These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#501 - 2015-09-22 01:14:41 UTC
Spugg Galdon wrote:
[

which was my original proposal. That + an extra launcher.


However, dropping a high and buffing the RoF bonus means the "Surprise Armour" fit is still viable. (and actually better)


Fleet Cyclone
The velocity bonus as proposed here is OK, insofar as a fleet ship has to be able to project damage. Most people who look at the stats of usage of ships have toruble separating imbalances in ships and weapon systems in the meta (ie; the over-proponderance of Navy Vexor, Gila, ishtar), from prominence based on the ability of a ship to form a "fleet doctrine".

Fleet doctrine ships have to have several elements:
- maneuverability
- tank
- damage projection
- ISK/DPS/Tank in the sweet spot relative to other choices

With the velocity bonus the Cyclone will be able to be buffer-fit effectively and gains damage projection.

The "underestimated" claim Fozzie makes is possibly related to true fleet-fit Cyclones where you dispense entirely with tackle, and pile on buffer and T2 rigs. You can get 670DPS and 100K EHP out of a Cyclone, 5 minutes cap with 2 x medium neuts. This is a nasty, nasty ship, and having 25% more missile range will help it project DPS. Kinda.

Arguably, it's not really enough projection though. The whole use of that ship that I've found is to be underestimated and get into range of enemy logistics and kill them because no one credits you with being dangerous. You still need to burn into 16km (soon to be 20km) if not 9km to use neuts and apply DPS. In this role the difference in projection is negligible, really as you have to get into neut range anyhow.

HML fitting it, your niche disappears. By now you may as well use a Drake if you're going to be dispensing with 150DPS and sitting back tossing missiles. You'll need the EHP the resists get, and no point using a ship where a hull bonus is given over to active tanking, in a fleet situation.

Thus the Cyclone remains potentially dangerous if used situationally, for anti-logi brawling. Or, say, dropping it on laser boats or marauders where capacitor is key. But you won't see fleet Cyclones proliferating because by the time you go for damage projection with HML's other ships with the same cost and greater maneuverability begin appearing.

Solo Cyclone
Now, the Cyclone is set up as a solo brawler ship, due to its bonus to shield boosting. Mostly this is interpreted by the user as "fit an XLASB" but that narrows your flying style down into very restricted space; you especially need to be able to use pills, links and so on. But even so, in the majority of cases the Cyclone sucks or doesn't do so well at this because missiles are really quite apalling for solo work and shield brawling, where you will lack hard tackle. (this is why I say the proposed Ferox is going to dominate it due to fitting a web).

It also doesn't help much when your sig radius starts out at stupendous levels and you blow this out even more.

So, the Cyclone is a niche ship designed around a fairly rare, narrow gameplay option for people. The missile velocity bonus adds range, so you might be able to flail ineffectually at kiters, but it's still going to die horribly to Gilas, VNI's and ishtars because you won't be able to run them down.

For this role, the two highslot utilities are pointless. In fact, ANY utility high is useless, because nos is a crapshoot and for active tanking neuts are a disaster. Smartbombs are cap destroying and worthless (mediums won't knacker Gila drones or Ogres fast enough) so you basically end up tossing PG and CPU into mids and lows or sacrifice to rig penalties (egl CPU -> missile rigs) and end up with pathetic 2 x small neuts "for capping out tackle". Yeah right.

Thus, twin utility highs for solo Cyclone theory are extraneous and worthless. It's just a fact CCP Fozzie. Take the shot to your ego, and dump them and adjust hardpoints and slot layout accordingly.

Finally, armour surprise Cyclone
This is possible, and OK. 1600 plated you get sooo many mids. I ran twin TD, web, scram, MWD. It absolutely murders, eg, the few laser legions i dropped it on.

Lessons from the Typhoon
The Phoon is also an "underrated" battleship. The reason the phoon does well is Cruise Missiles and application rigs, you can get the cruise missiles behaving like light missiles. This puts it into a very,very dangerous category of ship where you can single-shot MWDing ceptors with cruise missiles (usually two shots). The key is damage application.

