These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Devil Seven
GeoCorp.
The Initiative.
#581 - 2015-09-29 06:03:06 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Devil Seven wrote:
Can you look at giving the ferox a 5th low slot it will give it more fitting options and make it more useful in the proposed update otherwise the rest of them look good just not sure how I like the ferox atm looks like a huge nerf to the thing 7/6/5 is a good number too


You would have to remove one slot from somewhere else for that. With your layout the Ferox would one more slot that all the other battlcruisers.
As far as I have seen the Ferox is okay.


You really don't have to remove a slot from somewhere but anyways atm the way it will be the ferox is so out classed by the other BCs it already is a unfavorable ship for most the 7/6/5 would have more useful uses with the bonuses they have planned with the new bonuses it will be a sniper and a weak one at that as the attack bc already has that role and is better at it
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#582 - 2015-09-29 09:46:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Iyacia Cyric'ai
Devil Seven wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Devil Seven wrote:
Can you look at giving the ferox a 5th low slot it will give it more fitting options and make it more useful in the proposed update otherwise the rest of them look good just not sure how I like the ferox atm looks like a huge nerf to the thing 7/6/5 is a good number too


You would have to remove one slot from somewhere else for that. With your layout the Ferox would one more slot that all the other battlcruisers.
As far as I have seen the Ferox is okay.


You really don't have to remove a slot from somewhere but anyways atm the way it will be the ferox is so out classed by the other BCs it already is a unfavorable ship for most the 7/6/5 would have more useful uses with the bonuses they have planned with the new bonuses it will be a sniper and a weak one at that as the attack bc already has that role and is better at it

That's a fairly ridiculous statement. Ferox is already used in Rail doctrines, the buffs only help with that. Also the additional mid helps gives it more control for brawling so it's a solid buff for brawling fits as well. The only thing adding an extra low will do is encourage people to armor fit it and make it an OP control orientated brawler with 6 utility mids (mwd + double web + scram + MJD + cap booster).
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#583 - 2015-09-29 14:14:24 UTC
Devil Seven wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Devil Seven wrote:
Can you look at giving the ferox a 5th low slot it will give it more fitting options and make it more useful in the proposed update otherwise the rest of them look good just not sure how I like the ferox atm looks like a huge nerf to the thing 7/6/5 is a good number too


You would have to remove one slot from somewhere else for that. With your layout the Ferox would one more slot that all the other battlcruisers.
As far as I have seen the Ferox is okay.


You really don't have to remove a slot from somewhere but anyways atm the way it will be the ferox is so out classed by the other BCs it already is a unfavorable ship for most the 7/6/5 would have more useful uses with the bonuses they have planned with the new bonuses it will be a sniper and a weak one at that as the attack bc already has that role and is better at it


BC are supposed to have 17 slots (apply drone ship -1 slots when applicable), not 18 so yes the ferox would have to lose either a high or a mid to get an extra low.
Azazel The Misanthrope
Oblivion's Pendulum
Top Tier
#584 - 2015-09-29 15:54:00 UTC
Arkon Olacar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I know some players will be dissapointed that the damage bonus continues to be restricted to kinetic, but we do believe that damage specific bonuses are a useful tool for creating interesting distinctions between ships and we have no plans to phase them out.


I'm not sure how to make this more clearcut.

This is bad.

Stop doing this.

Please.


I think if this were to happen, Caldari missile ships would end up outclassing other missile ships outright unless they were then rebalanced to be more like their competitors damage wise.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#585 - 2015-09-29 16:20:45 UTC
Changes are live my friends. Go forth and rain destruction on the cruiser meta. Bonus points if you kill some orthrus'.

Should be fun.

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

Make the Muninn great again!
Uriam Khanid
New Machinarium Corporation
#586 - 2015-09-29 22:03:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Uriam Khanid
First impression not good.
Drake and Cane replaced by Navy Drake and Fleet Cane. basicly that all.
Ships with drone max. velocity - well, bad english here
as class BC are still sucks. especially against HAC and navy cruisers
fix Cyclone, please

proposal:
may be it will be good to mess CBC and ABC.
example:
Harbinger - 5H/4M/6L (4 large turrets) and role bonus - 50% tracking
Uriam Khanid
New Machinarium Corporation
#587 - 2015-09-29 22:11:21 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Changes are live my friends. Go forth and rain destruction on the cruiser meta. Bonus points if you kill some orthrus'.

Should be fun.


simply do not understand your enthusiasm. your proposal was good, but it looks like BC also need some dps, especially against HAC's
after 1-3 month everything will be same as before Vanguard
Relyt Remarc
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#588 - 2015-09-29 22:25:33 UTC
Captain Megabyte wrote:
Id really like to see the Caldari Naga changed to a Cruise missile ship/


i agree. more along the lines of being able to use cruise/ torpedo launchers and rapid heavy launchers though. you know, sticking with caldari doctrines.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#589 - 2015-09-29 23:16:09 UTC
Uriam Khanid wrote:
First impression not good.
Drake and Cane replaced by Navy Drake and Fleet Cane. basicly that all.
Ships with drone max. velocity - well, bad english here
as class BC are still sucks. especially against HAC and navy cruisers
fix Cyclone, please

proposal:
may be it will be good to mess CBC and ABC.
example:
Harbinger - 5H/4M/6L (4 large turrets) and role bonus - 50% tracking
That's a terrible giant nerf to the Harbinger. No. Just No. Use an Oracle if you want mobility and large lasers.

