These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next pageLast page
 

BS and T3 crusiers

Author
O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-10-22 23:38:19 UTC  |  Edited by: O2 jayjay
Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.

As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a huge gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.

Keep it simple.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2015-10-23 00:34:44 UTC
Do we really want two thousand DPS out of T1 ships though?

I mean, really?

And would you buff BCs as well? I'd like two thousand deeps out of my talos too please.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#3 - 2015-10-23 00:38:13 UTC
Don't need the DPS increase on BS. They project pretty well for their DPS.
Instead give them a larger EHP increase. My suggestion would be doubling their base EHP, while adjusting shield recharge rates appropriately to keep the same passive tank. This obviously doesn't work out to a straight doubling of EHP or anywhere near since 1600 plates add massive amounts, but does do a significant improvement.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2015-10-23 02:18:32 UTC
Don't buff battleships to try to nerf T3s.
If battleships need a buff then they should bet a buff.
T3 cruisers should be balanced as a cruiser.

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

Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#5 - 2015-10-23 02:38:22 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Don't buff battleships to try to nerf T3s.
If battleships need a buff then they should bet a buff.
T3 cruisers should be balanced as a cruiser.


I thinj t3c should be treated like BC. Slow them down and sig bloom them a bit. Then at least their tank will reflect the kind of ship they are rather than just being a straight cruiser+2.

Also at Nevyn:

Maybe making battleships have a role bonus where they receive double hp bonuses from shield extenders/plates? And not for every vessel mind you. Suitable ships could include

Raven.
Megathron
Abaddon
Tempest.

Role bonus: shield extenders and armour plates grant double the HP value listed on the module.

Think about it. Just take 5 minutes to think about it.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#6 - 2015-10-23 02:43:53 UTC
t3s are fine and if anything need a buff
Leto Aramaus
Frog Team Four
Of Essence
#7 - 2015-10-23 03:25:23 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Do we really want two thousand DPS out of T1 ships though?

I mean, really?

And would you buff BCs as well? I'd like two thousand deeps out of my talos too please.


Yes I do.

+1
Leto Aramaus
Frog Team Four
Of Essence
#8 - 2015-10-23 03:26:25 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
t3s are fine and if anything need a buff


Funniest thing I've read in a while.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#9 - 2015-10-23 04:21:13 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:


I thinj t3c should be treated like BC. Slow them down and sig bloom them a bit. Then at least their tank will reflect the kind of ship they are rather than just being a straight cruiser+2.

Also at Nevyn:

Maybe making battleships have a role bonus where they receive double hp bonuses from shield extenders/plates? And not for every vessel mind you. Suitable ships could include

Raven.
Megathron
Abaddon
Tempest.

Role bonus: shield extenders and armour plates grant double the HP value listed on the module.

Think about it. Just take 5 minutes to think about it.

Doesn't promote the more active style of fits on the BS. So I'm not a fan.
Also you are trying to pick very specific ships out, when it should be a class wide buff.

Base EHP changes are by far the simplest to do than trying to be too fancy and ending up missing half the BS playstyles.
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#10 - 2015-10-23 06:51:19 UTC
if you want to see a sensible version of this thread search for Baboli's "making battleships worth the warp" thread...
Caleb Seremshur
Commando Guri
Guristas Pirates
#11 - 2015-10-23 07:12:31 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Caleb Seremshur wrote:


I thinj t3c should be treated like BC. Slow them down and sig bloom them a bit. Then at least their tank will reflect the kind of ship they are rather than just being a straight cruiser+2.

Also at Nevyn:

Maybe making battleships have a role bonus where they receive double hp bonuses from shield extenders/plates? And not for every vessel mind you. Suitable ships could include

Raven.
Megathron
Abaddon
Tempest.

Role bonus: shield extenders and armour plates grant double the HP value listed on the module.

Think about it. Just take 5 minutes to think about it.

Doesn't promote the more active style of fits on the BS. So I'm not a fan.
Also you are trying to pick very specific ships out, when it should be a class wide buff.

