These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Odyssey] Attack Battlecruiser balance pass

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Johnson Oramara
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#301 - 2013-04-04 15:11:04 UTC
Roime wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Just because I posted one shield fit doesn't mean thats the only viable way to fly the ship. It was just the best way to achieve the numbers sited above me. Personally, I think active tank brutix is extremely fun and have flown armor and shield variations both quite a bit.

I'm happy to say that currently active armor bonuses are not as valuable as they maybe ought to be. We intend to keep looking at tank balance, and in the mean time we don't want to throw out all the bonuses and just give up on active armor ever having a place in the game.


Buffing the hull bonus from 7.5% to 10% would do it :) alternatively, buff the medium and large reppers. Since fitting active armor tank means sacrificing damage, and it has a common hard counter (neuts), I honestly see no reason why it shouldn't be more powerful.

Active tanking ftw, it adds an interesting mechanic into PVP and in it's own way complicates combat. Which is a good thing considering the somewhat limited nature of actual ship-to-ship combat mechanics of EVE.


Yes, i would like to see active tanking somehow buffed or buffer tanking nerfed, with active tanking you need to constantly manage your cap and are vulnerable to neuts, while with buffers you can just focus on keeping your target in range and other stuff... Now armor buffers were buffed with the mass reductions for plates and even skill was introduced for this... ASB's were when they were first released a bit op but now they are mediocre at best like AAR's.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#302 - 2013-04-04 15:14:28 UTC
Krell Kroenen wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:

I'm happy to say that currently active armor bonuses are not as valuable as they maybe ought to be. We intend to keep looking at tank balance, and in the mean time we don't want to throw out all the bonuses and just give up on active armor ever having a place in the game.


Well instead of just focusing on the active tank bonuses of the hull, look at the foundation of active armor tanking. Instead of trying to patch a sub-par tanking method by tweaking hull bonuses or coming up with gimmicky modules like AAR's. Just fix normal active armor tanking itself and then the hull bonuses will truly shine.


the problem is if you make the mod too good then the resist bonus will get better... so unless we nerf the resist bonus then we cant just make the mod better...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#303 - 2013-04-04 15:16:52 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Just because I posted one shield fit doesn't mean thats the only viable way to fly the ship. It was just the best way to achieve the numbers sited above me. Personally, I think active tank brutix is extremely fun and have flown armor and shield variations both quite a bit.

I'm happy to say that currently active armor bonuses are not as valuable as they maybe ought to be. We intend to keep looking at tank balance, and in the mean time we don't want to throw out all the bonuses and just give up on active armor ever having a place in the game.


Any plans to make armour tanking on ABCs more attractive? I have a 1600 dual web talos, but nobody seems to want me to undock it, because buffer shield tanking is better in every way.
Strange Shadow
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#304 - 2013-04-04 17:54:15 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
[Brutix, Brutix fit]

1347m/s - 910dps - 47.9ehp - obviously the range is not as good.

you said it just had to meet 2 of the metrics!


I see what you did there :)

Anyway, this clearly shows that DPS+Range+Tank+Speed total is unmatched on tier 3 BCs. Their only drawback is the tracking/signature, which is supposedly same as on battleships (not so true with a Talos, but anyway). Tracking issue mitigated by great speed these things have, and signature by tackler's MWD which is essential to keep up with these things.

So i perceive the SPEED to be a greater issue than anything else. Since it is attack BCs we are talking about, speed should be greater than combat BCs, but not THAT great. Take a brutix/talos example, talos is 40% faster out of the box, which is (i think) bit too much. Compare to the difference between attack/combat cruisers (e.g. thorax/vexor). I do recognize that talos does need that speed to survive, but as it is, the only C/BC that could catch up to/do damage to talos, and have chance to survive the attempt, is another talos(/tornado/...), and nothing else, which (i think) means it is little overpowered in this class.

About PG/CPU - it still seems strange to me that BCs can fit biggest of large guns (+tanks) so easy. With their bonuses they put most battleships out of business in everything but tank department. But maybe its just me not knowing what will become of battleships in the future :)
MinutemanKirk
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#305 - 2013-04-04 18:28:01 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Just because I posted one shield fit doesn't mean thats the only viable way to fly the ship. It was just the best way to achieve the numbers sited above me. Personally, I think active tank brutix is extremely fun and have flown armor and shield variations both quite a bit.

I'm happy to say that currently active armor bonuses are not as valuable as they maybe ought to be. We intend to keep looking at tank balance, and in the mean time we don't want to throw out all the bonuses and just give up on active armor ever having a place in the game.


