These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

New T2 Battlercruisers
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Wynta
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#1 - 2015-02-16 21:47:29 UTC
Bored sitting in a FW plex, talking on comms, and we get into a discussion about the somewhat lack, or deficiencies, in the battlecruiser hull class. Command Ships offer a great niche specialty in links, but can also be great damage ships. The problem arises in the T1 hulls and the lack of other T2 variants.

The T1 hull problem arises with the fact that they are overshadowed by T3's, some HACs, bombers (also a problem for battleships hulls), and their lack of mobility. These problems can be address by buffing certain aspects of the T1 hulls, increasing warpspeed and alignment speed, reducing sig radius, or increasing overall tank. But these type of changes do not address the fact that their is still a hole in the T2 variants.

The T2 hole could be filled with one or two new T2 classes. My suggestion being a Logistic T2 BC designed to be used with a Battleship sized fleet, and a T2 variant of the Attack BC (Oracle, Naga, Talos, Tornado) designed to be a more mobile BC. Since I am familiar with Caldari ships I am going to show potential hulls based on those BCs.

T2 Logistic BC

Base Hull: Ferox

7/5/5 Slot Layout

Caldari Battlecruiser bonuses (per skill level):
200% bonus to Remote Shield Booster and Remote Capacitor Transmitter range

Heavy Logistics bonuses (per skill level):
10% reduction in Remote Capacitor Transmitter activation cost
10% reduction in Remote Shield Booster activation cost

Role Bonus:
X% reduction in Remote Shield Booster CPU requirement
X% reduction in Remote Capacitor Transmitter powergrid requirement

Based heavily on the Basilisk bonus but they can tinkered with more to be more unique.

T2 Fast Attack BC

This T2 would be a more kite oriented Attack BC, getting bonuses to MWDs.

Base Hull: Naga

Caldari Battlecruiser bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret damage
10% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret optimal range

Fast Attack bonuses (per skill level):
10% reduction in Large Hybrid Turret activation cost
15% reduction in Microwarpdrive signature radius penalty

Role Bonus:
95% reduction in Large Hybrid Turret powergrid requirement
50% reduction in Large Hybrid Turret CPU requirement
-Fitted Microwarpdrives are immune to Warp Scrambler effects. (Or increased MWD speed)


T2 Fast Attack BC

This T2 would compliment the Naga variant and would focus more on brawling.

Base Hull: Drake

Caldari Battlecruiser bonuses (per skill level):
4% bonus to all shield resistances
5% bonus to Rapid Heavy Missile, Cruise Missile and Torpedo Launcher rate of fire

Fast Attack bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to Heavy Missile, Cruise Missile and Torpedo Launcher max velocity
5% bonus to Heavy Missile, Cruise Missile and Torpedo Launcher explosion radius

Role Bonus:
95% reduction in Launcher powergrid requirement
50% reduction in Launcher CPU requirement
50% bonus to Heavy Missile damage

This one might be a bit OP but couldn't really think of a unqiue 4th bonus.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#2 - 2015-02-16 21:55:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
The only thing keeping logistics cruisers from being horrifically overpowered is their relatively small tank. It's hard to push them past 65K ish EHP even with links, t2 rigs, and faction fittings, so they are often the very weakest critical link in any PvP fleet.

Logistics go from flimsy logi cruiser to effectively immobile triage carrier for a reason. And the less said about the state of the Nestor the better.

Letting there be 100k+ EHP logistic subcaps would make fleets horribly difficult to kill as most fleets focus on killing off enough logi to break reps on the main DPS. Often you don't have a chance in hell of breaking the tanks of the 150k+ ehp main combatants while significant logi is still alive.

So any change that increases the survivability of the logi several times over makes fleets turn into groups uselessly expending ammo on each other that the other side can easily tank.

As to the rest of your ideas, mixing super heavy firepower with high agility, high speed, and high resists is what resulted in the Ishtar.
Both of your damage dealing t2 BC proposals have a super potent combination of tank/gank/agility, combining t2 resists, a BC natural buffer, BS class weapons, and then either strong damage application bonuses or immunity to losing MWD to warp scrams.

