These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Make battleships and battlecruisers worth the warp! 2.0

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#121 - 2014-11-14 10:06:40 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
...@ FireFrenzy: Thanks for bringing up scan res. Definately gonna get looked at. Sorry we aren't FC bros no more, but lets still chill and make some mad isk together some time.


Thank you James for almost listening what I was saying since the battleship rabalance threads got a sticky on.

So I am poking you because I did say the same thing about scan resolution before FireFrenzy even with example values that should sound reasonable.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#122 - 2014-11-14 15:44:06 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
...@ FireFrenzy: Thanks for bringing up scan res. Definately gonna get looked at. Sorry we aren't FC bros no more, but lets still chill and make some mad isk together some time.


Thank you James for almost listening what I was saying since the battleship rabalance threads got a sticky on.

So I am poking you because I did say the same thing about scan resolution before FireFrenzy even with example values that should sound reasonable.

I am sorry. I wrote that last thing before bed during quite a long day yesterday.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#123 - 2014-11-14 15:58:11 UTC
James Baboli wrote:

I am sorry. I wrote that last thing before bed during quite a long day yesterday.


It's fine, dear!
Just get enough attention that our council of missile haters and griefers grace us with their presents and we get something important accomplished.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#124 - 2014-11-14 16:20:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Phaade
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
Subscribing...+1 OP.

BS and BC definitely need a LOT of love compared to how badly they are outclassed by literally everything smaller.

I suppose I don't really have any issue with the amount of dps they are capable of, but I agree, these are supposed to be huge, impressive ships-of-the-line, and currently they are just laughable.

Actually laughable is the perfect word. We see baltecs, we laugh. We catch some lone bs doing PVE, we laugh. We see a small gang trying to use BS, we laugh.

There is no reasonable application of battleship use in Eve online that does not cause us to laugh.

Whatever CCP does, they need to change it so that if you are flying something smaller, like hacs or cruisers or whatever, and you do encounter BS, you should not be laughing. Not. At. All.

But what do you do to a class of ship that is extremely vulnerable to small ships that can kite it while paralyzing its mobility, or getting the snot bombed out of it?

Give it some teeth.

I'm not going to spout 'boost EHP' although I do believe that is one thing in dire need. I'll suggest a few extreme changes (I get the best reactions out of those heheh)

- boost scan res significantly (these are huge ships its hard to believe it should take a year to lock a frig)
- resistance to webbing (they are slow enough already)
- resistance to warp disruptors: require several distruptors or one scram to tackle any BS (yes lots of people should now hate that it would now take lots of work to tackle a bs)
- no more class-size bonus for weapons. Ship bonuses now apply to all weapons, allowing for some BS to fit anti-tackle 'point-defense'

Just a few crazy ideas...



You mean turrets should get bonuses that disregard sizes like drones do??

BLASPHEMY. THIS IS DRONES ONLINE.

Seriously, BS's need major help.

Why on Earth would a massive ship get past the drawing boards if it can't deal with a goddam frigate?

And with the warp speed changes......you mis-click your warp in the event you do actually escape said frig, they WILL point you again. There is no escape. Hell there is no escape in a cruiser, a battleship will exit warp with the entire enemy fleet laughing at you.

Honestly, a ship that size should not warp or decelerate from warp slower than a frigate. They should certainly spend more time aligning, that's all the slowness you need.

EDIT: As far as different sized weapon batteries go, I've been wondering about this for a very long time. No large vessel ever constructed uses one size weapon system, it makes no sense if it can't deal with smaller threats.

Buff large weapons significantly, but reduce the number of large weapons that battleships can fit (ABC's similarly tweaked). Add medium and small hardpoints. Rokh now fits 3 large, 3 medium, 2 small, etc. all of which are bonused.

Or, simply add more hi slots, but EVE seems to be stuck on the 8 slot maximum.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#125 - 2014-11-14 16:47:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
I am COMPLETELY against any change that tries to make battleships travel faster insted of being more powerful. If you want to travel fast, use CRUISER.

And No Battleships do NOT have high dps.

Try to make a tempest with full tackle and minimally decent tank. Its DPS will be lower than several BC and Cruisers.


Battleships NEED to take a LONG time to reach the target. But when they arrive they MUST be more powerful than any smaller ship in the field on their main department... being resilient and projecting a LOT of damage on large or slow things.


The only battleships that are good are the drone ones because they allow IMPRESSIVE projection, while leaving all highs open. And blaster boats because they are the only ships that do damage FAR above smaller ships can reach. The APOC also has an use because it excel in the PROJECTION department.