Navy BCs are 4 times the cost of the standard BCs. The standard Hurricane does more raw DPS than the Fleet Cane, the Fleet Issue does more alpha and tracks better. It works. Have you even tried using these ships? Same with the Drake, the standard drake does more damage than the Navy Drake when using kinetic missiles. The Navy Drake applies the damage better and is more agile. All the BCs are much faster as well and the Cyclone can get over 2k with some heat. The changes are great.
Baali Tekitsu
AQUILA INC
Verge of Collapse
#590 - 2015-09-29 23:34:59 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Reserved for FAQ



RIP

RATE LIKE SUBSCRIBE
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#591 - 2015-09-29 23:56:55 UTC
Uriam Khanid wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Changes are live my friends. Go forth and rain destruction on the cruiser meta. Bonus points if you kill some orthrus'.

Should be fun.


simply do not understand your enthusiasm. your proposal was good, but it looks like BC also need some dps, especially against HAC's
after 1-3 month everything will be same as before Vanguard


How so? Drake can do 630dps cold with faction and 750 with rage. Harb does 700dps with quad lights. Cane does roughly 600 with acs and 550 with arty. Brutix is 800-1k depending on fit. Myrm and proph are alittle light but they can get huge tanks. Only a deimos could rival those numbers. Deimos doesnt have the utility of a BC though. Dps has always been fine, its the application thats been the issue, which the projection buffs will fix.

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

Make the Muninn great again!
Rekt Zero
Doomheim
#592 - 2015-09-30 10:43:01 UTC
Pretty sure drake is popular because of the tank, the dps is laughable at best.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#593 - 2015-09-30 11:42:36 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:

How so? Drake can do 630dps cold with faction and 750 with rage. Harb does 700dps with quad lights. Cane does roughly 600 with acs and 550 with arty. Brutix is 800-1k depending on fit. Myrm and proph are alittle light but they can get huge tanks. Only a deimos could rival those numbers. Deimos doesnt have the utility of a BC though. Dps has always been fine, its the application thats been the issue, which the projection buffs will fix.

I'm guessing their argument is because HAC's have better resists that a HAC vs BC actually does more effective damage once the higher average resists are taken into account.
It's a tough one to fully quantify especially taking into account we are talking T2 vs T1 in these cases, since the Command Ships did not get the improvement.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#594 - 2015-09-30 12:51:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Rekt Zero wrote:
Pretty sure drake is popular because of the tank, the dps is laughable at best.


Not the ships fault you don't know how to use it effectively.

Nevyn Auscent wrote:
I'm guessing their argument is because HAC's have better resists that a HAC vs BC actually does more effective damage once the higher average resists are taken into account.
It's a tough one to fully quantify especially taking into account we are talking T2 vs T1 in these cases, since the Command Ships did not get the improvement.


In what I quoted, it was mentioned they needed more dps, I think the dps is fine on the BC's, most of them are either on par with a HAC, or quite a bit higher (depending on fit).

Fleet cane has more dps with artillery than Muninn, and more dps with a/c's than vagabond. Brutix does more dps than deimos, drake does similar dps of a cerb, but can sport a better tank. So seems to be working as intended.

Yea, there is sig/speed and other things to consider, but its not like BC's are worthless, you'll just need to work harder for the kill. Even with MWD sig reduction, proper piloting and maintaining transversal will still allow you to hit a HAC just fine. I've yet to see a HAC that can fit an MJD.

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

Make the Muninn great again!
Fourteen Maken
Karma and Causality
#595 - 2015-09-30 16:45:26 UTC
Uriam Khanid wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Changes are live my friends. Go forth and rain destruction on the cruiser meta. Bonus points if you kill some orthrus'.

Should be fun.


simply do not understand your enthusiasm. your proposal was good, but it looks like BC also need some dps, especially against HAC's
after 1-3 month everything will be same as before Vanguard


Battlecruisers are cheap hulls, T1 insurance, low skillpoint threshold, MJD capable now more agile and with better range... players will find plenty of use for them.
Malcanis
Vanishing Point.
The Initiative.
#596 - 2015-09-30 18:45:00 UTC
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:
Arkon Olacar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I know some players will be dissapointed that the damage bonus continues to be restricted to kinetic, but we do believe that damage specific bonuses are a useful tool for creating interesting distinctions between ships and we have no plans to phase them out.


I'm not sure how to make this more clearcut.

This is bad.

Stop doing this.

Please.


I think if this were to happen, Caldari missile ships would end up outclassing other missile ships outright unless they were then rebalanced to be more like their competitors damage wise.



