These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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] Tech 1 Battleships - Amarr

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#661 - 2013-04-10 14:41:39 UTC
Tonto Auri wrote:
Crash Lander wrote:
Atomic Option wrote:
After sleeping on it, the simplest statement of the problem with the Apoc change is that:
the new bonus to tracking doesn't synergize well with the optimal bonus.

When do you most need optimal? When you're far away.
When do you most need tracking? When you're closer to an orbiting target.

The cap bonus can synergize with any fit that uses lasers, but the tracking bonus isn't useful in as many situations. If you want to move away from cap bonuses, find something else that synergizes with optimal.


QFT.

How the hell I missed this post? Care to provide a link? That person deserve a "like".

You might consider that apparently this person has never flown an Apoc in anger, nor as part of a fleet. A tracking bonus is a huge boost to these ships in a kiting role.

Laser tracking has always been it's weak point.

Inability to track incoming tacklers and kill them fast enough to leverage their range advantage has always been the Apoc's weak point.

If a workable cap level can be arrived at, then tracking is probably the PERFECT bonus for this ship in it's attack role.

I would respectfully suggest some folks spend less time using EFT and it's bretheren, and more time actually flying the ships they are offering comment on.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Jack C Hughes
State War Academy
Caldari State
#662 - 2013-04-10 14:44:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Jack C Hughes
Tonto Auri wrote:
Jack C Hughes wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
Neither Rokh, nor Maelstrom have that many lows.
Mael have 6 I recall, and rokh have smae or even less.


but they have their desired mid.
Amarr is struggling between dps and tank and now you say you will use that low slot for reactors?


I hit "Post" too early, please check back the the edited post. Sorry for inconvenience.
Also, relating to DPS and tank, if capacitor issues are resolved, Apocalypse could use a resistance bonus... if that would not make it a copy of the Rokh...


I do agree with you on the new player thing and that is for sure.
but as it does not have any dps bonus before, with a battleship skill of 3, it will have almost exatly as much dps as 8 turrets.
(6*1.30=7.8).
that does not cost alot of time to train
And now it would be easier to fit larger guns as only 6 turret is available

btw if the pg is going to be increased and cap regeneratioin boosted, i am perfectly well with things like 8 turrets + no damage bonus.

but it is not going that way, at least not now.
Arya Greywolf
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#663 - 2013-04-10 14:47:07 UTC
Rynnik wrote:
All three of these BS share 4 mids, 7 lows. You may have diversified away from lasers on all of them but you sure didn't shake up much else - especially in light of a Gallente 8 low BS. How about a Hyperion treatment with double damage bonus on 6 turrets for the Apoc. That further assists the cap issues and allows a slot to be reallocated to the lows.


This a million times. Everyone needs to keep quoting this. If you're going to tweak the Gallente slots to fit their roles, so do you need to tweak the Amarr and other races. Abaddon needs 8th low slot.

Additionally, please think about the Armageddon design. It's going to be a neut and drone boat. 4 Mids is pushing it. Please look at taking a high out for a mid. It's going to need a cap boosters, drone links, web, mwd, etc. With no damage bonus besides drones, take a high out for a mid. Do it.
Arya Greywolf
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#664 - 2013-04-10 14:48:30 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
Crash Lander wrote:
Atomic Option wrote:
After sleeping on it, the simplest statement of the problem with the Apoc change is that:
the new bonus to tracking doesn't synergize well with the optimal bonus.

When do you most need optimal? When you're far away.
When do you most need tracking? When you're closer to an orbiting target.

The cap bonus can synergize with any fit that uses lasers, but the tracking bonus isn't useful in as many situations. If you want to move away from cap bonuses, find something else that synergizes with optimal.


QFT.

How the hell I missed this post? Care to provide a link? That person deserve a "like".

You might consider that apparently this person has never flown an Apoc in anger, nor as part of a fleet. A tracking bonus is a huge boost to these ships in a kiting role.

Laser tracking has always been it's weak point.

Inability to track incoming tacklers and kill them fast enough to leverage their range advantage has always been the Apoc's weak point.

If a workable cap level can be arrived at, then tracking is probably the PERFECT bonus for this ship in it's attack role.

I would respectfully suggest some folks spend less time using EFT and it's bretheren, and more time actually flying the ships they are offering comment on.


