These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Battlecruisers: Projection Role Bonus

Author
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#201 - 2015-06-03 09:34:21 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Your experiences do not make up all of EVE, and neither do mine. However, saying a t1 dessie cannot, or has a lot of trouble killing AF/Pirate frigs is plain wrong. If all you fight are blaster cata's and a/c thrashers, then i can see why you would think that. My thrasher has similar EHP as some AF, so the whole squishy tank thing is also, not true.
AC wolf has more EHP than AC Thrasher. Blaster Enyo has more EHP than a Blaster Catalyst. Blaster Harpy has more EHP than a Blaster Cormorant. Fit for the same purpose, AFs generally will have be tankier and this isn't even considering their lower sig. The best destroyers to fight against AFs in my opinion is the Algos and the Dragoon because it's pretty hard to mitigate their damage. Although a competent Worm pilot still beats those two in most settings. So I still maintain that in most scenarios Assault Frigates and especially Pirate Frigates beat tech 1 destroyers.

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
So your worry that HAC's would suddenly be dunked by a projection bonus is unfounded, as HAC's still have a lot going for them against a BC. A deimos/ishtar/sac would walk all over a cane, drake, brutix, cyclone etc, regardless of if they had projection bonuses or not.

...

Why not? Sounds a lot like you're balancing around a price point, which you just said you weren't.... A role is not limited to the cost of ships. If a dessie can kill t1, faction, pirate and AF then why can't a BC kill t1, faction, pirate, and HAC? Your logic isn't holding up here.

If you mean that a hurricane with a 37.5-50% bonus would suddenly be the next vagabond, and outperform the vaga's role, then you would be mistaken. As i've already stated, the HAC has many other things going for it that make the BC less desirable in certain fights.

Keep in mind, a projection bonus does literally nothing against HAC's that are setup to brawl already. If a HAC is kiting the BC and getting hit due to the projection bonus, it can simply leave. BC's no longer should be free kills, and these cruiser pilots need to make decisions on if they want to commit or can't handle it and leave. Yep you might have to walk away from a fight, but you can't have an "I win" kite cruiser anymore.

If you are going to dispute my point, at least read it right:
I don't think you're reading my posts right. Given that half of what you said is just paraphrasing what I said:

Quote:
If you want BCs to take on HACs you'll need to give them a hell of a lot more than 37.5% projection bonuses. Hell even 50% wouldn't cut it. As even taking out the factor of speed and sig radius, in raw tank and dps stats many HACs like the Deimos and Sacrilege or even the Augoror Navy Issue, beat BCs without the need to kite them.


I never said that the projection bonus would make Tech 1 BCs beat HACs, my contention was to this general statement you made about balancing in response to my saying that Tech 1 BCs should be balanced around killing tech 1 Cruisers, not Faction or HACs:

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
BCs should kill cruisers like destroyers kill frigs... HAC, faction and t1 are all cruisers no matter how you look at it.

Why stay with t1 cruisers? A gila roaming around that sees a drake isnt going to say "oh hey, hes t1 and im pirate, im not going to engage that." A thrasher can regularly kill pirate frigs and t2 AF if the pilot is good with a decent fit. It is their ROLE to kill cruisers. Not just t1. Trying to say we should not compare to what they will actually face is foolish. HACs fall in the same category. If a t1 dessie can kill AF, why cant BCs kill a HAC?


As for your statement that "Price of a ship is not a way to balance ships", my opinion is this really only applies to the best ship of a particular role. Otherwise many faction frigates/cruisers/battlecruisers should be removed because many of them offer no new roles besides being generally better than their tech 1 counterpart. Heck faction and officer modules should be removed too because according to you price is no justification for them being better right?

I believe, and CCP has made statements to a similar effect, that where there is a legitimate performance difference between various ships that perform functionally similar roles, price should be a factor for balancing. Take the Navy Harbinger for example, it's in many ways a straight up improvement of the Harbinger, but its pricetag is a pretty big reason why many if not most people skip straight to the Absolution or stick with the tech 1 Harbinger.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#202 - 2015-06-03 09:40:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Iyacia Cyric'ai
Ran out of characters...

