These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Kronos] Pirate Faction Battleships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Liu Lios
Pitta Giros Food Company
#701 - 2014-04-17 07:16:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Liu Lios
What I am going to suggest about the rattlesnake comes as a consequence of my previously stated perception of it not being buffed in certain configurations where it is typically used today.

Fact: It is obviously the intention of CCP to increase the damage dealt by the rattlesnake.

Hence the ship is scheduled to get:
(a) missile damage bonus
(b) 5 instead of 4 slots for missile launchers

Now, (a) missile damage bonus applies to missile damage in any case but (b) 5 instead of 4 slots for missile launchers is only useful if someone is willing to use 5 out of the total of 6 high slots for missile launchers. This only leaves one slot free. In other words, the increase in missile launcher slots is only useful for close range setups, since long range/sniper setups need at least a couple of high slots for drone link augmentors.
Not only that but long range setups benefit less from (a) missile damage bonus since they do not use the max/intended number of missile launchers anyway.

Conclusion: If CCPs intent was to give rattlesnake a dps increase in all realistic and sane scenarios, the proposed changes only partially achieve that goal. They work in close range setups, but not in sniping setups.

Solution: It may sound extreme at first but after thinking about it for a while, i believe that it may not be unbalancing - eg by making the rattlesnake OP in some cases- to add an extra high slot, going from 6 to 7.

(a) It makes sense to do that since missile launcher slots also increase in number from 4 to 5.

(b) In cases of long range setups it solves the high slot problem allowing for the intended dps increase to actually be realized.

(c) In short range setups, there is a danger that this extra slot may make the rattlesnake a bit too strong. I would like to listen to more opinions about that but the way i see it, you ll have 5 torpedo launchers on your high slots, and thats it basically. So going from 6 to 7 high slots wont be a problem.

In summary: I suggest adding an extra high slot to the rattlesnake in order to facilitate the utilization of the 5th missile launcher slot.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#702 - 2014-04-17 07:18:42 UTC
Sgt Ocker wrote:
An extra 25m in the drone bay for the Snake would be nice - allow 4 flights of drones (2 of sentries, 2 of heavies) With space for only 7 drones it limits options greatly.

And that would be the catch with a hybrid setup...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#703 - 2014-04-17 07:34:11 UTC
Liu Lios wrote:
Solution: It may sounds extreme at first but after thinking about it for a while, i believe that it may not be unbalancing - eg by making the rattlesnake OP in some cases- to add an extra high slot, going from 6 to 7.

The Rattlesnake is losing the missile velocity bonus, so any notion that it's still well-suited for a "sniper" role is somewhat unrealistic. Cruise missiles will top out at around 120km and will take 12-15 seconds to hit their targets. The Rattlesnake is now much more in-line with the other 'brawlers', ie: autocannon Machariel, rail Vindicator and tachyon Nightmare. The only battleship that now has sniping capabilities is (wait for it)... the Nestor.

If my tinfoil were on tighter I might even go so far as to suggest that the Rattlesnake has been curtailed in some respects to make the Nestor more appealing (since the current Rattlesnake has much better damage application). If I were to entertain a full-blown conspiracy, I'd also entertain the distinct possibility that the new Rattlesnake has been engineered specifically with rapid launchers in-mind (since bonuses apply to light and heavy). That in itself limits applications to around 60km.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Mina Sebiestar
Minmatar Inner Space Conglomerate
#704 - 2014-04-17 07:52:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Mina Sebiestar
I will speak solely from incursions perspective here because that is where i like multi billion ships to be making me isk funding my game,hanging out with ppl chilling and stuff.

i also believe no matter how many times you optimize pirate / T2 bs ship for pvp it cost pretty much warrant that 99% of pvp pilots will never even think about using it ,let alone use it on daily basis unlike incursions where these ships are used by hundred if not thousands on daily basis,creating infinitely more gameplay than 1% of sporadic pvp use ever will.

I like Bhaalgorn it got nice buff maybe it manage to get in fleets as drone bunny now sporting some additional DPS.

Vindi same bit improved beast it stayed.

Rattle couldn't care less.

Mach nerfs.warp speed is nice perk if you warp solo to a l4 mission, doesn't do anything for fleet action ie incursions.

NM is buffed to the point that even faintest hope of paladin being viable dps alternative to use in incursions is gone.

I also believe it will completely push out machariels out of fleets. NM after all is considered best ship for incursions and further buff will make it even better there is reason why ISboxers are using NM predominately.

And it is already extremely hard to beat one if hi is using NM's this will get worse and my fear this alone can possibly kick machs out fleets.