Regardless of what else is said in this thread about the other changes... anyone who disagrees with the Apoc's new tracking bonus is whack. It is awesome.
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#665 - 2013-04-10 14:49:01 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
You might consider that apparently this person has never flown an Apoc in anger, nor as part of a fleet. A tracking bonus is a huge boost to these ships in a kiting role.

If you want a kiter, I suggest Armageddon.

Quote:
Laser tracking has always been it's weak point.

There's other lasers, than Tachyons, you know?

Quote:
Inability to track incoming tacklers and kill them fast enough to leverage their range advantage has always been the Apoc's weak point.

So, she was always a fleet battleship. We're not discussing Swiss Army Knives here, are we?

Quote:
If a workable cap level can be arrived at, then tracking is probably the PERFECT bonus for this ship in it's attack role.

Tracking is more suited for Armageddon, to go in hand with RoF bonus to boost her close combat abilities.
I'm undecided about Apocalypse bonuses, resistance seems very vital for buffer tank in fleet ops, but then again, you get an armortanking copy of the Rokh. I don't know, how good CCP with that. Probably not very good. What other bonus you can offer, assuming that cap issues are resolved?

Quote:
I would respectfully suggest some folks spend less time using EFT and it's bretheren, and more time actually flying the ships they are offering comment on.

I'm flying Amarr and Gallente ships. And only commenting on what I fly.

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison
Hulasikaly Wada
DO.IT
I.N.D.E.P.E.N.D.E.N.T
#666 - 2013-04-10 14:56:09 UTC
Arya Greywolf wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
Crash Lander wrote:
Atomic Option wrote:
After sleeping on it, the simplest statement of the problem with the Apoc change is that:
the new bonus to tracking doesn't synergize well with the optimal bonus.

When do you most need optimal? When you're far away.
When do you most need tracking? When you're closer to an orbiting target.

The cap bonus can synergize with any fit that uses lasers, but the tracking bonus isn't useful in as many situations. If you want to move away from cap bonuses, find something else that synergizes with optimal.


QFT.

How the hell I missed this post? Care to provide a link? That person deserve a "like".

You might consider that apparently this person has never flown an Apoc in anger, nor as part of a fleet. A tracking bonus is a huge boost to these ships in a kiting role.

Laser tracking has always been it's weak point.

Inability to track incoming tacklers and kill them fast enough to leverage their range advantage has always been the Apoc's weak point.

If a workable cap level can be arrived at, then tracking is probably the PERFECT bonus for this ship in it's attack role.

I would respectfully suggest some folks spend less time using EFT and it's bretheren, and more time actually flying the ships they are offering comment on.


Regardless of what else is said in this thread about the other changes... anyone who disagrees with the Apoc's new tracking bonus is whack. It is awesome.


True, but it will apply more dmg on undertraking situation ( you arent going to melt those rifters even with a web ... )
Increase dmg make everone fell better ( yes , E-peen is nice to have sometimes ) , save cap most of the time and make the ship desired to be flyed
( for a vet the old Apoc is Always looked like missing something because has its max dps show even at Amar-bs at lvl 1 )

Hula
Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
#667 - 2013-04-10 14:59:26 UTC
Jack C Hughes wrote:
I do agree with you on the new player thing and that is for sure.
but as it does not have any dps bonus before, with a battleship skill of 3, it will have almost exatly as much dps as 8 turrets.
(6*1.30=7.8).
that does not cost alot of time to train
And now it would be easier to fit larger guns as only 6 turret is available

btw if the pg is going to be increased and cap regeneratioin boosted, i am perfectly well with things like 8 turrets + no damage bonus.

but it is not going that way, at least not now.

Ease or hard to fit is a debate of CPU and PG allocation. It's a question, but not an important one.
What is important, and is a major and common issue, is that lasers DO use TREMENDOUS amount of capacitor, compared to other weapons. For common issues, it needs some common resolutions to make things work. Yes, you can change native capacitor recharge rates, but then you'll have to factor the:
1. Reppers. With faster capacitor recharge it's easier to run double- or even triple-rep.
2. Hardeners. However small cap they are using, it's still not zero.
3. Neuting and nossing. The higher your peak cap recharge, the harder it is for your opponent to deal with your cap. Which could be seen as imbalance from some POV's.
4. Whatever I forgot, what affecting capacitor games.

