These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
abrasive soap
Gape Deep Core Mining
#61 - 2015-05-01 18:23:17 UTC
I think the damage overlaps too much with cruisers, I say give back bc's their pg/CPU and turret/launcher slots that were taken away. They can remain slow but at least they will legitimately be stronger than cruisers in terms of damage output instead of getting completely dunked on by VNI's and the like
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#62 - 2015-05-01 18:52:12 UTC
abrasive soap wrote:
I think the damage overlaps too much with cruisers, I say give back bc's their pg/CPU and turret/launcher slots that were taken away. They can remain slow but at least they will legitimately be stronger than cruisers in terms of damage output instead of getting completely dunked on by VNI's and the like


Except that doesnt solve the fundamental issue with BCs. You can get 1k dps from a brutix. Doesnt mean you will ever get close enough to use it.

You could have all the dps possible, but if you have no projection to actually hit those cruisers, it will mean very little. So, BCs are slower and have none of the projection to actually hit or catch a cruiser. how do you suppose giving them more dps or fitting will help these shortfalls? Take longer to die while being plinked away by a rail thorax?
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#63 - 2015-05-01 21:18:53 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:

If the cane had a 50% optimal bonus (which isnt what i was proposing, but w/e), the ONLY way it could "kite" a pest is with artillery. Optimal bonus does literally nothing for autocannons. Have you ever fit an arty cane? 720s + mwd is 90% of your grid. You will have very little tank in comparison to an ac cane. If you put acs on your cane to "kite" a pest, you will need to stay at 11-18km to apply even moderate dps. Which as already pointed out will not end well for the hurricane.

You also forget one of the biggest utilities of BS. 24km neuts. Hard to kite when you have no cap. BS eat BC without a problem. Not sure why you think 100-200 m/s difference in speed is enough to mean a BS will never catch a BC.

t2 720s and 10mn MWD is 107% of the grid of a t1 cane and 90% of a fleet cane.
Going meta on both drops it to 97% and 81% respectively.
But arty fitting vs PG and so on is a different thread I believe you also ran.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#64 - 2015-05-01 23:09:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
abrasive soap wrote:
I think the damage overlaps too much with cruisers, I say give back bc's their pg/CPU and turret/launcher slots that were taken away. They can remain slow but at least they will legitimately be stronger than cruisers in terms of damage output instead of getting completely dunked on by VNI's and the like


Except that doesnt solve the fundamental issue with BCs. You can get 1k dps from a brutix. Doesnt mean you will ever get close enough to use it.

You could have all the dps possible, but if you have no projection to actually hit those cruisers, it will mean very little. So, BCs are slower and have none of the projection to actually hit or catch a cruiser. how do you suppose giving them more dps or fitting will help these shortfalls? Take longer to die while being plinked away by a rail thorax?


This.

And the fact that Battleship-BC damage spread is already too thin for comfort - More damage, more speed would not fix Battlecruisers.

Projection will. In a Cruiser world. Projection will. More range obviously gives option in certain cases for more de facto damage at the same ranges that were used previously.

All the while revitalising Battleships in the process, as their natural prey becomes numerous enough to hunt.
abrasive soap
Gape Deep Core Mining
#65 - 2015-05-02 00:21:18 UTC
Raven DPS is over 1k
Drake DPS is under 600

Abaddon and Armageddon DPS are about 1100
Harbinger DPS is about 700

Are these really that close?

Making BC's faster and more agile doesn't fix bc's, it fixes the hurricane which did not lose any bonuses weapons with the BC nerf
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#66 - 2015-05-02 00:35:38 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


Role Bonuses are bonuses built into the ship class itself, they can't differ from one BC to another (like a family trait). And the most needed built in bonus for BC's is propulsion and for CS's it's propulsion & optimal range.


Beg to differ. Take a look at the role bonus of various destroyers some time.


I was mainly agreeing with the OP with the need of a micro jump drive activation reduction and 50% optimal range bonus which is really all the CS's needs to be viable once again. Also they may need an additional mid or low slot.

Much as I would love a cane with another mid, or a harbi that can run prop, web, point, cap booster, TC, I'm pretty sure that would push them from appropriate to OP.


The 10 slot layout on T1 Bc's are fine but the CS's needs another mid or low slot because aside from having a higher base armor/shields amount the CS's tanks are identical to their little brothers the HAC's.
Devasha Detrasha
Doomheim
#67 - 2015-05-02 01:53:21 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
i just start too think this would push us back towards bc's online.
i suggest the better option is too reduce the top level of power on cruisers.
things like:
- cap dps at under bc levels 650 ish
- cap EHP under bc levels
- reduce the top level resists on cruisers too partial T2 resists, leave top level too command ships


Ok im not sure where you got this false premise that BCs online existed because of their damage or their tank or w/e. The primary reason that BCs online existed is because you could get more money back in insurance than the hulls cost. In the case of the drake you could get 5-10 mil more from insurance than the hull cost (in some cases more).

Drakes for example were never really that strong. HACs could out perform them, and some HACs (armor variants) could even out tank and out DPS them at the same time. The Cane was a bit stronger, in the sense it could do quite a lot of damage, and tank really well, and had awesome speed.

