These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Battleship PVP Viability
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2015-01-28 15:18:42 UTC
Buff large remote reps on battleships so everyone uses RR battleship gangs again! :D

In seriousness though, battleships can still be effective. They're just not always the right tool for the job, and that gets them some bad rep, from people using BS when they should have used a T3, or ishtar.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#22 - 2015-01-28 15:32:34 UTC
Kenrailae wrote:
Buff large remote reps on battleships so everyone uses RR battleship gangs again! :D

In seriousness though, battleships can still be effective. They're just not always the right tool for the job, and that gets them some bad rep, from people using BS when they should have used a T3, or ishtar.

The problem is that you should, or at least can, pretty much always use a T3 or Ishtar.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#23 - 2015-01-28 15:34:17 UTC
Make BS hulls immunt to local. They show up on D-scan, but not in local. Their lack of speed and manueverability are balanced by thier showing up on Dscan but not visible in local. They would also need to be overlooked by the jump in the last hour counters that the map displays.

What content this would generate.

Think it through folks. There are just soooo many plusses to this. So many intersting tactics. So many interesting options. Think of the expertise, planning and just everything for hiding your BS hammer fleet from the unsuspecting eyes of your victims. Then, once the hammer falls, the party is on. It's not like you can just race home after an engagement.
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union
#24 - 2015-01-28 15:38:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Rovinia
I think they need some sort of love in form of a rolebonus.

One idea:

"Heavy Reactor" - All bonuses for overloading modules get doubled. Also, 25% more heat damage gets applied.
Rovinia
Exotic Dancers Union
#25 - 2015-01-28 15:54:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Rovinia
...or another rolebonus for Battleship Droneboats: Can use Sentry Drones

Sorry Ishtar pilots Big smile
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#26 - 2015-01-28 16:05:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Serendipity Lost
Kenrailae wrote:
Buff large remote reps on battleships so everyone uses RR battleship gangs again! :D

In seriousness though, battleships can still be effective. They're just not always the right tool for the job, and that gets them some bad rep, from people using BS when they should have used a T3, or ishtar.


Here's the deal. When a gang is looking through it's hangar looking for a fleet to go roam with, they go with squishtars. Super squishy tanks, but the average risk averse eve tool just wants to drop his dps and kite out to safety. The problem with a BS is that if you undock in one you could lose it. There is a lot of focus on looking and being 'good' on the kb end of things and not a lot of emphasis on risking stuff and having fun doing it.

Your suggestion to buff RR kind of underlines this. Keep the ship as is and improve its survivability. Your average RR domi ball right now can dominate a comperable size squishtar fleet. Buffing them just unbalances a module and creates different problems. If you increased RR module effectiveness folks won't mothball their squishtars or their T3 and all hop in BS. It's a big slow expensive ship that is easy to hold down once catch you it.

Risk aversion is why BS don't see more use. There are just so many ships w/ greater survivability and mobility out there. Examining the standard cloaky wh T3 fleet. Their dps is borderline pathetic, BUT they are easy to keep alive w/ the 5 guardians/bassi that came along for the ride. Folks aren't going to just give that up.

Ishtars are picked over BS because they can drop sentries and run. Take the sentries away and they become a balanced HAC and they will return to normal status. T3 monster tank w/ molehill sig radius is why they get the nod over BS.

Buffing BS RR would just unbalance other parts of the game. It won't encourage BS fleets to become popular.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#27 - 2015-01-28 17:04:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
baltec1 wrote:
Harvey James wrote:

- T3 cruisers need tank and dps nerfs, especially the T2 resists
Nerf is inbound in the next "few months".

Harvey James wrote:

- HAC's, mainly ishtar and cerberus offer lots of dps and high resists/low sig/good speed mainly ishtar needs the nerfs


Cerb is fine as the the other HACs. Ishtar requires a nerf in the form of losing the sentry drones.

Harvey James wrote:

- ABC's offer battleship dps at a lower cost with more mobility .. pushed to T2 might help with this and slight dps nerf


ABCs lack the tank.

Harvey James wrote:

- faction cruisers like gila, VNI offer plenty of dps and tank with low sig and mobility.. some nerfs here needed


Ships are fine.



ishtar should keep sentries otherwise it becomes too samey as gila, smallerbay. reduced bonuses, specific damage bonuses too heavies and sentries at 7.5% are better options.

ABC's do lack the tank.. but the battleship dps they put out reduces the need for battleships too be used (point of the thread)

VNI and gila putting out 900dps or more also makes using battleships much less desirable..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Juan Mileghere
The Corporate Raiders
Safety.
#28 - 2015-01-28 17:12:03 UTC
Gremoxx wrote:
BS are not bad or worse, they are in some cases better than other PvP boats.

