These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Old Guard Weighs in on Battleships flaws
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#81 - 2015-07-11 23:36:41 UTC
Sleepaz Den wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


That's only due to their lower sig. BSs with their balloon sigs should have around 300k-400k ehp to compensate and a RHML turret based weapon system to track smaller sigs.


No. T3 cruisers should have cruiser EHP.


And I dare you to run a class 6 combat anomalie in your Megathron, you, only you and only your Megathron.


Though the Megathron may be an iconic ship, I will tell you what seven Sleepless Guardians will do to your Megathron in ~20 seconds:

Your boat will be the lead-victim of next week CSI - Special Victims Unit.

I don't hate you brake it to you again, nullsec is not the only playground in EVE.


That seems off-topic.

The impact of ehp-subs for pve just isn't there, mind that the only T3 seeing use in pve is a loki, and does really fine without one.

c4 solo tengus are a thing of the past since the RR-fixes, duo still works and entirely relies on range to tank sites, and they don't utilize buffer for that. C4 RR tengus don't even need an LSE, just the 4k-ish cruiser base hp. c5 tengus can be flown with LSEs albeit they also aren't necessary unless escalating. c6 you really want more buffer, but still far from supp screening buffer.
The total ehp is not a concern for pve-purposes. Buffersubs and their impact is a thing for pvp, and its opppressive performance subtracts from diversity.



With the exception of a cloaky Proteus, I'd never use a T3C for pvp unless I was in a fleet backed with logi. Only with logi support does the T3Cs impressive ehp resonates the OP-ness siren. If anything needs a nerf, its logi ships.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#82 - 2015-07-12 09:40:46 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:

With the exception of a cloaky Proteus, I'd never use a T3C for pvp unless I was in a fleet backed with logi. Only with logi support does the T3Cs impressive ehp resonates the OP-ness siren. If anything needs a nerf, its logi ships.


Logi also needs a nerf but t3 cruisers do desperately need to be trimmed down so they have the stats of a cruisers not battleships.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#83 - 2015-07-12 09:42:36 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
elitatwo wrote:


And I dare you to run a class 6 combat anomalie in your Megathron, you, only you and only your Megathron.


Though the Megathron may be an iconic ship, I will tell you what seven Sleepless Guardians will do to your Megathron in ~20 seconds:

Your boat will be the lead-victim of next week CSI - Special Victims Unit.

I don't hate you brake it to you again, nullsec is not the only playground in EVE.


That just goes to show how out of whak t3 cruisers really are. They need to have the stats of a cruiser not stats superior to ships two classes above them, especially when it comes to their tanking abilities.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#84 - 2015-07-13 11:06:01 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


That's only due to their lower sig. BSs with their balloon sigs should have around 300k-400k ehp to compensate and a RHML turret based weapon system to track smaller sigs.


No. T3 cruisers should have cruiser EHP.


And I dare you to run a class 6 combat anomalie in your Megathron, you, only you and only your Megathron.


Though the Megathron may be an iconic ship, I will tell you what seven Sleepless Guardians will do to your Megathron in ~20 seconds:

Your boat will be the lead-victim of next week CSI - Special Victims Unit.

I don't hate you brake it to you again, nullsec is not the only playground in EVE.



So the acid test for BS viability is the ability to solo a C6 anom? Please link proteus fit that can solo a C6 anom.... please link any fit of any ship that can solo a C6 anom.

Quoted as a candidtate for the most rediculous forum argument of the year.
Cannibal Zuza
Doomheim
#85 - 2015-07-13 11:49:57 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


That's only due to their lower sig. BSs with their balloon sigs should have around 300k-400k ehp to compensate and a RHML turret based weapon system to track smaller sigs.


No. T3 cruisers should have cruiser EHP.


And I dare you to run a class 6 combat anomalie in your Megathron, you, only you and only your Megathron.


Though the Megathron may be an iconic ship, I will tell you what seven Sleepless Guardians will do to your Megathron in ~20 seconds:

Your boat will be the lead-victim of next week CSI - Special Victims Unit.