The Cyclone really needs to have damage application buffs to truly be nasty. A HML Cyclonewith 25% buff to explosion velocity would be a dangerous foe vs AHACs at range. it would be nasty vs T3D's. It would be nasty vs frigs, including garmurs (possibly). HAMs with 25% application, again nasty vs AHACs and with javs versus kiting cruisers.

Please consider, CCP Fozzie. please consider. if you do this, Cyclones will be avoided like the plague by the current meta of link-wh0re Confessor-Svipuls and kitefaq meta.
Poranius Fisc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#502 - 2015-09-22 05:50:15 UTC
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Deacon Abox wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:
stuff about number of navy ships destroyed per month.

All well and good but this does not tell you about demand. It tells you something about how many ships were probably used for pvp. But pvp losses are not equal to number of ships sold. It does not tell you about the pve demand and sales which are probably huge if we are to go by the CCP estimates of how many players stay in highsec running missions or want their passive Drakes and Tengus for wormhole pve stuff.

Many of those level 4 highsec players start out thirsting for the Navy Raven in my experience, having played this game since 06. And a huge number of those, again anecdotally in my experience got a passive, and soon will get a navy, Drake.

Drakes were everywhere in huge numbers about 4 years ago. And the Navy Drake will be basically an improved version. I don't think the game will become Drakes Online again. But I certainly don't want anything close either, which I worry will happen with the proposed stats on the Navy Drake.


A pve ship can be bought and sold ten times over before it gets destroyed - that doesn't help calmil flush their lp. The same way the game needs ISK sinks to get rid of all the new ISK coming into the game, LP markets need LP sinks. It's pretty obvious that in the long run ship losses most definitely drive the demand for faction LP, and at the minute that equates to roughly 3 times as much demand for Gallente LP as there is for Caldari LP. It was my biggest gripe about faction war but not many people understood what I was talking about so I gave up - but ultimately it has a big impact on the warzone: It makes Calmil corps and pilots poorer, it makes it harder for them to attract players and new corps to their side, and it makes it harder to get people to sit in the plexes.

I wish the Navy Drake was OP because calmil need something stupidly OP to balance things out, but it's clearly not. Overall it's in a far better place than it was before because it has the speed to dictate range better but they're not about to darken the skies!

Overall I think the Fleet Cane looks best and hardly anyone is talking about it. It will be good in small gangs where the tracking bonus and the bigger alpha will help arty fits one shot smaller ships off the field - should be popular in the current meta, and it will work well with Autocannons too.

The Navy Brutix just got more hull tank, mobility bufs and the 25% range bonus. People shouldn't write off the 25% range bonus on blasters either because it helps close range ammo apply better in scram range and with long range ammo it allows the blasters to do damage further into disruptor range, along with the mobillity buffs and some decent manual piloting that should make them harder for small ships to kite - so it was already a solid pvp ship and it just got better.

In terms of pvp it's a close between Navy Brutix and Navy Drake for second imo, the Drake should be able to keep range if the fight starts at range so the New Navy Drake will be strong. It's got the speed to keep away from better brawlers but it needs that because it doesn't have cap warfare or dps to live with them in scram range, it has more dps from the drones but it's still got the weakest overall dps. It has a decent tank now (awesome tank for pve fits and gang fits without tackle or ewar) but it's lost a big range bonus while all the others gained range.

The Navy Harbinger is last imo, even though it's got nice buffs to mobility everything I see it do one of the others, or one of the t1 BC's can do better.

Are these changes even live on Sisi? the hard critique seems out of place until it's tested. Hopefully for longer than 3 days like the new missile module "buffs".
Gramps Pljugi
Missing the point
#503 - 2015-09-22 06:23:49 UTC
Poranius Fisc wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:
Deacon Abox wrote:
Fourteen Maken wrote:
stuff about number of navy ships destroyed per month.

All well and good but this does not tell you about demand. It tells you something about how many ships were probably used for pvp. But pvp losses are not equal to number of ships sold. It does not tell you about the pve demand and sales which are probably huge if we are to go by the CCP estimates of how many players stay in highsec running missions or want their passive Drakes and Tengus for wormhole pve stuff.

