These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Retribution 1.1] Combat Battlecruisers

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#501 - 2013-01-09 20:59:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Jorma Morkkis
Qvar Dar'Zanar wrote:
Oh and, hey, it's only losing a 10% of it's hp, who cares? 'Great' change.


A lot more since you don't have grid to fit 1600mm plate. With 800mm plate, 2x EANM II and meta 4 suitcase we are talking about 30k EHP.

Or you can if you fit AB... Armor buffer and AB though...
Mund Richard
#502 - 2013-01-09 21:01:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
nvm

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Shepard Wong Ogeko
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#503 - 2013-01-09 21:02:57 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Edward Pierce wrote:
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
Biggest Guns + battleship-sized plate.
I think it's great that the Harbi can fit either of them and it's fine that it cannot fit both. Go with a 800 mm plate if you want to go full dps and everything should fit perfectly.
I know, "Compromise" isn't an Amarrian word, but sometimes you just have to do it for better game balance.


Drake should only be able to fit MSEs. LSEs are BS sized shield extenders after all.


T2 LSE has 2625 shield bonus base. T2 800m plate has 2103 armor bonus base. T2 1600m plate has 4200 armor bonus base.

Read -> Math -> Post


Large shield extender
Large

Large = BS sized



Guess I should go take the Medium Shield Extenders off of my frigates.
Sofia Wolf
Ubuntu Inc.
The Fourth District
#504 - 2013-01-09 21:03:38 UTC
Now that you removed 2nd utility slot from a cane, so it is no longer possible to fit double med nuts with 6 cannons, would you please consider giving cane +50 PG (total of 1175). Sense cane PG nerf it has become rather hard to fit arty canes, especially for those of us that have less then perfect fitting skills. Alternatively you could instead make additional reduction of PG requirement for medium artillery, that could work fine too.

Suggested changes for habrnger seem a bit of an excessive nerf. -500 armour HP on an armour tanking ship that is already underperforming is a bit of a suspect. Why not make its armour HP nice 5500. Also nerfing CPU on as ship that already has CPU fitting problems seems unreasonable, so you better leave CPU at 375 too.

Jessica Danikov > EVE is your real life. the rest is fantasy. caught in a corporation. no escape from banality. open up yours eyes, peer through pod good and seeeeeee. I'm just a poor pilot, I need no sympathy. because I'm easy scam, easy go, little isk, little know. anyway the solar wind blows...
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#505 - 2013-01-09 21:04:17 UTC
SMT008 wrote:
Zimmy Zeta wrote:

Biggest Guns + battleship-sized plate.
I think it's great that the Harbi can fit either of them and it's fine that it cannot fit both. Go with a 800 mm plate if you want to go full dps and everything should fit perfectly.


No.

With a 800mm plate, you're still short 48 CPU, and you still need a 3% PWG implant.

That's not what I call "It fits perfectly".

Also, please note that both Projectiles and Hybrids have 3 variants for each weapon-size. Lasers only have 2, which means you are forced to downgrade to the smallest guns instead of being able to tweak it with 220mm like you can do on the Hurricane.

I understand that not everything will fit on a Harbinger. But it NEEDS to PWG to support the biggest guns, 1600mm plate and a MWD.

It's an Amarrian ship, designed to sport armor plates. How come it can't fit the plate it's supposed to ? The Prophecy does it, can fit his utility slot and has even 100 spare PWG.

That's just not how it's supposed to be.

The Harbinger needs a CPU boost (VERY IMPORTANT) and a PWG boost.


Oh, I see.

I was stupid then, sorry.

If 800mm RRT + biggest guns + Neut is not possible, then we have indeed a problem with the Harbi that CCP should address.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Mund Richard
#506 - 2013-01-09 21:05:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Shepard Wong Ogeko wrote:
Guess I should go take the Medium Shield Extenders off of my frigates.

Ok, may I suggest "oversized" plates and shield extenders be left in topics about armor/shield tanking, like this one.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Edward Pierce
State War Academy
Caldari State
#507 - 2013-01-09 21:07:14 UTC
mynnna wrote:
The T2 LSE also offers a fairly non-trivial boost to shield recharge and thus passive tank, so comparing it directly to an 800mm plate isn't entirely fair.

I'm not saying the 800m plate compares to the LSE, I'm just pointing out the inadequacy of Jorma's oversimplification.

