These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
fukier
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2013-01-08 21:21:35 UTC  |  Edited by: fukier
Abigail La'Fey wrote:
The Cyclone is missing a Launcher hardpoint.


indeed as far as i understand the belli and such have less dps due to them being e-war ships...

but the cyclone has a repper bonus meaning its a combat ship and should be comparable dps...

so yes it really needs that extra missile slot.
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Loki Vice
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#42 - 2013-01-08 21:22:29 UTC
why are you nerfing the harb across the board? it already barely gets flown
CaptainFalcon07
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#43 - 2013-01-08 21:22:35 UTC
Edward Pierce wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Ferox:
Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
5% bonus to all Shield Resistances
10% bonus to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal range
Fixed Bonus:
99% reduction in the CPU need of Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H, 5 M, 5 L (+1), 7 turrets (+1)
Fittings: 1100 PWG (+25), 510 CPU (+35)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 5000(+117) / 3500(+81) / 4250(+344)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2750(+250) / 723s(+56.33s) / 3.8 (+0.05)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 140 / 0.65(+0.05) / 13510000 (-500,000) / 8.2s (+0.3)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 25 / 25
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km (+5)/ 195 / 8
Sensor strength: 19 Gravimetric
Signature radius: 295 (+10)
Cargo capacity: 475 (+130)


An optimal range to hybrid guns practically forces you to use railguns since blasters have terrible optimals anyways, why not follow the Moa route and give this a damage bonus instead? Even a tracking or falloff bonus would beat this.


What's the point of using a Rail Ferox, when you have the Rail Naga?
Garphunkle
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#44 - 2013-01-08 21:24:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Garphunkle
Bienator II wrote:
you still sell cap use bonus as second bonus for amar ships :(

It should be a role bonus that you can use a weapon, ship bonus gives specialization. Other ships receive tracking, range, whatever bonus and amarr ships like harb or oracle have a "yey you can actually fire this weapon" bonus.


Seems to be an easier pill to swallow given Harbi is going from 5% to 10% damage bonus. More than makes up for the lost gun.

Does it seem utility highs are vanishing at an alarming rate?

EDIT: By my count only the cyclone can fit the cloak/neut combo i'm looking for, the Huricane/Harbi have to chose one or the other, and the rest are all just straight racks of guns, or drone boats
Prometheus Exenthal
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2013-01-08 21:24:44 UTC
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
Overall, this doesn't rustle my jimmies.

However, the Harbinger does look a wee bit outgunned.
You're now reducing its fitting, reducing base HP, removing a high (for consistency) but also removing a turret hardpoint, in addition to making it SLOWER.

Combined with the inherit weakness that is laser damage output & tracking, this simply doesnt seem like a good deal.
At the very least, I'd say reduce the high slots and all that, but let it keep the 7 turrets and the powergrid. This will allow for people to run high dps setups that can compete with the likes of the others, in addition to actually fitting BEAMS. If people want that utility high slot, they can choose not to fit the 7th gun.


Haven't you notice the damage bonus has been increased? its gone from 5% -> 10% damage per level.

Now: 7 turrets x 1.25 = 8.75 turrets.

Future: 6 turrets x 1.50 = 9 turrets

As you can see you will do more damage while needing less turrets.


oh man, im a big derp Lol

https://www.youtube.com/user/promsrage

DO YOUR JOBS, CCP DEVS. FIX THE GAME INSTEAD OF FKING IT
Mund Richard
#46 - 2013-01-08 21:25:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
*edit: was slow*
Harbringer getting +10% damage bonus instead of 5, becoming (miniscule) better, plus a spare flight?

In fact, it gets the same bandwidth and more bay than a Brutix!
Any chance that with the AI as it is, more ships with a tight bay of 50 get such a treatment?

Ferox is indeed underwhelming, expected more.
Well, a turret extra is nice, but not the OOOMPH I came expecting to see.

Brutix:
The extra low is nice, a bit of extra bay, and a better bonus wouldn't hurt.

Myrm:
Would have prefered that it only looses a turret slot, but I would also have preferred it getting a full 125 bay, and I knew that ain't happening. Roll A drone extra is nice, maybe +25/+50 instead of +25/+25... but I'm a droneophile, so I can never get enough.

Prophecy:
So now we have a drone ship with a passive tank bonus, and the possibility of 5 unbonused capless weaponry!
Triple size bay is also nice, or 4+spare smalls, if using meds instead of min/maxing.