Its all down to Cost v usability

The cost of well fitted BS v decent fitted HAC or SC.

Alliance SRP will pay for HAC or SC, it will cost less and you can use HAC on all ops.

Bring down the cost of buying + fitting BS and SRP´s will start directing everyone into BS.

I think that most BSes are cheaper than T3s by far and HACs depending on the HAC and region.

BSes need a look after T3 and Ishtars(and more importantly sentries), I'm not saying a change but take some time and take a look at usage, BSes still are great at Neuting and Smartbombing, fairly cheap and newbie friendly at T1 and durable with good DPS at that price.

Blobbing Explained
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#29 - 2015-01-28 17:17:23 UTC
Harvey James wrote:



ishtar should keep sentries otherwise it becomes too samey as gila, smallerbay. reduced bonuses, specific damage bonuses too heavies and sentries at 7.5% are better options.


Frankly, I would like the see sentries removed entirely as they cause no end of issues from the ishtar to the domi to the unkillable carrier blobs alphaing subcaps.

Harvey James wrote:

ABC's do lack the tank.. but the battleship dps they put out reduces the need for battleships too be used (point of the thread

They are no good in a fleet engagement and in a BS vs ABC the BS will out last it.

Harvey James wrote:

VNI and gila putting out 900dps or more also makes using battleships much less desirable..


You can neuter such ships and they pay a heavy price for that firepower.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#30 - 2015-01-28 18:16:14 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Harvey James wrote:



ishtar should keep sentries otherwise it becomes too samey as gila, smallerbay. reduced bonuses, specific damage bonuses too heavies and sentries at 7.5% are better options.


Frankly, I would like the see sentries removed entirely as they cause no end of issues from the ishtar to the domi to the unkillable carrier blobs alphaing subcaps.

Harvey James wrote:

ABC's do lack the tank.. but the battleship dps they put out reduces the need for battleships too be used (point of the thread

They are no good in a fleet engagement and in a BS vs ABC the BS will out last it.

Harvey James wrote:

VNI and gila putting out 900dps or more also makes using battleships much less desirable..


You can neuter such ships and they pay a heavy price for that firepower.


sentries should be removed from carriers for sure, along with the logi and link bonuses.. leave them to supers

ABC's .. in a decent sized fleet perhaps , especially if mobility isn't an issue , but in small skirmishes ABC's can be more useful

VNI and gila are used over battleships often in small fleets because the mobility, lower sig better applied damage etc...
weaknesses aren't as much as you suggest .. unless im missing something, also i speak from a small fleet engagement scenario generally rather than 0.0 large fleets.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2015-01-28 18:25:54 UTC
Harvey James wrote:

ABC's .. in a decent sized fleet perhaps , especially if mobility isn't an issue , but in small skirmishes ABC's can be more useful


ABCs have no tackle defense what so ever, ontop of a bad tank to sig ratio which means anything and I mean anything gets within scram range you're dead.

battleships have heavy neuts, heavy tanks, more slots and drones.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#32 - 2015-01-28 18:28:43 UTC
Tusker Crazinski wrote:
Harvey James wrote:

ABC's .. in a decent sized fleet perhaps , especially if mobility isn't an issue , but in small skirmishes ABC's can be more useful


ABCs have no tackle defense what so ever, ontop of a bad tank to sig ratio which means anything and I mean anything gets within scram range you're dead.

battleships have heavy neuts, heavy tanks, more slots and drones.


Talos's have light drones, and besides you would have the sense too bring some tackle with you

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#33 - 2015-01-28 18:35:44 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Tusker Crazinski wrote:
Harvey James wrote:

ABC's .. in a decent sized fleet perhaps , especially if mobility isn't an issue , but in small skirmishes ABC's can be more useful


ABCs have no tackle defense what so ever, ontop of a bad tank to sig ratio which means anything and I mean anything gets within scram range you're dead.

battleships have heavy neuts, heavy tanks, more slots and drones.


Talos's have light drones, and besides you would have the sense too bring some tackle with you


well yeah. this game is lol gallente ATM, I'm just saying battleships offer a lot of things ABC don't. namely a 24km neut. and 5-10 times the tank depending on fit
W0lf Crendraven
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2015-01-28 18:35:50 UTC
Scan ress and warp speed are the deciding factors, and agility is to bad.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#35 - 2015-01-28 18:36:01 UTC
So sentries should only be in BS w/ the bandwidth to use them and that's it. Baltec1 is right. They cause more problems than they are worth. That being said, keeping them in BS may be one of the niche things that breaths some life back into them.