I don't hate you brake it to you again, nullsec is not the only playground in EVE.



So the acid test for BS viability is the ability to solo a C6 anom? Please link proteus fit that can solo a C6 anom.... please link any fit of any ship that can solo a C6 anom.

Quoted as a candidtate for the most rediculous forum argument of the year.


You obviously have never witness the incredible might of Zuza's unstoppable Erebus. If CCP did the proper thang and allow my beautiful Erebus to enter those Whs, then even the sleepers would give witness to the spectacularness of Zuza's unstoppable Erebus.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#86 - 2015-07-13 14:29:32 UTC
Please link erebus fit and also please breing to Ami system top belt so I can admire this magnificent beast. Post the time you'll be at top belt with the fit. I'm sure at least 4 folks will want to come admire it.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#87 - 2015-07-14 02:49:37 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
elitatwo wrote:


And I dare you to run a class 6 combat anomalie in your Megathron, you, only you and only your Megathron.


Though the Megathron may be an iconic ship, I will tell you what seven Sleepless Guardians will do to your Megathron in ~20 seconds:

Your boat will be the lead-victim of next week CSI - Special Victims Unit.

I don't hate you brake it to you again, nullsec is not the only playground in EVE.


That just goes to show how out of whak t3 cruisers really are. They need to have the stats of a cruiser not stats superior to ships two classes above them, especially when it comes to their tanking abilities.


So if CCP decided to remove the T3Cs armor/shield buffer subs entirely, would that satisfy you? I doubt it! If there is a particular ship class that some pilots (particularly vets) don't like or view as OP that CCP reasonably nerfs that still has some uses, the opposing pilots would still scream for another nerf until the ships are completely worthless. A perfect example is the Ishtar that many pilots wants CCP to remove it's sentry bonuses (which I also agree with), but all is gonna happen is that you'll be seeing Ishtars with geckos moving 3k while doing 900+ dps shredding BSs apart all the same. What would the masses whine about then?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#88 - 2015-07-14 07:19:53 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Daniela Doran wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
elitatwo wrote:


And I dare you to run a class 6 combat anomalie in your Megathron, you, only you and only your Megathron.


Though the Megathron may be an iconic ship, I will tell you what seven Sleepless Guardians will do to your Megathron in ~20 seconds:

Your boat will be the lead-victim of next week CSI - Special Victims Unit.

I don't hate you brake it to you again, nullsec is not the only playground in EVE.


That just goes to show how out of whak t3 cruisers really are. They need to have the stats of a cruiser not stats superior to ships two classes above them, especially when it comes to their tanking abilities.


So if CCP decided to remove the T3Cs armor/shield buffer subs entirely, would that satisfy you? I doubt it! If there is a particular ship class that some pilots (particularly vets) don't like or view as OP that CCP reasonably nerfs that still has some uses, the opposing pilots would still scream for another nerf until the ships are completely worthless. A perfect example is the Ishtar that many pilots wants CCP to remove it's sentry bonuses (which I also agree with), but all is gonna happen is that you'll be seeing Ishtars with geckos moving 3k while doing 900+ dps shredding BSs apart all the same. What would the masses whine about then?


T3s will only be balanced when they stop out classing t2 cruisers. As far as the gecko ishtar goes that is highly unlikely simply due to the ever rising cost and rarity of those drones.
ChromeStriker
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#89 - 2015-07-14 08:24:40 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
elitatwo wrote:


And I dare you to run a class 6 combat anomalie in your Megathron, you, only you and only your Megathron.


Though the Megathron may be an iconic ship, I will tell you what seven Sleepless Guardians will do to your Megathron in ~20 seconds:

Your boat will be the lead-victim of next week CSI - Special Victims Unit.

I don't hate you brake it to you again, nullsec is not the only playground in EVE.


That just goes to show how out of whak t3 cruisers really are. They need to have the stats of a cruiser not stats superior to ships two classes above them, especially when it comes to their tanking abilities.