While missiles are not being used because delayed dmg there will be no excuses like that for minmatar weaponry other than fail weapon system.

If this happens IMO it will destroy far more gameplay that this changes are trying to achieve.

Hope i am wrong that is all i have on this.

You choke behind a smile a fake behind the fear

Because >>I is too hard
Liu Lios
Pitta Giros Food Company
#705 - 2014-04-17 08:15:18 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
The Rattlesnake is losing the missile velocity bonus, so any notion that it's still well-suited for a "sniper" role is somewhat unrealistic. Cruise missiles will top out at around 120km and will take 12-15 seconds to hit their targets. The Rattlesnake is now much more in-line with the other 'brawlers', ie: autocannon Machariel, rail Vindicator and tachyon Nightmare. The only battleship that now has sniping capabilities is (wait for it)... the Nestor.

If my tinfoil were on tighter I might even go so far as to suggest that the Rattlesnake has been curtailed in some respects to make the Nestor more appealing (since the current Rattlesnake has much better damage application). If I were to entertain a full-blown conspiracy, I'd also entertain the distinct possibility that the new Rattlesnake has been engineered specifically with rapid launchers in-mind (since bonuses apply to light and heavy). That in itself limits applications to around 60km.

I dont argue that the new rattlesnake will find its niche(s).

It seems though that several other people are sharing my pov.
Ahernar wrote:
RS needs another high (or keep the launcher count and compensate by bonus ++ ) . That or the RS pilots will have to change the way are using it . It could find itself a niche or it will become meh again . The chance to get it wrong again it's in the air.

It's not much of a buff if 2 kin therm launchers are costing you the old drone flexibility ,light med drone damage bonus and -50% missile speed .
It's not much of a buff if 3.5 kin therm launchers are costing you the old drone flexibility ,light med drone damage bonus -50% missile speed and crucially makes you slowboat 20-30km after a mjd until you can engage with drones .

At least IMO "rebalance" got it closer to the other pirate battleships but definitely not in the pack .


epicurus ataraxia wrote:
It would be much nicer with a damage bonus rather than an extra launcher, losing that drone link hurts. Sort of defeats the buff.


But apparently, if nothing changes it is a medium range cruise missile sentry boat?Shocked
It can work, sort of, but is that the plan?


..if all is taken into account, if you take advantage of the missile buff, you lose drone capability, if you do not, you lose capability. So the rattlesnake needed a buff to make it comparable, it is less of a buff than appeared initially.

If 25 Km drone control range was built into the bonuses, then the rattlesnake will gain the missile buff and will only have lost the ability to field 7.5 effective lights or mediums, and the loss of tracking and range in the new omnidirectional links,the cap use of the omnis is dealable with.


Morukk Nuamzzar wrote:

Rattlesnake

Role Bonus: something something smartbombs range and capacitor use

Can fit cover ops cloaking devices

Slot layout: 7H, 7M, 6L; 0 turrets, 5 launchers

Problem solved.


The Djego wrote:

Rattlesnake should have a extra spare high slot and 2 turret slots, it is one of the main features I miss compared to my fleet phoon. Give it a bit more speed(105-110 base at least), if you want to see it in pvp(and yes it got potential). Also same as on the gila a 2. lower bonus for light drones, for frig defence. 5 light drones with out a bonus are just embarrassing on a drone BS.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#706 - 2014-04-17 08:19:51 UTC
Ragnen Delent wrote:


I'm just trying to point out that simply stating you disagree with a change, while not defining the problems you have with it beyond "I like to do a nebulous thing with it" is not much for someone to work with if they're attempting to assess issues with a change. What do you do with these ships? What do you like about them? Why do you think the things you like are worth keeping, and how do the changes you propose keep to that spirit?

Guristas Cruiser and Battleship should have a bonus to 'Drone Activation Proximity" or better still a web bonus as a role bonus (100% to range).
Drones are their primary weapon system and each has a bonus to a specific type of drone, which only engages targets at specific range and speed..
For any use other than low level mission running (YUK) both will have trouble hitting anything that is moving faster than the drones can orbit it.
If for example someone wanted to use a Gila for solo pvp, they are limited as to what targets they can engage - webbed AB cruisers, due to drone activation proximity. Valkyrie ll (the fastest of the medium drones) has an orbit velocity of 600m/s, activation proximity of 2000m, if your target is going much over 120m/s your not going to hit it reliably.
Much the same can be said for the Rattlesnake, Ogres have an orbit speed of 300m/s and activation proximity of 5000m. Once a target is outside 5000m the Ogre then goes back into MWD mode to catch up, they do not fire on a target when in MWD mode, so until your drone is back in orbit it is not applying Dps..