So yes, shield tanking is very different from armor tanking; lets leave it at that and move on from this module to module comparison.
Edward Pierce
State War Academy
Caldari State
#508 - 2013-01-09 21:12:04 UTC
Mund Richard wrote:
Edward Pierce wrote:
T2 LSE has 2625 shield bonus base. T2 800m plate has 2103 armor bonus base. T2 1600m plate has 4200 armor bonus base.
Read -> Math -> Post

A 400 plate takes 30 PG, and is considered cruiser-size
1600 plate takes 500 PG and is considered BattleShip-sized
800 plates take 200 PG

Now, I'm no math expert, but I'd say from 200 to 500 the jump is x2.5, while from 30 to 200 x6.67 or something.
If I had to pick between it being a cruiser or a battleship module, which one should I pick, even if I ignore implants improving the health I wonder?

Quote:
Read -> Math -> Post
Back at you.

I never called any of these modules "cruiser sized", I simply pointed out the differences between the modules. Go bark at Jorma for bringing the shield vs tank comparisons.

Take it easy buddy, not all replies are to your posts.
Mund Richard
#509 - 2013-01-09 21:12:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Edward Pierce wrote:
Take it easy buddy, not all replies are to your posts.
Yeah, noticed my mistake before you posted that.
Might have misread it as yours being his reply or whatnot.

Taking it easy sounds like an idea.

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
Mekhana
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#510 - 2013-01-09 21:15:43 UTC
I don't like crude language but wtf CCP?

Still sticking with active armor rep bonuses for Gallente when they are useless.

Vide longe er eros di Luminaire VII, uni canse pra krage e determiniex! Sange por Sange! Descanse bravex eros, mie freires. Mortir por vostre Liberete, farmilie, ide e amis. lons Proviste sen mort! Luminaire liber mas! 
Jorma Morkkis
State War Academy
Caldari State
#511 - 2013-01-09 21:24:13 UTC
Edward Pierce wrote:
mynnna wrote:
The T2 LSE also offers a fairly non-trivial boost to shield recharge and thus passive tank, so comparing it directly to an 800mm plate isn't entirely fair.

I'm not saying the 800m plate compares to the LSE, I'm just pointing out the inadequacy of Jorma's oversimplification.

So yes, shield tanking is very different from armor tanking; lets leave it at that and move on from this module to module comparison.


With current stats Drake with one LSE has double the EHP 800mm Harbi has (77k vs 36k).
Edward Pierce
State War Academy
Caldari State
#512 - 2013-01-09 21:27:59 UTC
Jorma Morkkis wrote:
Edward Pierce wrote:
mynnna wrote:
The T2 LSE also offers a fairly non-trivial boost to shield recharge and thus passive tank, so comparing it directly to an 800mm plate isn't entirely fair.

I'm not saying the 800m plate compares to the LSE, I'm just pointing out the inadequacy of Jorma's oversimplification.

So yes, shield tanking is very different from armor tanking; lets leave it at that and move on from this module to module comparison.


With current stats Drake with one LSE has double the EHP 800mm Harbi has (77k vs 36k).

Yes, armor and shield tanking is different, we all get it.

Can we move on?
Colonel Goatbanger
Doomheim
#513 - 2013-01-09 21:41:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Colonel Goatbanger
I know that numerous people replied to this already, but two things stick out to me (similar to what already has been said).

1. With the HM nerf, which subsequently has gimped those who pilot Drakes isn't it about time to get rid of the Kin bonus and replace it with a RoF bonus (5-7.5-10%)?

2. If you intend to radically alter the Cyclone (from AC fit Missile fit) then why would you gimp it even further by not going all the way with a sixth launcher instead of this half-assed split weapon system crud you insist upon?

As far as Amarr and Gallente ships I have no opinion since I don't fly them and I prefer that pilots more experienced with lasers and drones provide commentary. Cool
Miang Sun
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#514 - 2013-01-09 21:41:17 UTC
Not happy at all with Gallente ship changes.
Roosevelt Coltrane
Rupakaya
#515 - 2013-01-09 21:45:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Roosevelt Coltrane
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
Roosevelt Coltrane wrote:
I have BC V and good drone skills, so this doesn't effect me, but where does a new Amarr pilot who specializes in drones (with a side dish of Missiles) go after the Prophecy?

Gallente pilots can go Domi>Navi Domi/Sin.

I like the Prophecy, don't change it, but I thought you wanted to make the game more new player friendly. What is the next step for a newish Amarr pilot?


Armageddon I'd say.
Considering that the NavyGeddon already has a huge dronebay and bandwidth, I suppose they increse the drone capacity of the standard Geddon, too when the battleships are due for tiericide.


Geddon and Navy Geddon can field a full flight of heavies/sentiries, but both are turret only ships with no drone bonuses.

