These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

First post First post
Author
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#81 - 2013-04-08 23:09:25 UTC
Cavalry Raven? Lower its mass 10% or up its speed/agility further and perhaps that term is applicable.

Also, is it possible to collapse the ECM bonuses (tweak modules slightly to make it work) into one and make room for a TP bonus to go with all the missile spamming of the race .. Minmatar have wanted to get that monkey off their back since forever and are getting explo velo bonuses now so it is defunct on their hulls.?
Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#82 - 2013-04-08 23:09:28 UTC
Rise, if you are actively scanning the thread, word is CCP wants to make ships more fragile to increase isk sink losses, making resists lower on BS's is the wrong way to do this I think. Why not increase the base material costs of all battleship hulls instead?
Doc Severide
Doomheim
#83 - 2013-04-08 23:13:25 UTC
Xiaodown wrote:
I'll quote what I said in the Reddit thread:

Quote:
The scorpion is almost worthless at this point. It used to be literally the most OP ship in the game - twice. But now, with the multiple nerfs to ECM, it's inability to speed, sig, or armor tank, and the latest nerf to ECM in the way of skills that can boost your sensor strength, I just don't see why anyone would ever fly it.
It costs 15x blackbird, and two blackbirds would be better. It costs the same as a falcon and, tbh, has a similar train time, but the falcon is better in every conceivable way. It's the only battleship without a bonus to either damage or tank; it is a strictly PVP ship - it's just a solution for a question that no one asks anymore.


I really wish something would be done about the scorpion. Since 2008 or so, ECM has been nerfed many times (at least 3 that I remember); it is only marginally effective, and even then only when you fill every mid and low slot for jamming, with maybe holding back two slots for tank.

So, basically, it's a ship that's only effective when hero tanked, and yet it's primaried first in almost every fleet I've been in, so what's the point? It's not cost effective, it's not mobile, it's not effective at jamming for more than a couple of cycles before it explodes, it has little to no tank, no PVE role.... Its role needs to be rethought, IMO.

Exactly...

I actually started EVE when my friend told me about ECM and Scorpions. That was in 2008. Sometimes I wonder why I keep on playing. Every ship I enjoyed is ****** over...
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#84 - 2013-04-08 23:17:08 UTC
Oh boy, where to start?

A very long time ago, long before there was a Drake and a Tengu, the Raven used to be the OMG-BBQ-PWN-mobile and everybody was crying, oh no, noo, nooooes dat evil bevil Raven is too OMG-OP.

Then came Empyrian Age I and the once proud ship and powerhouse of the Caldari Navy extinct.

Years later someone had the need to nerf torpedos of their range and make them hit even less than they already did with Empyrian Age.

I can tell you tales of Ravens using torpedos as a sniping weapon up to 90km and nobody to oppose them because if they arrived at their weapon range, they were as good as dead anyway.

Pinky, what buff are you talking about?
If you meant nerf, I happily agree with you.

Dear CCP Rise,
please do yourself a favor and use your CCP all V account, fit a Raven and do all level 4 missions and tell me again you need to take "some" ehp away.
After that, do a 1 vs 1 with CCP Fozzie in a Megathron and tell me what you were thinking.
Use the current and your proposed stats in comparison, you may be surprised how bad the Raven will perform.

Unless everything bad that has happened over the years to torpedos and cruise missiles and giving cruise missiles somewhat like 200% more base damage to make them worthwhile, I don't see them viable.

So far I agree to any points people said about the Scorpion.
I made a post years back, that the Scorpion should be made a battleship and not a large ecm boat with no guns, it should be more like a large Rook.
Somebody may even remember that the Scorpion used to be a turret boat.

And a last comment about the signal resolutions on Caldari battleships,
really 83mm on the Rokh?
Doesn't that get "slightly" close to the capital ship compartments?

Maybe you should decrease them even further, so they may never even lock anyone anymore and just sit there?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Zeko Rena
ENCOM Industries
#85 - 2013-04-08 23:18:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Zeko Rena
Why are the Caldari the only race to get one Battleship dedicated to stupid ECM, in my opinion battleships are not a platform to be used for ECM, we have other smaller ships that do it better, just turn it into some form of proper combat ship, like all the other races get.

ECM Battleship, do not want!
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#86 - 2013-04-08 23:30:07 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Raven


Seriously, it's impossible to give feedback on the Raven when we don't know what's going to happen with torps or cruise. I don't understand why those changes aren't being done at the same time.

As it stands, the torp velocity bonus is not very useful because it only increases the range of torps from ~20 km to ~30 km. This would be great if the Raven was able to kite in that region, but "kite" and "Raven will never be used together", the Raven simply doesn't have the mobility to keep a target in that window and hence make good use of the bonus. Nor, with 20 km base range on torps, is the bonus powerful enough to give a good damage projection advantage over the Typhoon. Now, if you turn round and say you're upping the range of torps by 50-75%, this would change things - but we don't know your plans for torps...

As for cruise, well, the extra range from the missile velocity bonus is not useful at all. The reduced flight time is vaguely useful; the greater ease of hitting fast targets is also only slightly useful - as seen by Drake blobs, whose HMs are able to chase down fast targets despite the lack of a missile velocity bonus. Cruise needs much more help than torps, and may well consist of speed and damage bonuses, but it's impossible to judge the value of a future cruise Raven and give feedback on these changes until we know what's happening with cruise!

The Raven is renowned for being flimsy. Getting an extra medslot is nice; losing base HP at the same time is silly. In a world of ABCs, BS need a very substantially superior tank to make up for the reduced mobility.
Pattern Clarc
Citeregis
#87 - 2013-04-08 23:31:48 UTC
Gypsio III wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Raven


Seriously, it's impossible to give feedback on the Raven when we don't know what's going to happen with torps or cruise. I don't understand why those changes aren't being done at the same time.

