These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Battleships and fleet diversity,
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
J A Aloysiusz
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#21 - 2014-08-08 05:51:07 UTC
Emma Muutaras wrote:
the reason why we (my corp/alliance) don't use battleships is a simple

1: Unless its a drone boat you struggle to apply full dps on anything smaller than a cruiser.

2. There massive sig makes them take full damage from just about everything which kinda negates the larger tank they can fit

3. There to god dam slow 2au/s warp speed along with the time to slow down/speed up i mean dam a Iteron mark v warps faster

4. takes forever to lock targets, unless you add sensor boosters which if you do your using a mid slot that could have been used for something else

so the question becomes why use a battleship when i can grab a Ishtar which can fit a battleship sized weapon that can hit stuff (sentry drones).
has a much lower sig so can negate a lot of the damage through sig/speed tanking true its Ehp is lower but hey with the ability to sig/speed tank the effective tank is probably similar to a battleship that takes full damage from everything.
Is a lot faster both in terms of warp speed and non warp speed.
can lock targets quite a bit faster than a battleship.

so again i ask why would i want to fly a battleship (even ratting i find a Ishtar a lot more effective)


The State War Academy / Caldari state doesn't use battleships!?
J A Aloysiusz
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#22 - 2014-08-08 06:24:05 UTC
But on a more practical note, I think the idea of battleships being like they are in real life is a pretty idea. Sadly, the pretty idea doesn't really fit the context of eve very well, in my opinion.

The single driving reason why battleships are lesser used in small gang warfare is logistics boats (which are nonexistent in naval warfare). In a small gang, a battleship is no stronger than a cruiser, because neither a ship with 50k ehp nor a ship with 200k EHP will die, as long as their logistics can support them. This fact alone is why the conscious gang of pilots chooses smaller ships: why use a slow, expensive ship, when a fast, cheap ship will perform just as well?

This is also, of course, the very same reason why battleships are more useful in larger fleet battles. When you scale up, eventually the incoming damage becomes so great that a large buffer is required to give logistics enough time to lock you and land reps.

Thus, your potential solution does not address the issue, it simply implements a kind of "magic" in an attempt to circumvent it. BUT, I'm not entirely sure the issue is as present as you think it is. What would make more sense to increase the use of battleships in small gang warfare is the increase of potential of battleship local tank. CCP has made (successful!) efforts to implement this recently, the most notable being bastion. Even without bastion, a hyperion is a force of its own in a small gang.

But, that's only half the battle. Ideally, a true battleship in the pretty idea of a naval battleship is the ability to support and carry a fleet. A battleship should be the center of gravity of a fleet, and the driving force. In actuality, this already exists in eve, and it's the capitals in a battleship fleet. And it's the supers in a capital fleet. And it's the titans in a super fleet.

So yeah. True battleships exist in eve. They're just not battleships. That's my dissertation for this evening.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2014-08-08 12:05:10 UTC
Edwin McAlister wrote:
im sorry sir, but i have to disagree with you

the biggest reason we dont see more battleships , is simply cost to build them / cost to buy them

just looking at tritanium alone to build the following ships:
Dominix = 11.5 million tritanium
Vexor = 600k tritanium
Tristan = 23k tritanium

i could build 500 tristan's for every 1 Dominix roughly, or almost 20 vexor's for that same Dominix

as for market in buying them,
Dominix goes for 190 mil give or take a bit depending on were ya go
Vexor goes for 10 mil give or take
Tristan goes for 500k give or take

i could have over 380 tristans for 1 Dominix, or 19 vexor's for 1 dominix

IF they were to cut the mineral cost in manufactureing battleships in half, then yea, might see more battleships
lets also not forget the costs in fitting a battleship vs that of a frigate or cruiser, even the modules require vastly more minerals compared to their smaller counterparts



Completely wrong. We fly ships that are very very rare to be under 1 bil isk.. and we almsot never use battlehsips. Knwo why? BEcause they had their mobility HALVED whenof the warp changes, and received NOTHING in return. THey are 99% of time not worth the extra time it takes to move them

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#24 - 2014-08-08 12:11:30 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
... Knwo why? BEcause they had their mobility HALVED whenof the warp changes, and received NOTHING in return. THey are 99% of time not worth the extra time it takes to move them

How about a warp acceleration/deceleration rig with -15% T1 and -25% T2 time reduction that only comes in 'Large' ?
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2014-08-08 12:18:16 UTC
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
... Knwo why? BEcause they had their mobility HALVED whenof the warp changes, and received NOTHING in return. THey are 99% of time not worth the extra time it takes to move them

How about a warp acceleration/deceleration rig with -15% T1 and -25% T2 time reduction that only comes in 'Large' ?