Cyclone:
Probably wouldn't mind an extra launcher.
With the Cane loosing a highslot, this is the only (non-drone) ship with two unbonused spare weapon/utility slots?

"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.
Berluth Luthian
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#47 - 2013-01-08 21:28:21 UTC
Mizhir wrote:
CCP Fozzie wrote:

Cyclone:
Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
5% bonus to Heavy Missile and Heavy Assault Missile rate of fire
7.5% bonus to shield boosting amount
Fixed Bonus:
99% reduction in the CPU need of Warfare Link modules
Slot layout: 7 H (-1), 5 M, 5 L (+1), 2 turrets, 5 Launchers
Fittings: 1200 PWG (-10), 525 CPU (+100)
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 4750(+355) / 4000(+94) / 3500(+81)
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 2250(+62.5) / 592s(+8.67s) / 3.8 (+0.05)
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 165 / 0.704 / 12500000 / 8.2s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 (+10) / 50 (+10)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 45km / 220 / 6
Sensor strength: 16 Ladar
Signature radius: 250 (+10)
Cargo capacity: 450 (-25)


Why not 6 launchers? I thought you were going away from the split weapon layout. Now it just seems like you swapped it around for the cyclone.

Also, many of the former tier2 ones seem to lose their utility high. I had hoped to see t1 BCs being used more with a link or two for small fleets with the upcomming change to links, but the loss of the utility high will just mean that ppl will be less likely to fit one with a link.


Looks like there might be a philosophical shift away from utility highslots toward more utility drones from t1s
Gilbaron
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#48 - 2013-01-08 21:30:15 UTC
so you guys made a new drake model with 8 awesome slots and i can use only 7 of them ?

that makes no sense !

give the drake 8 highslots for 8 launchers and nerf the damage-bonus

don't forget to add enough pg/cpu for another launcher
Berluth Luthian
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2013-01-08 21:30:55 UTC
fukier wrote:
Abigail La'Fey wrote:
The Cyclone is missing a Launcher hardpoint.


indeed as far as i understand the belli and such have less dps due to them being e-war ships...

but the cyclone has a repper bonus meaning its a combat ship and should be comparable dps...

so yes it really needs that extra missile slot.


+1 lowslot means damage mod buff.
Gungnir Winder
State War Academy
Caldari State
#50 - 2013-01-08 21:31:38 UTC
Ferox needs 5% damage bonus, it's time to make it a useful ship...

My Youtube channel  Gungnir Winder
Valleria Darkmoon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#51 - 2013-01-08 21:32:09 UTC
I said this in another thread after the dev post about new battlecruisers but it bears repeating. You were right to be concerned about the Ferox and Naga sharing a sniper role on the battlefield. That is because comparatively the Naga with rails fitted has much longer optimal far superior damage as well as better mobility. The Ferox has a better tank...but so what if you're receiving heavy fire as a sniper something has gone awry in your plan.

The two ships will NOT be competing for the sniper role the Naga will simply win, having the advantage in every area that counts (aside from tracking I suppose but the longer range will help to mitigate that as a problem) and the Ferox will continue to collect dust. At least you didn't give the Ferox a carbon copy of the Naga bonuses which was originally the plan if memory serves. The whole point however was that it needed bonuses that better fit it's adopted role in the post Naga era which is a brawler. 5% shield resistance and 5% medium hybrid damage would not make it overpowered as it's damage is currently low compared with other short range battlecruisers and would give it a very clearly defined role within the Caldari lineup.

Reality has an almost infinite capacity to resist oversimplification.
Kismeteer
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#52 - 2013-01-08 21:32:33 UTC
What is strange is that every race has a damage dealer and an extra tank version, except the Gallente, who just has two bonuses to local tanking. This doesn't seem to line up at all with the rest of the t1/t2 battlecruisers. Shouldn't at least one of them have double weapon bonuses, like better tracking instead of the armor bonus on the brutix?
Bobbechk
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#53 - 2013-01-08 21:32:41 UTC
Sphit Ker wrote:
What could be the reasoning behind nerfing the Harbinger? I can't think of anything that ship need taken off. Consider me puzzled


The damage bonus is changed from 5% to 10%, meanwhile -1 turret.

This means its actually a great boost for the ship, both in DPS and cap-usage

The lost fitting is the same as 1 Heavy pulse so thats fine as-well.