But the rest of the battleships are BAD at the main battleship roles.

Battleships need a DPS AND TANK buff. Other type of changes just steer them away from being BATTLESHIPS.

Even bringing sheer DPS is something that Battleships lost.... in high sec when someone wants to kill a POCO what do they bring? TALOS and ORACLE. Almost NEVER a battleship. Battleships take a LOT to reach target and do not bring anything that an ABC cannot do. The Tank issue is moot because several logies make the tanking capability of an ABC just a bit smaller than a Battleship.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#126 - 2014-11-14 17:24:18 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:


And No Battleships do NOT have high dps.

Try to make a tempest with full tackle and minimally decent tank. Its DPS will be lower than several BC and Cruisers.




I get over 800 DPS with two neuts on a solo pest. It gets much more effective if you use it with other ships as you can forgo to tackle and go with basically a big brother to the old cane.
Phaade
LowKey Ops
Shadow Cartel
#127 - 2014-11-14 19:08:51 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
I am COMPLETELY against any change that tries to make battleships travel faster insted of being more powerful. If you want to travel fast, use CRUISER.

And No Battleships do NOT have high dps.

Try to make a tempest with full tackle and minimally decent tank. Its DPS will be lower than several BC and Cruisers.



Why should battleships be that much slower? They are massive ships designed for front-line combat. Being slow on the field is enough.

They are like 1/10th the warp speed of frigates.. It's really, really, really bad. Even cruisers are disgustingly slow after flying frigates often enough.

Battleships should warp at cruiser speeds, with everything else warping slightly faster.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#128 - 2014-11-14 19:24:56 UTC
Battleships are still in the game. At least, the role we associated them with still exists.

We simply stopped calling them battleships, and we now call them cruisers.

Cruisers are faster, have far more tech 2 versions which are in demand on grid, and when we need the large guns for punch, we have battlecruisers.
Some even mount the large weapon set.

If we scale up existing battleships, so they again have the greater tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, all we do is engage in power creep.

I don't believe CCP wants sub caps DPS increased, in this manner.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#129 - 2014-11-14 19:54:12 UTC
Phaade wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
I am COMPLETELY against any change that tries to make battleships travel faster insted of being more powerful. If you want to travel fast, use CRUISER.

And No Battleships do NOT have high dps.

Try to make a tempest with full tackle and minimally decent tank. Its DPS will be lower than several BC and Cruisers.



Why should battleships be that much slower? They are massive ships designed for front-line combat. Being slow on the field is enough.

They are like 1/10th the warp speed of frigates.. It's really, really, really bad. Even cruisers are disgustingly slow after flying frigates often enough.

Battleships should warp at cruiser speeds, with everything else warping slightly faster.

You can already do this by sacrificing some rigs or lows, or using implants. This thread is about making it worth using them with such modules or implants, or making them powerful enough without such things fit that they are worth it to use.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#130 - 2014-11-14 19:57:26 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Battleships are still in the game. At least, the role we associated them with still exists.

We simply stopped calling them battleships, and we now call them cruisers.

Cruisers are faster, have far more tech 2 versions which are in demand on grid, and when we need the large guns for punch, we have battlecruisers.
Some even mount the large weapon set.

If we scale up existing battleships, so they again have the greater tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, all we do is engage in power creep.

I don't believe CCP wants sub caps DPS increased, in this manner.

Can you point to any evidence at all that this is the case? CCP buffed cruisers because they were almost unused. They have said they want everything to be viable when properly used, and I will go and find that quote if need be.

As for gaining more tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, they had more DPS and tank relative to such ships, and warped at the same speed. They have lost both of these, and so to return them to something even sort of resembling parity requires an adjustment of their stats.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#131 - 2014-11-14 20:06:59 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Battleships are still in the game. At least, the role we associated them with still exists.

We simply stopped calling them battleships, and we now call them cruisers.

Cruisers are faster, have far more tech 2 versions which are in demand on grid, and when we need the large guns for punch, we have battlecruisers.
Some even mount the large weapon set.

If we scale up existing battleships, so they again have the greater tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, all we do is engage in power creep.

I don't believe CCP wants sub caps DPS increased, in this manner.

Can you point to any evidence at all that this is the case? CCP buffed cruisers because they were almost unused. They have said they want everything to be viable when properly used, and I will go and find that quote if need be.

As for gaining more tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, they had more DPS and tank relative to such ships, and warped at the same speed. They have lost both of these, and so to return them to something even sort of resembling parity requires an adjustment of their stats.

