These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123Next page
 

Super Battleships ?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Hal Morsh
Doomheim
#21 - 2017-04-24 23:58:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Hal Morsh
https://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2zqcfi/t3_battleships/

There ya go. Have fun.


Shallanna Yassavi wrote:
Dreadnought with high-angle weapons.


A naglfar killed my microwarp fit celestis. **** got real.

Oh, I perfectly understand, Hal Morsh — a mission like this requires courage, skill, and heroism… qualities you are clearly lacking. Have you forgotten you're one of the bloody immortals!?
Beast of Revelations
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#22 - 2017-04-25 06:34:45 UTC
I'm not opposed to the idea in theory. But it would be nice if they fixed current battleship issues with respect to tank, firepower, etc. before we ask for super-battleships. Many people don't even fly battleships because they consider cruisers to be better.

Also, I wouldn't want capships to be stepped-on.
Hello Meow Kitty
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#23 - 2017-04-26 04:14:23 UTC
Now if they introduced a frigate ship where a small gang of 10 dudes (no alts) gangbang a Titan and take it down I'll be 100 percent on board.
joshua tee
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2017-04-26 06:17:04 UTC
tat may or may not be offtopic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua2p9tmIzCw
joshua tee
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2017-04-26 06:30:44 UTC
Hello Meow Kitty wrote:
Now if they introduced a frigate ship where a small gang of 10 dudes (no alts) gangbang a Titan and take it down I'll be 100 percent on board.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Igooxb4D1c

; (
joshua tee
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2017-04-26 06:37:28 UTC
did he call him jack?
joshua tee
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#27 - 2017-04-26 06:48:48 UTC
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#28 - 2017-04-26 07:33:12 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
BCs should be next for more hulls.

Especially considering there are no faction BCs except Gnosis.

Also: Maurauders.

You have navy faction bcs and some time ago they had a tier added, dd has had 2 ships added, bs had one added ages ago. Cruisers and frigate hasn't had anything minus when they added mordu

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
joshua tee
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2017-04-26 07:44:14 UTC
sfsdsfsf
Salvos Rhoska
#30 - 2017-04-26 07:54:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Agondray wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
BCs should be next for more hulls.

Especially considering there are no faction BCs except Gnosis.

Also: Maurauders.

You have navy faction bcs and some time ago they had a tier added, dd has had 2 ships added, bs had one added ages ago. Cruisers and frigate hasn't had anything minus when they added mordu


I didnt mean "navy" ships when I said faction.
Furthermore there are 2 navy BS options per empire, whereas only 1 BC navy option per empire.

When I said faction, I meant Pirates/SoE, each of which offers a BS hull, but no BC option.

BS: 12 T1 + 8 Navy + 8 T2 + 7 Faction = 35 hulls

BC: 12 T1 + 4 Navy + 8 T2 + Gnosis = 25 hulls

The faction BS are especially notable in this comparison, for stats, variety and how many there are.
Furthermore the BC T2 variants are differentiated largely only by weapon/tank/burst type, as command ships of each empire. Whereas the BS T2 variants, as BLOPS and Marauders respectively, fill two distinct separate roles.

I think it makes more sense to add more BC variety into the gap between Cruisers and BS.
This would also involve less powercreep than more BS hulls (especially a T3BS).
BS can instead be balanced with stat changes.

BCs, as having neither the raw tank/dps of BS, nor the speed/sig of cruisers, are ideally situated for this.


Furthermore, depending on how hard changes hit T3Cs, more BC options can help fill the vacuum without stepping on anyones toes.

Also I understand there are a lot more BS pilots than BC pilots.
That again indicates BC as the missing link, and the greatest benefit from expanding.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
joshua tee
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2017-04-26 08:07:05 UTC
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mq1YthGFjRI


ща ма пружжтаат руснацити, ма, Путин, froevah!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-f6X71ab1OM
joshua tee
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2017-04-26 08:19:44 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Agondray wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
BCs should be next for more hulls.

Especially considering there are no faction BCs except Gnosis.

Also: Maurauders.

You have navy faction bcs and some time ago they had a tier added, dd has had 2 ships added, bs had one added ages ago. Cruisers and frigate hasn't had anything minus when they added mordu


I didnt mean "navy" ships when I said faction.
Furthermore there are 2 navy BS options per empire, whereas only 1 BC navy option per empire.

When I said faction, I meant Pirates/SoE, each of which offers a BS hull, but no BC option.

BS: 12 T1 + 8 Navy + 8 T2 + 7 Faction = 35 hulls

BC: 12 T1 + 4 Navy + 8 T2 + Gnosis = 25 hulls

The faction BS are especially notable in this comparison, for stats, variety and how many there are.
Furthermore the BC T2 variants are differentiated largely only by weapon/tank/burst type, as command ships of each empire. Whereas the BS T2 variants, as BLOPS and Marauders respectively, fill two distinct separate roles.

I think it makes more sense to add more BC variety into the gap between Cruisers and BS.
This would also involve less powercreep than more BS hulls (especially a T3BS).
BS can instead be balanced with stat changes.