Reducing lasers cap use is something I don't see to happen - for abovementioned resons (brief recount: endless ammo, instant optimal change, relatively short cooldown)

On the other hand, flat role bonus allow you to set capacitor usage of your turrets to whatever line you want it to be, and play cap games in a more even environment.

Ship balancing is not an easy game >.>

Two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity. -- Harlan Ellison
Nolove Trader
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#668 - 2013-04-10 15:04:21 UTC
Tonto Auri wrote:
Jack C Hughes wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
Neither Rokh, nor Maelstrom have that many lows.
Mael have 6 I recall, and rokh have smae or even less.


but they have their desired mid.
Amarr is struggling between dps and tank and now you say you will use that low slot for reactors?


I hit "Post" too early, please check back the the edited post. Sorry for inconvenience.
Also, relating to DPS and tank, if capacitor issues are resolved, Apocalypse could use a resistance bonus... if that would not make it a copy of the Rokh...


Apoc could also need capless guns, a 8/8/8 slot design, 125 mbit/450m³ drone bay, a 100% damage bonus, Kin/Explo Ammunition and of course a Doomsday Device, just in case. The Apoc was always a rather solid ship, although it definitely was somewhat eclipsed by the Abaddon / Navypoc in the various metas of recent years.

And while I much appreciate the increased cap on the Apoc, i still don't see much of a point in the tracking bonus regarding the Apocs intended role of a longrange BS. And given the fact that Pulses on a Apoc are sufficient to reach post-Apocrypha longrange optimal, they still track much, much better than Arties or Rails, having more than three times the tracking of 425mm Rails. And these Guns don't need a tracking bonus to work currently in their longrange role (Rokh, Naga, Mael), so I just can't see the point of it. Then again, why does the Apoc have a 7.5% Optimal bonus while most other ships get 10%/level, although Pulses reaching out to about 90?95?100?km within optimal would maybe be a bit too crazy, especially when Large Pulses have basically been excellent since the final demise of the 200km sniping BS of old.

However, the new Mega will put massive pressure on the Apoc, putting out more DPS on a comparable range, while being only somewhat more fragile, but this can be compensated with the eight lowslot.

I don't know, somehow this Apoc feels like being so close to a good ship, but then falling just slightly short.
Jack C Hughes
State War Academy
Caldari State
#669 - 2013-04-10 15:05:50 UTC
Tonto Auri wrote:
Jack C Hughes wrote:
I do agree with you on the new player thing and that is for sure.
but as it does not have any dps bonus before, with a battleship skill of 3, it will have almost exatly as much dps as 8 turrets.
(6*1.30=7.8).
that does not cost alot of time to train
And now it would be easier to fit larger guns as only 6 turret is available

btw if the pg is going to be increased and cap regeneratioin boosted, i am perfectly well with things like 8 turrets + no damage bonus.

but it is not going that way, at least not now.

Ease or hard to fit is a debate of CPU and PG allocation. It's a question, but not an important one.
What is important, and is a major and common issue, is that lasers DO use TREMENDOUS amount of capacitor, compared to other weapons. For common issues, it needs some common resolutions to make things work. Yes, you can change native capacitor recharge rates, but then you'll have to factor the:
1. Reppers. With faster capacitor recharge it's easier to run double- or even triple-rep.
2. Hardeners. However small cap they are using, it's still not zero.
3. Neuting and nossing. The higher your peak cap recharge, the harder it is for your opponent to deal with your cap. Which could be seen as imbalance from some POV's.
4. Whatever I forgot, what affecting capacitor games.

Reducing lasers cap use is something I don't see to happen - for abovementioned resons (brief recount: endless ammo, instant optimal change, relatively short cooldown)

On the other hand, flat role bonus allow you to set capacitor usage of your turrets to whatever line you want it to be, and play cap games in a more even environment.

Ship balancing is not an easy game >.>


What I prefer the most is still the 6 turret thing and don't regard my last post as "I support the 8 turret". I am just Okay with that.

the 6 turret thing does not require a capacitor boost. It require less cap to run the guns.

