisons are.

Quote:
My point is if you want an accurate overall comparison of a ship you don't throw it into a fleet. You look at its individual attributes versus other ships.
No, you look at its individual roles in the multitude of situations it can encounter — including fleets — and see how it fares across all of those situations. Individual attributes are meaningless because only come to life in a larger (and very varied) context. Hell, even if that was the way you made an overall comparison, you still fail at making one since you've not once looked at those individual attributes.

Quote:
You can't just make things up to make them true
So stop doing that. Stop making up irrelevant comparisons that only look at a minute set of characteristics that are, essentially, meaningless on their own. Try to follow at least some semblance of basic principles, such as either admitting that you're comparing a niche case (making the results impossible to generalise) or do full-spectrum comparisons: a full range of fleet sizes; a full range of fleet compositions; a full range of engagement ranges.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: your generalisations are inherently false because you generalise from a very specific and hugely biased single-case sample; your claims are factually incorrect and/or ridiculously cherry-picked and you petulantly refuse to answer simple questions or support those claims; you keep moving the goal posts when you're (consistently and inevitably) proven wrong. Now you've crossed over into dev abuse when your attempt at history revisionism fell flat on its face when it came in contact with reality.

Different tactic needed Tippia, this ones becoming predictable and boring.

You're post is so full of nonsense its really impossible to address it without an essay sized reply.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
James Amril-Kesh
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#300 - 2014-01-04 09:33:09 UTC
You need to be podded back to 900k sp.

Enjoying the rain today? ;)