Base EHP changes are by far the simplest to do than trying to be too fancy and ending up missing half the BS playstyles.


That depends on the reasons why you feel ewar ships and already dominant boats like dominix and navy apoc/vindi etc deserve the help.

No I was specific with my examples because these are ships that need something to distinguish them from other ships and are otherwise not pulling their weight.

If you feel role specific bonuses are inappropriate why does say the drake have one?

I also made sure to deliberately avoid ships that had pre existing resist bonuses (bar the abaddon which is desperately grasping at straws to live) and also kept in mind the unique playstyles already afforded to other ships in the t1 bracket like mael being active tanked or the domis drones and spare highs.

This isn't convoluted - a role bonus for these ships like doubled effect from buffer modules is a good idea because it comes at the expense of speed or signature and these things have measurable effects when large buffer counters come in to play.

A single nag could still easily dispatch an equal value or better in buffer abaddons.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2015-10-23 08:10:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
O2 jayjay wrote:
Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.

As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.

Keep it simple.



I completely agree that battleships are underpowered.

I don't think they need any more tank or capacitor buffs but I think the DPS needs a big buff... Someone asked "do we need 2000 dps battleships" but you have to remember that it is harder for large weapons to apply their damage to smaller targets.

PS. t3 cruisers are fine. They are supposed to be the pinnacle of ship technology ffs! Of course they should be able to beat a T1 BC.
O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2015-10-23 20:53:00 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
O2 jayjay wrote:
Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.

As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.

Keep it simple.



I completely agree that battleships are underpowered.

I don't think they need any more tank or capacitor buffs but I think the DPS needs a big buff... Someone asked "do we need 2000 dps battleships" but you have to remember that it is harder for large weapons to apply their damage to smaller targets.

PS. t3 cruisers are fine. They are supposed to be the pinnacle of ship technology ffs! Of course they should be able to beat a T1 BC.


Exactly! Not only do you get 2 au warp speed and snail align times. They use larger gun (don't understand how med gun match them in dps) with worse tracking. They require alot more skills to properly fly one.

So why not have 2000 dps battleships. They are BATTLEships! (not directed at replied user). BC are fine where they are.

Leto Aramaus
Frog Team Four
Of Essence
#14 - 2015-10-23 22:08:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Leto Aramaus
A problem with flat HP buffs across the board for all Battleships is that it further extends the idea that 1600mm plates and Large Shield Extenders are not "BS sized" modules.

If the Megathron's armor is increased by 50% or 100%, then a 1600mm is that much less of an actual bonus, and the meta will probably shift to resist mods and (!) maybe even Layered Plating will become useful (layered plate mods give a flat % bonus to armor HP instead of resists, and you never see them used currently).

This would mean 1600mm plates, which were originally intended to be fit by Battleships and probably NOT cruisers... would exclusively be fit on cruisers. And then we'll have people calling for "BS sized" mods to be introduced.

I say BS don't need an HP buff, just a DPS and maybe range/tracking buffs.

i.e. Megathron = cant expect 2000 dps
i.e. Vindicator = " 3000 dps

Why not?
O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2015-10-23 23:05:11 UTC
Leto Aramaus wrote:
A problem with flat HP buffs across the board for all Battleships is that it further extends the idea that 1600mm plates and Large Shield Extenders are not "BS sized" modules.

If the Megathron's armor is increased by 50% or 100%, then a 1600mm is that much less of an actual bonus, and the meta will probably shift to resist mods and (!) maybe even Layered Plating will become useful (layered plate mods give a flat % bonus to armor HP instead of resists, and you never see them used currently).

This would mean 1600mm plates, which were originally intended to be fit by Battleships and probably NOT cruisers... would exclusively be fit on cruisers. And then we'll have people calling for "BS sized" mods to be introduced.

I say BS don't need an HP buff, just a DPS and maybe range/tracking buffs.

i.e. Megathron = cant expect 2000 dps
i.e. Vindicator = " 3000 dps

Why not?