As it stands, the torp velocity bonus is not very useful because it only increases the range of torps from ~20 km to ~30 km. This would be great if the Raven was able to kite in that region, but "kite" and "Raven will never be used together", the Raven simply doesn't have the mobility to keep a target in that window and hence make good use of the bonus. Nor, with 20 km base range on torps, is the bonus powerful enough to give a good damage projection advantage over the Typhoon. Now, if you turn round and say you're upping the range of torps by 50-75%, this would change things - but we don't know your plans for torps...

As for cruise, well, the extra range from the missile velocity bonus is not useful at all. The reduced flight time is vaguely useful; the greater ease of hitting fast targets is also only slightly useful - as seen by Drake blobs, whose HMs are able to chase down fast targets despite the lack of a missile velocity bonus. Cruise needs much more help than torps, and may well consist of speed and damage bonuses, but it's impossible to judge the value of a future cruise Raven and give feedback on these changes until we know what's happening with cruise!

The Raven is renowned for being flimsy. Getting an extra medslot is nice; losing base HP at the same time is silly. In a world of ABCs, BS need a very substantially superior tank to make up for the reduced mobility.

New raven may be faster than the drake...

Ex CSM member & Designer of the Tornado. Gallente - Pilot satisfaction

Xiaodown
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#88 - 2013-04-08 23:41:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Xiaodown
Hey, just a stream of consciousness based on what some other folks in the thread have said, what if ECM modules *did* become high-slot?

Scorpion: 2 token launcher hardpoints, 0 turret hardpoints
8 highs
6 mids
4 lows

Fit a rack of ECM on the highs, in the mids you can have MWD, , cap booster, 2x invuln / 1x LSE, Sensor booster. Lows can be a mix of signal amps / signal distortion amps / PDUs / whatever.

Basically, it would be able to attack and tank at the same time, rather than having one rack of slots entirely useless.

That would be sexy.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#89 - 2013-04-08 23:41:37 UTC
I have to agree that the sooner we have a handle on the torp/cruise changes the faster we can give informed opinion on all of the missile boats (of all the races).

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.

Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#90 - 2013-04-08 23:45:19 UTC
Pattern Clarc wrote:
New raven may be faster than the drake...


Yeah, but the Drake is really slow too! It works despite being a slowarse because of decent weapon systems and solid tank - can we say the same for the Raven?
Kyang Tia
Matari Exodus
#91 - 2013-04-08 23:49:27 UTC
When complaining about the Raven being worse than the Phoon, please consider the fact that a 7-medslot Raven can mount an active tank comparable to a Maelstrom. It might struggle with fitting, but that still sounds pretty powerful to me, considering the Raven's damage projection abilites.
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#92 - 2013-04-09 00:01:04 UTC
Stuff is changing but nothing is really changing.
Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#93 - 2013-04-09 00:24:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
Yea, at this point, its like "Hey! All of the best tech 1 BS's are getting slightly worse! One other battleship is getting slightly better, but other than that, Status Quo!". Is there any reason to fly tech 1 BS's over strategic cruisers at this point?
Pinky Denmark
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#94 - 2013-04-09 01:34:45 UTC
Please not that taking HP away from these ships will kill the chance of an effective active tank. The trend of Eve is bigger groups of players and ships will often receive large amounts of damage. Even with a 7th medslot the Raven will break over like a baked turd no matter how strong an active tank you have.

This goes for Hyperion too - They need a decent buffer for active repping to take effect or everything will be pointless... The 7th slot on the unresisted Raven is not a huge threat so don't cut the wings yet, please...
Pinky Denmark
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#95 - 2013-04-09 01:36:36 UTC
Van Mathias wrote:
Yea, at this point, its like "Hey! All of the best tech 1 BS's are getting slightly worse! One other battleship is getting slightly better, but other than that, Status Quo!". Is there any reason to fly tech 1 BS's over strategic cruisers at this point?


Strategic cruisers are currently horrible overpowered and imbalanced (and not even expensive any longer). They are only fun if you fly them yourself or you have a huge blob ready to gank them. They will hopefully be adressed at the same time as T2 cruisers or shortly after.
Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#96 - 2013-04-09 01:41:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
My point exactly, why fly a BS when a strat cruiser owns any BS that isnt a pirate faction model? You spend about as much SP and ISK into either of those options, but one is so much stupidly better than the other.
Jose Montalvo
Orbital Defense Battalion
#97 - 2013-04-09 01:56:32 UTC
Dear CCP Rise what can we expect on the Navy Raven? How this changes will affect this faction ship? And now that i mention this can you guys clarify the changes for the Navy Scorpion and the lovely crossover Rattlesnake aswell.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#98 - 2013-04-09 02:03:18 UTC
So battleships as a class are still going to be inferior to everything else?

You should have waited until you release battleship weapon updates before showing us this.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Ereilian
Doomheim
#99 - 2013-04-09 02:11:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Ereilian
Waiting on -

Explanation of why resist boni need to be nerfed (the two challengers for the Mael crown .. Abbadon and Rokh ... shock horror)
Explanation of why the Mael is untouched (nah not really we all know why)
Explanation of the new BS class missile systems and how it will impact the post nerf BS
Explanation as to why a brand new CCP employee with recent ingame ties is spearheading the nerf bat attack on all but alpha doctrine ships.

Chances of getting the above .. nil to zero
Dato Koppla
Did he say Jump
#100 - 2013-04-09 02:21:24 UTC
Looks reasonable but as mentioned, we need to know the upcoming changes to BS sized missiles in order to make a proper judgement, right now the Raven looks better, but still miles away behind other BS.

Please tell me I didn't train T2 Cruise for nothing!