These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance

First post First post First post
Author
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#201 - 2015-09-12 00:05:38 UTC
Can we take a look at giving the Cyclone a bit more CPU? It's pretty tight, even on a double-nano brawling setup, but if you want to fit Heavy Missiles and try for long range, you need a Co-Processor or rig, and Meta/Faction a lot of modules. You could probably take a little PG away from the Cyclone to balance it, as it always seems to have some left, although being able to use both utility high slots would be nice. Some example builds:

http://i.imgur.com/q3gYFxd.png
Igor Nappi
Doomheim
#202 - 2015-09-12 00:16:39 UTC
Drone nerf when? Turret/Missile ships can't really compete with droneboats.

Furthermore, I think that links must be removed from the game.

Jamir Von Lietuva
Nameless Minions
GaNg BaNg TeAm
#203 - 2015-09-12 00:18:35 UTC
Could we make the ROF bonus on the Cyclone apply to Rapid Lights? because if you leave it like it is it will be the rifter of BCs
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#204 - 2015-09-12 00:25:17 UTC
Ransu Asanari wrote:
Can we take a look at giving the Cyclone a bit more CPU? It's pretty tight, even on a double-nano brawling setup, but if you want to fit Heavy Missiles and try for long range, you need a Co-Processor or rig, and Meta/Faction a lot of modules. You could probably take a little PG away from the Cyclone to balance it, as it always seems to have some left, although being able to use both utility high slots would be nice. Some example builds:

http://i.imgur.com/q3gYFxd.png


Or you could like fit the right size shield booster on the cyclone. I believe those x-large are for battleships.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#205 - 2015-09-12 00:27:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Ao Kishuba wrote:
If putting damage locks on missile ships is healthy, why aren't Minmatar ships damage locked?

Notice the cyclone waaaaaaaay down on the bottom of both stats in the OP. And also observe the drakes prominence at the top of both lists. Usage stats definitely don't tell the whole story, but it surely can't be ignored that something is causing a gap between the two.

Probably a toss-up between tank and gank.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#206 - 2015-09-12 00:33:25 UTC
Buzz Kill wrote:
Dont forget about the command ships



Yes, The Command Ships are the biggest time sinkers in the game right now. Don't Forget about them!!
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#207 - 2015-09-12 00:42:03 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Ransu Asanari wrote:
Can we take a look at giving the Cyclone a bit more CPU? It's pretty tight, even on a double-nano brawling setup, but if you want to fit Heavy Missiles and try for long range, you need a Co-Processor or rig, and Meta/Faction a lot of modules. You could probably take a little PG away from the Cyclone to balance it, as it always seems to have some left, although being able to use both utility high slots would be nice. Some example builds:

http://i.imgur.com/q3gYFxd.png


Or you could like fit the right size shield booster on the cyclone. I believe those x-large are for battleships.

Exactly, it's an oversized shield booster, so compromises on the fitting are going to be inevitable.

I've always thought the Cyclone is a powerful ship in terms of its shield bonus, but the hull concept is all over the place. The main drawback is that fact that the weapon system and shield bonus don't go well with the slot layout. The damage application isn't great due to the fact it needs it's mid slots for shield mods instead of webs, target painters, or the new missile trackers.

In essence it is a shield tanked ship with 5 low slots when it only really needs 3 or a maximum of 4, and it is in bad need of more mid slots in order to apply damage as well as fit a decent shield tank. It doesn't help that it gets no bonus to Rapid Lights meaning it really has no way of reliably applying its damage to anything below a battlecruiser.

I'd say the solution is either remove a low for a mid. Allow bonused Rapid Lights. Or improve those low slot missile guidance modules so they are actually worth fitting.

Minty Aroma
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#208 - 2015-09-12 00:56:23 UTC
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOZZIE - SOOOO HYPED!
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#209 - 2015-09-12 00:58:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Ransu Asanari
I really don't want to see Rapid Light Missile bonuses on Battlecruiser hulls. They are already a bit too oppressive in a lot of cases for Cruisers. Making point-defense Battlecruisers with Rapid Light specific bonuses would just be stupidly OP.

You CAN fit them, and they'll apply damage well, but you won't get a damage bonus on them. That's why they work well on hulls with unbonused launcher hardpoints, like the Prophecy or Hurricane.
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#210 - 2015-09-12 01:10:15 UTC
Quote:
Or you could like fit the right size shield booster on the cyclone. I believe those x-large are for battleships.


Fair enough, there will always be fitting choices when trying to fit oversized mods.

But even if I drop down to a LSE + Large ASB, there is still a lot of extra powergrid, and CPU is still tight, or you go over trying to use your utility highslots. I still think it could use some tweaking:

http://i.imgur.com/LHMuqNG.png
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#211 - 2015-09-12 01:20:04 UTC
Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Dersen Lowery wrote:
Malcanis wrote:
They just suck, particularly when the damage lock is on such a poor damage type, in fact arguably the worst damage type.