Furthermore, depending on how hard changes hit T3Cs, more BC options can help fill the vacuum without stepping on anyones toes.


twice our guns, twice our numbers ;(
Salvos Rhoska
#33 - 2017-04-26 08:28:10 UTC
joshua tee wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Agondray wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
BCs should be next for more hulls.

Especially considering there are no faction BCs except Gnosis.

Also: Maurauders.

You have navy faction bcs and some time ago they had a tier added, dd has had 2 ships added, bs had one added ages ago. Cruisers and frigate hasn't had anything minus when they added mordu


I didnt mean "navy" ships when I said faction.
Furthermore there are 2 navy BS options per empire, whereas only 1 BC navy option per empire.

When I said faction, I meant Pirates/SoE, each of which offers a BS hull, but no BC option.

BS: 12 T1 + 8 Navy + 8 T2 + 7 Faction = 35 hulls

BC: 12 T1 + 4 Navy + 8 T2 + Gnosis = 25 hulls

The faction BS are especially notable in this comparison, for stats, variety and how many there are.
Furthermore the BC T2 variants are differentiated largely only by weapon/tank/burst type, as command ships of each empire. Whereas the BS T2 variants, as BLOPS and Marauders respectively, fill two distinct separate roles.

I think it makes more sense to add more BC variety into the gap between Cruisers and BS.
This would also involve less powercreep than more BS hulls (especially a T3BS).
BS can instead be balanced with stat changes.


Furthermore, depending on how hard changes hit T3Cs, more BC options can help fill the vacuum without stepping on anyones toes.


twice our guns, twice our numbers ;(


Exactly.

I find it very hard to believe that if CCP added faction BCs, that they could mess up stats so badly that they would unfairly overshadow existing either Cruiser or BS in their respective roles and stats.

BCs edge out over Cruisers by around 100dps (so about 1/5-1/4 more), yet still have only about half the raw dps of BS hulls.
BCs roughly double raw ehp of a Cruiser, but have twice the sig size and about 3/5s the speed.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
joshua tee
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2017-04-26 08:49:03 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
joshua tee wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Agondray wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
BCs should be next for more hulls.

Especially considering there are no faction BCs except Gnosis.

Also: Maurauders.

You have navy faction bcs and some time ago they had a tier added, dd has had 2 ships added, bs had one added ages ago. Cruisers and frigate hasn't had anything minus when they added mordu


I didnt mean "navy" ships when I said faction.
Furthermore there are 2 navy BS options per empire, whereas only 1 BC navy option per empire.

When I said faction, I meant Pirates/SoE, each of which offers a BS hull, but no BC option.

BS: 12 T1 + 8 Navy + 8 T2 + 7 Faction = 35 hulls

BC: 12 T1 + 4 Navy + 8 T2 + Gnosis = 25 hulls

The faction BS are especially notable in this comparison, for stats, variety and how many there are.
Furthermore the BC T2 variants are differentiated largely only by weapon/tank/burst type, as command ships of each empire. Whereas the BS T2 variants, as BLOPS and Marauders respectively, fill two distinct separate roles.

I think it makes more sense to add more BC variety into the gap between Cruisers and BS.
This would also involve less powercreep than more BS hulls (especially a T3BS).
BS can instead be balanced with stat changes.


Furthermore, depending on how hard changes hit T3Cs, more BC options can help fill the vacuum without stepping on anyones toes.


twice our guns, twice our numbers ;(


Exactly.

I find it very hard to believe that if CCP added faction BCs, that they could mess up stats so badly that they would unfairly overshadow existing either Cruiser or BS in their respective roles and stats.

BCs edge out over Cruisers by around 100dps (so about 1/5-1/4 more), yet still have only about half the raw dps of BS hulls.
BCs roughly double raw ehp of a Cruiser, but have twice the sig size and about 3/5s the speed.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#35 - 2017-04-26 08:50:37 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
I'm not opposed to the idea in theory. But it would be nice if they fixed current battleship issues with respect to tank, firepower, etc. before we ask for super-battleships. Many people don't even fly battleships because they consider cruisers to be better.

Also, I wouldn't want capships to be stepped-on.


That's not a battleship problem, its a T3C problem.
Salvos Rhoska
#36 - 2017-04-26 10:30:41 UTC
Lothros Andastar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#37 - 2017-04-26 10:34:02 UTC
People only use cruisers en-mass because they are a LOT faster to move and half the cost of the same sized battleship fleet.
Salvos Rhoska
#38 - 2017-04-26 10:39:59 UTC
Lothros Andastar wrote:
People only use cruisers en-mass because they are a LOT faster to move and half the cost of the same sized battleship fleet.


According to baltec1, cost doesnt matter.

And ofc cruisers are faster to move than BS.
I doubt that will ever change.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#39 - 2017-04-26 10:43:44 UTC
Lothros Andastar wrote:
People only use cruisers en-mass because they are a LOT faster to move and half the cost of the same sized battleship fleet.


T3C tank more, are harder to hit, move faster, are easier to get cap stable with a prop mod and when you take sigs, tracking, gun sig and engagement ranges commonly used they also hit around as hard.
Salvos Rhoska
#40 - 2017-04-26 10:50:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
T3C dps vs BS dps depends on the targets.

BS may not be as effective at applying on smaller/faster targets, but on larger/slower ones they easily double that of T3Cs.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Previous page123Next page