BS become the only platform that can deploy sentry drones and are immune to local = BS become an interesting PVP option.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#36 - 2015-01-28 18:38:44 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Kenrailae wrote:
Buff large remote reps on battleships so everyone uses RR battleship gangs again! :D

In seriousness though, battleships can still be effective. They're just not always the right tool for the job, and that gets them some bad rep, from people using BS when they should have used a T3, or ishtar.


Here's the deal. When a gang is looking through it's hangar looking for a fleet to go roam with, they go with squishtars. Super squishy tanks, but the average risk averse eve tool just wants to drop his dps and kite out to safety. The problem with a BS is that if you undock in one you could lose it. There is a lot of focus on looking and being 'good' on the kb end of things and not a lot of emphasis on risking stuff and having fun doing it.

Your suggestion to buff RR kind of underlines this. Keep the ship as is and improve its survivability. Your average RR domi ball right now can dominate a comperable size squishtar fleet. Buffing them just unbalances a module and creates different problems. If you increased RR module effectiveness folks won't mothball their squishtars or their T3 and all hop in BS. It's a big slow expensive ship that is easy to hold down once catch you it.

Risk aversion is why BS don't see more use. There are just so many ships w/ greater survivability and mobility out there. Examining the standard cloaky wh T3 fleet. Their dps is borderline pathetic, BUT they are easy to keep alive w/ the 5 guardians/bassi that came along for the ride. Folks aren't going to just give that up.

Ishtars are picked over BS because they can drop sentries and run. Take the sentries away and they become a balanced HAC and they will return to normal status. T3 monster tank w/ molehill sig radius is why they get the nod over BS.

Buffing BS RR would just unbalance other parts of the game. It won't encourage BS fleets to become popular.


Wow, was definitely kidding about buffing RR. Excellent reading comprehension. The 'In seriousness' following it wasn't a good indicator that it was a joke?

You should also look into your alliances. I guess I have a different perspective on battleships because we don't just use them, we use vindi's and bhaalgorns, mach's, Blops, all the super shiny ones that most people wouldn't even think of bringing into a fight. So yes, I stand by my statements, BS are definitely still viable. There are times one should use a T3 for it's survivability, times to use an ishtar to harass a larger/heavier opponent, and times to use a fleet of bhaalgorns and vindi's for their face grape damage and other fun stuff.

It's also well noted that T3's are broken as crap, and well noted that their day is coming... soon *TM. That doesn't mean battleships are out of place, only that T3's and ishtars are currently broken.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#37 - 2015-01-28 18:46:29 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Scan ress and warp speed are the deciding factors, and agility is to bad.


I have a megathron that warps and aligns faster than cruisers.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#38 - 2015-01-28 18:52:50 UTC
I haven't used a bhallgorn since..... the day before yesterday. Mine is a cap stable shield version without a ship scanner. It totally rocks and all my corpies totally hate the fit.... until they want a carriers cap removed, then it's ok to have. The last 2 BS I lost were a pair of pve nightmares I dropped into and ishtar fight to save a bud's vargur. It was a bad idea, but I was already in them, so....

Maybe we are twins seperated at birth?

As far as ishtars and T3. I'm in what may be the only wh corp in eve that doesn't like to use either one of them.

I like the no BS in local and the only sentry drone platform idea. Not everyone can cope w/ losing billion isk battleships in pvp.
Kenrailae
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#39 - 2015-01-28 18:54:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Kenrailae
Small add in: Sentries are a huge PITA. They should be restricted to certain classes and above. The ishtar would be nearly fixed if it couldn't use sentries. But as long as sentries are in game(ignoring the debate of whether they should or not) carriers should still have them, because carrier and carrier. Sentries removed from all hulls below battleship would be a huge step in the right direction.

EDIT: My last two battleships losses were a geddon and my first vindi :( I has new one now, but still. I was sad. For like a week. Da**it Snuff.

The Law is a point of View

The NPE IS a big deal
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#40 - 2015-01-28 18:59:05 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Scan ress and warp speed are the deciding factors, and agility is to bad.


I have a megathron that warps and aligns faster than cruisers.



I have an IQ of 163 and an 'average' peen of 10.328 inches.

Oh... sorry, I thought this was going in a different direction.


He's still right Baltec1. Of course you can make your mega do amazing things, but at a price.

I can put a higs rig on my mega and make it so slow that you wouldn't notice I was getting away.

Now all 3 of us have correct statements. I'm just not sure what you and I are trying to prove.