Many of those level 4 highsec players start out thirsting for the Navy Raven in my experience, having played this game since 06. And a huge number of those, again anecdotally in my experience got a passive, and soon will get a navy, Drake.

Drakes were everywhere in huge numbers about 4 years ago. And the Navy Drake will be basically an improved version. I don't think the game will become Drakes Online again. But I certainly don't want anything close either, which I worry will happen with the proposed stats on the Navy Drake.


A pve ship can be bought and sold ten times over before it gets destroyed - that doesn't help calmil flush their lp. The same way the game needs ISK sinks to get rid of all the new ISK coming into the game, LP markets need LP sinks. It's pretty obvious that in the long run ship losses most definitely drive the demand for faction LP, and at the minute that equates to roughly 3 times as much demand for Gallente LP as there is for Caldari LP. It was my biggest gripe about faction war but not many people understood what I was talking about so I gave up - but ultimately it has a big impact on the warzone: It makes Calmil corps and pilots poorer, it makes it harder for them to attract players and new corps to their side, and it makes it harder to get people to sit in the plexes.

I wish the Navy Drake was OP because calmil need something stupidly OP to balance things out, but it's clearly not. Overall it's in a far better place than it was before because it has the speed to dictate range better but they're not about to darken the skies!

Overall I think the Fleet Cane looks best and hardly anyone is talking about it. It will be good in small gangs where the tracking bonus and the bigger alpha will help arty fits one shot smaller ships off the field - should be popular in the current meta, and it will work well with Autocannons too.

The Navy Brutix just got more hull tank, mobility bufs and the 25% range bonus. People shouldn't write off the 25% range bonus on blasters either because it helps close range ammo apply better in scram range and with long range ammo it allows the blasters to do damage further into disruptor range, along with the mobillity buffs and some decent manual piloting that should make them harder for small ships to kite - so it was already a solid pvp ship and it just got better.

In terms of pvp it's a close between Navy Brutix and Navy Drake for second imo, the Drake should be able to keep range if the fight starts at range so the New Navy Drake will be strong. It's got the speed to keep away from better brawlers but it needs that because it doesn't have cap warfare or dps to live with them in scram range, it has more dps from the drones but it's still got the weakest overall dps. It has a decent tank now (awesome tank for pve fits and gang fits without tackle or ewar) but it's lost a big range bonus while all the others gained range.

The Navy Harbinger is last imo, even though it's got nice buffs to mobility everything I see it do one of the others, or one of the t1 BC's can do better.

Are these changes even live on Sisi? the hard critique seems out of place until it's tested. Hopefully for longer than 3 days like the new missile module "buffs".


I like how everything is nicely outlined and in place with the buffs and the guy solidly explained on what and where with the ships buffed, though he did not mention anything about Myrmidon and Prophecy, i wonder why?
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#504 - 2015-09-22 06:27:59 UTC
Poranius Fisc wrote:

Are these changes even live on Sisi? the hard critique seems out of place until it's tested. Hopefully for longer than 3 days like the new missile module "buffs".


It's not a hard critique I prefixed everything with "possibly, imo, or I think" these are just my impressions, and it's hardly out of place on a feedback thread.
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#505 - 2015-09-22 06:30:15 UTC
Gramps Pljugi wrote:


I like how everything is nicely outlined and in place with the buffs and the guy solidly explained on what and where with the ships buffed, though he did not mention anything about Myrmidon and Prophecy, i wonder why?


because I was just talking about the faction ships and the myrm and prophecy aren't Navy ships.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#506 - 2015-09-22 07:49:04 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
The Cyclone is very, very underwhelming. I mean, the missile velocity bonus is better than nothing, but it's not enough to really make it worthwhile. It's hardly a buff.

The biggest issue for the Cyclone is the huge sig radius - 250 - which is only a bit less than a Tempest. Given you have to shield tank the thing, it really is a giant punching bag with mediocre DPS and woeful application of the DPS.

25% missile velocity bonus = 20km Rage HAMs. uh...ok. It is going to be over-run by the Brutix easily, and easily outmaneuvered. its tank is quite weak - the Ferox is going to do it better without the shield HP bonus for repping, given the oversupply of mids. As a buffer fit, it's still going to be OK but it still lacks a midslot for full tackle (scram and web).