They would bulldoze nearly anything else in the game.

Sorry, -1 on all three for being horribly OP.
Wynta
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#3 - 2015-02-16 22:04:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Wynta
Anhenka wrote:
The only thing keeping logistics cruisers from being horrifically overpowered is their relatively small tank. It's hard to push them past 65K ish EHP even with links, t2 rigs, and faction fittings, so they are often the very weakest critical link in any PvP fleet.

As usual, -1 to anything that permits massively tanky logistics vessels with relatively high mobility. It goes from flimsy logi cruiser to effectively immobile triage carrier for a reason.

Letting there be 100k+ EHP logistic subcaps would make fleets horribly difficult to kill as most fleets focus on killing off enough logi to break reps on the main DPS. Often you don't have a chance in hell of breaking the tanks of the 150k+ ehp main combatants while significant logi is still alive.

So any change that increases the survivability of the logi several times over makes fleets turn into groups uselessly expending ammo on each other that the other side can easily tank.


What about balancing them by giving them a smaller rep range, and tank wise they wouldbe 100k with full links. They would be a lot less mobile both on grid and in warp, you could balance it by not allowing it to use MJD, the purpose of the hull would be to provide logistics to BS sized fleets that would not get instantly shredded. Cruiser logistics in a cruiser sized fleet is usually the weaker target, but cruiser logi in a BS fleet is extremely weak. A Logi BC would seek to fill a gap where you needed a tankier logistics and were willing to trade alot of your mobility for it but were not willing to drop capitals.
Wynta
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#4 - 2015-02-16 22:22:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Wynta
Anhenka wrote:

As to the rest of your ideas, mixing super heavy firepower with high agility, high speed, and high resists is what resulted in the Ishtar.
Both of your damage dealing t2 BC proposals have a super potent combination of tank/gank/agility, combining t2 resists, a BC natural buffer, BS class weapons, and then either strong damage application bonuses or immunity to losing MWD to warp scrams.

They would bulldoze nearly anything else in the game.

Sorry, -1 on all three for being horribly OP.


The Naga T2 would not be tanky, it would be a mobile kiting BC.

The Drake T2 would be tanky but lack mobility and would primarily be bonuses for Rapid Heavies making their sustained damage low. Now I will agree that their damage bonuses were a bit over the top but the idea behind it I think was relatively balanced. Maybe even taking away the cruise/torp bonuses and just make it a rapid heavy boat.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#5 - 2015-02-16 22:25:31 UTC
Maybe the problem is not that there's a lack of T2 BCs, but there's too many T1 BCs and they occupy unneeded roles.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#6 - 2015-02-16 22:25:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Wynta wrote:

What about balancing them by giving them a smaller rep range, and tank wise they wouldbe 100k with full links. They would be a lot less mobile both on grid and in warp, you could balance it by not allowing it to use MJD, the purpose of the hull would be to provide logistics to BS sized fleets that would not get instantly shredded. Cruiser logistics in a cruiser sized fleet is usually the weaker target, but cruiser logi in a BS fleet is extremely weak. A Logi BC would seek to fill a gap where you needed a tankier logistics and were willing to trade alot of your mobility for it but were not willing to drop capitals.


Long rep range is only a necessity for cruisers that need to stay as far away as possible from the enemy in order to survive

As to the buffer issue: Let's say an enemy fleet can kill a Logi in 4 seconds of continuous fire when it's called primary. And even if the logi starts locking as soon as they fire, by the time they lock, the enemy has been shooting for two seconds already. They only have two more seconds to apply reps before it explodes.

That's on a logi with 50K of it's EHP in its primary buffer. Double that to 100K, and suddenly while the EHP has only doubled, the margin of error to get reps on target goes from two seconds to six seconds, tripling the amount of effective time for other logi to lock and begin applying reps.