So if CCP decided to remove the T3Cs armor/shield buffer subs entirely, would that satisfy you? I doubt it! If there is a particular ship class that some pilots (particularly vets) don't like or view as OP that CCP reasonably nerfs that still has some uses, the opposing pilots would still scream for another nerf until the ships are completely worthless. A perfect example is the Ishtar that many pilots wants CCP to remove it's sentry bonuses (which I also agree with), but all is gonna happen is that you'll be seeing Ishtars with geckos moving 3k while doing 900+ dps shredding BSs apart all the same. What would the masses whine about then?


T3s will only be balanced when they stop out classing t2 cruisers. As far as the gecko ishtar goes that is highly unlikely simply due to the ever rising cost and rarity of those drones.


Also Utility highs... it would be sad to destroy all those geckos Sad

No Worries
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#90 - 2015-07-14 08:52:08 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
This is where they should be.

Nerf for T3s is needed but I don't think it will hit as hard as on that chart. CCP already have problem with Worm and Gila being to OP compared to others hull in their own class. We have problem with T3 being threat to higher classes which have to be solved. Balancing in same class is problem too. After T3s all we will be flying will be pirates ships, because they will be tops. Let's say tengu ability to be cloaky scanning boat will be nerfed below Stratios. Why use it then? I'll use best for the role, T3 flexibility will not be as much desirable then. Chart is wrong, it balances nothing apart from T1 and T2 in their roles and they are already balanced.

How to bring BS to fight? As RavenPaine wrote cruiser must have natural predator: BC. But how to balance it? Warp speed nerf won't help at all.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#91 - 2015-07-14 10:06:33 UTC
Some battleships need to be tuned. They finally did the tempest, one less to go.


On a general note, battleships decay is related to the environment. Back on AoE dooomsday age, battleships were needed a lot, because smaller ships would NOT survive a doomsday. So much that logi cruisers were EXTREMELY rare, since they were fragile to AoE.

Nowadays the ONLY AoE weapon in usage, the bombs, is effectively almost only against battleships. So the scenario is reversed completely.



Changes to the AoE weaponry would be a good way to balance things. Make bombs do less damage but be more efficient against smaller ships, and suddenly you will start to see more battleships. Halve their base damage.... cur their " resolution" (i do not remember if it is listed as explosion radius sorry) to 1/3 of now.

or just give battleships a role bonus... 33% less damage from AoE sources :) that would be awkward but would make it work.

T3 need to have less EHP, or battleships need way more EHP (in fact I think the sane approach would be to reduce a bit t3 and increase a tiny bit battleships so that the feeling of nerf everything does not come up). A t3 cruiser should NEVER exceed the EHP of a buffer tanked abaddon or navy battleships. In fact they probably should not even exceed command ships EHP.


Something I think needs to be done is rebalance the tier 1 2 and 3 of large guns. Large guns do not hit anything unless the target is far or is tackled heavily, therefore there is very very little reason to use the Dua 425mm, Electrons.. etc

I would make those guns more effective against smaller threats ( reduce the sig to 300 from 400 on them), that would already be a good start.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#92 - 2015-07-14 10:55:09 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Some battleships need to be tuned. They finally did the tempest, one less to go.


On a general note, battleships decay is related to the environment. Back on AoE dooomsday age, battleships were needed a lot, because smaller ships would NOT survive a doomsday. So much that logi cruisers were EXTREMELY rare, since they were fragile to AoE.

Nowadays the ONLY AoE weapon in usage, the bombs, is effectively almost only against battleships. So the scenario is reversed completely.



Changes to the AoE weaponry would be a good way to balance things. Make bombs do less damage but be more efficient against smaller ships, and suddenly you will start to see more battleships. Halve their base damage.... cur their " resolution" (i do not remember if it is listed as explosion radius sorry) to 1/3 of now.

or just give battleships a role bonus... 33% less damage from AoE sources :) that would be awkward but would make it work.

