These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Navy issue battlecruisers
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#81 - 2011-12-25 13:25:55 UTC
TrueGrits Chris wrote:
Who else thinks this would be a good add on to the game faction battlecruiser.

I love to see a fleet issue hurricane or navy issue drakeBig smile


I got a way better idea... How about we un-break command ships before we introduce tier 2 faction bcs that will obviously have 1 or 2 more slots, more ehp, and 3 rigs...
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#82 - 2011-12-25 13:31:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerick Ludhowe
RougeOperator wrote:
Soon Shin wrote:
Navy Battlecruisers concerns me in that it would be equal or superior to field command ships. Command ships need buffing for the costs and the skill prerequisite needed to fly them.

Either Navy Battlecruisers have to be gimped, or Tech 2 Field Command Ships need to be buffed.



Command ships use Command links.

navy ships would not step on the toes of their role. Tech 3 cruisers already did that.

making navy BCs would be no different then what we have now in terms of Navy cruisers vs HACs etc.


Field commands have the same bonuses to fitting command links as t1 bcs and I don't see everyone posting "Bcs are meant to fit Command links". Just like t1 bcs, fitting a command link to a field command often gimps them into the underwhelming category.

If you want to work with gang links fit a specialized off grid bc, fleet command, or t3 please...

Learn to fit field commands first before posting such a pigeonholed arguments.

"No, it wouldn't, and why should it?
They are two.
Distinct.
Classes.
Of ships."

Because we all know that a ship of a class is ONLY allowed to fight another ship from it's exact class... There is allot more involved in determining if a ship is overpowered other than looking at how it holds up inside it's own class. Even if this were the case you're argument already fails as a select few tier 2 bcs are CLEARLY better than the other 6 ships in their class... In conclusion? Just stop please...

any one more thing.... "The existence of Tier 2 Battlecruisers is totally immaterial to whether or not T1 cruisers are useful." just stop Liang...
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#83 - 2011-12-25 16:45:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Lunkwill Khashour wrote:
If anything the Harbinger, Drake and Hurricane should be nerfed (loosing a slot at least). They are way too popular atm and obsolete too many other ships. If these three were brought inline, there would be more diversity in space than can be achieved by adding better hulls of these ships.


Sigh. Another one. What ships do you feel that they obsolete for the role they are supposed to fill?

Jerick Ludhowe wrote:

any one more thing.... "The existence of Tier 2 Battlecruisers is totally immaterial to whether or not T1 cruisers are useful." just stop Liang...


Its true and you know it. We could delete all tier 2 BCs from the game tomorrow - or nerf them to have 1 high/mid/low each - and T1 cruisers would STILL be a bad choice 100% of the time.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#84 - 2011-12-25 19:00:52 UTC
The absolution should be given another gun since the sleipnir has one more turret and bigger drone bay than the hurricane, while the absolution has one less turret and smaller drone bay. The absolution should be given more grid and cpu to accomodate the 7th turret.

The nighthawk deserves another missile, I don't see a reason why it has less missiles than the drake. 7 heavy missiles will make the nighthawk worth using, it also needs a bit more grid and cpu.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#85 - 2011-12-25 20:45:49 UTC
Soon Shin wrote:
The absolution should be given another gun since the sleipnir has one more turret and bigger drone bay than the hurricane, while the absolution has one less turret and smaller drone bay. The absolution should be given more grid and cpu to accomodate the 7th turret.

The nighthawk deserves another missile, I don't see a reason why it has less missiles than the drake. 7 heavy missiles will make the nighthawk worth using, it also needs a bit more grid and cpu.


I like these idea more or less.

Abso with +1 high and another turret +fittings would allow for it to compete with legions for medium laser dps king.

Imo Nighthawk should get +1 mid and have the kinetic bonus changed to a flat damage bonus allowing it to compete with it's tier 2 cousin. Currently the drake is more or less superior to the NH outside of specific situations where the beast kin/therm resistance shines. For those that do no know, the drake has 1 more total slot as well as an additional rig when compared to the Nighthawk, you know the command ship with an 8x Multiplier skill?.....

I'd like to see the Astarte get an additional low as well...
Lyrrashae
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
#86 - 2011-12-26 02:34:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Lyrrashae
Liang Nuren wrote:
[

Sigh. Another one. What ships do you feel that they obsolete for the role they are supposed to fill?

Jerick Ludhowe wrote:

any one more thing.... "The existence of Tier 2 Battlecruisers is totally immaterial to whether or not T1 cruisers are useful." just stop Liang...


Its true and you know it. We could delete all tier 2 BCs from the game tomorrow - or nerf them to have 1 high/mid/low each - and T1 cruisers would STILL be a bad choice 100% of the time.

-Liang


Liang is right (as s/he often is), so quoting for truth.

And you all bloody well know it, so let's stop kidding ourselves.

Nerfing a distinct ship-class because another distinct ship-class to the first happens to suck teh meat? OOooooooooooooooooo-kay, I see the rock-solid logic there! It's not like the parallel you're drawing between them isn't 100 per cent arbitrary, and based totally on your own self-confirming biases, now is it. RollRoll

Please Lumkill, or whatever, and others like him, just do yourselves a favour and stop posting without thinking.