I'd like to see the Cyclone lose a high, gain a mid, and gain a missile bay. it needs more DPS, given how HML's are pathetic for it, and HAMs don't apply DPS to anything and have such a short range.

Yes to the 1 utility high to the mid, no to the extra launcher. No one would fly drakes if the Cyclone had 6 launchers and a non-damage locked damage bonus to go with it.

I do think that HAMs should get a very slight damage application buff though.
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#507 - 2015-09-22 22:43:40 UTC
Test server feedback:
The agility and mobility buff is a gift from god, thank you fozzie. Navy drake and Navy cane finally good ships.

RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
#508 - 2015-09-23 06:41:40 UTC
Removed some profanity.

ISD Dorrim Barstorlode

Senior Lead

Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Interstellar Services Department

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#509 - 2015-09-23 12:50:10 UTC
Baali Tekitsu wrote:
Test server feedback:
The agility and mobility buff is a gift from god, thank you fozzie. Navy drake and Navy cane finally good ships.


I took the navy drake out and fit my current fleet cane up to the new setup and.. yea, things are going to be awesome. The cane feels more agile and is a bit faster (1600-1700m/s cold, compared to 1500m/s), and i can drop an ACR with my current fit for a different rig.

Drake feels agile and is decently fast with a single nano (1500m/s cold). I think it will fill a good fleet role, being able to be semi fast and project with HML w/ application bonus.
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#510 - 2015-09-23 15:22:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Baali Tekitsu
My initial feedback stands by the way, if command ships are supposed to be something more than overtanked FC boats without guns or station hugging offgrid boosters then they need a rework done.
As it is now the t1 Battlecruisers (especially navy BCs) will obsolete them as combat ships. Not as much due to raw stats and bonuses, but navy BCs are a much more well rounded package than command ships are.
Offensive wise navy BCs are almost as good as command ships with for example the Harbinger Navy Issue being clearly superior to the Absolution as it has a projection AND application bonus while the Absolution just gets a tiny bit of more raw damage on top. However the Harbinger Navy Issue gets much better mobility which isnt just good in combat but also makes travelling a lot more bearable.

EDIT
We had this happen with the t1 Cruiser rebalance before, when t1 Cruisers obsoleted HACs in the meta, not being superior in direct comparison but being the better overall package.

RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE

Frostys Virpio
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#511 - 2015-09-23 17:00:22 UTC
Baali Tekitsu wrote:
My initial feedback stands by the way, if command ships are supposed to be something more than overtanked FC boats without guns or station hugging offgrid boosters then they need a rework done.
As it is now the t1 Battlecruisers (especially navy BCs) will obsolete them as combat ships. Not as much due to raw stats and bonuses, but navy BCs are a much more well rounded package than command ships are.
Offensive wise navy BCs are almost as good as command ships with for example the Harbinger Navy Issue being clearly superior to the Absolution as it has a projection AND application bonus while the Absolution just gets a tiny bit of more raw damage on top. However the Harbinger Navy Issue gets much better mobility which isnt just good in combat but also makes travelling a lot more bearable.

EDIT
We had this happen with the t1 Cruiser rebalance before, when t1 Cruisers obsoleted HACs in the meta, not being superior in direct comparison but being the better overall package.


I'm in support of this but care should be used because I don't think anyone want any Ishtar like situation where a ship from a changed class just outshine many different class all by itself.
Deacon Abox
Black Eagle5
Villore Accords
#512 - 2015-09-23 22:53:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Deacon Abox
Frostys Virpio wrote:
I guess navy vexor online for god know all long was ok but navy drake online would be bad...

Yes. Considering there was a never a vexor navy online. The navy vexor is a good ship, but it does not and never has constituted a complete fleet comp. 3 years though of Drakes Online, with that ship at the top of the pvp kill stats by at least double the second place ship, was very very bad. Any time of Navy Drakes Online would just be adding insult to injury.

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Tiericide also happened in that 4 year window after drakes got dropped/nerfed. The meta is not the same and almost every other ship has been rebalanced for the better. A navy drake MWD'n around will have the sig of a moon. Hop in a BS and shoot it down. You will have the range/tracking/utility to handle it without much issue. Apoc maybe? Will it have a role? The anti-drake.