T3 need to have less EHP, or battleships need way more EHP (in fact I think the sane approach would be to reduce a bit t3 and increase a tiny bit battleships so that the feeling of nerf everything does not come up). A t3 cruiser should NEVER exceed the EHP of a buffer tanked abaddon or navy battleships. In fact they probably should not even exceed command ships EHP.


Something I think needs to be done is rebalance the tier 1 2 and 3 of large guns. Large guns do not hit anything unless the target is far or is tackled heavily, therefore there is very very little reason to use the Dua 425mm, Electrons.. etc

I would make those guns more effective against smaller threats ( reduce the sig to 300 from 400 on them), that would already be a good start.


You've address the main issues with BSs +1.

By buffing their Base EHP, reducing their vulnerability to bombs and giving them a wider range of weapon selection for hitting smaller sigs (turrets) would definitely bring them back into the meta again.

As for T3s, they are only OP when receiving reps from logi support, so I would propose that CCP add a penalty on the buffer subsytem that disallow them from receiving reps from external sources (similar to the Marauders while in bastion mode).
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#93 - 2015-07-14 11:21:18 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Some battleships need to be tuned. They finally did the tempest, one less to go.


On a general note, battleships decay is related to the environment. Back on AoE dooomsday age, battleships were needed a lot, because smaller ships would NOT survive a doomsday. So much that logi cruisers were EXTREMELY rare, since they were fragile to AoE.

Nowadays the ONLY AoE weapon in usage, the bombs, is effectively almost only against battleships. So the scenario is reversed completely.



Changes to the AoE weaponry would be a good way to balance things. Make bombs do less damage but be more efficient against smaller ships, and suddenly you will start to see more battleships. Halve their base damage.... cur their " resolution" (i do not remember if it is listed as explosion radius sorry) to 1/3 of now.

or just give battleships a role bonus... 33% less damage from AoE sources :) that would be awkward but would make it work.

T3 need to have less EHP, or battleships need way more EHP (in fact I think the sane approach would be to reduce a bit t3 and increase a tiny bit battleships so that the feeling of nerf everything does not come up). A t3 cruiser should NEVER exceed the EHP of a buffer tanked abaddon or navy battleships. In fact they probably should not even exceed command ships EHP.


Something I think needs to be done is rebalance the tier 1 2 and 3 of large guns. Large guns do not hit anything unless the target is far or is tackled heavily, therefore there is very very little reason to use the Dua 425mm, Electrons.. etc

I would make those guns more effective against smaller threats ( reduce the sig to 300 from 400 on them), that would already be a good start.


You've address the main issues with BSs +1.

By buffing their Base EHP, reducing their vulnerability to bombs and giving them a wider range of weapon selection for hitting smaller sigs (turrets) would definitely bring them back into the meta again.

As for T3s, they are only OP when receiving reps from logi support, so I would propose that CCP add a penalty on the buffer subsytem that disallow them from receiving reps from external sources (similar to the Marauders while in bastion mode).


T3 need a nerf, not only because of their relation to battleship. Just compare the to command ships. They are stronger than command ships. That is clearly not the intended positioning on the scale. THey should be slightly weaker than Commandships, but more mobile.

I already presented several times the best solution. Increase all PLATES and extenders HP AND PG usage by 50%. Battleships can still fit them easily. BC sized hulls with some sacrifice as well. Both would have more EHP at end. T3 cruisers will be forced into 800mm plates etc.. with a bit less EHP than they have now.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#94 - 2015-07-14 11:50:28 UTC
Here's my take on T3 cruisers.

They are an awesome powerful ship for the entry level player. A newbro can train all the level 1 skills to 3 or 4 quickly. He can go buy a t3 hull and a few subsystems and pow - he's got a mighty powerful ship.

They are super flexible. Each hull has a wide variety of uses. They are a great innovation for the game.

I think the trade off is their high cost and loss of SP. That is balanced out by the versatility of the subsystems that are available.


Here's the rub, and I agree with Baltec1 on this. Their sig radius is too small and their possible tank is too large. They are a plague on medium and small sized gangs. You add a few logis to the mix and it's pretty much impossible to break them. Which leads to the meta to break the logi support, which leads to the T3 fleet leaving the field. I can't speak to how they play out on the larger null alliance stage.

