These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#101 - 2015-05-10 05:28:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Iroquoiss Pliskin
Daniela Doran wrote:
Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:


Sleipnir = fall-off bonused
Claymore = explosion radius bonus
Nighthawk = explosion radius bonus
Vulture = Optimal bonus
Astarte = fall-off bonus
Eos = Drone and turret tracking bonuses
Absolution = Cap usage reduction bonus..? (odd one out)
Damnation = Missile velocity bonus


Quote:
Absolution = Cap usage reduction bonus..? (odd one out)


lel

I've proposed a solution how to fix this disparity in the Switch projection bonus from Damnation to Absolution

Iroquoiss Pliskin wrote:
if projection bonus is absolutely needed, here is my proposed new Absolution bonuses:

Old:

Command Ships bonuses (per skill level):

10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret damage
5% bonus to Medium Energy Turret rate of fire


Amarr Battlecruiser bonuses (per skill level):

10% reduction in Medium Energy Turret activation cost
4% bonus to all armor resistances
_________________________________________________
New:

Command Ships bonuses (per skill level):

10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret Optimal Range
10% bonus to Medium Energy Turret Rate of Fire


Amarr Battlecruiser bonuses (per skill level):

10% reduction in Medium Energy Turret activation cost
4% bonus to all armor resistances

Bingo-presto - same 10 Effective turrets, same DPS as the current Abso. I'm drawing inspiration from the immortal Armageddon, which is forever fitted with Mega Pulses in my heart. ♥

Scorch range @ 33+6.3km vs 22+6.3km; Heavy Beams MF 22.5+10km vs 15+10km before, and Standard @ 45 vs 30km.


Smile

Accompanying maths,

Current Absolution effective turrets: 5 Turrets * 1.5x Damage bonus * (1/(1-0.25)) RoF = 10 Effective turrets.
New Absolution effective turrets: 5 * (1/(1-0.5)) RoF = 10 Effective turrets. Smile

Astarte has: 5 Turrets * 1.375 Damage Bonus * (1/(1-0.375)) RoF = 11 and Sleipnir 11.25 Effective turrets with a projection bonus. Attention


Very nice, Our minds functions alike Iroquoiss. I was thinking the exact same thing for the Absolution. That ship is the one in the most dire need of service out of all the CS's.


Zealot is not broken because of an Optimal range bonus, altho it was rekking heads of everything Tech 1 when it was first introduced ten years ago. Blink

Right now, HB setup (15+10km w/ MF) does 5% less DPS than a 250mm Astarte, with the latter having 18+23km AM range, and with Spike it is 65+32km and the same 5% more DPS versus 54+10km with Heavy Beams. I'm not sure what CCP were thinking with Absolution, but whatever. Same thing they're thinking about Ishtar probably. Smile
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#102 - 2015-05-10 10:44:16 UTC
James Baboli wrote:
So get gud or learn to fit them more effectively. Command ship, not solowtfpwnmobile. Meant to support a gang, not yolo into a hostile fleet. They can, if well skilled and flown, but that isn't the intent of the ship.


Well, last time I talked to a sleipnir it was angry and disagreed with that statement..

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#103 - 2015-05-10 12:17:52 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
So get gud or learn to fit them more effectively. Command ship, not solowtfpwnmobile. Meant to support a gang, not yolo into a hostile fleet. They can, if well skilled and flown, but that isn't the intent of the ship.


Well, last time I talked to a sleipnir it was angry and disagreed with that statement..


Thats because the slep has extra grid for arty. Dropping down to 180s gives it a lot of grid to play with, and makes shoehorning 2 XLASBs fairly easy with a sprinkling of pimp. The whole 100% bonus to projectile damage tends to help too.

The other ships dont quite have a weapon that uses as little grid as 180s. You can make a dual XLASB vulture with electrons though and fit mmjd. Nighthawk has a pretty dumb slot layout as well... 1 less mid than its t1 counterpart, and an extra low (you know.. because armor fits are what we wanted from a caldari CS Roll.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#104 - 2015-05-10 16:38:04 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
So get gud or learn to fit them more effectively. Command ship, not solowtfpwnmobile. Meant to support a gang, not yolo into a hostile fleet. They can, if well skilled and flown, but that isn't the intent of the ship.


Well, last time I talked to a sleipnir it was angry and disagreed with that statement..


Thats because the slep has extra grid for arty. Dropping down to 180s gives it a lot of grid to play with, and makes shoehorning 2 XLASBs fairly easy with a sprinkling of pimp. The whole 100% bonus to projectile damage tends to help too.

The other ships dont quite have a weapon that uses as little grid as 180s. You can make a dual XLASB vulture with electrons though and fit mmjd. Nighthawk has a pretty dumb slot layout as well... 1 less mid than its t1 counterpart, and an extra low (you know.. because armor fits are what we wanted from a caldari CS Roll.


I know, I was just referring to the sleipnir as a solo-wtf-bbq-omg-pwn-mobile. And the Nighthawk still has the best shield regeneration fit going for her, just not the damage that a sleipnir can do.

Speaking of heavy missiles, when will they be useful again?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#105 - 2015-05-10 17:12:05 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
So get gud or learn to fit them more effectively. Command ship, not solowtfpwnmobile. Meant to support a gang, not yolo into a hostile fleet. They can, if well skilled and flown, but that isn't the intent of the ship.


Well, last time I talked to a sleipnir it was angry and disagreed with that statement..