I wouldn't suggest that either, however, I think that it is not only overkill but incredibly unbalanced to have BOTH Gallente BC's with said bonus: Only the Caldari have both their BC's with the same tanking bonus (which works well). I too hope that the rep bonus will one day be worthwhile. Until then, I would suggest either swapping one of them for a passive tank/damage bonus OR have two different rep bonuses for the Myrm and Brutix.
fukier
Gallente Federation
#306 - 2013-04-04 19:00:12 UTC
you know come to think about it the rep bonus would not be so bad if it also reduced the cap activation cost by 7.5% too...
At the end of the game both the pawn and the Queen go in the same box.
Irelia Stark
Doomheim
#307 - 2013-04-04 19:42:03 UTC
Lelob wrote:
No. The talos does not need to remove the drones because that is not what the drones do. They don't "blap" jack ****, and chances are they barely have time to even reach the frig and start applying the whopping sub-100 dps before the frig dies. You could happily give drones to all of the t3 bc's and the effect would be the same. They have such amazing dps projection that they will kill most frigs far before their drones can ever reach them to be an issue.

Even if you were to use your 5 hobgobs/warriors against a frig, that was say scramming you, it wouldn't matter because the frig can tank the drones long enough to either kill the drones or kill you with your pitiful tank. In fact it kind of goes to show that you don't know what you're talking about when you talk about damage drones, when anyone with 1/2 a brain will just be using ec-300s anyways, gven that they are the only way that you can hope to run away if you get scrammed.

Again though, the amount of versatility that the drones offer to the talos is fairly minimal.

As has been said time and time again, projecting between 600-1000 dps out to 20-70km in the case of the t3 bc's using short range guns is the real problem. They simply give far too much dps, with an insanely overpowered projection to even be remotely considered balanced. You could nerf the speed down to that of a drake, going 1k/s and it still wouldn't matter for gangs because you are still going to be sitting at between 20-70km projecting insane dps in a ship that costs at most maybe 80-90mil after insurance.

The speed of the t3 bc's helps to exacerbate the problem of the t3 bc's, but the real problem has always and will continue to remain in their damage projection. As I have said before, these changes will do nothing of value to fix them.


If you actually thought I was saying that 5 warriors could 'blap' a frig, you need to stop and think. I suppose that I never literally wrote in my post that I meant the Talos's tracking and damage from TURRETS is what is so very good against frigs, not drones. But thanks for going bananas on a point that has no relevance to my argument.
Maximus Andendare
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#308 - 2013-04-05 05:02:37 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
. . . and in the mean time we don't want to throw out all the bonuses and just give up on active armor ever having a place in the game.
But in the mean time you're asking us to throw away one of the bonuses, since it has no place in fleet/logi gangs. How is this any fairer than making us wait around with a crappy bonus while active armor tanking gets fixed who knows when?

Enter grid and you're already dead, destined to be reborn and fight another day.

>> Play Eve Online FREE! Join today for exclusive bonuses! <<

Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#309 - 2013-04-05 07:44:04 UTC
Maximus Andendare wrote:
...But in the mean time you're asking us to throw away one of the bonuses,...

*cough* Amarr laser cap bonus *cough*

We have a lot of stuff in more urgent need of attention, eWar, null sov, large missiles, drone interface are infinitely more important than making 2-3 hulls work "as intended" if you ask me (which you didn't or wouldn't but there it is Smile.

Not as if the Gallente is completely crippled as the bonus is not present on all/most hulls or there is a lack of mids to make shield work. Until armour is sorted, you just have to either use the shield option or limit yourself to engaging 2-3 enemies instead of 5+ at once.

On topic: Is the plan to let the tier3's be the de facto Large Gun snipers? If so then I can't wait to see what roles you have planned for BS Smile
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#310 - 2013-04-05 10:19:52 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Maximus Andendare wrote:
...But in the mean time you're asking us to throw away one of the bonuses,...

*cough* Amarr laser cap bonus *cough*

We have a lot of stuff in more urgent need of attention, eWar, null sov, large missiles, drone interface are infinitely more important than making 2-3 hulls work "as intended" if you ask me (which you didn't or wouldn't but there it is Smile.

Not as if the Gallente is completely crippled as the bonus is not present on all/most hulls or there is a lack of mids to make shield work. Until armour is sorted, you just have to either use the shield option or limit yourself to engaging 2-3 enemies instead of 5+ at once.

On topic: Is the plan to let the tier3's be the de facto Large Gun snipers? If so then I can't wait to see what roles you have planned for BS Smile



Amarr laser cap bonus is not thrown away. Compare the damage of lasers unbonused with any other weapon of same class unbonused. Lasers are far more powerful. That means their damage bonus is embedded and the amarr cap bohnus is so that the weapons become usable only on amarr ships.


Just compare the DPS of Rails and Tachyons , alsot their trackign if you do not beleive me. Both on unbonused ships of course.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#311 - 2013-04-05 11:01:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Veshta Yoshida
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Just compare the DPS of Rails and Tachyons , alsot their trackign if you do not beleive me. Both on unbonused ships of course...