Now if you take a cruiser to a BC fight, then id say working as intended. Same way you dont take a frig gang into a destroyer/t3d gang, unless you have the right gang comp.

We shall see. Since judging by past performance, at this point the proposed changes will become the changes. Wonder if Fozzie is even still reading this thread.

Funny you should mention different ship classes since you appear to have no problem with the Navy Drake counter requiring an upship to a BS Apoc or Napoc. Btw, Apocs were used as a counter to the regular T1 drake blobs of 3 years ago or whenever.

Fourteen Maken wrote:
A pve ship can be bought and sold ten times over before it gets destroyed - that doesn't help calmil flush their lp. The same way the game needs ISK sinks to get rid of all the new ISK coming into the game, LP markets need LP sinks. It's pretty obvious that in the long run ship losses most definitely drive the demand for faction LP, and at the minute that equates to roughly 3 times as much demand for Gallente LP as there is for Caldari LP. It was my biggest gripe about faction war but not many people understood what I was talking about so I gave up - but ultimately it has a big impact on the warzone: It makes Calmil corps and pilots poorer, it makes it harder for them to attract players and new corps to their side, and it makes it harder to get people to sit in the plexes.

I wish the Navy Drake was OP because calmil need something stupidly OP to balance things out, but it's clearly not. Overall it's in a far better place than it was before because it has the speed to dictate range better but they're not about to darken the skies!

Overall I think the Fleet Cane looks best and hardly anyone is talking about it. It will be good in small gangs where the tracking bonus and the bigger alpha will help arty fits one shot smaller ships off the field - should be popular in the current meta, and it will work well with Autocannons too.

The Navy Brutix just got more hull tank, mobility bufs and the 25% range bonus. People shouldn't write off the 25% range bonus on blasters either because it helps close range ammo apply better in scram range and with long range ammo it allows the blasters to do damage further into disruptor range, along with the mobillity buffs and some decent manual piloting that should make them harder for small ships to kite - so it was already a solid pvp ship and it just got better.

In terms of pvp it's a close between Navy Brutix and Navy Drake for second imo, the Drake should be able to keep range if the fight starts at range so the New Navy Drake will be strong. It's got the speed to keep away from better brawlers but it needs that because it doesn't have cap warfare or dps to live with them in scram range, it has more dps from the drones but it's still got the weakest overall dps. It has a decent tank now (awesome tank for pve fits and gang fits without tackle or ewar) but it's lost a big range bonus while all the others gained range.

The Navy Harbinger is last imo, even though it's got nice buffs to mobility everything I see it do one of the others, or one of the t1 BC's can do better.

You are correct that Navy Drakes and Fleet Canes will be the big demand ships because they can make valid fleet comps for pvp. The Navy Brutix and Navy Harb are **** in comparison I agree. You complain though about Comets and Navy Vexors. They don't make large fleet comps though and so even if they sell better for solo or small gang pvp they cannot equal the demand a large fleet comp capable ship has.

Also, I think you underestimate the pve market. As I said it is healthy in a different manner than pvp ships are due to pvp losses. Pve favored ships find a continuing stream of buyers. Some of these are new casual highsec missioners. This is how Navy Ravens continue to sell even as they are rarely used in pvp and suffer very few pvp losses. Likewise Drakes and Navy Drakes will continue to sell extremely well for wormhole pve due to the ridiculous passive tanking abilities. An ability few other ships can match and those that can match or exceed in this all have a larger pricetag.

Lastly, BCs are not soloing ships. So to talk about hypothetical one on one battles between these ships to miss the point. It is all about whether a ship can make a fleet comp, or whether it can stupidly sit like a tanking brick and missile spew in pve content, that will determine the number of sales. Navy Drakes will do both and too well.

edit: And to reiterate. It is not very good design to give a range bonus to the entire class, well except for the drone ships which are left as dren in this class, and then to have a ten percent per level additional range bonus for one of those ships. This only ensures that one ship, the Ferox will be best at what the entire class is meant to do. So clearly Caldari wins this balancing pass with the Ferox and Navy Drake. Both will make fleet comps. The only other ship that might come close is the Fleet Cane, simply for the alpha go boom factor.