That is dumb (sorry) know why? Because you are just tryign to NEUTRALZIE thing. Make the ships even more euqla an their differences more irrelevant. No that is not the path. The path is REJOICING on the differences. Battleships are slow to move? OK.. great just make them WORTH that speed!!

Your rig idea would just cancel PART of their speed disadvantage at a cost of roughly 50% their EHP (by not usign the rigs properly)... final result a ship that is weaker than anythign that could already fly at 3 au sec.. therefore irrelevant.

The path to balance with diversity is not homogenization.. its specialization with costs (nto monetary cost) balanced by capabilities.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2014-08-08 12:23:27 UTC
It's a bit radical, but why not just let them fly at 3AU/s? And BCs too.

Far as I'm concerned so long as inty/frigates are much quicker, that's good enough for me.
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#27 - 2014-08-08 12:33:50 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
... Knwo why? BEcause they had their mobility HALVED whenof the warp changes, and received NOTHING in return. THey are 99% of time not worth the extra time it takes to move them

How about a warp acceleration/deceleration rig with -15% T1 and -25% T2 time reduction that only comes in 'Large' ?



That is dumb (sorry) know why? Because you are just tryign to NEUTRALZIE thing. Make the ships even more euqla an their differences more irrelevant. No that is not the path. The path is REJOICING on the differences. Battleships are slow to move? OK.. great just make them WORTH that speed!!

Your rig idea would just cancel PART of their speed disadvantage at a cost of roughly 50% their EHP (by not usign the rigs properly)... final result a ship that is weaker than anythign that could already fly at 3 au sec.. therefore irrelevant.

The path to balance with diversity is not homogenization.. its specialization with costs (nto monetary cost) balanced by capabilities.

Hahaha, you said halved and nothing in return, I offer the option to get the 'half' back and you say 'no', op or whatever ... just funny.
And as far as I remember, BS have more slots then C and BCs for example, you still gain something over those hulls, even if the rest would be reduced to the same theoretical values°°.
And every implementation that makes them 'worth' the disadvantages, would create more incentive to use them in blobs anyway not a shift to smaller gangs... just to bigger gangs. So back to you.

Just thought I trow it in. No need to reply °°.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2014-08-08 12:36:10 UTC
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
... Knwo why? BEcause they had their mobility HALVED whenof the warp changes, and received NOTHING in return. THey are 99% of time not worth the extra time it takes to move them

How about a warp acceleration/deceleration rig with -15% T1 and -25% T2 time reduction that only comes in 'Large' ?



That is dumb (sorry) know why? Because you are just tryign to NEUTRALZIE thing. Make the ships even more euqla an their differences more irrelevant. No that is not the path. The path is REJOICING on the differences. Battleships are slow to move? OK.. great just make them WORTH that speed!!

Your rig idea would just cancel PART of their speed disadvantage at a cost of roughly 50% their EHP (by not usign the rigs properly)... final result a ship that is weaker than anythign that could already fly at 3 au sec.. therefore irrelevant.

The path to balance with diversity is not homogenization.. its specialization with costs (nto monetary cost) balanced by capabilities.

Hahaha, you said halved and nothing in return, I offer the option to get the 'half' back and you say 'no', op or whatever ... just funny.
And as far as I remember, BS have more slots then C and BCs for example, you still gain something over those hulls, even if the rest would be reduced to the same theoretical values°°.
And every implementation that makes them 'worth' the disadvantages, would create more incentive to use them in blobs anyway not a shift to smaller gangs... just to bigger gangs. So back to you.

Just thought I trow it in. No need to reply °°.



if you cannto udnerstand by my anwer why your idea is irrelevant.. then you do nto deserve more attention.

Think the following. the govenrment double your taxes.. and does nto invest anythign in return .. you complain.. they offer you to return about half of that increase back to you.. You get happy with that?