I have no hard evidence of this, but it begs the question of why CCP overshadowed the battleships this way, if they intended these ships to keep the same relationship past BS and cruisers had.
That's why I respectfully stated this as a belief, not something I could otherwise prove.

It just fits the events, as I see them.

The adjustment to warp speed alone, to me, suggests a less reactive, more deliberated role for them.
While they may be keeping their options open, I think CCP has a pretty good idea about what role the BS will have.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#132 - 2014-11-14 20:08:08 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Battleships are still in the game. At least, the role we associated them with still exists.

We simply stopped calling them battleships, and we now call them cruisers.

Cruisers are faster, have far more tech 2 versions which are in demand on grid, and when we need the large guns for punch, we have battlecruisers.
Some even mount the large weapon set.

If we scale up existing battleships, so they again have the greater tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, all we do is engage in power creep.

I don't believe CCP wants sub caps DPS increased, in this manner.

Can you point to any evidence at all that this is the case? CCP buffed cruisers because they were almost unused. They have said they want everything to be viable when properly used, and I will go and find that quote if need be.

As for gaining more tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, they had more DPS and tank relative to such ships, and warped at the same speed. They have lost both of these, and so to return them to something even sort of resembling parity requires an adjustment of their stats.


Find me a cruiser with 800 dps from autos, 34km range(50km with barrage), 85k ehp, hits 1000m's and sports a pair of heavy neuts.
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#133 - 2014-11-14 20:15:00 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Battleships are still in the game. At least, the role we associated them with still exists.

We simply stopped calling them battleships, and we now call them cruisers.

Cruisers are faster, have far more tech 2 versions which are in demand on grid, and when we need the large guns for punch, we have battlecruisers.
Some even mount the large weapon set.

If we scale up existing battleships, so they again have the greater tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, all we do is engage in power creep.

I don't believe CCP wants sub caps DPS increased, in this manner.

Can you point to any evidence at all that this is the case? CCP buffed cruisers because they were almost unused. They have said they want everything to be viable when properly used, and I will go and find that quote if need be.

As for gaining more tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, they had more DPS and tank relative to such ships, and warped at the same speed. They have lost both of these, and so to return them to something even sort of resembling parity requires an adjustment of their stats.

I have no hard evidence of this, but it begs the question of why CCP overshadowed the battleships this way, if they intended these ships to keep the same relationship past BS and cruisers had.
That's why I respectfully stated this as a belief, not something I could otherwise prove.

It just fits the events, as I see them.

The adjustment to warp speed alone, to me, suggests a less reactive, more deliberated role for them.
While they may be keeping their options open, I think CCP has a pretty good idea about what role the BS will have.



CCP also never realized C5 wandering wormholes spawned in C6s until 5 years after Apocrypha. I think CCP is more than capable of forgetting gameplay assets.

Schrodinger's Hot Dropper

The Fate of Forum Alts

Guaranteed Success
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#134 - 2014-11-14 20:20:12 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
Battleships are still in the game. At least, the role we associated them with still exists.

We simply stopped calling them battleships, and we now call them cruisers.

Cruisers are faster, have far more tech 2 versions which are in demand on grid, and when we need the large guns for punch, we have battlecruisers.
Some even mount the large weapon set.

If we scale up existing battleships, so they again have the greater tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, all we do is engage in power creep.

I don't believe CCP wants sub caps DPS increased, in this manner.

Can you point to any evidence at all that this is the case? CCP buffed cruisers because they were almost unused. They have said they want everything to be viable when properly used, and I will go and find that quote if need be.

As for gaining more tank and DPS compared to cruisers as in the past, they had more DPS and tank relative to such ships, and warped at the same speed. They have lost both of these, and so to return them to something even sort of resembling parity requires an adjustment of their stats.


Find me a cruiser with 800 dps from autos, 34km range(50km with barrage), 85k ehp, hits 1000m's and sports a pair of heavy neuts.

No such cruiser exists. Cruisers with one or two of these in combination are theoretically possible, but unwise in the extreme other than the speed and tank. The issue as I see it is that battleships do not have enough on-grid performance to justify their relative costs in SP, minerals and travel time with the changes to t2 cruisers and warp speed. I am trying to make a balance pass to put them in a place which is usable and justifies these costs relative to cruisers.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#135 - 2014-11-14 20:32:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
[
Find me a cruiser with 800 dps from autos, 34km range(50km with barrage), 85k ehp, hits 1000m's and sports a pair of heavy neuts.