The nerf to BCs was never done to facilitate the usage of other hull classes, the nerfs (primarily to Drake and Cane) were done to balance the BC line of ships, as these 2 specifically just shat all over the capabilities of the other 6 BCs, to a lesser extent the Harby and Brutix also shat over the other 4 (Myrm, Ferox, Proph, Cyclone).

The only reason that we now have cruisers online, and not BCs online, is because they offer you the most bang for the buck, you can get solid tanks (40-50K) with solid DPS (300-500DPS) great speed (AB or MWD fit) for a fully fit cost of around 30-40M (less than the cost of a BC Hull). More over, Crusiers were designed to be balanced against other hull types, not specifically against just their hull size like BCs were.


Now with the amount of changes to weapons systems, addition of drones as a weapons platform, and revamps to mineral cost/insurance payouts. BCs themselves could use with a rework of their role. Which should be effectively similar to that of the Destroyers and Frigs relationship.

BCs should **** all over Cruisers. But they don't, so they go underused simply because Cruisers are better at shitting on each other for the price point.

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)

These of course are without any additional flavors such as someone webbing the Frigs down so BCs can eat them, similarly with Cruisers being webbed down vs BS. This is just a basic food chain...and when one link is missing you get left with which ever ship has the least predators above it...in this case. Cruisers, and is partially why we see limited use of BS.


In regards to OP....I like the idea of making the BC/C relationship more like Dessies/Frigs...this is how it used to be before CCP started Tiericide, and then kind of stopped halfway through the balance act in 2013.


What a brilliant description of the ship food chain hierarchy in eve , thank you Mario. I can use this as a guideline throughout my days in eve for a long while. Some of the CCP developers should read this because it looks like they completely forgot about the BC meta which looks like it's headed for extinction due to having multiple predators from all sides with no prey to sustain themselves. So glad I choose to train for the Paladin. Much congrats to the OP for posting such a remarkable post in the hope of saving an endangered species. +1
Dregalis DeGraiden
Doomheim
#68 - 2015-05-02 02:21:31 UTC
I agree with the OP in the need for and additional Role Bonus. I'm 37 days from maxing out for a Sleipnir and I can assure you that I won't be using it for the warfare links bonus. This ship is a brawling beast when fitted with dual X-large ASB's and should be giving an appropriate bonus that synergies with it uses as a combat ship. The Sleip is at the top of the rank in this class of ships, the others are too clunky, too slow, and can't hit anything moving beyond 20 km. So indeed, they are in dire need of service in the mobility and optimal range department or just continue to be a kiter's wetdream wrapped in a lovely T2 shoebox.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#69 - 2015-05-02 03:23:14 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:


The 10 slot layout on T1 Bc's are fine but the CS's needs another mid or low slot because aside from having a higher base armor/shields amount the CS's tanks are identical to their little brothers the HAC's.


With more fitting room to put on LARs or XLASBs. The issue with HACs vs CS is that people are so used to the sacrifices needed to fit the largest buffer mods on HACs, but cannot easily put more of same on a CS because where HACs are generous in the fitting space, CS are a bit tight, and would need to fit 2 buffer mods to get a proportionally heavier tank.

Nitpick: T1 CBCs have 17 slots (proph and myrm excepted, @ 16) . Highs do count after all.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#70 - 2015-05-02 03:25:20 UTC
abrasive soap wrote:
Raven DPS is over 1k
Drake DPS is under 600

Abaddon and Armageddon DPS are about 1100
Harbinger DPS is about 700

Are these really that close?

Making BC's faster and more agile doesn't fix bc's, it fixes the hurricane which did not lose any bonuses weapons with the BC nerf


There are other issues they deliberately slapped on the cane in addition. Losing that 2nd utility high and getting as much tighter to fit as it did just nuked it.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

FT Cold
No Vacancies
No Vacancies.
#71 - 2015-05-02 05:27:08 UTC
Keep seeing good stuff here, this would be a good change in the ship meta, IMO. Would love to see it happen.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#72 - 2015-05-02 16:39:12 UTC
abrasive soap wrote:
Raven DPS is over 1k
Drake DPS is under 600

Abaddon and Armageddon DPS are about 1100
Harbinger DPS is about 700

Are these really that close?

Making BC's faster and more agile doesn't fix bc's, it fixes the hurricane which did not lose any bonuses weapons with the BC nerf


Actually drake DPS is over 700 with rage missiles. 800ish w/ heat. So its closer than you think.

In fact, a 3 gyro cane does similar dps as a 2 gyro pest.

Tempest: 890 Dps (2 gyro)
Hurricane: 755 Dps (Hail + 3 gyro)

Just depends on how you fit them really.

