These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#401 - 2013-05-19 22:21:14 UTC
Akturous wrote:
And weapon systems. They obsolete:

Nano pest
Arty Pest
Arty Mach (to some extent)
Arty Cane
Sniper Hacs
Medium Rails
Medium Arty
Medium Beams
All other BC's in a shield BC gang
Eagle
Ferox
Active Tanking

Deletion from the game is the only way of balancing these things, they've just screwed everything.


Ferox and especially the Eagle were garbage before ABC's came out.
For the life of me, the Eagle is complete shite.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#402 - 2013-05-19 22:38:38 UTC
NeoShocker wrote:
Ya know, when I saw the mass, it doesn't make sense.

Each race have perks that they have advantage over other races.

Following perks are:

minmatar ships have the best speed, lowest mass, best locking speed, worst sensor str and lock range of all races, balances of slots, best Power Grid amount

Caldari? Best shield hp, best cpu output, best sensor str and locking range, but biggest mass, most mid slots

Amarr? Best amor hp, best capacitor, but slowest speed (right? don't recall), most low slots

Then gallente, best structure HP, best drone bay size, and supposely well balanced in most aspects? slot wise, similar than minmatar, but more low slot and less mid slots than usual.

When I say best, they have better numbers on specific areas than other races.

So tornado not having the least mass? Its pretty much not consistent. Doesn't make sense that naga have the least mass either.

Do note, there are other perks I missed out, but its been years I seen those perks on the net, and its not there when I try to find it.





NAGA:

Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 2160 / 1575 / 1755

Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km / 200 (-20) / 8


TORNADO:

Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 1890 / 1800 / 1800


The Naga gets slight better shields but the Nado get more armor and hull, so the ehp actually equals out.

As for more CPU, lock range, the naga needs it because it is the long range sniper boat, which requires sensor boosters to lock up faster and longer range which takes away those extra mid slots.

Considering the Naga has less armor and hull, one would think that it would be faster than it is, but Minnie gets that bonus plus sig radius.

Go figure.

Though in terms of actual sniping damage, the Arty Nado just wreaks havoc on everything it touches. When you only have time to get a shot off on something before it warps. Alpha damage is king and the Nado does not disappoint.

The most common BS fleets are alpha fleets by far, and at the end of the day Arty ships win.
Feather Storm
Tindalosian Trading Consortium
#403 - 2013-05-23 05:25:56 UTC
Hagika wrote:
Feather Storm wrote:
To all of you out there wishing for a missile Naga it is not going to happen. The origional prototype of the Naga had both gun and missile hardpoints and bonus to both weapon systems. However it turned out in testing on SiSi that the missile Naga was way to easy to turn into a frigate killer of insane capability. So CCP removed the missile hardpoints and bonus giving us the Naga we have today. Just a small piece of history I think you should know so you know why it is the way it is.



Wait, so you are honestly saying a Cruise/ Torp Naga was a frigate killer? What drugs are you on? Seriously....

Frigs laugh at both weapon systems. You cant even 1 shot a frig with them or even 2 shot. Ironically as you say this, the other 3 races can 1 shot frigs with no issue.

Dont feed bullcrap to the folks, the issue was missiles apply damage rather crappy and you can not snipe with them and up close shooting means dead ABC..


Nothing was said about mounting battleship sized launchers for the frigate killer set up.

Things change you adapt or you whine.

[u]Please note[/u]: Whining will alert the nearest predator resulting in death and the continuation of the EVE-olutionary process.

Florian Kuehne
Tech3 Company
#404 - 2013-05-23 10:50:31 UTC
What about Commandship changes now? Was announced on Fanfest that there are several changes to the fleet boni and smaller adjustments due to balancing.
Ioci
Bad Girl Posse
Somethin Awfull Forums
#405 - 2013-05-23 22:30:29 UTC
The only ship I tried to fit in tier 3 was an Oracle due to skills and the only fit that proved worth while was a shoulder mounted grenade fit. Strap as much immediate DPS on to it as it would allow, fire it off, watch it go boom, repeat and rinse. I just can't afford to do that for any extended period of time and I really don't know of a lot of alliances that could. The few that can have capital fleets and use BC fleets to create buffer, they don't need that sort of throw away DPS compliment.