I did, and?

Tachs have a whopping 15% dps advantage over 425mm Rails on unbonused hull (used a Mael), for that you have to burn three times the cap (1.5x after cap bonus) and use 50% more grid.

What you said was true, but most of the weapon systems have caught up with them in both damage and partially range so that lasers are now left as a fittings intensive and cap hungry weapon system with scorch being the only redeeming feature.

I am of Amarr, have flown the golden hulls exclusively (albeit some with Blaster/AC fits Big smile) for 6+ years so believe it or not, I am fully aware of the way the wind has been blowing. Granted, lasers are still get their revision now that missiles (Torp/Cruise changes coming) are the last of remaining three to get sorted although rails still could still do with a little somethingsomething.

Until that revision we'll carry on living our lives leaning on the crutch called Scorch to make it through the days.

But perhaps you right, maybe lasers really are god weapons (as they rightly should be .. AMARR!) and the ships using them is just filtered out of the various killboards and replaced with ac/blaster boats to keep it a secret Big smile
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#312 - 2013-04-05 11:31:42 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Just compare the DPS of Rails and Tachyons , alsot their trackign if you do not beleive me. Both on unbonused ships of course...

I did, and?

Tachs have a whopping 15% dps advantage over 425mm Rails on unbonused hull (used a Mael), for that you have to burn three times the cap (1.5x after cap bonus) and use 50% more grid.

What you said was true, but most of the weapon systems have caught up with them in both damage and partially range so that lasers are now left as a fittings intensive and cap hungry weapon system with scorch being the only redeeming feature.

I am of Amarr, have flown the golden hulls exclusively (albeit some with Blaster/AC fits Big smile) for 6+ years so believe it or not, I am fully aware of the way the wind has been blowing. Granted, lasers are still get their revision now that missiles (Torp/Cruise changes coming) are the last of remaining three to get sorted although rails still could still do with a little somethingsomething.

Until that revision we'll carry on living our lives leaning on the crutch called Scorch to make it through the days.

But perhaps you right, maybe lasers really are god weapons (as they rightly should be .. AMARR!) and the ships using them is just filtered out of the various killboards and replaced with ac/blaster boats to keep it a secret Big smile



I am not saying anything about balance directly.. just that the cap usage bonus is not a wasted bonus.. its just a creative way to hide the true damage bonus of the weapon.

To remove amarr cap bonus you wold need to reduce laser cap usage.. and that woudl jus tmake all weapons almost equal... BORING.

You fix that by increasing the base damage advantage of the lasers. Or just make beams easier to fit.. check how much damage a 7 tachyon geddon can dish with 3 damage mods :P

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Bouh Revetoile
In Wreck we thrust
#313 - 2013-04-05 11:35:45 UTC
In fact, lasers are plain better than projectile weapons (even at close range, even quad light beam are better than 220mm AC). And laser are better than all other weapons at around 5 or 6 km IIRC (for small & medium weapons at least). They have quite a big superiority range in fact, the only problem being the ability to use this superiority range.

And most of the time, what amarr ships lack in dps, they get it in tank.

In the end, I think a TD would serve the amarr way better than a web, because that would give them the tracking superiority they lack in duel.
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#314 - 2013-04-05 12:07:19 UTC
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
In fact, lasers are plain better than projectile weapons (even at close range, even quad light beam are better than 220mm AC). And laser are better than all other weapons at around 5 or 6 km IIRC (for small & medium weapons at least). They have quite a big superiority range in fact, the only problem being the ability to use this superiority range.

And most of the time, what amarr ships lack in dps, they get it in tank.

In the end, I think a TD would serve the amarr way better than a web, because that would give them the tracking superiority they lack in duel.


....

I don't even know how to respond to that..

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Jonas Sukarala
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#315 - 2013-04-05 12:30:27 UTC
besides my earlier posts of asking for a turret to be removed so as to allow battleships to have better dps,
i think another solution alongside that is to make these a T2 specialist bc double the price give them T2 resists as these are a specialization they are not really T1 bc's.

Much like you have T1 logi using medium repper the T2 logi use large reppers...... noticing the link here?

'Tech3 ships need to be put down, like a rabid dog drooling everywhere in the house, they are out of line' CCP Ytterbium Nerf missile range into place where is the TD missile change?  ..projectiles should use capacitor. ABC's should be T2 HABC and nerf web strength its still too high

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#316 - 2013-04-05 13:41:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Kagura Nikon
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
In fact, lasers are plain better than projectile weapons (even at close range, even quad light beam are better than 220mm AC). And laser are better than all other weapons at around 5 or 6 km IIRC (for small & medium weapons at least). They have quite a big superiority range in fact, the only problem being the ability to use this superiority range.