With 5 drones in space you usually have 2 or 3 in range applying damage while the others play catchup, with only 2 drones available, playing catchup means a lot less Dps being applied..

Want to test this out??
Find an incursion, drop your Warrior ll's on a Tama (does around 420m/s) and watch them chase it around not dealing damage. They need to be webbed, dual webbed is better, for your drones to damage them.
Kill off the rest of the room and drop a flight of Beserkers on a Sansha Nation Commander and watch as they hilariously chase it around unable to deal any damage at all.

Drone Activation Proximity is the key to Medium Scouts and Heavy Drones ability to apply Dps. Increasing Drone MWD speeds (part of the summer drone updates) will reduce Catch Up time but it will still be a major factor.


My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
Stein Backstabber
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#707 - 2014-04-17 08:46:48 UTC
That rattler is....just insane.
Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#708 - 2014-04-17 09:06:04 UTC
Stein Backstabber wrote:
That rattler is....just insane.

Sentry - Cruise setup will possibly work ok for sniping.. Wouldn't put too much hope on Heavies being of much use for pvp, without dual webs.
There is a reason Ishtars, even with the heavy drone bonus, use sentries.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.
motie one
Secret Passage
#709 - 2014-04-17 09:31:54 UTC  |  Edited by: motie one
Liu Lios wrote:
What I am going to suggest about the rattlesnake comes as a consequence of my previously stated perception of it not being buffed in certain configurations where it is typically used today.

Fact: It is obviously the intention of CCP to increase the damage dealt by the rattlesnake.

Hence the ship is scheduled to get:
(a) missile damage bonus
(b) 5 instead of 4 slots for missile launchers

Now, (a) missile damage bonus applies to missile damage in any case but (b) 5 instead of 4 slots for missile launchers is only useful if someone is willing to use 5 out of the total of 6 high slots for missile launchers. This only leaves one slot free. In other words, the increase in missile launcher slots is only useful for close range setups, since long range/sniper setups need at least a couple of high slots for drone link augmentors.
Not only that but long range setups benefit less from (a) missile damage bonus since they do not use the max/intended number of missile launchers anyway.

Conclusion: If CCPs intent was to give rattlesnake a dps increase in all realistic and sane scenarios, the proposed changes only partially achieve that goal. They work in close range setups, but not in sniping setups.

Solution: It may sound extreme at first but after thinking about it for a while, i believe that it may not be unbalancing - eg by making the rattlesnake OP in some cases- to add an extra high slot, going from 6 to 7.

(a) It makes sense to do that since missile launcher slots also increase in number from 4 to 5.

(b) In cases of long range setups it solves the high slot problem allowing for the intended dps increase to actually be realized.

(c) In short range setups, there is a danger that this extra slot may make the rattlesnake a bit too strong. I would like to listen to more opinions about that but the way i see it, you ll have 5 torpedo launchers on your high slots, and thats it basically. So going from 6 to 7 high slots wont be a problem.

In summary: I suggest adding an extra high slot to the rattlesnake in order to facilitate the utilization of the 5th missile launcher slot.


Much much simpler solution. Add the extra launcher damage as a bonus instead. No messing with slots. Ship gets the buff it is meant to get. All is good

As it stands the buff is pretty well wasted. You want the damage? Then you have to lose 25km drone control range. Give up the mjd and fit a microwarp,change your tank to active, put in cap mods etc etc or spend ages burning around to get back in drone range. so actually a wasted bonus.
Hai fanfan
Space Resque and Salvage S.A.
#710 - 2014-04-17 10:02:27 UTC
gascanu wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
why do some have 19 slots and the mach/vindi has 20?


I believe because when the models were updated there wasn't room for the number of effective turrets needed so they were given less slots with larger role bonuses. The Rattlesnake has less because of drones. We talked about adjusting for them all to have the same number but we like where the balance is for them and didn't feel it was worth messing with just for the sake of making the slot count match.