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Pirate cruiser = its still a cruiser, that gets BC level of tank.. Again, you're using price point as your argument. Ignoring the role of the ship class. This originally started by you saying that BC's have far superior tank to cruisers, i gave you examples which you shoo'd away just because they're more expensive or don't fit the same "role" as the BC in question.
You really see no problem comparing the EHP of a brawling fit to a kiting/sniper fit? If you think those comparisons aren't valid explain why. Don't just jam your fingers in your ears and go "nananana cruisers have the same EHP as BCs". I've already showed you how a blaster ferox has 50% more EHP than a blaster MOA and how an arty shield cane has almost twice the EHP of an Arty Rupture. But sure I'm off work now and I can show more examples:

Minmatar
MWD shield Hurricane with 720s: 43k EHP
MWD shield Rupture with 720s: 24k EHP

MWD armor Hurricane with 220s: 72k EHP
MWD armor Rupture with 220s: 42k EHP

Amarr
MWD armor Harbinger with focused medium pulses: 88k EHP
MWD armor Omen with focused medium pulses: 28k EHP (with 800 plate and 3x trimarks) or 36k EHP (with 1600 plate with one ancillary)
MWD armor Maller with focused medium pulses: 66k EHP

MWD armor Prophecy: 125k EHP (with 4x small neuts) or 103K EHP (with Rapid Lights)
MWD armor Arbitrator with 4x small neuts to maximise fitting for tank: 39K EHP

Caldari
MWD shield Ferox with Neutron Blasters: 60k EHP with web (Solo) or 77k EHP with invuln instead of web (Gang/Fleet)
MWD shield Moa with Ion Blasters: 36k EHP with web (Solo) or 48k EHP with invuln instead of web (Gang/Fleet)

MWD shield Drake with HMLs: 95k EHP (2 slots used for MWD + Point)
MWD shield Caracal with Rapid Lights: 37k EHP (2 slots used for MWD + Point) or 30k EHP with HMLs


If you want to maintain that Pirate Cruiser is still just a Cruiser for the purpose of looking at the balancing of Tech 1 CBCs and point out that the rapid light Gila can get 68k EHP and the that the Stratios can get 61k EHP with small neut/heavy tackle fit, then there's no reason why I can't say well a Command Ship is still a BC and point out the 300k + tank the Damnation gets and say hey lets nerf BCs in general because Command Ship = BC and that level of tank is ridiculous. But I'm sure you understand that kind of logic is beyond silly and extremely unproductive.
Eliane Harper
Marilith Enclave
#203 - 2015-06-03 10:02:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Eliane Harper
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:


Ferox:Optimal range bonus doesn't really help blasters that much and it's too slow to take advantage of the rails in small gang fights. I think it should just go the way of the Moa and receive a damage bonus instead. A 20% damage bonus would make it an impressive brawler. The reason why I don't think range bonus is needed is because anything less than 50% range bonus will mean this will still be overshadowed by the Eagle while giving it 50% range bonus will mean it overshadows the Eagle.

Conclusion: 25% damage role bonus so the 10% per level optimal range bonus can stay so those few rail Feroxes don't cry. -1 Turret and High Slot, +1 Mid Slot.
25% damage role bonus seems a bit strong don't you think?
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#204 - 2015-06-03 10:13:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Iyacia Cyric'ai
Eliane Harper wrote:
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:


Ferox:Optimal range bonus doesn't really help blasters that much and it's too slow to take advantage of the rails in small gang fights. I think it should just go the way of the Moa and receive a damage bonus instead. A 20% damage bonus would make it an impressive brawler. The reason why I don't think range bonus is needed is because anything less than 50% range bonus will mean this will still be overshadowed by the Eagle while giving it 50% range bonus will mean it overshadows the Eagle.

Conclusion: 25% damage role bonus so the 10% per level optimal range bonus can stay so those few rail Feroxes don't cry. -1 Turret and High Slot, +1 Mid Slot.
25% damage role bonus seems a bit strong don't you think?

That's why I took away a turret and a highslot for a midslot. I mean currently a buffer fit Brutix gets the same EHP as a Ferox (fitting only scram and mwd and the rest dedicated to tank). I still see Autocannon fitted Feroxes in small gang combat because frankly the energy neut immunity and fitting freedom of 180mm autocannons is better than the 10% optimal bonus for brawling.