CCP, there are off buttons for ship explosions, missile effects, turret effects, etc. "Immersion" does not seem to be harmed by those. So, [u]please[/u] give us a persisting off button for the jump gate and autoscan visuals.

Maraner
The Executioners
#513 - 2015-09-23 23:26:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Maraner
Is CCP still monitoring this thread? seeing lots of good points.

For myself I’d like to say a big thank you for the upcoming BC buff. It is most welcome and needed.
As part of the battlecruiser rebalance and in the spirit of CCP looking at past changes that may not have worked out well and revising them where applicable I would like to humbly ask for the warp speed of BC’s and BB’s be re-examined.
I believe that most of us welcomed the increased warp speed of the smaller ships in the game, and the addition of warp faster clones, rigs and low slot warp speed modules was a nice addition to the depth that EVE has.
It did however come at a cost of a speed nerf to many of the most enjoyed and frequently flown ship classes in the game namely battlecruisers and battleships.
I would therefore like to suggest that BC (and BB) warp speeds are returned to a base of 3.0
I have no issue with smaller ships going faster, all power to them but please un nerf / buff the warp speeds to these classes of ships.
It is a giant pain in the arse when you are on a roam when half of your fleet is getting left behind. It discourages mixed ship composition of fleets. This is part of the reason why fleets have become so generic.
Thanks
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#514 - 2015-09-24 01:54:11 UTC
Deacon Abox wrote:
You are correct that Navy Drakes and Fleet Canes will be the big demand ships because they can make valid fleet comps for pvp. The Navy Brutix and Navy Harb are **** in comparison I agree. You complain though about Comets and Navy Vexors. They don't make large fleet comps though and so even if they sell better for solo or small gang pvp they cannot equal the demand a large fleet comp capable ship has.


I am unconvinced that any faction battle cruiser would ever make a decent large scale fleet concept, especially the fleet cane.

The cost of faction battle cruisers puts them in competition with battleships and hacs. I think if you compared navy canes to muninns they would be embarrassed as a fleet concept. I don't think that navy drakes would do so much better than normal drakes to justify the huge price increase, and I still think they would get their teeth kicked in by any of the more standard fleets that sport 200m line ships.

So no, I don't see any of these becoming the next new fleet concept. The benefit of faction battle cruisers is in small gang work where they take advantage of their large tanks and good damage application to push through other small gangs, not putting them in max sized fleets where damage application takes a back seat to range.

Not a professional fleet designer though, so what do I know.
Jed Airtech
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#515 - 2015-09-24 04:23:37 UTC
Nerfing something because it is popular to use is such a ill-thought idea.

Here's how I imagine the people at CCP think things through:

Quote:
"Let's see now... what do people like to do in our game? OK YES, let's nerf that"

"Next item for discussion: Why are we losing subscriptions?"



If all of your development time is spent destroying the things people like to do, then do not be surprised when people do not like to play.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#516 - 2015-09-24 05:42:38 UTC
Deacon Abox wrote:


Funny you should mention different ship classes since you appear to have no problem with the Navy Drake counter requiring an upship to a BS Apoc or Napoc. Btw, Apocs were used as a counter to the regular T1 drake blobs of 3 years ago or whenever.


Battleships have always been the proper counter to BC's, its just BC's have been outclassed for so long, people stopped flying them. Hence the lull in BS activity outside of specific doctrine fits. Cruisers countered BC's far more effectively since they had range/projection/speed to stay outside of a BC's range and still apply damage (not to mention far cheaper than a BS). Or they could out brawl them in the case of a deimos/vaga/sac etc.

So if Apoc's countered them years ago, does it not make sense they will still continue to counter them? A BS countering a BC, seems to working as intended like i mentioned. Apoc and navy drake prices are comparable, but a BS will insure far better than a faction BC. I can't see how having more BC's on field is a bad thing. It will bring cruiser blobs in line, and when BC blobs start happening, then BS can come out and stretch their legs. Heavy neuts, high dps, good projection, MJD, there are plenty of tools there to counter these ships.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#517 - 2015-09-24 05:52:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Ersahi Kir wrote:
Deacon Abox wrote:
You are correct that Navy Drakes and Fleet Canes will be the big demand ships because they can make valid fleet comps for pvp. The Navy Brutix and Navy Harb are **** in comparison I agree. You complain though about Comets and Navy Vexors. They don't make large fleet comps though and so even if they sell better for solo or small gang pvp they cannot equal the demand a large fleet comp capable ship has.


