These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

battlecruiser role addition

Author
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#1 - 2014-08-22 17:56:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
As it stands now, BCs feel kind of luckluster. Im currently flying a cyclone, and often find myself thinking "i can get the same dps but more speed and still be brawly with another ship". There is nothing that really makes BCs unique other than a larger EHP pool. Maybe its just the bcs i have access to. The myrm/brutix/prophecy seem to be the standard. Harby and maybe ferox seem ok. Cyclone isnt bad, its dps just seems low compared to what some of the other tankier bcs can output. Drake and hurricane are garbage imo.

Anyway onto my proposal. Taking a page from t3 or the recently buffed deepspace transports. Could bcs recieve either an OH role bonus (25%) to reduce heat damage or give a 25% bonus to OH module stats. Possibly both, could get hairy for balance though. As an alternative, the bonus increases the HP of modules attached to the ship, which would allow longer OH.

The reasoning is that bcs are much larger than their cruiser counterparts but still share many of the same systems (med weapons and prop). With all the extra girth of the ship, couldnt these systems be more resilient, have some extra durability afforded to them?

This would allow bcs to OH tank and weapons longer and get a more sustained tank and damage output. Making them slightly more challenging to engage/kill.

Also, i see this affecting the standard bcs more than the tier 3s. Tier 3s seem to be in a good spot at the moment.




So after discussing with you guys so far, here's the TL:DR

My proposal to buff BC's, including adding an additional role bonus

100% bonus to module HP or 25-50% heat damage reduction and 100% bonus to overheated modules

Can fit 2 warfare links
All BC's have 8 highs
.25 Au warp speed increase

That i think would put BC's in a good position, and we can see what needs to be tweaked from there. Obviously the PG/CPU would need to be tweaked and individually BC's may need to be rebalanced with the added changes. I think a 6 launcher cyclone would be cool, and would give it a needed bump in the DPS department. But.. thats just a personal hope :) not really expected.
Psianh Auvyander
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2014-08-22 22:34:53 UTC
I think this is kind of a cool idea. I'd like to take this and run with it in my mind a bit - mind if I write about it later after I ruminate on it?

My Blog

@wsethbrown

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#3 - 2014-08-22 22:40:00 UTC
Psianh Auvyander wrote:
I think this is kind of a cool idea. I'd like to take this and run with it in my mind a bit - mind if I write about it later after I ruminate on it?


I don't mind, go for it. I'm just trying to think of a way to give BC's alil more uniqueness without them becoming OP murderboats.
Linkxsc162534
Silent Scourge
#4 - 2014-08-22 23:01:51 UTC
Sadly it is a problem that HACs can regularly outDPS, outrun, outsigtank, and outtank, the CBCs nowadays. But yet people in 1 thread try to argue that cost should be the balancing factor, when a minute later when talking of their favorite ships, cost doesn't matter.
There is always the T2 argument, but well T2 CBCs are commandships, which the only thing they compete on are tank, and perhaps utility in the command sense.

Although you can put a command module on your CBC and make you're gang extremely more effective without the cost of a CS. And someday when they finally figure out how they want to work out on grid boosting, they'll probably have a springback because of the lower odds of them being primaried.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#5 - 2014-08-22 23:17:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Linkxsc162534 wrote:
Sadly it is a problem that HACs can regularly outDPS, outrun, outsigtank, and outtank, the CBCs nowadays. But yet people in 1 thread try to argue that cost should be the balancing factor, when a minute later when talking of their favorite ships, cost doesn't matter.
There is always the T2 argument, but well T2 CBCs are commandships, which the only thing they compete on are tank, and perhaps utility in the command sense.

Although you can put a command module on your CBC and make you're gang extremely more effective without the cost of a CS. And someday when they finally figure out how they want to work out on grid boosting, they'll probably have a springback because of the lower odds of them being primaried.


Just to note, link bonuses would still apply, this would be an additional role bonus. It would not remove the ability to fit links.

Those were some of the things i thought about when i proposed this. This still keeps HAC's in their respective specializations, but this adds alil more depth to flying a BC.

I wouldn't mind a 25% OH bonus, plus a module HP bonus. That doesn't permanently make the ship OP, but for periods of time, it would be more difficult to kill, becomes faster, or puts out a larger amount of DPS longer. It does tend to make sense, it is a battle cruiser, and should have systems available that make it more battle ready.

