These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
12Next page
 

A claim in a thread was made about Battleship nerfing... ?

Author
Joia Crenca
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#1 - 2015-09-23 02:24:46 UTC
There was a rant that included Battleships being nerfed soon. I was interested as to whether this was so, and have looked through Dev logs, but haven't found any info on Battleships.


So my question is whether there indeed has been any news about upcoming Battleship changes? (I'm not in favor of nerfing them, however. )
Dradis Aulmais
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2015-09-23 02:33:09 UTC
Battle cruisers are currently getting a balance pass I think battle ships will happen while they prep for the capital rebalance. Nothing I have read has said anything about nerfing them, only they plan on making them relevant again.

Dradis Aulmais, Federal Attorney Number 54896

Free The Scope Three

T' Elk
Strategically Bad
Goonswarm Federation
#3 - 2015-09-23 02:33:10 UTC
I was there.

~Badposter since FOOOOREEEEEVAAAAAR~ I come back after 2 years to THIS? ~Now 4 years apparently

Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#4 - 2015-09-23 02:33:16 UTC
They became more expensive in Odyssey with the mineral changes when they were rebalanced, but aside from that, the claim in that rant was very strange.
Otso Bakarti
Doomheim
#5 - 2015-09-23 06:29:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Otso Bakarti
Battleships have steadily seemed to be nerfed as "improvements" to other ships progressed making the stats sort of funny in relation to one another. That is, in the period following the introduction of the T3 assault cruiser which all but replaced the battleship, (causing some people to *smack forehead* wondering how someone could take such a significant item as a BATTLESHIP and make it INCONSEQUENTIAL in the main.)

Far be it from me to spread rumors, but scuttlebutt has it that the BS is in some kind of line to get its recalibration. However, some things are difficult to believe. It's a lot like fixing old plumbing. Tighten up that new fix and a new leak pops up further down the line. Fix it...sproing again. Just think, by the time they've "adjusted" all the ship classes, the ratios between them will be what they were before they were "fixed", only all the stats will be incrementally higher. Pretzel logic.

There just isn't anything that can be said!

Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2015-09-23 07:05:24 UTC
Some people took CBC buff as a sign that BS will be even less spaceworthy after that. Others believe that BS will rise because there will be more CBC for them around to shoot.
Yarda Black
The Black Redemption
#7 - 2015-09-23 07:30:37 UTC
I saw the same post and noticed it too. I don't know which nerf was referred to. Kinda ignored it.

I have a theory tho:

All warpchanges had interesting effects on ships up to cruiser size. Battleships are now very slow with like 1.5 AU or something. Only the Machariel still has "normal" warp speed as part of its bonus.

To put things into perspective: We have titans that are faster.
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#8 - 2015-09-23 07:48:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Kinete Jenius
Yarda Black wrote:
I saw the same post and noticed it too. I don't know which nerf was referred to. Kinda ignored it.

I have a theory tho:

All warpchanges had interesting effects on ships up to cruiser size. Battleships are now very slow with like 1.5 AU or something. Only the Machariel still has "normal" warp speed as part of its bonus.

To put things into perspective: We have titans that are faster.

Those titans are faster than some frigates in warp..

10s overheat align and 6.5 AU/s warp.
Anize Oramara
WarpTooZero
#9 - 2015-09-23 08:45:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Anize Oramara
Yarda Black wrote:
I saw the same post and noticed it too. I don't know which nerf was referred to. Kinda ignored it.

I have a theory tho:

All warpchanges had interesting effects on ships up to cruiser size. Battleships are now very slow with like 1.5 AU or something. Only the Machariel still has "normal" warp speed as part of its bonus.

To put things into perspective: We have titans that are faster.

As far as I'm aware all BS warp at 2 au/s while T2 battleships warp at 2.2 au/s. Machariel, having a 50% role bonus to warp speed warps at 3 AU/s, same as T1 cruisers. T2 cruisers 3.3 base, apart again, from the angel cruiser (cynabal) again having a 50% role bonus. Nestor looks like it has a built in 25% bonus to warp speed (no role bonus from what I can see) as it has a base warp speed of 2.5 au/s

All Titans warp at 1.4 au/s base.