With 6 turrets and 25% role bonus the ferox still only has 7.5 effective turrets. The Brutix with its 10% bonus per level has 9 effective turrets so it's still king of raw DPS. Brutix can also field a full flight of medium drones. I don't think it's too strong but I'm open to suggestions.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#205 - 2015-06-03 12:16:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
[quote=Iyacia Cyric'ai]Basically a summary of my view for each of the CBCs:

Prophecy:

Conclusion: MJD cooldown bonus

Harbinger:

Conclusion: 25% optimal bonus. Maybe a slight cap buff.

Drake:

Conclusion: Fix HMLs, 25% missile velocity bonus.

Ferox

Conclusion: 25% damage role bonus so the 10% per level optimal range bonus can stay so those few rail Feroxes don't cry. -1 Turret and High Slot, +1 Mid Slot.

Myrmidon:

Conclusion: MJD cooldown bonus.

Brutix:

Conclusion: 25% tracking bonus.

Cyclone: A pretty decent ship if medium missiles weren't bad. Fix medium missiles. Give it a 25% bonus to explosion velocity bonus (differentiates it from Caldari and fits with Typhoon).

Conclusion: Fix medium missiles, 25% explosion velocity bonus.

[b]Hurricane
:

Conclusion: Powergrid buff, 25% falloff bonus.






This was a great analysis breakdown Iyacia, but you have to take a look at the Role Bonuses on other hulls. You'll notice that they're relatively all the same for each class of ships, therefore these Role Bonus needs to be the same for all CBC's like a family trait which is why Stitch proposed the Optimal Range as the Role bonus for all T1 BC's. The only exceptions may be with the Myrmidon and Prophecy being drone boats so something like drone control range or drone optimal range for these two. If some have more deficiencies in other areas, then CCP needs to insert those changes within the ship hull itself or readjust the ships individual BC skill bonuses.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#206 - 2015-06-03 13:25:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
Giving more range than needed for BCs to force off tackle then starts to tread into the damage support roles of ABCs, especially the closer range ones like the AC nado and the Blaster Talos.


Lets compare then, because i'm not sure how you came up with that.

Tornado with 800mm and x2 TE/Gyro = 781dps @ 3.6km+45km using faction

Hurricane with 425's + 50% fall-off bonus x2 TE/Gyro = 549dps @ 1.8km+27km using faction

Using barrage there is still a big range disparity between the nado and cane, and dps is still significantly different. ABC's will always have more dps/range than CBC's, as they use large guns which have a higher base range and damage, plus they have 8 of them, compared to BC's 5-6.

And to pull a page from your book, we'll say they're the same role, and fit with artillery. For this example, CCP decides to go with a 50% optimal bonus for all turret based CBC's.

Tornado with 1400's x2 TE/Gyro = 606 dps @ 36+77km w/ 10k alpha using faction ammo

Hurricane with 720's x2 TE/Gyro and 50% optimal bonus = 474dps @ 27+31km w/ 3.7k alpha using faction ammo

So, again, huge alpha difference, dps is better and has better range (including optimal). The only difference is tracking. And generally an MWD cruiser's sig is big enough that it could be tracked fairly well at a tornado's operating range.

ABC's will always be king of range and dps. CBC's will have better tank, less range, less dps, more utility. I see no problem with giving CBC's more range, as even with a 50% bonus, it won't be close.
Not always under your proposed buffs. Admittedly the Nado won't be so much affected but the Blaster Talos (which you conveniently skipped) definitely will. WIth faction ammo and 2xTEs the Talos gets 5.8+18 (let's just say 24km). Hurricane with faction ammo outranges the Talos with either a 50% falloff bonus or a 37.5% falloff bonus. With 25% falloff bonus it just matches the Talos' falloff range so the Talos has a decent chance of beating the Cane provided it knows how to fly to manage tracking.


Why are you comparing blaster talos to cane? Shouldnt that be blaster talos to blaster brutix? But ok, ill play. You didnt mention null..

Talos with null and x2 TE/MS shoots out to 15+24km and does about 800dps. A hurricane with 50% falloff and x2 TE/gyro and barrage will be right around 40km and is doing 440dps. And since falloff and medium acs are pretty bad, the applied damage will be considerably lower, even at point range. The talos is also faster so it can dictate range as needed.

This is with the biggest projection bonus applied. With 37.5% the talos will edge out the cane easily. Not to mention cane would be locked in with explo damage. Talos would be shooting therm/kin right in the canes resist hole. Cane would be shooting into talos' highest resist (with both shield tanked).