...and that's why you are flying these, and not Harpies.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#136 - 2014-11-14 21:01:13 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
James Baboli wrote:

No such cruiser exists. Cruisers with one or two of these in combination are theoretically possible, but unwise in the extreme other than the speed and tank. The issue as I see it is that battleships do not have enough on-grid performance to justify their relative costs in SP, minerals and travel time with the changes to t2 cruisers and warp speed. I am trying to make a balance pass to put them in a place which is usable and justifies these costs relative to cruisers.


So, why are you not using this ship which you admit cannot be matched by cruisers?

SFM Hobb3s wrote:


...and that's why you are flying these, and not Harpies.


I don't, tisn't a megaBlink
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#137 - 2014-11-14 21:17:28 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
James Baboli wrote:

No such cruiser exists. Cruisers with one or two of these in combination are theoretically possible, but unwise in the extreme other than the speed and tank. The issue as I see it is that battleships do not have enough on-grid performance to justify their relative costs in SP, minerals and travel time with the changes to t2 cruisers and warp speed. I am trying to make a balance pass to put them in a place which is usable and justifies these costs relative to cruisers.


So, why are you not using this ship which you admit cannot be matched by cruisers?


I will admit. I do already use battleships, and shiny ones at that, for both PvE and PVP. This happens to be the character I use for the forums and mostly for grinding out PvE isk safely, so most of the kills aren't gonna show up on this character. As for why I wouldn't use it, because to make such a ship function well takes a relatively high cost, and you have poor selection for your fights.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#138 - 2014-11-14 21:34:39 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
James Baboli wrote:

No such cruiser exists. Cruisers with one or two of these in combination are theoretically possible, but unwise in the extreme other than the speed and tank. The issue as I see it is that battleships do not have enough on-grid performance to justify their relative costs in SP, minerals and travel time with the changes to t2 cruisers and warp speed. I am trying to make a balance pass to put them in a place which is usable and justifies these costs relative to cruisers.


So, why are you not using this ship which you admit cannot be matched by cruisers?


I will admit. I do already use battleships, and shiny ones at that, for both PvE and PVP. This happens to be the character I use for the forums and mostly for grinding out PvE isk safely, so most of the kills aren't gonna show up on this character. As for why I wouldn't use it, because to make such a ship function well takes a relatively high cost, and you have poor selection for your fights.


244 mil cost and it can take on any targets any other small roaming gang can.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#139 - 2014-11-14 21:49:03 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
James Baboli wrote:

No such cruiser exists. Cruisers with one or two of these in combination are theoretically possible, but unwise in the extreme other than the speed and tank. The issue as I see it is that battleships do not have enough on-grid performance to justify their relative costs in SP, minerals and travel time with the changes to t2 cruisers and warp speed. I am trying to make a balance pass to put them in a place which is usable and justifies these costs relative to cruisers.


So, why are you not using this ship which you admit cannot be matched by cruisers?


I will admit. I do already use battleships, and shiny ones at that, for both PvE and PVP. This happens to be the character I use for the forums and mostly for grinding out PvE isk safely, so most of the kills aren't gonna show up on this character. As for why I wouldn't use it, because to make such a ship function well takes a relatively high cost, and you have poor selection for your fights.


244 mil cost and it can take on any targets any other small roaming gang can.

This sounds like a ship I would like to know better, pardon my interrupting.

Can you show the fitting?
I would appreciate knowing something better, that earned such praise.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#140 - 2014-11-14 21:58:39 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

This sounds like a ship I would like to know better, pardon my interrupting.

Can you show the fitting?
I would appreciate knowing something better, that earned such praise.


[Tempest, Im still cool]

Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Gyrostabilizer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Tracking Enhancer II
Damage Control II

Prototype 100MN Microwarpdrive I
Heavy Electrochemical Capacitor Booster I, Navy Cap Booster 400
EM Ward Field II
Large Shield Extender II
Adaptive Invulnerability Field II

800mm Repeating Cannon II, Barrage L
800mm Repeating Cannon II, Barrage L
800mm Repeating Cannon II, Barrage L
800mm Repeating Cannon II, Barrage L
800mm Repeating Cannon II, Barrage L
800mm Repeating Cannon II, Barrage L
Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I
Heavy Unstable Power Fluctuator I

Large Anti-Thermal Screen Reinforcer II
Large Core Defense Field Extender I
Large Core Defense Field Extender I

Big brother of the old cane, fit in the exact same way only bigger. Much ignored by the wider population because they think battleships cant pvp in small gangs.