CCP Rise pls consider giving Rattlesnake another slot:
up until now it made sense to have one less because of drones(and was the worse pirate bs by far, btw), but after this rebalance rattlesnake is becoming a split weapon system, so it will need 2 types of damage mods, while the rest of the pirate bs only need one;

More to the point, while any othe pirate bs will need 4 damage mods to get max dps rattlesnake will need 6
Considering this i'm sure you can see my point and give it another slot, be it a low, med or high, i'll be happy with any at this point Blink


this^^!
one more slot will put rattlesnake in line with the rest of the pack;

don't get me wrong, the new rattlesnake is better than the old one, but it feel... how to say ..."unfinished"? it does good dps on paper, but half from that dps is coming from missiles... and with current missile mechanics about 30% or more of that dmg will faill to apply in maybe 4 out of 5 situations
GULL
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#711 - 2014-04-17 10:07:42 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
why do some have 19 slots and the mach/vindi has 20?


I believe because when the models were updated there wasn't room for the number of effective turrets needed so they were given less slots with larger role bonuses. The Rattlesnake has less because of drones. We talked about adjusting for them all to have the same number but we like where the balance is for them and didn't feel it was worth messing with just for the sake of making the slot count match.



I still think the rattler needs to have 20 slots since I think it is still under powered even after next patch
Otti
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#712 - 2014-04-17 10:11:33 UTC
The rattlesnake needs more it is just not good enough

yeah I think atleast it would need 20 slots like the vindi
Shrak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#713 - 2014-04-17 10:22:57 UTC
Of course the Rattlesnake gets the short straw again and is and from the looks of it will still be the worst faction Battleship in the game.

Why only 19 slots? you need damage mods for 2 types (Missiles and drones)


sucks
Hai fanfan
Space Resque and Salvage S.A.
#714 - 2014-04-17 10:32:29 UTC
also how come the rattlesnake have worse fittings that a simple t1 raven?

rattlesnake:
Fittings: 10000 PWG, 710 CPU

raven:
Fittings: 11000 PWG, 750 CPU

Ugh
Saira Minamoto
Perkone
Caldari State
#715 - 2014-04-17 10:40:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Saira Minamoto
From a mission perspective then the rattlesnake is way out there.

This rattlesnake balancing should have been done a long time ago and should be getting another boost now.

this balancing only brings the Rattlesnake closer to current faction BS's

Give it 20 slots "Atleast"

Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Finally we get to the battleships!
Can you confirm a warp speed of 3.0 AU/s? Also, 7 turrets just looks godawful. Could we please look at dropping this to 6 turrets, swapping a high for a mid slot and changing the role bonus to a 37.5% rate of fire instead? It works out to a +0.28% DPS increase, but this is somewhat negated by a higher ammunition consumption rate. Let's not forget that the Machariel is losing align time, scan resolution and signature bloom.


Mach need more. Would be nice to get more ROF bonus and bring it down to 6 turrets and giving it one more med slot instead of high.
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#716 - 2014-04-17 12:44:09 UTC
To Compenstate the rattlesnake, and now its lack of good range. it either needs the role bonus to apply to all drone sizes, so you can use mediums & lights.or one more drone launched. Either that or it needs the 7th high slot to allow for the extra range mod
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#717 - 2014-04-17 13:05:06 UTC
While I would never object to another high or another low for the Rattlesnake, I think it is going to be an absolute beast for running Anomalies - able to apply great DPS out to the maximum range that rats will spawn. Of course, it will be more vulnerable to roaming gangs than an Ishtar, because it is slower to warp out if someone shows up in local. On the other hand, it should also last longer in that eventuality, which means friends can show up to help. Which ultimately creates more content than just POSing or docking up. Will be interesting to see...

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Morukk Nuamzzar
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#718 - 2014-04-17 13:59:36 UTC
Fabulous Rod wrote:

After the "ohh shiney" factor wears off...

Rattle prices are slowly dropping down and angry mission runners are to blame for ruining the market.
Jenn aSide
Soul Machines
The Initiative.
#719 - 2014-04-17 14:08:40 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
While I would never object to another high or another low for the Rattlesnake, I think it is going to be an absolute beast for running Anomalies - able to apply great DPS out to the maximum range that rats will spawn. Of course, it will be more vulnerable to roaming gangs than an Ishtar, because it is slower to warp out if someone shows up in local. On the other hand, it should also last longer in that eventuality, which means friends can show up to help. Which ultimately creates more content than just POSing or docking up. Will be interesting to see...


Ishtar can't mount the mighty MJD which when used correctly helps battleships GTFO quickly and better. The new Snake will be such a beast I'm more worried about CCP nerfing it than anything else lol.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#720 - 2014-04-17 15:52:51 UTC
Vulfen wrote:
To Compenstate the rattlesnake, and now its lack of good range. it either needs the role bonus to apply to all drone sizes, so you can use mediums & lights.or one more drone launched. Either that or it needs the 7th high slot to allow for the extra range mod


no