The progression path of Dragoon>Arbitrator/Curse>Prophecy are all Drone bonused ships that can use launchers. Aside from the Pilgrim, all the Amarr drone boats have as many or more launcher hardpoints than turret hardpoints.
4LeafClover
ONTAP
Goonswarm Federation
#516 - 2013-01-09 21:46:06 UTC
SMT008 wrote:


Why would anyone choose to fly the new Cyclones ? It's pretty simple.

First, you can choose what damage you want to deal.

Second, you have one hell of an active tank.

Third, it's not a slowbrick.

Fourth, doesn't look like a Drake.

If you want to solo in this ship, you do the same thing Cyclone pilots already do, except with missiles and 2 utility slots.

Any questions ?



First - So can a drake, but they don't get a bonus to them all....you can still choose to shoot anything you like. AND YOU HAVE TWO EXTRA BAYS!

Second - 0.o an impressive tank with 5 slots? 1 prop, 1 web, 1 point, 2 slots left? Put LAR? maybe, but it's a one trick pony and you don't have grid to do anything else...including high dps launchers... fill two of your three holes in shield resists? Hmmmm... Keep in mind the Drake has 6 mids.


Third - It's not a fast BRICK either....it is a quicker glass missile boat....and that sounds like fun to fly for a guy that has trained projectile weapons....

Fourth - You have a valid point here

I'll give you 10 successful solo Drake fits, for every 1 successful solo Cyclone fit.
Edward Pierce
State War Academy
Caldari State
#517 - 2013-01-09 21:50:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Edward Pierce
Colonel Goatbanger wrote:
I know that numerous people replied to this already, but two things stick out to me (similar to what already has been said).

1. With the HM nerf, which subsequently has gimped those who pilot Drakes isn't it about time to get rid of the Kin bonus and replace it with a RoF bonus (5-7.5-10%)?

2. If you intend to radically alter the Cyclone (from AC fit Missile fit) then why would you gimp it even further by not going all the way with a sixth launcher instead of this half-assed split weapon system crud you insist upon?

As far as Amarr and Gallente ships I have no opinion since I don't fly them and I prefer that pilots more experienced with lasers and drones provide commentary. Cool

CCP Fozzie wrote:
Dear Capsuleers.
Two utility highslots is not the same as split weapons.
All the best.
-Love Fozzie

:Had to deal with something else, will reply to more questions tomorrow:

The Cyclone has two utility slots, not mixed weapon systems.

Blatantly stealing this from Mynnna's review on TheMittani.com:
The ROF bonus on the Cyclone is better than the kinetic damage bonus on the Drake. The Cyclone also has an extra low which allows it to have more damage mods. Giving it a 6th launcher would give it too much DPS compared to other BCs.
Sinzor Aumer
Planetary Harvesting and Processing LLC
#518 - 2013-01-09 21:53:02 UTC
Zimmy Zeta wrote:
SMT008 wrote:
The Harbinger needs a CPU boost (VERY IMPORTANT) and a PWG boost.

Oh, I see.
I was stupid then, sorry.
If 800mm RRT + biggest guns + Neut is not possible, then we have indeed a problem with the Harbi that CCP should address.

Heavy Pulses are not the biggest guns. Heavy Beams are.
And 1600mm plate fits even on some cruiser hulls (armor HACs, anyone?) - so should be not a problem at all on BC. Battleships mostly carry 2 or even 3x1600 plates.
That's why Harbinger should get a HUGE buff in PG, to be able to fit either:
1) 1600 plate + MWD + rack of pulses + med.nosf/neut, or
2) 2x med.reps + AB + med.cap-booster + rack of beams
I can close my eyes on CPU, as there are non-energized plates, and that's amarrian ship after all, so should be tight on CPU. But the power grid - it needs some!
Mund Richard
#519 - 2013-01-09 21:58:07 UTC
Edward Pierce wrote:
Blatantly stealing this from Mynnna's review on TheMittani.com:
The ROF bonus on the Cyclone is better than the kinetic damage bonus on the Drake. The Cyclone also has an extra low which allows it to have more damage mods. Giving it a 7th launcher would give it too much DPS compared to other BCs.

I agree, a 7th launcher would be too much.
How about giving it a 6th launcher?

"We want PvE activities to require active participation and mirror PvP more closely." Stacking penalty for NPC EWAR then? Lock range under 9km from over 100 in a BS is not fun. Nor is two NPC web drones making me crawl 10m/s. PvP SW-900 x5: 75m/s.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#520 - 2013-01-09 21:58:43 UTC
you iknow i was really hopping for a dev responce today... but i think that today fozzie spent most of the day working over the rebalance and is relaying the info to the csm before responding...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.