Obviously these are just rough numbers, but you get the drift.

Even current logi wings can easily tank any enemy fleet in a head to head contest between applied reps and the DPS of an enemy fleet of equal size to their own. The limiting issue is the logistics getting alphaed off the field before reps can land. Increase the ability to get reps down before ships explode due to more buffer though, and the survivability increases at a far greater proportion than simply the %increase of EHP.
Wynta
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#7 - 2015-02-16 22:28:56 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Wynta wrote:

What about balancing them by giving them a smaller rep range, and tank wise they wouldbe 100k with full links. They would be a lot less mobile both on grid and in warp, you could balance it by not allowing it to use MJD, the purpose of the hull would be to provide logistics to BS sized fleets that would not get instantly shredded. Cruiser logistics in a cruiser sized fleet is usually the weaker target, but cruiser logi in a BS fleet is extremely weak. A Logi BC would seek to fill a gap where you needed a tankier logistics and were willing to trade alot of your mobility for it but were not willing to drop capitals.


Long rep range is only a necessity for cruisers that need to stay as far away as possible from the enemy in order to survive

As to the buffer issue: Let's say an enemy fleet can kill a Logi in 4 seconds of continuous fire when it's called primary. And even if the logi starts locking as soon as they fire, by the time they lock, the enemy has been shooting for two seconds already. They only have two more seconds to apply reps before it explodes.

That's on a logi with 50K of it's EHP in its primary buffer. Double that to 100K, and suddenly while the EHP has only doubled, the margin of error to get reps on target goes from two seconds to six seconds, tripling the amount of effective time for other logi to lock and begin applying reps.

So often while even current logi wings can tank an enemy in a head to head DPS race, the limiting issue is the logistics getting alphaed off the field before reps can land. Increase the ability to get reps down due to more buffer though, and the survivability increases at a far greater proportion than simply the %increase of EHP.


So is there a way for a BC logi to be able to survive BS fleet battles but not overpower cruiser fleet battles
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#8 - 2015-02-16 22:39:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Wynta wrote:

So is there a way for a BC logi to be able to survive BS fleet battles but not overpower cruiser fleet battles


No, it's really not without entirely artificial restrictions that reduce applied reps on targets smaller than BS's. And that would be horrible game design. (Or a triage like mode, but triage on something without a carriers buffer and self rep is rapid one way ticket to a pod express, plus the whole stationary issue.)

BS fleets are bad for other reasons, mainly bombers. But that's a topic for another threadnaught.

Even Harpy and Talwar fleets often bring Scythes as logistics instead of bursts because of their greater utility, resistance to getting alphaed, repping amount, and range. The only trade off is that the Harpy FC needs to compensate slightly for the slightly slower Scythes, but it's still an excellent trade to prevent your logi from being easily blapped.

Same thing would happen with cruiser fleets, they would just compensate somewhat by sticking closer to their logi. For the tradeoff of not having to quit because all your logi died it's a miniscule downside.

http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=4665&b=6377355&e=126&t=uu&r=1 (Click over to the involved tab to easily see ship losses)

If you look at this recent fight between two fleets of highly tanky Tengu fleets, there were very few actual casualties among the primary DPS ships.

Each side just hammered on the other sides logi until there were not enough left to keep the DPS ships alive under fire, then the side that lost critical levels of logi's first just left. Because until you kill the logi's, you are not going to be able to kill the t2 rigged, linked Tengu's with 170K EHP, nearly all in their primary buffer.

Make BC logi's super tanky, and cruiser fleets would swap to them in a heartbeat to avoid the situation I just laid out from happening.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#9 - 2015-02-16 22:46:01 UTC
how something called Battle Cruiser could fit in a logistic role.
plus a bigger and tankier logistic than what we have already would be terrible for the game, neutral RR in high sec are already bad enough the way they are now.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#10 - 2015-02-16 22:47:52 UTC
Wynta wrote:
Anhenka wrote:

As to the rest of your ideas, mixing super heavy firepower with high agility, high speed, and high resists is what resulted in the Ishtar.
Both of your damage dealing t2 BC proposals have a super potent combination of tank/gank/agility, combining t2 resists, a BC natural buffer, BS class weapons, and then either strong damage application bonuses or immunity to losing MWD to warp scrams.