So talos gets similar range, more dps, speed, but has worse tank (about 15k EHP less).. again ABCs will still be the go to ship for dps/range but sacrifice tank. A naga is not going to be obsoleted because a ferox has a 50% optimal bonus... oh wait thats already happening. Nagas still see use and are not outclasses by the ferox in a sniper role.

However, in the case of the naga, they arent used as frequently because ishtars are so common. Resist profile plus large gun tracking/sig resolution makes them a less than ideal choice in the current meta. Not because a ferox straight up outperforms it.
Phaade
Surreptitious Technologies
Shadow Ultimatum
#207 - 2015-06-03 13:44:09 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Ran out of characters

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
And if arty hurricanes are so good at tearing up cruisers, why are they seldomly used? They probably work in a niche, but are paper tanked.


To add on to this, that 65k EHP # you quoted will not work at all with a 720 arty mmjd fit hurricane. Youre looking at closer to 45k EHP, which is well within the realm of some t1 cruisers. Unless you are going with double ACRs.

Edit: Threw together a couple fits to see. You need either 1 t1 ACR and RCU or 1 t1 ACR and 1 t2 ACR to fit a cane with 720s, mmjd, ab and a meta 800mm plate. Best case scenario is 48k EHP. With 2 TC and faction short range ammo, you have 19.5+35km with 470dps. If you want mwd, then youre losing more tank.


Yea my post about T1 BC killing T1 C, Faction BC killing Faction C wasn't thorough, it was just a cup of coffee to those in thread that seem against the idea of giving T1 BC's a 25% optimal range role bonus. But is 25% optimal range on a T1 BC really that big of deal? I really don't think it would make that big a difference and only a small difference using medium long range weapons. A major rebalance is needed for the entire BC meta where CCP needs to decide what these ships are suppose to be, either giving them more range or more speed to align in with their proposed roles. Since T1 BC's can now use the MMJD, CCP may think that giving them optimal range bonus on them to be a bit overkill, but I see no reason why they wouldn't do it for the Faction BC's and to be honest I think 50% optimal range bonus is needed on these hulls.



I think 50% would go a long way. Or even 25 optimal 25 falloff.

A LOOONNNG way to making them useful, yet not even close to OP. Ishtars will still out damage, out tank, out run them with more utility and less signature..........

So yeah.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#208 - 2015-06-03 13:53:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Sorry Stitch this is a little off subject but Iyacia mentioned that Medium Autocannons are broken in a bad way, is this true? I'm a little troubled by this since I'm 15 days from maxing out CS 5 to fly the Sleipnir. If they are broken then are Medium Arties any good on a Sleip?
Phaade
Surreptitious Technologies
Shadow Ultimatum
#209 - 2015-06-03 13:55:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Phaade
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Ive killed enyos, triple masb hawks, vengeance, ret, jags and harpies in my thrasher. Actually im pretty sure ive killed every AF with it. Pirate frigs are alittle harder but still do able.
I've never had trouble killing thrashers in AFs but to avoid this inevitably going to a KB epeen comparing competition I guess I'll just have to agree to disagree. Dessies perform well in doing damage and projecting it but generally die if something sneezes on it. Most AFs do less damage but have more mobility, resiliance and quite a few have better midslots to control range or fit e-war to beat dessies in 1v1.

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
If you think a 37-50% wouldnt affect how they engage hacs (and would need more), then why are you proposing 25% instead?
Because I think 25% is sufficient to give tech 1 BCs the significant advantage over tech 1 cruisers. I don't believe tech 1 BCs should overpower HACs. I said this already come'on.

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
I never said a BC should outright dunk a HAC, but should give them a run for their money. Just like if an AF screws up.against a dessie, they will normally DIAF.

Trying to balance by price point is bad. These ships have a role to fill. BCs should kill cruisers like destroyers kill frigs. There is no disclaimer when flying a dessie that it can only kill something under 8m isk. HAC, faction and t1 are all cruisers no matter how you look at it. Do you think corms should be nerfed because they could snipe a daredevil at 80km for 10m? So why should t1 BC have an artificial isk to kill limit?
What I said was "I don't believe that a 65million isk (tech 2 fittings) tech 1 Battlecruisers should beat a 280 million isk (also tech 2 fittings) HAC where both are fit for the same purpose"

Who fits a daredevil for sniping? They don't even have the lock range...