1600 T2 mm plate gives 4,800 additional armor hp. T2 Energized Armor Layering Membrane (EALM) give 15% more armor hp. Which means you would need 32,000 raw armor hp for the EALM to match the 1600mm plate (.15x32000=4800). A mega only has 6,500, then you have to include your 25% skill for more armor HP=8,1250. If they received my 22% buff plus the 25% from skills the new number would be 9912.5 which is alot under the 32,000 for the EALM to replace the 1600 T2 armor plates. So not by a long shot would my suggestion make the ship more powerful to where 1600MM plates will not be considered BS armor plating. using resistance over hp amount is the difference between being buffer fit and logi fit. When you have outside reps more resist is better. When you don't have logi DPS and Buffer is better. Different meta for different game play. My suggestions Keeps both metas and separates cruisers being closer to battleships and moving its power shifts slightly to the capital side without going anywhere near their territory.

That is why I made this post for a simple non destructive way to fix the T3 and BS problem. (above comment was a armor comparison for a mega and was picked due to the 1600 mm plate discussion)
Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#16 - 2015-10-23 23:37:09 UTC
O2 jayjay wrote:
Doing alittle thinking today and found a simple solution that will balance the game and not destroy everything.

As it sits everyone complains about T3 with battleship tank and damage per second. When you compare a battleship to captials, there is a hige gap between them. My suggestion is make all battleships hit 17.8% harder, 22% more shield, structure, armor hp, and finally 11% larger cap with 8% faster cap recharge. This is a simple fix that will fix the gap between battleships and capital. Buffing battleships to this level will not only make it worth wild bringing a BS gang against a T3 gamg. It will also balance out the SP required to fly a proper BS compare to a proper T3.

Keep it simple.



the gap between BS and capitals is WAY bigger then the gap between cruisers and BS and on this note only your solution is NOT a solution. T3 cruisers need a nerf it is as simple as that.

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#17 - 2015-10-23 23:43:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
Leto Aramaus wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
t3s are fine and if anything need a buff


Funniest thing I've read in a while.


indeed, sadly some people buy into the it costs more and its T3 so it should be better line, when even the devs have said cost shouldn't be a defining balancing point and that T3's are meant too be generalists rather than the pinnacle of brawlers, but do people listen??...

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Ellendras Silver
CrashCat Corporation
#18 - 2015-10-23 23:45:48 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
t3s are fine and if anything need a buff


please pee in this cup i would like to test it for drugs

[u]Carpe noctem[/u]

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#19 - 2015-10-24 00:02:46 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
Do we really want two thousand DPS out of T1 ships though?

I mean, really?

And would you buff BCs as well? I'd like two thousand deeps out of my talos too please.

Moros is a T1 ship and it can break a lot more than 2k DPS. I say this not to be facetious but to make an important point: tech level has little to do with damage, and even ship size doesn't mean that much. The most important factor is projection, which is a composite of range and tracking mostly.

Your Talos can dish out well over 1K DPS, and it's okay because it does so with weak tracking (as far as cruisers are concerned) and mediocre range. It isn't particularly effective against anything smaller than a battleship until you already have the target webbed and have closed into optimal range.

A Naga can reach nearly 1K DPS with railguns, with plenty of range to spare. But it tracks like cold honey, so it's not all that impressive. It can hit cruisers pretty well at range when it sacrifices a lot of DPS to use longer range T1 ammo, but there's no way for the Naga to web them at that range so unless you have another partner to tackle them there's not a lot you can do.

It's all balanced out this way but it is becoming increasingly obvious that Battleships lack an edge to really put their power up there where their price and maneuverability lie. They have the projection, they sort of have the DPS but that's strained by attack battlecruisers, and they don't really have the hit points.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#20 - 2015-10-24 00:07:00 UTC  |  Edited by: O2 jayjay
Is their a way to restore your post? I jacked it up and deleted it.
123Next pageLast page