They would bulldoze nearly anything else in the game.

Sorry, -1 on all three for being horribly OP.


The Naga T2 would not be tanky, it would be a mobile kiting BC.
So like the Talos?

Quote:

The Drake T2 would be tanky but lack mobility and would primarily be bonuses for Rapid Heavies making their sustained damage low. Now I will agree that their damage bonuses were a bit over the top but the idea behind it I think was relatively balanced. Maybe even taking away the cruise/torp bonuses and just make it a rapid heavy boat.
Immobile and tanky with rapid heavies... so like the Raven?

Whenever new ships are suggested the same questions need to be asked:

What role do they fill that does not currently exist?
What issues do they address that can't be fixed by amending existing hulls?
Tiddle Jr
MOONFIRE SERVICE PROVIDER
#11 - 2015-02-16 22:48:49 UTC
That's very true cause bc class logi would be the primary choice from now and so on due to it's tanking ability.

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#12 - 2015-02-16 23:03:40 UTC
BC logi could be interesting if, and only if, some rebalancing of cruiser logi and logi mechanics is done first.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2015-02-17 00:15:41 UTC  |  Edited by: BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie
The Nestor is already in a very similar role. I don't see a reason for another medium sized logi ship though. I'd much rather see t2 frigate logis, and changes/ease of use buffs to small reps than a release of a BC hull with logistics bonuses. Honestly, Command Ships are in a pretty good place as combat vessels right now, and while the t1 and navy BC's might need some love, they aren't too bad. Tier 3 BC's are excellent.

Founder of Violet Squadron, a small gang NPSI community! Mail me for more information.

BeBopAReBop RhubarbPie's Space Mediation Service!
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#14 - 2015-02-17 06:14:22 UTC
The problem with a T2 BC logi is that despite dropping sig tanking and speed tanking for just solid tank is that it actually adds to the N+1 problem. So long as it can hold the field long enough it will always receive reps. Unless it somehow had larger sig and slow enough speed to occasionally be blapped by dreads I don't see how it could be viable for anything other then escalation of fleets in null.

The T2 fast attack BC's are just their base form with the added bonus of not being able to be slowed down. Quite honestly the entire BC ship class needs to be re-evaluated before we can discuss adding a T2 line to it. The BS line is in the same pickle after the warp speed nerfs as well. They're just too damn slow for what they offer in combat strength and tank. The solution to that is a second wave of rebalance, not a set of T2 variants.
Liam Inkuras
Furnace
#15 - 2015-02-17 07:08:53 UTC
How about we just un-**** warp speed for BCs, ABCs at least.

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
Cassius Invictus
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#16 - 2015-02-17 14:07:43 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Wynta wrote:

So is there a way for a BC logi to be able to survive BS fleet battles but not overpower cruiser fleet battles


No, it's really not without entirely artificial restrictions that reduce applied reps on targets smaller than BS's. And that would be horrible game design. (Or a triage like mode, but triage on something without a carriers buffer and self rep is rapid one way ticket to a pod express, plus the whole stationary issue.)

BS fleets are bad for other reasons, mainly bombers. But that's a topic for another threadnaught.

Even Harpy and Talwar fleets often bring Scythes as logistics instead of bursts because of their greater utility, resistance to getting alphaed, repping amount, and range. The only trade off is that the Harpy FC needs to compensate slightly for the slightly slower Scythes, but it's still an excellent trade to prevent your logi from being easily blapped.