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
I mentioned gila because you said cruisers cant get to BC level tank.Then you mentioned the 2 most tankiest drone boat BCs have no problems killing cruisers. Because drone boats can use drones against varying classes/damage types and arent limited by a single turret resolution or missile application or range (since drones follow). You missed your own point to the extent its like youre moving the goalposts.
And the Gila is a pirate cruiser with a tank bonus and 6 midslots and drone focussed DPS so it can use the bare minimum of its fittings for weapon systems. What was your interpretation of my point because mine was that they were fine at killing cruisers and yours according to the OP was that these hulls should receive a very large role bonus to drone speed.



Do you solo pvp much? I'm not **** waving here, but killing AF's in destroyers is very, very easy to do. A Thrasher out tracks and far out damages them, unless the AF goes for pure dps, which is then shredded by 350 dps selectable damage. If they go for pure tank, they still can't tank that much damage without links and boosters....which is not solo. They can also fit a neut....And don't even get me started on what I do to AF's in an Algos or Dragoon. It's disgusting.

Eve would benefit greatly if BC's were as combat capable against cruisers and HACs as destroyers were against frigs and AF's. This would even give Battleships a reason for existing, other than for drones and heavy neuts, that is. Okay Rapid Heavies can be a thing too.

And no, drones don't need any special attention. They are completely OP as they sit.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#210 - 2015-06-03 14:04:13 UTC
LOL, I can fly both the Algos and Dragoon with max skills, but haven't even tried them out yet.Lol How do they fare against T1 Cruisers? Are they good for ratting?
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#211 - 2015-06-03 14:44:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Daniela Doran wrote:
Sorry Stitch this is a little off subject but Iyacia mentioned that Medium Autocannons are broken in a bad way, is this true? I'm a little troubled by this since I'm 15 days from maxing out CS 5 to fly the Sleipnir. If they are broken then are Medium Arties any good on a Sleip?


Acs on anything but a sleip are generally bad. Some could argue the vagabond/cynabal is good, but the applied damage that they operate in at point range is pretty pathetic (below 400dps and stuck in explo damage). Compared to other long range HAC's and pirate/faction cruisers, its pretty easy to see why they're outclassed.

Youll be fine using arty or acs on a sleip, its about the only ship minny have that is really good. It only took a 100% bonus to autocannon damage and a 50% bonus to fall-off to do it.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#212 - 2015-06-04 02:53:50 UTC
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
Basically a summary of my view for each of the CBCs:

Prophecy:

Conclusion: MJD cooldown bonus

Harbinger:

Conclusion: 25% optimal bonus. Maybe a slight cap buff.

Drake:

Conclusion: Fix HMLs, 25% missile velocity bonus.

Ferox:

Conclusion: 25% damage role bonus so the 10% per level optimal range bonus can stay so those few rail Feroxes don't cry. -1 Turret and High Slot, +1 Mid Slot.

Myrmidon: Probably the best CBC hull mostly thanks to drones and flexibility in the highs. Like the prophecy, the only thing the Myrm lacks is mobility. I think an MJD bonus would benefit it the most.

Conclusion: MJD cooldown bonus.

Brutix: Overshadowed by the Myrmidon that can outbrawl it, is less cap dependant and can deal with more ships. The speed advantage doesn't make up for it. Falloff bonus I also think isn't that useful. With 2 TEs and null loaded and giving it a generous 50% falloff bonus, its still only hitting out to 24km in deep falloff. Meaning it's only doing decent damage at 16.5km. The currently strategy cruisers and frigs have vs the brutix is to hold it at long point until heavy dps arrives and unless the brutix gets a ridiculous 100% falloff bonus this strategy won't change. You could fit Rails but people would probably still use the Eagle for fleets and Deimos/Thorax/Moa for small gang because of mobility. I think a 25% tracking bonus would help both rail and blaster fits the most without treading on the Eagle/Deimos.

Conclusion: 25% tracking bonus.

Cyclone: A pretty decent ship if medium missiles weren't bad. Fix medium missiles. Give it a 25% bonus to explosion velocity bonus (differentiates it from Caldari and fits with Typhoon).