E: For additional clarity and my usual typing-fail.

Ni.
Luh Windan
green fish hat bang bang
#87 - 2011-12-26 09:01:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Luh Windan
Berluth Luthian wrote:
Would game mechanics allow something like a 'deep space battlecruiser'?

You could make something that operated akin to a capital ship in that it couldn't travel into high-sec, maybe had some scanning bonuses, +1 default warp core stabilizer, was a little nerfed for a BC, but had like an outrageously low mass so that you could take them in and out of WH's without worrying about collapsing them...

Just trying to get creative, don't know if it is necessary...


certainly one of the more interesting ideas. CCP played with WH specific ships with the Zephyr - it would be nice to see some more WH specific ships.

Given that you need to access Whs from k space of various flavours - perhaps they could fly in k-space but performed badly there - heavy penalties (justification being- systems heavily optimised for w-space don't work properly outside or something like that)

Perhaps you could apply this further. For example low sec optimised ships (justification being something like - they don't need to carry the security ID electronics. You could make them *always* flashy red in high and perhaps orange in low no matter what the sec status of the pilot) with different bonuses and abilities.

[ edit: actually I'm quite liking this idea: ships that mean you are *always* a target (maybe though CONCORD would leave you alone but any players could shoot you without invoking the aggression mechanisms) in return for some bonuses etc. "come and get me if you are hard enough" ships. High sec PVP would be more fun because there would be more targets without all the war dec nonsense (and it really is nonsense in my experience) - players who wanted to fight could go out in one, fight others the same or wait until the fight came to them - they would still have some advantage because of the ship bonuses in return for being always a target. ]

it would certainly be nice to see a bit more creativity along these lines
Opertone
State War Academy
Caldari State
#88 - 2011-12-27 08:47:35 UTC
relax navy ships are not top of the line PvP choices.

They are new players rewards for their first steps in missions and facwar. Long before they can fly tech 2 ships, navy versions which are more expensive and hard to get let them step into that 'semi tech II' field.

Of course Navy ships don't have extra resists, are too expensive for regular PvP, but they need clear and certain advantage over tech 1, nearing or surpassing tech 2. Speaking of which, +20 CPU is not a bonus.

+50 MB (up to 125) drone bandwidth will make Navy Vexxor and Navy Myrmidon a favorite beginner ship.

Navy drake can get extra launcher, missile explosion radius or double missile velocity (which is a hefty bonus)

Don't give navy ships stupid bonuses, you will not get them overpowered. Simply because they are role specific temporary solutions for low SP players. Pirate ships and tech 3 are the top end choices. Please give navies some life.

This post sums up why the 'best' work with DCM inc.

WARP DRIVE makes eve boring

really - add warping align time 300% on gun aggression and eve becomes great again
Lunkwill Khashour
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#89 - 2011-12-27 14:46:07 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Lunkwill Khashour wrote:
If anything the Harbinger, Drake and Hurricane should be nerfed (loosing a slot at least). They are way too popular atm and obsolete too many other ships. If these three were brought inline, there would be more diversity in space than can be achieved by adding better hulls of these ships.


Sigh. Another one. What ships do you feel that they obsolete for the role they are supposed to fill?

-Liang


Any smaller hull that doesn't do the nano-kiting-sniping thing or doesn't do a support role is outclassed by a harby, drake or cane. This ranges from T1 frigs to T2 hac's to tech1 BC's. The smaller snipers are outclassed at sniping by the tech3 BC's and the drake-harby-cane nano-kite themselves very well.
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#90 - 2011-12-27 19:06:47 UTC
Lunkwill Khashour wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:
Lunkwill Khashour wrote:
If anything the Harbinger, Drake and Hurricane should be nerfed (loosing a slot at least). They are way too popular atm and obsolete too many other ships. If these three were brought inline, there would be more diversity in space than can be achieved by adding better hulls of these ships.


Sigh. Another one. What ships do you feel that they obsolete for the role they are supposed to fill?

-Liang


Any smaller hull that doesn't do the nano-kiting-sniping thing or doesn't do a support role is outclassed by a harby, drake or cane. This ranges from T1 frigs to T2 hac's to tech1 BC's. The smaller snipers are outclassed at sniping by the tech3 BC's and the drake-harby-cane nano-kite themselves very well.


So basically what you're telling me is that T1 frigates are useless as DPS ships because tier 2 battlecruisers make them so.

Ok.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
drdxie
#91 - 2011-12-27 22:57:14 UTC
It would be really nice if CCP showed any love for missile pilots.. so I am all for anything that will make an affordable missile boat with good damage. Nerfing the naga before it launched was really mean, I trained for t2 torps in anticipation Sad even tested it on sisi. So a faction/navy drake will make me happy...

Caldari Loving needed.. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1608277&#post1608277
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#92 - 2011-12-27 22:59:50 UTC
drdxie wrote:
It would be really nice if CCP showed any love for missile pilots.. so I am all for anything that will make an affordable missile boat with good damage. Nerfing the naga before it launched was really mean, I trained for t2 torps in anticipation Sad even tested it on sisi. So a faction/navy drake will make me happy...