Same thing would happen with cruiser fleets, they would just compensate somewhat by sticking closer to their logi. For the tradeoff of not having to quit because all your logi died it's a miniscule downside.

http://evf-eve.com/services/brcat/?s=4665&b=6377355&e=126&t=uu&r=1 (Click over to the involved tab to easily see ship losses)

If you look at this recent fight between two fleets of highly tanky Tengu fleets, there were very few actual casualties among the primary DPS ships.

Each side just hammered on the other sides logi until there were not enough left to keep the DPS ships alive under fire, then the side that lost critical levels of logi's first just left. Because until you kill the logi's, you are not going to be able to kill the t2 rigged, linked Tengu's with 170K EHP, nearly all in their primary buffer.

Make BC logi's super tanky, and cruiser fleets would swap to them in a heartbeat to avoid the situation I just laid out from happening.


How about we scrap logi entirely? This is really stupid mechanic. Im tired of fights where its shooting their logi vs. our logi. Without logi fight would be more dynamic and bloody with weaker side being able to inflict comparable damage based and good target calling etc. Now its a matter of "if u have enough dps to kill their first logi" if no - you run, if yes - they run. Boring as fu*k.
Wynta
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#17 - 2015-02-17 18:44:00 UTC
Lyra Gerie wrote:
The problem with a T2 BC logi is that despite dropping sig tanking and speed tanking for just solid tank is that it actually adds to the N+1 problem. So long as it can hold the field long enough it will always receive reps. Unless it somehow had larger sig and slow enough speed to occasionally be blapped by dreads I don't see how it could be viable for anything other then escalation of fleets in null.

The T2 fast attack BC's are just their base form with the added bonus of not being able to be slowed down. Quite honestly the entire BC ship class needs to be re-evaluated before we can discuss adding a T2 line to it. The BS line is in the same pickle after the warp speed nerfs as well. They're just too damn slow for what they offer in combat strength and tank. The solution to that is a second wave of rebalance, not a set of T2 variants.


My thought was a module that like triage/bastion that would stop the ship and increase rep range, amount, or cycle time, maybe increase sig, or lower sensor strength.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#18 - 2015-02-17 18:49:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Wynta wrote:

My thought was a module that like triage/bastion that would stop the ship and increase rep range, amount, or cycle time, maybe increase sig, or lower sensor strength.


And now it's totally useless for anything except PvE and POS repping in highsec.

In large fights, staying still means death. Being unable to receive remote reps means death.

Even triage carriers get chewed through in a hurry in large fights. Something with only a high BC buffer and cannot move or receive remote reps?

Even less survivable than current t2 cruiser hulls.

And in small fights mobility is king over all.
Davey Talvanen
Kingsparrow Wormhole Division
Birds of Prey.
#19 - 2015-02-17 21:10:04 UTC
The drake is sort of OP (not too OP) but if you made the naga (and all others) A. remove scram immunity and B. bad resists and tank, like 15-20 k EHP and under 50 resists on a full tank fit. Also they should have a 50% MWD sig penalty and crap tracking (pretty obvious with large guns) so their hard counter are figs with good speed but they can kite out of current doctrine range and be useful in solo or small gang pvp.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#20 - 2015-02-17 21:38:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Davey Talvanen wrote:
The drake is sort of OP (not too OP) but if you made the naga (and all others) A. remove scram immunity and B. bad resists and tank, like 15-20 k EHP and under 50 resists on a full tank fit. Also they should have a 50% MWD sig penalty and crap tracking (pretty obvious with large guns) so their hard counter are figs with good speed but they can kite out of current doctrine range and be useful in solo or small gang pvp.


I really want some of what your smoking. The drake is OP? Dafuq?

As to the rest of your ideas:
Ooh look at my shiny t2 BC that has no special features, less EHP than a t1 cruiser, worse resists than a t1 cruiser. I can sig tank with a bloom of only 50% of normal, which means my sig is only slightly larger than a battleship, and a speed that is still slower than any cruiser hull out there

I love flying it!. Nope.

If it retained the ability to fit large weapons like the OP proposed, your version would be like a currently fairly decent ABC .... except worse in basically every conceivable way.
12Next page