I'm just not seeing a good side to a 300dps cloaky proteus with 200k EHP. Well - it's an excellent fun sponge, but other than that I'm just not seeing an interesting use for them.

Lowering the EHP would change that uninteresting meta. I beleive there would be enough versatility left that the EFT nerds would still come up with a good number of valid uses for them AND FCs would utilize those fits when approriate.

I make and sell subs to fund my fleet of supers, so I'm not trying to destroy the T3 market. I just want the anit-fun fleets to be in the rear view mirror.
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#95 - 2015-07-14 12:05:04 UTC
Here's my take on BS:

They are pretty awesome as is. (I still want the geddon changed back to the fire spewing penis of doom) They will never be the dominant ship of the line that they were back in the day. Good, bad or indifferent - eve has moved past that. 100+ dread fleets do the heavy lifting.

Large coalition pvp fights are now about killing erebus and titans and then other minor stuff. When heavy lifting went from dread fleets to super fleets the BS lost any foothold they had in the 'end game' crap. They just aren't significant on that scale.

What they are good for:
1. they have a place in small and medium gang
2. they have a place in non-capital fights
3. they are mission kings (Once we limit sentry drones to BS only)

Hopes for the future:
1. we'll see how the entosis fights play out - spreading out the battle field will hopefully bring these ships back to end game changer status
2. i hope to see BS fleets interdict reshipping efforts in future super fights - the idea is out there, someone just needs enough clever to make it happen

I'll pitch it one more time. Making senty drones BS only weapons will do a lot to balance out several aspects of the game. For the purposes of this thread - it will give a boost to pvp value for BS fleets. Two other effects would be: 1. Get rid of the soul crushing player induced lagfests (that would be the archon sentry fleets). 2. Fix the istard (they are are nerf number three to the ishtar hull w/ very minimal effect - the blinding flash of the obvious is getting more difficult to ignore)
Hrett
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2015-07-14 15:36:01 UTC
Ive been gone for a year, so my memory is a bit hazy, but did they give BS an extra warp core strength? I cant remember. They should if they havent.

Would also be nice if they gave BC and BS a role bonus of : 2% web strength and range per level for BC and 4% for BS. It would at least allow them to fight off some tacklers. Also give BCs at least, if not BS too a warp speed boost to at least cruiser level. Bigger/More engines or something. Align times are still a major drawback, so it wouldnt be unbalanced.

Im one of those that was enticed to the game simply because I saw an ad with the Megathron hull in it. (Still the sexiest ship in eve!) I love the old videos. Its a shame BS are almost extinct in the solo/small gang context in everything but station hugging applications.

spaceship, Spaceship, SPACESHIP!
Liam Inkuras
Furnace
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
#97 - 2015-07-14 16:35:32 UTC
Hrett wrote:
Ive been gone for a year, so my memory is a bit hazy, but did they give BS an extra warp core strength? I cant remember. They should if they havent.

Would also be nice if they gave BC and BS a role bonus of : 2% web strength and range per level for BC and 4% for BS. It would at least allow them to fight off some tacklers. Also give BCs at least, if not BS too a warp speed boost to at least cruiser level. Bigger/More engines or something. Align times are still a major drawback, so it wouldnt be unbalanced.

Im one of those that was enticed to the game simply because I saw an ad with the Megathron hull in it. (Still the sexiest ship in eve!) I love the old videos. Its a shame BS are almost extinct in the solo/small gang context in everything but station hugging applications.

Thanks to our lovely CSM rep Gorski Car, BCs received a nice buff to warp speed that puts them up over 3 au/sec with a single t1 hyperspatial rig

I wear my goggles at night.

Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#98 - 2015-07-14 19:23:26 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Some battleships need to be tuned. They finally did the tempest, one less to go.