And most of the time, what amarr ships lack in dps, they get it in tank.

In the end, I think a TD would serve the amarr way better than a web, because that would give them the tracking superiority they lack in duel.


....

I don't even know how to respond to that..



maybe because mathematically he IS right

Put Mega Pulses and 800mm AC on a 2 rocks and fire at each other and guess wich one will win?

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#317 - 2013-04-05 13:54:32 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
maybe because mathematically he IS right

Put Mega Pulses and 800mm AC on a 2 rocks and fire at each other and guess wich one will win?

That before or after you allow for all the stuff that is possible due to fittings/cap disparity, that is twin large neuts and more tank than reasonable on the AC fit? Smile

He is right about the TD remark though, but then again everyone can and do benefit from those so not sure why it is even in there .. perhaps a nod towards the people wanting an extra mid on some laser hulls.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#318 - 2013-04-05 15:27:42 UTC
Veshta Yoshida wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
maybe because mathematically he IS right

Put Mega Pulses and 800mm AC on a 2 rocks and fire at each other and guess wich one will win?

That before or after you allow for all the stuff that is possible due to fittings/cap disparity, that is twin large neuts and more tank than reasonable on the AC fit? Smile

He is right about the TD remark though, but then again everyone can and do benefit from those so not sure why it is even in there .. perhaps a nod towards the people wanting an extra mid on some laser hulls.



When I stated the rokh was implicid 8 turrets of course. We want to compare the weapons not other modules. His statement was strictly about the weapons and usign to a conclusion that the issue on lasers are the platforms. Your argument only corroborates with his statement.


Anyway the no cap Usage is hardly a huge advantage as some post. Because when you have no cap your minmatar ships loose its mobility that is much more important for them then for amarr. Its an advantage, but its not like some pople try to make it sound "minmatar do not need cap " . When I flew more battleships I used to have less worries on capacitor while in an APOC than in a tempest. The ammount of cpacitor the amarr ships have extra is usually enough to cover all weapon firing usage on a short fight, and on long fights, they have larger cargo bays (with less ammo space usage) to carry more boost charges). So there are times where the no cap usage on guns will be relevant, but do not try to make it soudn like its an extremely common thing.

I am even having a hard time to remember last time I was unable to fire because of capacitor being empty and that I was not already doomed anyway even if I had capless weapons.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Garviel Tarrant
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#319 - 2013-04-05 16:15:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Garviel Tarrant
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
In fact, lasers are plain better than projectile weapons (even at close range, even quad light beam are better than 220mm AC). And laser are better than all other weapons at around 5 or 6 km IIRC (for small & medium weapons at least). They have quite a big superiority range in fact, the only problem being the ability to use this superiority range.

And most of the time, what amarr ships lack in dps, they get it in tank.

In the end, I think a TD would serve the amarr way better than a web, because that would give them the tracking superiority they lack in duel.


....

I don't even know how to respond to that..



maybe because mathematically he IS right

Put Mega Pulses and 800mm AC on a 2 rocks and fire at each other and guess wich one will win?



Yes and conflag/void/hail are the best ammo types for ALL situation because they get the BEZT DPZ! Looking at EFT numbers is pointless if you don't understand them.

EDIT: also large (pulse, beams are still terrible on everything other than nightmares) lasers are good because battleships have half a billion slots/fittings to fit stuff to compensate for their weakness. Medium and small? not so much

BYDI recruitment closed-ish

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#320 - 2013-04-05 16:35:00 UTC
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Garviel Tarrant wrote:
Bouh Revetoile wrote:
In fact, lasers are plain better than projectile weapons (even at close range, even quad light beam are better than 220mm AC). And laser are better than all other weapons at around 5 or 6 km IIRC (for small & medium weapons at least). They have quite a big superiority range in fact, the only problem being the ability to use this superiority range.

And most of the time, what amarr ships lack in dps, they get it in tank.

In the end, I think a TD would serve the amarr way better than a web, because that would give them the tracking superiority they lack in duel.


....

I don't even know how to respond to that..



maybe because mathematically he IS right

Put Mega Pulses and 800mm AC on a 2 rocks and fire at each other and guess wich one will win?



Yes and conflag/void/hail are the best ammo types for ALL situation because they get the BEZT DPZ! Looking at EFT numbers is pointless if you don't understand them.

EDIT: also large (pulse, beams are still terrible on everything other than nightmares) lasers are good because battleships have half a billion slots/fittings to fit stuff to compensate for their weakness. Medium and small? not so much



Not based on EFT, based on my experience fighting with both ammar , minmatar battleships.

Amarr battleships ARE superior.. the problem is.. currently Battleships have not much use...

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"