This would make solo'ing in a BC more manageable, as you could get good tank temporarily while you kill your opponents, to give you a window to OH prop to escape. Or, and this is just an option, but letting bonus apply to tackle/web as well. BC's are slow for the most part, they could use some help trying to apply a web, and an extra few km on web or scram isn't going to ruin much. People will just have to adjust their strategies when fighting BC's, which is good, adds variety. In terms of engaging them, neuts and ewar still apply, so even if they do get a monsterous tank from OH, if you hit em with enough neuts or ewar, it will crumble just like it normally would.

This would make them distinctive from BS and HACs. I don't believe i'd want to this to carry over to CS hulls, as they are "Command Ships" and not Battle cruisers, technically, not to mention that would be extremely OP. Most CS are already pretty awesome as it stands.
Ix Method
Doomheim
#6 - 2014-08-22 23:41:29 UTC
Linkxsc162534 wrote:
And someday when they finally figure out how they want to work out on grid boosting, they'll probably have a springback because of the lower odds of them being primaried.

And we have a winner. Its a shame they've been somewhat pre-nerfed but they should make a lot more sense when this comes round.

Giving them T2esque specialist bonuses isn't really a fix is it?

Travelling at the speed of love.

Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#7 - 2014-08-22 23:52:56 UTC
I'm all for 25% oh bonus, to effect that is.
Don't think it would be game breaking.

If it applied to abcs though... Heated talos dps.

Dat gank projection.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#8 - 2014-08-23 00:03:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Arya Regnar wrote:
I'm all for 25% oh bonus, to effect that is.
Don't think it would be game breaking.

If it applied to abcs though... Heated talos dps.

Dat gank projection.


Yea it would be amazing but horribly OP.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#9 - 2014-08-23 01:03:54 UTC
An OH bonus is not a role though. It's a buff to all roles you can fit the ship to do.

So while I'm in agreement BC (& BS) are not in a good place, I don't think this is the way to fix them.
Valkin Mordirc
#10 - 2014-08-23 05:41:50 UTC
I would say Combat Battlecruiser need something more, with the recent warp speed changes, making the CBC even slower than they were before, the low speed, high sig, they do have a problem. I wouldn't say DPS is an issue, the Cyclone has a naturally low DPS in comparison to other CBC's exchange for a good active tank.

However Combat Battlecruiser have always been in a midriff for a roles. HAC's obviously out damage them while matching the tank and they are faster and smaller, but I don't think a CBC fleet should stand toe to toe with a HAC fleet in first place should be fair so comparing them is a little skewed.

The percentage bonus for overheat may be an idea, but I don't see it being completely the game changer to making CBC having a good role.

CPP already gave a new thing to CBC's, the MMJD, but I don't see people using them, at least not in Highsec wars that I participate in. Null, and Low may be different.


Personally I think all CBC need a speed buff, and maybe to counter it a slight mass increase. Making them good at flying fast in a straight line, that way they get to where they need to be quickly but not so they can turn on a dime and avoid fire like a hac could. Give them all a slightly better tank, increasing the main part of the ships tank while decreasing the unused part, IE: Raise the Ferox's shield HP by 500 and dropping the Armor EHP by 500. But keep the DPS the same. Also changing the warp speed to around 3 AU or 2.75 AU, because 2.5 is just waaay to slow for something with medium guns. The speed bonus plus the MMJD would make them great for landing inside a enemies fleet, and dealing damage there.

Also any bonuses given to CBC should NOT be given to ABC's. The Attack Battlecruisers have roles and are very good and making those roles work, they don't need any buffs.

That's my two cents anyways, I've never tried to think about how to balance the game. But that's how I would like to see CBC's work. Sorta like a heavy cavalry, dive right into the enemy lines and burn out before they start taking real damage.
#DeleteTheWeak
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#11 - 2014-08-23 13:44:17 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
I would say Combat Battlecruiser need something more, with the recent warp speed changes, making the CBC even slower than they were before, the low speed, high sig, they do have a problem. I wouldn't say DPS is an issue, the Cyclone has a naturally low DPS in comparison to other CBC's exchange for a good active tank.


I honestly don't see much difference in warp speed changes with them. Maybe some of the BC's with plates on em take ages to get into warp, but the cyclone is only a few seconds slower than my vaga getting into warp and arrives at places maybe 2-3 seconds slower, really depends on the distance of the warp. Also, myrm/brutix have a much better tank, and more dps than the cyclone. Either you go dual LASB or XLSB w/ cap booster which only peaks out around 500-600dps tank with drugs and with 3 BCU's you're pushing 550dps, which 150 of that is from the 5 medium drones.