Conclusion: Fix medium missiles, 25% explosion velocity bonus.

Hurricane: Massive powergrid nerf, high slot nerf, medium autocannons are crappy, artillery powergrid increased, various nerfs to the hull (mass, align time, signature radius and tank). Add on the TE nerf and you have one very over-nerfed ship. If the Muninn wasn't so crappy and if the hull itself didn't look so badass, no one would fly the Hurricane. Powergrid needs to be buffed, medium autocannons need to be fixed and a 25% falloff bonus would go a long way into making this ship viable again.

Conclusion: Powergrid buff, 25% falloff bonus.


How do MJD bonuses affect how a BC deals with cruisers? MJD bonuses should be reserved for CS, a'la marauders.

The brutix cannot get a tracking bonus, the navy brutix already has one. And having 2 of the same ship but one with more EHP is boring (see hurricane).

For the ferox, it makes no sense for it to be the only BC with a damage role bonus, especially since my proposal is to give all BC's a projection bonus. So we'd have 7 BC's with projection bonuses, and 1 with a damage bonus. I've already proposed how the ferox would change, similar to what you have, just in a manner that is consistent.

Ferox
5% bonus to medium hybrid turret damge
4% bonus to shield resistances

Role bonus: 50% bonus to optimal range

It would lose 1-2 turrets to compensate, and keep the overall damage the same. But by losing a turret or 2, it will help with fitting immensely. As the ferox does suffer from some slight fitting issues.

The other thing, the ferox is a sniper ship, not a blaster boat. The targeting range is the highest of any t1 BC, tell me why we would need an 81km targeting range with blasters? The drake is the second highest at 75km, everything else falls around 65-60km. To add on to this statement, a ferox already has a 50% optimal bonus, but is not out tearing up or obsoleting HAC's or ABC's. They were recently being used by an alliance as a cheap fleet rail doctrine (i want to say Brave.. but not 100%).

People put blasters on the ferox for double XLASB fits, as it can still make a decent brawler in certain cases.

I agree with most of your description and reasoning, the only thing i still disagree with is the 25% projection bonus and the fact that there is no consistency in your proposal. Ships getting missile velocity, tracking, damage, and MJD bonuses. Its all over the place and confuses the role.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#213 - 2015-06-04 05:23:13 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
Sorry Stitch this is a little off subject but Iyacia mentioned that Medium Autocannons are broken in a bad way, is this true? I'm a little troubled by this since I'm 15 days from maxing out CS 5 to fly the Sleipnir. If they are broken then are Medium Arties any good on a Sleip?


Acs on anything but a sleip are generally bad. Some could argue the vagabond/cynabal is good, but the applied damage that they operate in at point range is pretty pathetic (below 400dps and stuck in explo damage). Compared to other long range HAC's and pirate/faction cruisers, its pretty easy to see why they're outclassed.

Youll be fine using arty or acs on a sleip, its about the only ship minny have that is really good. It only took a 100% bonus to autocannon damage and a 50% bonus to fall-off to do it.


Bare with me Stitch with another off topic question. What about the Loki as a PVP and C3 wormhole ship? Is it good with medium AC's or Arties? I'm trying to decide if it's worth training for after I finish training for the Sleip, so I can do C3's in it.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#214 - 2015-06-04 14:32:01 UTC
Im not experienced in WH pvp so i couldnt answer that. I have flown lokis and IMO is best used as an arty platform since that matches up well with the web bonus.
Ben Ishikela
#215 - 2015-06-04 19:14:31 UTC
Quote:
Ideally you would have a system like this.

BS > BC
BS should eat BCs (they do)
BC > C
BC should eat C (they don't)
C > D
C should eat D (they do)
D > F
D should eat F (they do)

With

F > BC
F should eat BC with time (they do)
C > BS
C should eat BS with time (they do)

Exactly.
Get some BCs in your BS fleet and kill them pesty cruisers.
Also i vote that Cruisers should not get any projection boni. Only DPS/speed/support. Because if this "foodchain" is functioning properly in effect, Cruisers should be the best DPS per ISK, as they are in the middle (and fielding good support ships).
-- Rapid Light Missiles kind of break that chain with (some)C>F, but ...idk. At least make Dual150mm/quadlaser/*?ac do this job also.Ugh
Also:
enough F > anything. Roll

Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.