On a general note, battleships decay is related to the environment. Back on AoE dooomsday age, battleships were needed a lot, because smaller ships would NOT survive a doomsday. So much that logi cruisers were EXTREMELY rare, since they were fragile to AoE.

Nowadays the ONLY AoE weapon in usage, the bombs, is effectively almost only against battleships. So the scenario is reversed completely.



Changes to the AoE weaponry would be a good way to balance things. Make bombs do less damage but be more efficient against smaller ships, and suddenly you will start to see more battleships. Halve their base damage.... cur their " resolution" (i do not remember if it is listed as explosion radius sorry) to 1/3 of now.

or just give battleships a role bonus... 33% less damage from AoE sources :) that would be awkward but would make it work.

T3 need to have less EHP, or battleships need way more EHP (in fact I think the sane approach would be to reduce a bit t3 and increase a tiny bit battleships so that the feeling of nerf everything does not come up). A t3 cruiser should NEVER exceed the EHP of a buffer tanked abaddon or navy battleships. In fact they probably should not even exceed command ships EHP.


Something I think needs to be done is rebalance the tier 1 2 and 3 of large guns. Large guns do not hit anything unless the target is far or is tackled heavily, therefore there is very very little reason to use the Dua 425mm, Electrons.. etc

I would make those guns more effective against smaller threats ( reduce the sig to 300 from 400 on them), that would already be a good start.


Dual 425s have a lot of uses. Its just people have preconceived notions that they cant hit anything because they are large guns. They already track very well for a BS sized gun that does BS levels of dps. You lower the sig resolution and you can quite easily start popping frigs with no problem if you know what youre doing. Ive killed a couple hecates with them the past couple days.

That being said, im not opposed to the change, as its fairly logical, but can see how it could be abused easily. Hybrid/laser equivalent may not be as dicey as ac's to balance. Thing with acs is they get ammo that increases tracking. Throw in a meta rig or drop booster, and you can get well over medium 220 tracking with dual 425s.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#99 - 2015-07-15 05:29:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
By buffing their Base EHP, reducing their vulnerability to bombs and giving them a wider range of weapon selection for hitting smaller sigs (turrets) would definitely bring them back into the meta again.
As for T3s, they are only OP when receiving reps from logi support, so I would propose that CCP add a penalty on the buffer subsytem that disallow them from receiving reps from external sources (similar to the Marauders while in bastion mode). [/quote]
T3 need a nerf, not only because of their relation to battleship. Just compare the to command ships. They are stronger than command ships. That is clearly not the intended positioning on the scale. THey should be slightly weaker than Commandships, but more mobile.
I already presented several times the best solution. Increase all PLATES and extenders HP AND PG usage by 50%. Battleships can still fit them easily. BC sized hulls with some sacrifice as well. Both would have more EHP at end. T3 cruisers will be forced into 800mm plates etc.. with a bit less EHP than they have now.
[/quote]





I always thought that CSs were more powerful than T3Cs, didn't realize they were actually weaker. I agree with you that cruiser hulls shouldn't be able to fit 1600mm plates so if CCP implemented your plate/extender HP & PG proposed changes that would be fine.

What about the active tanking T3C fits, are they consider OP as well?
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#100 - 2015-07-15 05:46:31 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:


Dual 425s have a lot of uses. Its just people have preconceived notions that they cant hit anything because they are large guns. They already track very well for a BS sized gun that does BS levels of dps. You lower the sig resolution and you can quite easily start popping frigs with no problem if you know what youre doing. Ive killed a couple hecates with them the past couple days.

That being said, im not opposed to the change, as its fairly logical, but can see how it could be abused easily. Hybrid/laser equivalent may not be as dicey as ac's to balance. Thing with acs is they get ammo that increases tracking. Throw in a meta rig or drop booster, and you can get well over medium 220 tracking with dual 425s.



You're right Stitch, I always thought that for Large Projectiles, it was 800mm for ACs or 1400mm for Arties. Never even bother to glance at the other options. As always, there's something I learn every time I read your post +1 and thanks. I may be training into BSs soon, I have a hunch they are about to make a comeback.