Quote:
CPP already gave a new thing to CBC's, the MMJD, but I don't see people using them, at least not in Highsec wars that I participate in. Null, and Low may be different.


I've looked at the MMJD and its only useful really if you have a spare mid. Cyclone can't afford it because it doesn't have a spare mid + tank. You kinda need a standard prop mod to get in range to apply tackle/web, unless you're fighting a bunch of bads who just approach you. MMJD only seems usable with either armor ships or ships with baked in resist profiles (ferox/drake).


Quote:
Personally I think all CBC need a speed buff, and maybe to counter it a slight mass increase. Making them good at flying fast in a straight line, that way they get to where they need to be quickly but not so they can turn on a dime and avoid fire like a hac could. Give them all a slightly better tank, increasing the main part of the ships tank while decreasing the unused part, IE: Raise the Ferox's shield HP by 500 and dropping the Armor EHP by 500. But keep the DPS the same. Also changing the warp speed to around 3 AU or 2.75 AU, because 2.5 is just waaay to slow for something with medium guns. The speed bonus plus the MMJD would make them great for landing inside a enemies fleet, and dealing damage there.


Maybe a small speed buff, but most seem to be in a decent position on speed, they're battle cruisers, and speed should be their limiting factor. Though a .25-.50 warp speed change is not game breaking. EHP buffer on the ones i've flown so far seems fine, maybe a few of them need some tweaking, but i don't think it needs it across the board. If we buffed speed (warp and native) and included the OH bonuses, that i think would help inject some new flavor into the standard BC.

Quote:
Also any bonuses given to CBC should NOT be given to ABC's. The Attack Battlecruisers have roles and are very good and making those roles work, they don't need any buffs.


Agreed
Psianh Auvyander
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2014-08-24 03:44:34 UTC
Here's part one of a series I'm going to do on this topic. Thanks again for the idea!

My Blog

@wsethbrown

Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#13 - 2014-08-24 10:21:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
Currently, bonuses that reduce heat damage are the domain of T3s. Personally, I think it should stay that way.

What I wouldn't object to, however, is seeing battlecruisers change a little bit to better reflect what they are. In terms of size, they're halfway between a cruiser and a battleship. They use cruiser-sized modules which puts them at a disadvantage against battleships and they're almost as slow as those same battleships which leaves them at a disadvantage against cruisers. If you think about it from a lore sort of perspective, those medium-sized guns look kind of small on a battlecruiser hull, which means there's a lot of room for all kinds of interesting ship systems. It doesn't have to all be taken up by hanging cages for exotic dancers.

We already have ships with overheat bonuses to tanking and prop mods, so that's out. Battlecruisers do have near-exclusive access to Medium Microjumps, which is good but doesn't seem like quite enough. Personally, I've always been underwhelmed by the tank on a battlecruiser - though that could admittedly just mean I'm bad at tanking them - and would like to see the EHP increased somewhat. That's power creep though and we don't really want that ... so perhaps ...

A specific % bonus to damage dealt by overheated guns.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#14 - 2014-08-24 17:38:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
Currently, bonuses that reduce heat damage are the domain of T3s. Personally, I think it should stay that way.


if you don't want a literal heat damage modifier, then as mentioned, you could in its place use a 50-100% bonus to module's Hit points attached to the hull. Therefore making it unique to battlecruisers. As an example:

Role Bonus:
- Can fit warfare link modules
- 100% bonus to Module hitpoint and overheat bonus


Quote:
What I wouldn't object to, however, is seeing battlecruisers change a little bit to better reflect what they are. In terms of size, they're halfway between a cruiser and a battleship. They use cruiser-sized modules which puts them at a disadvantage against battleships and they're almost as slow as those same battleships which leaves them at a disadvantage against cruisers. If you think about it from a lore sort of perspective, those medium-sized guns look kind of small on a battlecruiser hull, which means there's a lot of room for all kinds of interesting ship systems. It doesn't have to all be taken up by hanging cages for exotic dancers.


But that's exactly what i'm getting at. You have a large ship using cruiser sized weapons, what benefit do you get in a slower ship with the lower classed weapons, but a slightly bigger buffer. With all that extra mass, shouldn't a ship be able to have better fail-safe's and control of those weapon/tank systems (larger heatsinks, etc). So, instead, we get supercharged versions of the medium weapon/tank system. I mean, look at the tier 3's, their added mass and control systems, gave them bigger guns, but lower tank. So instead of trying to fit massive guns on battle cruisers, the extra room/weight is used to give better tank and get more out of the weapon/tank system than a typical cruiser.