Ben Ishikela
#216 - 2015-06-04 19:44:10 UTC
You say, the Brutix cant get a 25%Tracking because BNI already has. But BNI is different. It has a damageBonus as well. (and more hulltank Cool). Of course you could change the BNI away from damage, but it needs to kill quick before getting blobbed imho.
Brutix has that Repair Bonus. additionaly give it 7.5% to Tracking+Falloff on medium hybrids. Because Blasters have tiny Falloff and even 10% Falloff on neutrons would only result in a +3kmFalloffRange on lvl5.
Yes?

Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.

Portiko
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#217 - 2015-06-04 19:54:03 UTC
CBCs definitely need a projection bonus, but I'm not in favour of giving them a bonus to medium weapons. Instead, they should be upgraded to large weapons systems, prop mods, and tank mods. Their combat mobility should be nerfed to compensate (roughly equal to a typhoon or navy mega), but their warp speed should be increased to match cruisers. They'll keep the same slot layout but role bonuses should be changed.

SDPPenter link description here

Send dick pics please...

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#218 - 2015-06-04 20:59:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Portiko wrote:
BCs definitely need a projection bonus, but I'm not in favour of giving them a bonus to medium weapons. Instead, they should be upgraded to large weapons systems, prop mods, and tank mods. Their combat mobility should be nerfed to compensate (roughly equal to a typhoon or navy mega), but their warp speed should be increased to match cruisers. They'll keep the same slot layout but role bonuses should be changed.


A large weapon BC already exists with the ABCs. Theyre faster, more agile and do more damage than their CBC counterparts, just have less tank. If you want tank plus large guns, you're looking for a battleship which already exist. Dont think anyone wants a fast BC with large guns and CBC levels of tank as it would obsolete battleships even more than they are now.

Not to mention changing them to large weapons, and adding more speed and tank would mean CCP would need to rebalance them from the ground up. Which is a lot of time that could be spent better elsewhere.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#219 - 2015-06-04 23:43:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Portiko wrote:
BCs definitely need a projection bonus, but I'm not in favour of giving them a bonus to medium weapons. Instead, they should be upgraded to large weapons systems, prop mods, and tank mods. Their combat mobility should be nerfed to compensate (roughly equal to a typhoon or navy mega), but their warp speed should be increased to match cruisers. They'll keep the same slot layout but role bonuses should be changed.


A large weapon BC already exists with the ABCs. Theyre faster, more agile and do more damage than their CBC counterparts, just have less tank. If you want tank plus large guns, you're looking for a battleship which already exist. Dont think anyone wants a fast BC with large guns and CBC levels of tank as it would obsolete battleships even more than they are now.

Not to mention changing them to large weapons, and adding more speed and tank would mean CCP would need to rebalance them from the ground up. Which is a lot of time that could be spent better elsewhere.


I think she's referring to a T2 version of the ABCs, which would be interesting. But it would require a lot more balancing then her proposal to keep from stepping on the BSs toes.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#220 - 2015-06-05 13:33:40 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Portiko wrote:
BCs definitely need a projection bonus, but I'm not in favour of giving them a bonus to medium weapons. Instead, they should be upgraded to large weapons systems, prop mods, and tank mods. Their combat. obility should be nerfed to compensate (roughly equal to a typhoon or navy mega), but their warp speed should be increased to match cruisers. They'll keep the same slot layout but role bonuses should be changed.


A large weapon BC already exists with the ABCs. Theyre faster, more agile and do more damage than their CBC counterparts, just have less tank. If you want tank plus large guns, you're looking for a battleship which already exist. Dont think anyone wants a fast BC with large guns and CBC levels of tank as it would obsolete battleships even more than they are now.

Not to mention changing them to large weapons, and adding more speed and tank would mean CCP would need to rebalance them from the ground up. Which is a lot of time that could be spent better elsewhere.


I think she's referring to a T2 version of the ABCs, which would be interesting. But it would require a lot more balancing then her proposal to keep from stepping on the BSs toes.


No, she specifically said CBCs. Then mentioned not in favor of bonusing the medium weapons, but replacing them with large weapons. Then goes to say they should also make them use large prop mods, tank mods (which they already do) and then slowing them down to BS speed levels. Basically making a battleship that warps at cruiser speeds. Which can be done now with ABCs or CBCs/BS with hyperspatial rigs.