Ships & Modules

Nothing catches bombs like a battleship?

I'd love to see a new T2 battleship that follows along the lines of a Battlestar from BSG - kinda like a mini-carrier capable of carrying fighters (but not fighter bombers). Like any other ship that's not a carrier, it would be limited to launching no more than five at a time. No logistics bonuses though, and no weapons bonuses other than those applied to fighters (no bonuses drones or sentries), but definitely some good racial tanking bonuses. Beyond that, I haven't really thought of the particulars. Ever since I started playing this game I think the one thing that's annoyed me the most is that ships below capital-class can't carry manned fighters. A Neb-B frigate from Star Wars is 150m long, a little bigger than a Rifter, and even it can carry two squadrons (24 ships total) of X-wings. The 5,000m3 that a fighter uses in this game is somewhat ridiculous tbh, there's no way a ~20m long/wide ship is gonna take up that much space.

Hacs doing more dps than vindicator a eh?

Tanking more than abbadons

Are we playing the same game?

HACs and T3s definitely do not do more raw damage than battlships, however they tank similar amounts due to speed, sig and resists

It's a combination of being slow and being basically target practice for bombers

One of the things that battleships can generally do better than HACs and T3s is project good damage at ranges of 150km+ while maintaining a solid buffer tank. With the current meta favoring closer-range combat, this well-defined niche for battleships often gets ignored completely, or relegated to cheaper, more mobile ABCs performing hit-and-run raids.

Battleships have always been slow and the speed changes did hurt them, but I still believe that it was the movement away from sustained long-range combat that started the downward trend of battleship use in PvP fleets. So long as fleet fights favor closer range combat or hit-and-run sniping instead of sustained long-range fire, battleships will be at a disadvantage. Not useless mind you, but not as useful as they once were.

BS dont need a buff, T3 need their nerf.

sure if you want to talk raw numbers, I'd say we're playing a different game, perhaps you're playing the game on a calculator

Even assuming your point were all true, which they aren't, T3s are T3, HACs are T2, BSs are T1.
Get it now?

If you want to evaluate BSs, you need to compare them to cruisers and BCs.
In any case, BSs still have more raw HP and DPS than HACs and also have better range, more fitting room, bigger drone bays ect.

Well a rattlesnake or slightly blinged TFI is still a very good contender for pve and pvp roles. Mostly people try to evaluate battleships as solo vessels and while.some are built for the task e.g. hyperion others are much better when deployed in fleets like the rokh as they perform a fundamentally different role.

The same could be said for caracal vs moa where one is a dumb but dependable brick that works best with logi the other can be fit for multiple roles and in a pinch works solo or in fleets.

But for battleships specifically yes I think that most of the time people want to use them in a context they're not designed around. A high skilled player.can dish 800-1200 damage with long range weapons and basicly be bricky enough to deter being shot at in return.

The real trick question is the use of a carrier outside of blobs or a dread.