Or, to even add on to that, you get unique OH bonuses to each battle cruiser. As an example for the Cyclone:

Role Bonus:
- Can fit warelink modules
- 100% bonus to module hitpoint and when overheated shield booster capacitor need reduced by 60%

This would then allow fitting of XL boosters with medium cap booster, and while the cap booster reloads, you can OH SB and get better tank and much less cap consumption, allowing you to possibly survive between reloads, until either you still cap out, or burn out your tank.

Now that's an example, and not necessarily what i would want. Each ship could be different though. Hurricane could get a prop mod specific one, drake could be more tank or damage, or even precision. I mean there is a lot of potential there to get creative, and make each hull fun or fill a niche`. Keeping in mind, this is only during OH, so its not permanent.

Quote:
We already have ships with overheat bonuses to tanking and prop mods, so that's out. Battlecruisers do have near-exclusive access to Medium Microjumps, which is good but doesn't seem like quite enough. Personally, I've always been underwhelmed by the tank on a battlecruiser - though that could admittedly just mean I'm bad at tanking them - and would like to see the EHP increased somewhat. That's power creep though and we don't really want that ... so perhaps ...

A specific % bonus to damage dealt by overheated guns.


MMJD as mentioned earlier are a nice added tool, but are limited to ships with spare mids (generally armor ships or shield specific ships like drake). I will admit, BC tank seems a bit meh, but if they buff it more, then you're going to be getting into some of the buffer levels of BS. Then, what really is the point to fly BS?
Ghaustyl Kathix
Rising Thunder
#15 - 2014-08-24 19:56:06 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
HAC's obviously out damage them while matching the tank
Not quite. Most reasonably-tanked HACs don't do quite as much damage as a reasonably-tanked battlecruiser of the same weapon type.
Psianh Auvyander
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2014-08-26 04:11:55 UTC
I've finished the second part of The Current State of Combat Battlecruisers. This part focuses on data I gathered regarding the usage of combat battlecruisers. I think you'll be as surprised as I am to see the numbers laid out.

My Blog

@wsethbrown

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#17 - 2014-08-26 04:40:26 UTC
Psianh Auvyander wrote:
I've finished the second part of The Current State of Combat Battlecruisers. This part focuses on data I gathered regarding the usage of combat battlecruisers. I think you'll be as surprised as I am to see the numbers laid out.

Combat Battlecruisers are in fairly dire straights having been consistently nerfed into the ground for the past year - the Drake in particular (no surprises there). I think they could benefit from partial T2 resistances and a slight buff to DPS. Giving them an inherent -1 or even -2 warp core strength could give them an interesting role as well.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Christopher Mabata
Northern Accounts and Systems
#18 - 2014-08-26 05:27:31 UTC
I would like to see a second T2 class of Battlecruiser honestly, if you dont want a command ship theres no point in really invsting in battlecruisers for the same reasons you listed, its just a bit more EHP, roughly the same DPS, and speed for more ISK.

♣ Small Gang PVP, Large Fleet PVP, Black Ops, Incursions, Trade, and Industry ♣ 70% Lethal / 30% Super-Snuggly / 110% No idea what im doing ♣

This Message Brought to you by a sweet and sour bittervet

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2014-08-26 11:47:13 UTC
First off I love the myrm in model terms and PvE usage but haven't experienced PvP yet with it. However I'm thinking that with CBC's having a command role they (and Command Ships) should maybe be able to use the target spectrum breaker. Naturally any command ship will be one of the first targets to be shot down so interfering with enemy targeting would give a CBC or CS more of a fighting chance on the field. Until OGB is changed I doubt command ships will show up on the actual field of battle but for smaller groups a hard to target CBC with links could become a much nicer prospect.

I like the idea of the target spectrum breaker but don't hear of it being used much and it's really cheap so I assume it isn't that effective. Giving the CBC a bonus on its utility (I suggested the same for the nestor but with higher bonus) could give them the additional survivability to bring them back into the field more often.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#20 - 2014-08-26 12:20:18 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
[quote=Psianh Auvyander]I've finished the second part of The Current State of Combat Battlecruisers. I think they could benefit from partial T2 resistances and a slight buff to DPS. Giving them an inherent -1 or even -2 warp core strength could give them an interesting role as well.


I think resists are fine where they are. Its a t1 ship, it gets t1 resists. Warpcore strength? I see no real use for it, except for running away. Which is not what i want to do. I'd rather have more tank/dps to kill people, instead of running away.
123Next page