Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Decent Idea +1

i just think that bc's are there for brawling mainly(heavy cruisers), the warfare link helps them boost the group's tankability.
where as dessies don't do anything for a group and don't tank very well .. so it kind of leaves them with the anti-frig role as a default.
its kind of the HAC's and even command ships role too project damage along with resilience and group support, even ABC's for damage projection.
combat bc's need help with the tanking part, mainly in a sizeable sig radius reduction, especially helpful at insulating damage from ABC's and battleships.

personally would like too see ABC's moved too T2 too allow greater options in the cbc department.

Because the ferox already has an optimal bonus, we change that optimal bonus trait, and roll the optimal bonus into the role bonus. That leaves an extra trait slot. Meaning that trait slot can be changed to a damage or RoF bonus, allowing the ferox to drop a gun or 2 (since it won't need 7 guns anymore to stay competitive, which is taxing on fitting).

This free's up PG on a hull, that many people believe could use alittle more grid. Or, gives you 2 utility high's, meaning it can do links, or have plenty of extra fitting options (double RLML paired with rails, or dual nuets, or a link/neut etc).

Battlecruisers should be flexible in the same way that destroyers are. If i want to fit my thrasher with a/c's and do 300+ dps, i can. If i want to fit artillery, and be alil squishier, but snipe a kite frigate out at 30km, i can do that too. Battlecruisers should be FAR more flexible than they are now.

As to the rest of what you mentioned, let me ask you this. Would people still fly destroyers if they ONLY they had application bonuses? Would a kite scorch coercer still be viable? Would arty thrashers and SNIPER cormorants still have their own unique role? Or would people drop them, because they can't hit **** outside 15km? Kinda like whats happening to BC's right now.

A tracking bonus hurricane would still not be able to shoot out past 16-18kmkm with autocannons, is slow as hell, and has no way to pick off a kite stabber. Not saying it should everytime, but i think it should at least be able to harass or apply some modicum of damage, or, force the stabber to actually FLY his ship to mitigate damage. Not just orbit at 20km and GG.



So quick to dismiss the biggest benefit they have in a group. They are hard counters to a ship type. If i'm bringing heavy cruisers or even battlecruisers, you don't think a gang would benefit from a few destroyers to act as anti-frigate?

I have seen so many video's of good small gang pvp'ers use T3D, dictors or some other destroyer as a firewall to frigates for their bigger ships. We are talking 2-5 man size gangs. They are damn near untouchable when they fly right.

In terms of their tanking ability, they tank MORE than frigates (in most cases), their intended targets. My T1 hull tanked thrasher has more EHP than my MSE fit arty jag. Yea a 400m wolf,ret,venge will be probably have more EHP, but at the cost of fairly lower dps. Destroyers get more EHP because they sacrifice speed/signature, for more firepower and projection+application.

HAC's are specialized in a role against a broad range of targets, destroyers and battlecruisers are specialized in a role against a ship class smaller than them. They are a support ship, for bigger ships in theory anyway. And guess what, if we don't add a role bonus to CS, then the progression of T1 BC to CS makes more sense, because CS have a range bonus already, +1 new trait bonus and resist package. The resists, +3 links, and new trait and EHP buffs more than make up for it.

Lets use the Ferox (with its new role) as an example.
4% Shield Resist per level
5% Medium Hybrid damage per level

Role Bonus: 50% to Medium Hybrid Turret optimal Range

Now, compare that to its T2 Variant.

Vulture
10% Bonus to medium Hybrid turret optimal range
4% Bonus to Shield resist

10% Bonus to medium Hybrid turret optimal range
10% Bonus to medium Hybrid turret damage

That seems like a VERY good transition into a CS. The vulture does the ferox's job better, has more EHP, more damage, more range, more links. Which is expected of a CS.

ABC's use LARGE guns, meaning they don't track that great against close cruisers. They are okish at longer ranges against cruisers. Their main bonus is BS weapons on a smaller hull, more mobile but flimsy, but pack a hell of a punch.

BC's use MEDIUM weapons, to counter cruisers specifically, and as of right now, they only do it close, not far (minus ferox). Medium weapons will NEVER match ABC weapon ranges, since large weapons inherently have more range. Compare a naga to a ferox, sure, they both shoot far, but the naga will always be the farthest, and the ferox will track better.

I feel this change may have a positive impact on Battleship proliferation as well, seeing as BCs are going to be murdering the cruiser masses.

Who are you going to call.

*More BC? Possibly, and upto a point. Their signature radii is very conductive to the signature and explosion resolutions of Battleship weaponry.