Just to play devil's advocate: if kinetic is the worst damage type, then if the Drake had a flat bonus then nobody would ever load Scourge, right? Why would you opt to fire into a resist wall?

So what the Kinetic "lock" actually does is counter the fact that so many ships have high kinetic resists, making Scourge a viable and even desirable option as ammunition.

This would be true if the kinetic damage bonus was much higher, and there was a lesser bonus to non-kinetic. However as it stands with all the kin locked ships, you can either fire kinetic and do meh damage due to high kinetic resists on everything not T1, or you can fire not kinetic and do crap damage due to having no bonus.


So in other words, the Drake does crap damage.

...

Yeah. Always has. Decent alpha firing HMLs, though.

If it was a straight across the board buff, can you think of a single time you'd ever load Scourge? I mean, you almost made an argument there for increasing the kinetic-only bonus.

Alexis Nightwish wrote:
Removing options is not good for any game, especially a sandbox. You can say that people can still choose to use different ammo, but it's just the illusion of choice and the result is a bunch of dudes running around only shooting scourge because there's really no other viable option.


If there's no reason to ever load Scourge because of more-or-less universal resist profile characteristics, hasn't a choice been effectively removed? I still haven't seen how the Drake's bonus is anything other than "crap DPS or maybe somewhat less crap if you fire kinetic."

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!

Dato Koppla
Rattini Tribe
Minmatar Fleet Alliance
#212 - 2015-09-12 01:51:01 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Buzz Kill wrote:
Dont forget about the command ships



Yes, The Command Ships are the biggest time sinkers in the game right now. Don't Forget about them!!


Chiming in for the Command Ships. They need some love too Fozzie.
Bobby Artrald
Capitalist Pigs Inc.
#213 - 2015-09-12 02:19:11 UTC
i love you guys so much
Humang
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#214 - 2015-09-12 02:24:01 UTC
All looks good to me, and looking forward to playing around with them.

Chiming in on the damage lock for the drake discussion, I would bring up the old idea (can't remember who brought it up) that the damage bonus simply adds bonus kinetic damage to any missile used, instead of just a bonus to kinetic missiles themselves.

AFK cloaking thread Summary - Provided by Paikis Good Post Etiquette - Provided by CCP Grayscale

Nevil Kincade
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#215 - 2015-09-12 02:29:44 UTC
About the T1 Harbinger skill level bonus:

"10% bonus Medium Energy Turret capacitor use"

This is essentially not a bonus but merely compensating for the terribly balanced cap consumption of lasers and their ammunition types.

All other hulls are getting a bonus on their tank, damage or application instead.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#216 - 2015-09-12 02:32:56 UTC
Ah some love for the Cyclone, my favorite ship.

One note: Interceptors are bubble immune, recons D-scan immune. The T2 command ship variant of the BC needs some "special ability" to further the cost and time of training for and using them. I don't know what, but something would be interesting.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Galphii
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#217 - 2015-09-12 02:40:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Galphii
Weapon range, agility and speed - just what they needed! My only quibble is the harb's 10% capacitor use 'bonus' which should probably be removed from all amarr ships, and then just balance the weapon's cap usage.

This places BC's very nicely as heavier, long ranged mid-sized weapon platforms to give them something over cruisers. Hoping to see battleships move further above BC's in terms of endurance (100% hitpoint boost for most of them!) which will plant them between subcaps and capitals :)

Oh, and should the scan resolution be made a little better too? Not quite cruiser level but something closer to it perhaps.

"Wow, that internet argument completely changed my fundamental belief system," said no one, ever.

Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#218 - 2015-09-12 02:52:14 UTC
Nevil Kincade wrote:
About the T1 Harbinger skill level bonus:

"10% bonus Medium Energy Turret capacitor use"

This is essentially not a bonus but merely compensating for the terribly balanced cap consumption of lasers and their ammunition types.

All other hulls are getting a bonus on their tank, damage or application instead.



Agreed, this skill should be built into the hull itself and replace with an Armor Resist, Optimal Range, or a Tracking Speed bonus. Same with the Abso.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#219 - 2015-09-12 02:56:27 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Buzz Kill wrote:
Dont forget about the command ships



Yes, The Command Ships are the biggest time sinkers in the game right now. Don't Forget about them!!

But they are not, they are up there in their training time, but it is iirc less than before.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#220 - 2015-09-12 03:09:51 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
Ah some love for the Cyclone, my favorite ship.

One note: Interceptors are bubble immune, recons D-scan immune. The T2 command ship variant of the BC needs some "special ability" to further the cost and time of training for and using them. I don't know what, but something would be interesting.



Been thinking about this for ages and came up with:

* 70% reduction in Medium Micro Jump Drive reactivation delay
* 100% Bonus to Cap Boost Injected Amount

And Increase cargo bays for Command Ships to around 650m3 to 800m3.
Or increase their Cap Recharge rates by an additional 35%.