I am unconvinced that any faction battle cruiser would ever make a decent large scale fleet concept, especially the fleet cane.

The cost of faction battle cruisers puts them in competition with battleships and hacs. I think if you compared navy canes to muninns they would be embarrassed as a fleet concept. I don't think that navy drakes would do so much better than normal drakes to justify the huge price increase, and I still think they would get their teeth kicked in by any of the more standard fleets that sport 200m line ships.

So no, I don't see any of these becoming the next new fleet concept. The benefit of faction battle cruisers is in small gang work where they take advantage of their large tanks and good damage application to push through other small gangs, not putting them in max sized fleets where damage application takes a back seat to range.

Not a professional fleet designer though, so what do I know.


Actually the new fleet cane will blow a muninn out of the water as a doctrine fit. Shield fit cane will have double the EHP of shield fit Muninn (which is the last doctrine i saw for alpha muninns). The fleet cane will have more tracking than the muninn and with a combined 25% optimal/falloff bonus, will have very similar projection, but much larger alpha.

The cane has 6 turrets + 50% alpha, whereas the Muninn has 5 turrets + 25% alpha and RoF. DPS will be less on the cane, but alpha will be considerably more.

Navy drakes can utilize omni damage, where as T1 drakes are stuck with kinetic damage. A drake fleet would get murdered by an ishtar/vulture/tengu doctrine. Not saying a navy drake would fair better, but at least it could shoot into their resist holes. Small gang would have a role for it as well, since its fairly quick/agile, and paired with MJD + HML, could be decent with proper support.

Jed Airtech wrote:
Nerfing something because it is popular to use is such a ill-thought idea.

Here's how I imagine the people at CCP think things through:

Quote:
"Let's see now... what do people like to do in our game? OK YES, let's nerf that"

"Next item for discussion: Why are we losing subscriptions?"



If all of your development time is spent destroying the things people like to do, then do not be surprised when people do not like to play.


Cry more. This is a thread about BC buffs, no nerfs. Not to mention CCP isn't nerfing ships because they're popular, its because they are overpowered and breaking ship balance/variety. Pull your head out of your ass and understand there is more going on than your Level 4 mission runner and your isk/hr ratio. Please direct your self-entitled whine somewhere else.
Jed Airtech
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#518 - 2015-09-24 06:46:41 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
[quote=Ersahi Kir][quote=Deacon Abox]

Cry more. This is a thread about BC buffs, no nerfs. Not to mention CCP isn't nerfing ships because they're popular, its because they are overpowered and breaking ship balance/variety. Pull your head out of your ass and understand there is more going on than your Level 4 mission runner and your isk/hr ratio. Please direct your self-entitled whine somewhere else.


Hey calm down dude, please direct your aggression somewhere else. By admission in this thread, CCP does in fact balance ships so that popular ones are used less. When you buff everything more than something else, I would say you have effectively nerfed the thing that got less buffed (but I can see how that is totally debatable).
Yngvar ayShorn
Einheit X-6
Ushra'Khan
#519 - 2015-09-24 06:50:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Yngvar ayShorn
CCP Fozzie, do you look at this thread anymore?

Maybe, could you give us some feedback about the requestet "Cyclone needs some more love"-thing?

Cyclone wasn't used much, checked.
After rebalance, Cyclone won't be used much. Incomming check.

By design? Sad

+250.000 Skillpunkte für neue Accounts mit meinem Link!  -->> Klick mich <<-- -- Minmatar FactionWar --

widgetman
Widgetland
#520 - 2015-09-24 07:06:50 UTC
I do not see any changes to the Gnosis?
They state that all Battlecrusiers are being buffed?

This BC is very slow compared to the others.....just my Two Penneth worth :)