R.I.P. Vile Rat

SGT FUNYOUN
Elysian Space Navy - 1st Fleet
#406 - 2013-06-04 02:32:49 UTC
Ok, many are missing the point of the tier 3 BC's.

It was DESIGNED to be an OP'd glass cannon.

So, knocking off one gun, and reducing alpha and them giving a better tank???

HELLO... you want to fly a Battleship or a Battle Cruiser here?
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#407 - 2013-06-04 03:57:18 UTC
The problem is the 'OP'ed' bit.
ABC's kick out more firepower & fit the biggest guns easier than a Battleship does.
That isn't right.
ABC's having large guns is fine, it means a BC fleet can bring sudden firepower to the field.
But ABC's shouldn't totally outclass battleships, and that's where the imbalance is in their firepower.

If they have weaker firepower than the BS's, but still more range than the other BC's, that lets them act as additional firepower to a faster moving BC group, without causing BS's to be obsolete.
Maximus Aerelius
PROPHET OF ENIGMA
#408 - 2013-06-06 20:46:06 UTC
When are these going be unstickied to give Page 1 back to Player Posts? Odyssey is in and the Feedback and Issues threads are active. Why not replace these with a "Link Sticky" to those two threads?

We all know how lazy we are to go clicking...wait for it...past Page 3 of this Forum section. Blink
MrSpaceDragon
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#409 - 2013-09-01 15:19:57 UTC
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.


I'm pretty sure the intent of these ships was high dps and low tank, so buffing the tank would basically turn this ship into a small battle ship. I must disagree with this guy.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#410 - 2013-09-01 15:21:47 UTC
MrSpaceDragon wrote:
Jonas Sukarala wrote:
decent changes but i think you can go further here.
-remove a turret
-buff tank to be better than combat cruisers as it seems odd a moa can outank a naga at least in HP anyway.

And nerf the alpha on arties for christ sake they are OP in this regard i think missiles should really do the alpha damage not guns.


I'm pretty sure the intent of these ships was high dps and low tank, so buffing the tank would basically turn this ship into a small battle ship. I must disagree with this guy.



This three month thread necro was really valuable, thank you for your input. Roll
MrSpaceDragon
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#411 - 2013-09-01 15:29:15 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Looks ok, but I don't think the Talos needs the drones.


CCP - PLEASE DON'T TAKE AWAY DRONES ON THE TALOS.

It makes it unique to the other ABC's but it does not give it a massive difference in dps. Having those 5 little drones makes this ship really awesome for running asteroid belts in null sec because it can quickly kill a BS and also it can kill the little annoying frigs with its drones. Plus, it can leave the belts quickly if a pirate enters the system with it's quick warp time.

Anyone who thinks this ship should not have drones is being a whiny little baby.
MrSpaceDragon
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#412 - 2013-09-01 15:35:41 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
The problem is the 'OP'ed' bit.
ABC's kick out more firepower & fit the biggest guns easier than a Battleship does.
That isn't right.
ABC's having large guns is fine, it means a BC fleet can bring sudden firepower to the field.
But ABC's shouldn't totally outclass battleships, and that's where the imbalance is in their firepower.

If they have weaker firepower than the BS's, but still more range than the other BC's, that lets them act as additional firepower to a faster moving BC group, without causing BS's to be obsolete.



It seems like a lot of people don't like the ABC's and I apologize if I sound rude, but I think those people are idiots.

It is really awesome having a battleCruiser size ship that can blast more dps than a BS.

There is no imbalance here because ABC's have very weak tanks. They pop like popcorn.
They were meant to have massive dps and the tank of a cruiser. If you take away their dps, then they're just another nerfed weak cruiser added to a long list of other worthless ships.

People who complain about a ship being too strong really **** me off. A lot.