Read the notes before you whine nerd.
Mund Richard
#54 - 2013-01-08 21:33:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Garphunkle wrote:
Does it seem utility highs are vanishing at an alarming rate?

EDIT: By my count only the cyclone can fit the cloak/neut combo i'm looking for, the Huricane/Harbi have to chose one or the other, and the rest are all just straight racks of guns, or drone boats

As a Gallente, I don't mind that at all... Roll

Now if only one of our BCs had something more exciting than the tanking bonus!

Kismeteer wrote:
What is strange is that every race has a damage dealer and an extra tank version, except the Gallente, who just has two bonuses to local tanking. This doesn't seem to line up at all with the rest of the t1/t2 battlecruisers. Shouldn't at least one of them have double weapon bonuses, like better tracking instead of the armor bonus on the brutix?
Well, Caldari have double shield resist and only one damage bonus... Roll
But yes, came expecting the Brutix to become a giant Thorax.

"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.
Valleria Darkmoon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#55 - 2013-01-08 21:36:41 UTC
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
CaptainFalcon07 wrote:
Prometheus Exenthal wrote:
Overall, this doesn't rustle my jimmies.

However, the Harbinger does look a wee bit outgunned.
You're now reducing its fitting, reducing base HP, removing a high (for consistency) but also removing a turret hardpoint, in addition to making it SLOWER.

Combined with the inherit weakness that is laser damage output & tracking, this simply doesnt seem like a good deal.
At the very least, I'd say reduce the high slots and all that, but let it keep the 7 turrets and the powergrid. This will allow for people to run high dps setups that can compete with the likes of the others, in addition to actually fitting BEAMS. If people want that utility high slot, they can choose not to fit the 7th gun.


Haven't you notice the damage bonus has been increased? its gone from 5% -> 10% damage per level.

Now: 7 turrets x 1.25 = 8.75 turrets.

Future: 6 turrets x 1.50 = 9 turrets

As you can see you will do more damage while needing less turrets.


oh man, im a big derp Lol


Don't worry man I made the same mistake at first, so at least you know you're not alone.

7 turrets with 10% damage would have been too much.

Reality has an almost infinite capacity to resist oversimplification.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#56 - 2013-01-08 21:39:30 UTC
Garphunkle wrote:
Bienator II wrote:
you still sell cap use bonus as second bonus for amar ships :(

It should be a role bonus that you can use a weapon, ship bonus gives specialization. Other ships receive tracking, range, whatever bonus and amarr ships like harb or oracle have a "yey you can actually fire this weapon" bonus.


Seems to be an easier pill to swallow given Harbi is going from 5% to 10% damage bonus. More than makes up for the lost gun.

Does it seem utility highs are vanishing at an alarming rate?


Medium nos was never good enough to compensate the cap use of unbonused cruiser or BC in pvp. Removing utility slots is actually not a huge problem IMO. Putting neuts on cap dependent ship is meh, fight a cane and he will laugh at the neut so you can just leave it off and move a bit qucker. It just widens the gap between cap dependent ships and cap independent ships, ASBs made it worse.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Saul Hyperion
Palmetto Galactic
#57 - 2013-01-08 21:41:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Saul Hyperion
These are incredibly underwhelming. Active tank bonuses screw over those ships as active tanking in small and larger gangs is dumb.


At the very least the Myrm should get a hybrid optimal like the Algos.

The Brutix should have a tracking bonus like the Thorax below it and the Megathron above it.

Gallente definitely got screwed again here.
Aprudena Gist
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#58 - 2013-01-08 21:43:49 UTC
And you still give the ******* cyclone a split weapon system? for fucks sake
Raid'En
#59 - 2013-01-08 21:44:09 UTC
Was surprised for the harbi nerf, didn't knew it needed one, as I don't see people flying one.
not surprised that the drake got a bit nerfed on defensive abilities. the lost high on the cane hurts however.
I though the tier3 bc would have a few changes also, surprised not a number changed.
After I'm not a fitting guru at all, so I won't say if these changes are good or bad in my view, only saying I'm surprised by some ;)
Mund Richard
#60 - 2013-01-08 21:45:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Mund Richard
Raid'En wrote:
I though the tier3 bc would have a few changes also, surprised not a number changed.

Hint:
Combat Battlecruiser topic

As in, not attack, assault or whatever CCP calls those.

"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.