I'm not sure what you think the Drake is.... ? Also, the Torp Naga was a steaming pile of ****... its removal wasn't a nerf.

-Liang

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Capital T
Doomheim
#93 - 2011-12-28 07:29:27 UTC
Fine... then can I just have a customizable paint scheme so I can make my cane or drake look like a Navy issue or look cooler? lol
Lunkwill Khashour
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#94 - 2011-12-28 10:44:13 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:

So basically what you're telling me is that T1 frigates are useless as DPS ships because tier 2 battlecruisers make them so.

Ok.

-Liang


No, I'm saying outside of a few specific roles and/or BS-hulls, the cane, drake and harby are your goto hulls for all situations.
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2011-12-28 11:10:36 UTC
Lunkwill Khashour wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:

So basically what you're telling me is that T1 frigates are useless as DPS ships because tier 2 battlecruisers make them so.

Ok.

-Liang


No, I'm saying outside of a few specific roles and/or BS-hulls, the cane, drake and harby are your goto hulls for all situations.

Nope ares or stiletto are my go to hulls......


Just saying.
Songbird
#96 - 2011-12-28 19:32:10 UTC
we should compromise - instead of navy we should get pirate BC's .

serpentis one gets webs and hybrids - basically a buffed up brutix

angel one speed and falloff

blood raider one gets web range + neuting

guristas get missiles + 125mb drones (if the cruiser has that I doubt the bc will have less)

sansha shield + lazors + tracking.

Did I miss something?
Liang Nuren
No Salvation
Divine Damnation
#97 - 2011-12-28 19:37:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Liang Nuren
Lunkwill Khashour wrote:
Liang Nuren wrote:

So basically what you're telling me is that T1 frigates are useless as DPS ships because tier 2 battlecruisers make them so.

Ok.

-Liang


No, I'm saying outside of a few specific roles and/or BS-hulls, the cane, drake and harby are your goto hulls for all situations.


I disagree rather strongly with this statement. Just because they're YOUR goto hulls doesn't mean that they're mine, or that they cover the majority of the situations reasonably encountered in Eve. They are strong tank and spank hulls, I admit. But they aren't nearly as goto as you claim.

-Liang

Ed: Also, my goto hulls appear to be Basilisks and Harpies.

I'm an idiot, don't mind me.
Lyrrashae
Hellstar Towing and Recovery
#98 - 2011-12-31 06:06:39 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:


So basically what you're telling me is that T1 frigates are useless as DPS ships because tier 2 battlecruisers make them so.

Ok.

-Liang


I know, right?

Logic--he haz it...

...NOT!!!

Ni.
Versuvius Marii
Browncoats of Persephone
Ironworks Coalition
#99 - 2012-01-01 14:23:58 UTC
Liang Nuren wrote:
Versuvius Marii wrote:
ElCholo wrote:
I would rather see the tier 1 BCs as faction issues. It would be fun to have a Fleet Cyclone. Maybe make them a little more viable since the tier 2 BCs usually make the tier 1 BCs obsolete.

Clearly sir, you've never fought a properly fitted Cyclone. Or fought against one for that matter.


Does a "properly fitted Cyclone" include a faction fit, blue pill, crystal set, and tengu+loki booster?

-Liang

If you're comparing it to every other "solo" PVPer out there then you clearly know the answer to your own question.

The Gaming MoD - retro to modern, console to MMO, I blog about it if it's a game and I'm interested in it. Yes, I play games other than Eve and I don't care if you think I'm wrong.
lollerwaffle
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#100 - 2012-01-04 08:21:11 UTC
Really don't get the "nerf drake/cane/harb because XXX sucks" crowd. The tier 2 BC's are very well-balanced IMO, Myrm might be slightly underwhelming, but that's not due to the other 3 ships, more to do with the current state of the game.

Also, fail logic is fail. IMO, most BS can do the tank and spank role better than tier 2 BC (more EHP more DPS) therefore BS should be nerfed too amirite? And let's not forget about capitals, those have even bigger EHP and more DPS than tier 2 BC's. In fact, let's make ALL ships have the same EHP and DPS, regardless of ship size, that would be 'balanced' amirite?

Let me tell you a little story:

Long, long ago in a galaxy far, far away, CCP introduced a whole new class of battlecruisers. Back then, everyone thought, "WOW hurricane, WOW myrmidon, WOW harbinger, meh PVE drake poo poo"... Since that mythical time when tier 2 battlecruisers were introduced, we've seen myrm drone bandwidth nerf, nano-balancing, scorch OP buff, AC OP buff... Those were the days when flying a drake meant you were a PVE noob. Since then, we have had no changes to the drake, while the mindset of people playing have changed according to buffs/nerfs to the other races.

So all of a sudden, people start realizing the drake is actually a pretty damn good ship, and therefore must be nerfed? Give me a break. Maybe the other ships should be looked at again, seeing as how the drake has not been as greatly affected by all the changes in the past.

Also, my heart says YES to navy/faction/t2 drake, but my head says NO. You should be ashamed of yourself.