Interesting thing to not is that there are Command ships that have higher DPS than most BS so yea, it'd be good to see some love for BS ships. That said BS have a huge advantage in combining tank, damage, and most importunately range. Drone(sentry) ships kind of muck it up a bit but sometimes things are not clear cut :P

A guide (Google Doc) to Hi-Sec blitzing and breaking the 200mill ISK/H barrier v1.2.3

Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2015-09-23 10:33:09 UTC
Well, they're unable to nerf the Black ops ships as they already suck (Except the Sin)
Hochopepa
Creative Research and Production Services
#11 - 2015-09-23 16:06:14 UTC
The problem with battleships has always been, not the power, but the ability to effectively utilize them in mobile fleet scenarios. Take for instance, a roaming gang of 10 ships, cruisers, frigs, even bc's. If 1 guy is flying a BS, he's going to be the last to warp, the last to arrive and the last to lock a target, generally speaking. Then, depending on what he's in and what the other ships are, he might even be lower on the damage dealt/dps spectrum than others.

Now, with that being said, BS's have their strengths in fleet engagements where sustained DPS and HP come into play.

I would love to see BS's get a boost to their ability to work better in gang setups as well as a reduction in production costs.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#12 - 2015-09-23 16:14:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Markus Reese
Sad part is it is less the hull, more the gear. Would be nice if fits were able to be more varied and roll oriented. Did an f and i aboit it a while back in regards to weapons.

Hochopepa wrote:
The problem with battleships has always been, not the power, but the ability to effectively utilize them in mobile fleet scenarios. Take for instance, a roaming gang of 10 ships, cruisers, frigs, even bc's. If 1 guy is flying a BS, he's going to be the last to warp, the last to arrive and the last to lock a target, generally speaking. Then, depending on what he's in and what the other ships are, he might even be lower on the damage dealt/dps spectrum than others.

Now, with that being said, BS's have their strengths in fleet engagements where sustained DPS and HP come into play.

I would love to see BS's get a boost to their ability to work better in gang setups as well as a reduction in production costs.


Thing is, we dont want large ships to be main, but still key. The ideal fleet arrangement would match the SP spread of the desired active playerbase to encourage vets to work and need low sp or alternate play styles. So your battleship is damage projection but needs defence support. So it should be more differences between hulls, but harder to defend the bigger you are.

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

Hochopepa
Creative Research and Production Services
#13 - 2015-09-23 16:43:35 UTC
Oh absolutely, I agree with that as well. I think they are both aspects of the same thing in that the role really needs to be looked at.
Markus Reese
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#14 - 2015-09-23 18:11:13 UTC
Hochopepa wrote:
Oh absolutely, I agree with that as well. I think they are both aspects of the same thing in that the role really needs to be looked at.


Here is that thread where I talked weapons. Making the weapons varied which would then give more role fittings to ships as well as weaknesses. Can be point defence through to heavy bombardment. Make every hull your choice to whether it is a rock, paper, or scissors.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=6000705

To quote Lfod Shi

The ratting itself is PvE. Getting away with it is PvP.

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#15 - 2015-09-23 22:49:34 UTC
Problem with battleships isn't the hulls or the weapons but the pilots.
Tiddle Jr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#16 - 2015-09-23 22:56:58 UTC
Joia Crenca wrote:
There was a rant that included Battleships being nerfed soon.


Any chance to share original source of that rant?

"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

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#17 - 2015-09-23 23:00:00 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Problem with battleships isn't the hulls or the weapons but the pilots.

That's because battleships are for Sissies.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#18 - 2015-09-23 23:04:09 UTC
Tippia wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Problem with battleships isn't the hulls or the weapons but the pilots.

That's because battleships are for Sissies.


Nano dreads are the future I tell you!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#19 - 2015-09-23 23:26:35 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Tippia wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Problem with battleships isn't the hulls or the weapons but the pilots.

That's because battleships are for Sissies.

Nano dreads are the future I tell you!

They can already Tokyo drift — do you really need to make them faster or furiouser?
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#20 - 2015-09-23 23:59:07 UTC
Tippia wrote:

They can already Tokyo drift — do you really need to make them faster or furiouser?


There is no such thing as too fast too furious.
12Next page