If you get happy with that.. I have some patche s of land in heaven I would like to sell to you.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Fer'isam K'ahn
SAS Veterinarians
#29 - 2014-08-08 12:46:17 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
if you cannto udnerstand by my anwer why your idea is irrelevant.. then you do nto deserve more attention.

Think the following. the govenrment double your taxes.. and does nto invest anythign in return .. you complain.. they offer you to return about half of that increase back to you.. You get happy with that?

If you get happy with that.. I have some patche s of land in heaven I would like to sell to you.

Ac/deceleration pre change: 5 sec
Ac/deceleration post change: 10 sec
Ac/deceleration post change with 2x T2 rigs: 5 sec ..... is my math wrong ?

How do I get half of the double back ? I get all of the double back. Nothing changes except maybe a few % interest lost, assuming I am good at investing.
Shaklu
State War Academy
Caldari State
#30 - 2014-08-08 13:27:38 UTC
I wonder how much they would get used if remote repping went away.. I mean.. if there were no logistics, and only local reps, give battleships a nice boost to their tank and repping.. It would be a bit more realistic, and would make battleships really nice.. I don't see that ever ever happening, however :P
Linkxsc162534
Silent Scourge
#31 - 2014-08-08 18:22:01 UTC
Fer'isam K'ahn wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
if you cannto udnerstand by my anwer why your idea is irrelevant.. then you do nto deserve more attention.

Think the following. the govenrment double your taxes.. and does nto invest anythign in return .. you complain.. they offer you to return about half of that increase back to you.. You get happy with that?

If you get happy with that.. I have some patche s of land in heaven I would like to sell to you.

Ac/deceleration pre change: 5 sec
Ac/deceleration post change: 10 sec
Ac/deceleration post change with 2x T2 rigs: 5 sec ..... is my math wrong ?

How do I get half of the double back ? I get all of the double back. Nothing changes except maybe a few % interest lost, assuming I am good at investing.

Firstly, the problem with "getting the half back" is that it was taken away for... really no reason. Yeah they argued that they wanted small ships to be faster, but they were already faster both tactically and strategically. Now they're even faster strategically and battleships are slower than hell. There are some systems that a BS takes over a minute to cross at warp. Cruisers and Hacs do it in 35-40 seconds. Over a 20 second difference and thats not considering align times, and warp acceleration. 20 seconds is an eternity in gangs, and (especially when tidi kicks in) an eternity in large fights.

If you spot that someone is attacking your assets, the only way battleships are ever gonna get to the fight is if you fly to the syste and reship to craft stored there, or you bridge. Those 10-20 seconds lost each jump add up a lot when trying to be on the defense.

Perhaps instead of a rig, a module. Cause remember this equipment would really only be used for travel fits (or maybe moving the fleet around, afterall with MDUs they could arrive a jump or 2 from their target, refit with fighting gear, and have at it, rigs would defeat the purpose)

Though its moot anyways, they forced battleships to be the slowest ships in the game because "blarg"
Everything smaller is literally faster, and everything bigger is figuratively faster (being roughly a few seconds slower than the craft that lights the cyno). They lost 1/3rd of their mobility in 1 fell swoop, and were offered no boost to defense or offense to offset the severe penalty shoved onto them.
IceAero
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#32 - 2014-08-08 18:53:54 UTC
Linkxsc162534 wrote:


Though its moot anyways, they forced battleships to be the slowest ships in the game because "blarg"
Everything smaller is literally faster, and everything bigger is figuratively faster (being roughly a few seconds slower than the craft that lights the cyno). They lost 1/3rd of their mobility in 1 fell swoop, and were offered no boost to defense or offense to offset the severe penalty shoved onto them.


Yup.

There's probably a limitless number of ways to address this, but the first one that comes to mind is a re-do to the smaller class of BS-sized weapon systems.

That is to say, make weapons like the "Dual Heavy Pulse Laser" into a more powerful version of the "Heavy Pulse Laser," instead of just a weaker Mega Pulse Laser.

I know this doesn't work for all systems, aka the 1200m artillery is very different than the 720mm, but I think one way that BSs could be used more is to give them the ability to be fit for anti-cruiser roles better. The trade-off would be a reduction in range.

Previous page12