With this plan you don't actually need to change anything, not lasers, not cap regain.

we will have exactly what we want, a sniping ship.
and a combat ship, the abaddon.
Also a good ship for newbees to run lvl4 mission, the extra low slot for heat sink or cap, or tank.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#670 - 2013-04-10 15:08:25 UTC
Rynnik wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
Rynnik wrote:
Amarr Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+7.5% to Large Energy Turret damage and optimal range
+7.5% Large Energy Turret tracking speed (replaced large energy turret cap use)

Fixed the bonuses for a 6 turret Apoc. It brings it in just above the current 8 effective turrets at level 5.

1. It makes the ship 3-bonused. Which is unlikely to happen.
2. Please leave 8-turret Apocalypse alone. It is designed to work that way.


Only if you accept that the Domi is going to be 4-bonused. Which there is a very good reason for based on drones etc and that CCP seems perfectly happy with. So really that isn't an issue

I am not saying this is the best or only solution but at least it is SOME attempt to consolidate the issues of slot repetition for all 3 ships, cap usage, Tach fitting while achieving their tracking/optimal bonused platform intent.

Ok, I've been thinking about this quite abit, and I think that what needs to be changed on the Apoc should work quite well along these lines... keep the current hull bonuses, but change it to a 6 turret hull and add a +35% damage Role Bonus to the hull. This will keep it at only slightly over a total count of 8 turrets, and still allow it to fit Tachs so that it can go back to being a proper sniper platform, or if they want to fit it with Pulse/Scorch a decent kiting platform without completely killing it's ability to do fit anything else.
Nolove Trader
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#671 - 2013-04-10 15:09:50 UTC
Nobody truly snipes any more with the Apocrypha scanning system, at least not in something as sluggish as an BS.
Loki Vice
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#672 - 2013-04-10 15:11:46 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
OP updated for some slight tweaks to the Apocalypse and Armageddon. Cap stability increase for Apoc and a powergrid tweak for the armageddon.



TO further iterate, the Abaddon is now the brawler of choice for your changes, spoiler alert, the abaddon isn't capable of running it's guns/prop mod/armor tank. so in order to keep those things running, you have to bring carriers or a fleet of logi not to rep them necessarily, but to keep them shooting, and no one wants to engage a fleet of abaddons with an overly large gang of logi behind it.

the apox is NOT a brawling ship, it doesn't do the damage nor does it have the tank to be able to brawl, it has always been a sniping ship of sort with it's range bonus and sorch, so it's a moot point here.

The armageddon WAS the amarr's ship that was capable of fighting under it's own pretense, it didn't support the tank of the abaddon, but it also didn't suffer from the cap issues. By removing this ships roll you have reduced amarr gangs to bring more logi than is necissary to fights which will makes pilots grumpy and unhappy. (that and the new geddon design is ****)
Jack C Hughes
State War Academy
Caldari State
#673 - 2013-04-10 15:13:46 UTC
Nolove Trader wrote:
Nobody truly snipes any more with the Apocrypha scanning system, at least not in something as sluggish as an BS.


well it all depends on the changes.
You can't do it now does not mean you can't do it after the change.
No one exppected domi could have sentris that fires at such distance.

In another words, if it has the ability to snipe, we could find ways to use it.
Crash Lander
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#674 - 2013-04-10 15:16:03 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
Tonto Auri wrote:
Crash Lander wrote:
Atomic Option wrote:
After sleeping on it, the simplest statement of the problem with the Apoc change is that:
the new bonus to tracking doesn't synergize well with the optimal bonus.

When do you most need optimal? When you're far away.
When do you most need tracking? When you're closer to an orbiting target.

The cap bonus can synergize with any fit that uses lasers, but the tracking bonus isn't useful in as many situations. If you want to move away from cap bonuses, find something else that synergizes with optimal.


QFT.

How the hell I missed this post? Care to provide a link? That person deserve a "like".

You might consider that apparently this person has never flown an Apoc in anger, nor as part of a fleet. A tracking bonus is a huge boost to these ships in a kiting role.

Laser tracking has always been it's weak point.

Inability to track incoming tacklers and kill them fast enough to leverage their range advantage has always been the Apoc's weak point.

If a workable cap level can be arrived at, then tracking is probably the PERFECT bonus for this ship in it's attack role.

I would respectfully suggest some folks spend less time using EFT and it's bretheren, and more time actually flying the ships they are offering comment on.


Your point is just as valid as the quote. Hence we have a problem. One one hand you have fleet uses for a ship (any ship) that generally don't have to deal with cap problems too much (engagements are short, there are guardians around etc). These situations favor the tracking bonus.