I don't think making BC's faster, do more dps, or give them more EHP is going to do anything about the current problem. They were nerfed for a reason, as kite canes used to be a thing. I don't see CCP changing their minds about that.
Segraina Skyblazer
Doomheim
#73 - 2015-05-02 23:44:34 UTC
It's about time someone made a Post addressing this, great job Stitch. I thought I was the only one annoyed by the BC's useless Role Bonus. And yes, until CCP get rid of OGB this role bonus is useless because 80% of the time someone use warfare links they use a T3. But a optimal range role bonus on a T1 BC would make them OP and overused again so I suggest a similar role bonus applied for their big brothers the CS's and also something that would reduce the cool downs for the MMJD's.
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#74 - 2015-05-03 08:44:28 UTC
Segraina Skyblazer wrote:
II suggest a similar role bonus applied for their big brothers the CS's and also something that would reduce the cool downs for the MMJD's.


It would be a gimmick that could become very effective in certain situations.

But it's still a gimmick.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#75 - 2015-05-05 19:38:58 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:

If the cane had a 50% optimal bonus (which isnt what i was proposing, but w/e), the ONLY way it could "kite" a pest is with artillery. Optimal bonus does literally nothing for autocannons. Have you ever fit an arty cane? 720s + mwd is 90% of your grid. You will have very little tank in comparison to an ac cane. If you put acs on your cane to "kite" a pest, you will need to stay at 11-18km to apply even moderate dps. Which as already pointed out will not end well for the hurricane.

You also forget one of the biggest utilities of BS. 24km neuts. Hard to kite when you have no cap. BS eat BC without a problem. Not sure why you think 100-200 m/s difference in speed is enough to mean a BS will never catch a BC.

t2 720s and 10mn MWD is 107% of the grid of a t1 cane and 90% of a fleet cane.
Going meta on both drops it to 97% and 81% respectively.
But arty fitting vs PG and so on is a different thread I believe you also ran.


Oh, so its worse than i remembered. Illustrates my point well then :).

Yes arty fitting is quite absurd. But thats a whole other thread.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#76 - 2015-05-07 07:52:48 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:

If the cane had a 50% optimal bonus (which isnt what i was proposing, but w/e), the ONLY way it could "kite" a pest is with artillery. Optimal bonus does literally nothing for autocannons. Have you ever fit an arty cane? 720s + mwd is 90% of your grid. You will have very little tank in comparison to an ac cane. If you put acs on your cane to "kite" a pest, you will need to stay at 11-18km to apply even moderate dps. Which as already pointed out will not end well for the hurricane.

You also forget one of the biggest utilities of BS. 24km neuts. Hard to kite when you have no cap. BS eat BC without a problem. Not sure why you think 100-200 m/s difference in speed is enough to mean a BS will never catch a BC.

t2 720s and 10mn MWD is 107% of the grid of a t1 cane and 90% of a fleet cane.
Going meta on both drops it to 97% and 81% respectively.
But arty fitting vs PG and so on is a different thread I believe you also ran.


Oh, so its worse than i remembered. Illustrates my point well then :).

Yes arty fitting is quite absurd. But thats a whole other thread.

You listed the Pre-retribution percentages.....

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#77 - 2015-05-08 21:17:14 UTC
A good additional Role Bonus for Command Ships would be 75-100% Weapon Damage Bonus. That way they can replace a turret high slot for a utility so that the CS's can have 3 high slots for command warfare links instead of just 2. Also they can replace one of their Command Ship weapon damage bonus for additional range bonus like falloff or optimal range.
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#78 - 2015-05-08 21:38:43 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
A good additional Role Bonus for Command Ships would be 75-100% Weapon Damage Bonus. That way they can replace a turret high slot for a utility so that the CS's can have 3 high slots for command warfare links instead of just 2. Also they can replace one of their Command Ship weapon damage bonus for additional range bonus like falloff or optimal range.

Nope. Takes them out of the command role, and into mainline combatant. While they are great in this role, it is not their intended use case, and optimizing them for it is wrong.
Maybe another in HA series of ships, should it become extant, but not command ships.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

Tusker Crazinski
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#79 - 2015-05-08 22:50:01 UTC
James Baboli wrote:

Nope. Takes them out of the command role


Ok lets not lie here that is not a role, it's piece of equipment manned by an alt booster boats. may as well be deployable structures.

I really think one of the CSs should just be re-labeled and re-bonused to be a heavy anti-support ship.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#80 - 2015-05-08 23:07:05 UTC
Tusker Crazinski wrote:

Ok lets not lie here that is not a role, it's piece of equipment manned by an alt booster boats. may as well be deployable structures.

I really think one of the CSs should just be re-labeled and re-bonused to be a heavy anti-support ship.

Or.... lets not.
There is a deliberate trade off currently that for max boosts (before command processors) you are giving up some DPS. But still actually produce a decent amount of DPS.
And the choice of weapons is nice.

A projection bonus of 25% to optimal/fall off/missile velocity actually has the effect of making command ships more viable on grid since it lets their range get out towards battleships whom a CS is likely to be supporting. They still suffer from the 'odd man out' syndrome which makes them primary but that can be solves by flying enough of them in fleet to make that not worth it.
So the projection bonus works nicely, doesn't need to be as big as a destroyers projection bonus, but does give BC's something 'special' that cruisers simply can't match other than links which are not going to be used on each individual pilots BC.