Man that would be terrible, imagine an EVE where there was some kind of racial theming to ship bonuses. You'd see ridiculous outcomes like Gallente drone ships outclassing other drone ships outright.

"Just remember later that I warned against any change to jump ranges or fatigue. You earned whats coming."

Grath Telkin, 11.10.2016
Mike Azariah
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#597 - 2015-09-30 18:46:39 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Azazel The Misanthrope wrote:
Arkon Olacar wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:
I know some players will be dissapointed that the damage bonus continues to be restricted to kinetic, but we do believe that damage specific bonuses are a useful tool for creating interesting distinctions between ships and we have no plans to phase them out.


I'm not sure how to make this more clearcut.

This is bad.

Stop doing this.

Please.


I think if this were to happen, Caldari missile ships would end up outclassing other missile ships outright unless they were then rebalanced to be more like their competitors damage wise.



Man that would be terrible, imagine an EVE where there was some kind of racial theming to ship bonuses. You'd see ridiculous outcomes like Gallente drone ships outclassing other drone ships outright.


heaven forbid, that would also derail the plan to make all the ships look the same . . . 1960's rocket style (and I so love the litte triangle fins)

m

Mike Azariah  ┬──┬ ¯|(ツ)/¯
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#598 - 2015-10-01 01:05:31 UTC
First impressions:
Ferox: ridiculously ridonkadonk brawler, great dualprop MWD-MJD rail fleet boat, perfetto. *italian kissing motions*
Cylone: Thanks for the projection bonus, but still sucks.
Drake: Thanks, feels like the Old Drake
Cane; Kinda feels like the old Cane, but crappier. Arty is still a horrible bloaty weapon choice, terrible tracking. Not bad armour brawler.
Prophecy: Meh. Drone speed is good if you hate being kited by Garmurs.
Harby: Eh. Slooow.
Brutix: Thanks for the mobility, now every other brawler is toast. No one active tanks these anymore.
Myrm: Same-same.

Navy Drake: Honestly, you can buffer fit a Cyclone and get the same effect, so why bother.
Fleet Cane: Hellooo alphacanes. Pity you have to pay through the nose to get not much more of a ship. Welp.
Brutix navy: Same-same, still a decent gank hull-tank station camper's paradise boat
Harby navy: Same-same. Sloooow.

I think you can call this, basically, the Ferox Rebalance. it's more or less a missed opportunity to redo the lineup, I think. The tweaks aren't very substantial in most parts. I would have thought that spreading some EWAR bonuses through half the non-navy lineup would have done something better. You know, neut bonus on Prophecy, damp bonus on Myrm, TP's on Cyclone (with more mids!), etc. I dunno. Something more than "oh, we better give these slow punching bags some projection buffs, that's going to save them".

Nope.

The only significant change is the Ferox, and that came about due to slot layout changes. That's an interesting lesson to take away, isn't it, Fozzie?

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#599 - 2015-10-01 06:20:07 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
BC are supposed to have 17 slots (apply drone ship -1 slots when applicable), not 18 so yes the ferox would have to lose either a high or a mid to get an extra low.

I personally don't see much of a problem with deviations from standard slot count. In the end we get a space sphere with certain stats. If that is achievable with less base stats and more modules (for added flexibility, most likely) - all power to you.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Bayou
Doomheim
#600 - 2015-10-01 10:44:16 UTC
Trinkets friend wrote:
First impressions:
Ferox: ridiculously ridonkadonk brawler, great dualprop MWD-MJD rail fleet boat, perfetto. *italian kissing motions*
Cylone: Thanks for the projection bonus, but still sucks.
Drake: Thanks, feels like the Old Drake
Cane; Kinda feels like the old Cane, but crappier. Arty is still a horrible bloaty weapon choice, terrible tracking. Not bad armour brawler.
Prophecy: Meh. Drone speed is good if you hate being kited by Garmurs.
Harby: Eh. Slooow.
Brutix: Thanks for the mobility, now every other brawler is toast. No one active tanks these anymore.
Myrm: Same-same.

Navy Drake: Honestly, you can buffer fit a Cyclone and get the same effect, so why bother.
Fleet Cane: Hellooo alphacanes. Pity you have to pay through the nose to get not much more of a ship. Welp.
Brutix navy: Same-same, still a decent gank hull-tank station camper's paradise boat
Harby navy: Same-same. Sloooow.

I think you can call this, basically, the Ferox Rebalance. it's more or less a missed opportunity to redo the lineup, I think. The tweaks aren't very substantial in most parts. I would have thought that spreading some EWAR bonuses through half the non-navy lineup would have done something better. You know, neut bonus on Prophecy, damp bonus on Myrm, TP's on Cyclone (with more mids!), etc. I dunno. Something more than "oh, we better give these slow punching bags some projection buffs, that's going to save them".

Nope.

The only significant change is the Ferox, and that came about due to slot layout changes. That's an interesting lesson to take away, isn't it, Fozzie?


Explain how the Ferox is a good brawler when it moves at 1650 m/s OH and why the Cyclone sucks.