On the other hand you have the traditional domain of this ship. Solo/small group PvE used mostly beginners before they move to other hulls. The removal of the cap bonus is bad here.

I can tell you as someone that does a fair bit of PvE with amarr ships that the cap bonus really made this ship (and its navy variant) distinct from the other two ships.

That second group is just as large (if not larger) than the first. This is what CCP gets for shoehorning PvP oriented changes across the entire BS line.
Kerdrak
Querry Moon
#675 - 2013-04-10 15:17:25 UTC
Where is my 8 low slot amarr battleship?Ugh
Nolove Trader
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#676 - 2013-04-10 15:18:48 UTC
Kerdrak wrote:
Where is my 8 low slot amarr battleship?Ugh


Navypoc
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#677 - 2013-04-10 15:19:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Naomi Knight
Crash Lander wrote:

Your point is just as valid as the quote. Hence we have a problem. One one hand you have fleet uses for a ship (any ship) that generally don't have to deal with cap problems too much (engagements are short, there are guardians around etc). These situations favor the tracking bonus.

On the other hand you have the traditional domain of this ship. Solo/small group PvE used mostly beginners before they move to other hulls. The removal of the cap bonus is bad here.

I can tell you as someone that does a fair bit of PvE with amarr ships that the cap bonus really made this ship (and its navy variant) distinct from the other two ships.

That second group is just as large (if not larger) than the first. This is what CCP gets for shoehorning PvP oriented changes across the entire BS line.

there is no problem with taking pvp first then pve second , there are marauders entirely for pve , when they get the balance pass ,just be rdy to adress your issues
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#678 - 2013-04-10 15:21:25 UTC
Jack C Hughes wrote:
Pelea Ming wrote:
Rynnik wrote:
All three of these BS share 4 mids, 7 lows. You may have diversified away from lasers on all of them but you sure didn't shake up much else - especially in light of a Gallente 8 low BS. How about a Hyperion treatment with double damage bonus on 6 turrets for the Apoc. That further assists the cap issues and allows a slot to be reallocated to the lows.

^^^^ This. You've already given the Dominix as a T1 hull a Role bonus (the only one I've yet seen in the game, btw), you could very well do the same with the Apoc.


all attack frigs do have role bonus
and where is the role bouns for domi? I did not see any.


Gallente Battleship Skill Bonuses:
+10% Drone Damage and Drone hitpoints
+10% Drone optimal range and Drone tracking speed (replaces large hybrid turret damage)

Check one of the more recent posts on the Gallente BS thread by CCP Rise, he is giving the Domi a Role Bonus: +50% Drone Control Range.
Pelea Ming
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#679 - 2013-04-10 15:22:50 UTC
Arya Greywolf wrote:
Seeing as the Megathron and Hyperion got insane buffs on your last pass over, I think the main armor, laser boat of the Amarr should get a buff as well.

These changes would be very becoming of the Abaddon:

-2 high slots, make it 10% damage per level --> like the hyperion got.
+1 low, so 8 lows --> like the Megathron got.

Amarr is the armor race. The Abaddon is supposed to be a massive brick. If the megathron is getting an 8th low, the Abaddon needs one too.

^^^^ Completely agree, this.
Jack C Hughes
State War Academy
Caldari State
#680 - 2013-04-10 15:23:53 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
Crash Lander wrote:

Your point is just as valid as the quote. Hence we have a problem. One one hand you have fleet uses for a ship (any ship) that generally don't have to deal with cap problems too much (engagements are short, there are guardians around etc). These situations favor the tracking bonus.

On the other hand you have the traditional domain of this ship. Solo/small group PvE used mostly beginners before they move to other hulls. The removal of the cap bonus is bad here.

I can tell you as someone that does a fair bit of PvE with amarr ships that the cap bonus really made this ship (and its navy variant) distinct from the other two ships.

That second group is just as large (if not larger) than the first. This is what CCP gets for shoehorning PvP oriented changes across the entire BS line.

there is no problem with taking pvp first then pve second , there are marauders entirely for pve , when they get the balance pass ,just be rdy to adress your issues


You are saying that new players are going to pve with marauders?
We have to have at lease something that could run lvl 4 mission with low skills
And I don't see any of them now could satisfy this role.