This needs to happen. (ง ͠° ͟ل͜ ͡°)ง

I don't really agree with your idea simply because of the fitting requirements of links. Putting a link on a T1 BC isn't an afterthought. It forces you to make a sacrifice somewhere (tank/gank/utility/etc.). If links were 1PG/1CPU sure I'd support your idea but I feel there's enough counterbalance as it is now.


Okay I understand now, and I disagree
I don't believe any of the CBCs need more raw DPS, I feel that they're more or less okay in that area. What I think they need is more application of that damage. More DPS will make them more dangerous to other BCs and BSs, not really to cruisers. This is why none of my suggested bonuses conveyed RoF or raw damage.

EDIT: regarding the Minmatar BCs, I chose tracking because giving optimal only helps arty, and falloff only helps AC. I didn't want to pigeonhole them into one type of gun.

No BC would see a dps increase, or if there is one (in the case of the ferox, it would be minor). The ferox would simply drop 1-2 turrets, gain a small damage bonus, and put the current optimal bonus as its role bonus. As James already pointed out, its not to increase damage, but to bring it in-line with other BC's in what it can fit for flexibility.

Optimal doesn't help a/c's, period. Fall-off helps both. Remember, projectiles operate mostly out in fall-off. An optimal bonused 720 fit projects better to about 35km compared to a fall-off bonused ship. After 35km, the fall-off bonused ship starts to do more dps. So, fall-off is not worthless on artillery, it just projects the dps further, at the cost of fighting in fall-off earlier.

I mean arty wolfs (wolves?) are a thing, and work fairly well (minus the whole no tank thing).

The proposals are ridiculously over the top and would see the death of tech 1 cruisers except for a select few used for niche roles like tackle Vexors and 900 DPS suicide gank thoraxes.

You say it, but give no reasons why. Do you complain about destroyers killing frigates? Why should BC's not be more viable against cruisers?

If BC's start to become more popular after the proposed change, all you have to do is hop into a BS and obliterate the BC. No tank or significant DPS values are changed with what i'm proposing. So the same fit drake/cane/prophecy etc will have the same tank and dps as they do now, but will be able to actually hit back.

If you're in a brawler fit ship, there is literally no difference, since you're going to be well within the available range with current settings. If you're a kiter, you MIGHT take more damage depending on the ship you're fighting and how well its fit (or if they have support). I say "might" because a blaster brutix will still have fairly poor range. But a 220mm cane might be able to shoot out past 20km if they fit for range.

If you look at an a/c fit thrasher, or blaster fit corm/catalyst, its the same principle. Those destroyers get excellent ranges/application with certain fits/weapons. If you fit short range weapons, you still generally get terrible range (minus scorch coercer). When using long range weapons, you now gain the range but lose tracking. And since these changes do nothing about tracking/application, you should still be able to outtrack long range guns easily by fitting TD or being fast and orbiting as needed. Might actually involve MANUAL piloting.

So, like i mentioned before, it will be more about pilot skill and fits, then just "i brought the fast cruiser, and your BC can't catch me, please wait for blob".

Pretty bold claim very little details.

Id wager that it wouldn't be the case, what with mostly all T1 cruisers being able to

A) Outrun all T1 BCs
B) Applying 100% damage against all T1 BCs
C) Mittigating around 35% of turret based BC damage, and nearly 50% of missile based BC damage.
D) Costing about 1/5th as much

But ya T1 cruisers would see a reduction in usage...which is kind of the point (they make up the vast vast majority of fielded ships in EVE).

So when BC online happens again, and BS come out of the wood work to hard counter them, we play BS online for a bit? At least until people remember that T1 Cruisers can kill T1 BS very easily.

What a wonderful sob story. Cruisers Died, and on the third day they arose to slay the glut of OP BS's everywhere, who ate all the BC's.

Sorry i missed this post I was midway typing.



BS absolutely SMASH BCs, especially shield BC's. It is literally the exact same relationship as Cruiser to Dessie. The problem is BCs don't have the same relationship with Cruisers as Dessie share with Frigs.The #1 counter to a BC is and always has been a BS. Its not even a contest BS just smash the ever living **** out of BC.



HAHA WUT?
Just fly away. Ain't no BC ever going to catch a Frig or a Dessie unless they let themselves be caught. I mean **** Cruiser have a hard enough time killing frigs without webs and that is ones with application bonuses, something BC's won't have. Projection =/= Application. An Optimal of 100KM doesn't help you track any better when a ship is orbiting on your paint.