Thats because the slep has extra grid for arty. Dropping down to 180s gives it a lot of grid to play with, and makes shoehorning 2 XLASBs fairly easy with a sprinkling of pimp. The whole 100% bonus to projectile damage tends to help too.

The other ships dont quite have a weapon that uses as little grid as 180s. You can make a dual XLASB vulture with electrons though and fit mmjd. Nighthawk has a pretty dumb slot layout as well... 1 less mid than its t1 counterpart, and an extra low (you know.. because armor fits are what we wanted from a caldari CS Roll.


I know, I was just referring to the sleipnir as a solo-wtf-bbq-omg-pwn-mobile. And the Nighthawk still has the best shield regeneration fit going for her, just not the damage that a sleipnir can do.

Speaking of heavy missiles, when will they be useful again?


NH does more damage than the slep, as long as your target doesn't have high kin resist. With rage missiles though it can do 1k dps (including drones). With 3 gyro's and 425's + hail, sleipnir is pushing about 874 w/ drones.

I too am curious as to when HML will not be ****. The funny thing is, the best fleet ships that can use them, are locked in to kinetic damage types (drake/NH), which in Ishtar's online means no one really wants to use them in a fleet role. On top of that, their application is so poor in a solo environment, they don't get used there either.. So in many parts of PvP in the game, HML are just not used. I'm not sure how CCP doesn't see this, unless they're looking at PVE metrics... then HML are working as intendedâ„¢.
Johny Tyler
LOGOS Community
Lux Collective
#106 - 2015-05-11 11:51:44 UTC
I think MJD could have been a big help to BC utility by adding a mobility option. The problem is 100km is just not a useful distance for a BC in most cases. Considering typical weapon ranges and lock ranges, 50km MJD would be a lot more useful imo for BC.

For the most part a BC is a cruiser weapon platform with more HP, more cap and less mobility. Generally, mobility is better than HP for survivability in many situations which is part of the reason we see a lot more cruisers now. I think making the mobility option of the MJD more useful would help the BC class a lot.

MJD could add to the "projection" of the entire weapon platform, but the current 100km is overshooting in most cases. With 50km MJD I could jump away and continue firing, or lock target and then jump in front or on top of them.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#107 - 2015-05-11 14:26:57 UTC
Johny Tyler wrote:
I thicould have been a big help to BC utility by adding a mobility option. The problem is 100km is just not a useful distance for a BC in most cases. Considering typical weapon ranges and lock ranges, 50km MJD would be a lot more useful imo for BC.

For the most part a BC is a cruiser weapon platform with more HP, more cap and less mobility. Generally, mobility is better than HP for survivability in many situations which is part of the reason we see a lot more cruisers now. I think making the mobility option of the MJD more useful would help the BC class a lot.

MJD could add to the "projection" of the entire weapon platform, but the current 100km is overshooting in most cases. With 50km MJD I could jump away and continue firing, or lock target and then jump in front or on top of them.


Mjd is more useful to escape, rather than projecting damage. Also, as per my OP, if bcs recieved a role bonus to projection, it would pair up better with mjd. A 720 cane with optimal/falloff bonus would project close to 100km with sabot/tremor with a couple TE/TC.

Mjd needs to remain at 100km due to things like orthrus/garm/lach/arazu. If you jump 50km to escape a garm, theres a good chance you will still be pointed 50km away. Or he can burn 10km and point again. This has happened to me with 100km jumps.

Maybe a script for mjd to switch between 100-50km, but tbh, i prefer the 100km mjd.
Johny Tyler
LOGOS Community
Lux Collective
#108 - 2015-05-11 17:17:00 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Johny Tyler wrote:
I thicould have been a big help to BC utility by adding a mobility option. The problem is 100km is just not a useful distance for a BC in most cases. Considering typical weapon ranges and lock ranges, 50km MJD would be a lot more useful imo for BC.

For the most part a BC is a cruiser weapon platform with more HP, more cap and less mobility. Generally, mobility is better than HP for survivability in many situations which is part of the reason we see a lot more cruisers now. I think making the mobility option of the MJD more useful would help the BC class a lot.

MJD could add to the "projection" of the entire weapon platform, but the current 100km is overshooting in most cases. With 50km MJD I could jump away and continue firing, or lock target and then jump in front or on top of them.


Mjd is more useful to escape, rather than projecting damage. Also, as per my OP, if bcs recieved a role bonus to projection, it would pair up better with mjd. A 720 cane with optimal/falloff bonus would project close to 100km with sabot/tremor with a couple TE/TC.

Mjd needs to remain at 100km due to things like orthrus/garm/lach/arazu. If you jump 50km to escape a garm, theres a good chance you will still be pointed 50km away. Or he can burn 10km and point again. This has happened to me with 100km jumps.

Maybe a script for mjd to switch between 100-50km, but tbh, i prefer the 100km mjd.



I think a script would be fine.

I would much prefer to use MJD as tactical mobility than a get-away button. And using the MJD to project the BC adds more options and flavour to the game than simply adding range to guns imo. Having a handful of ships which could maintain a point during a jump wouldn't worry me too much. What I could do offensively with a 50km MJD would more than make up for adding a few ships I couldn't get away from.

I agree that the BC needs better projection. I would rather just project the whole ship rather than simply add some range to weapons. But I would be happy to see either one get implemented.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#109 - 2015-05-12 14:13:36 UTC
Mjd functions well in both roles, no need to bring bcs back to getting solo'd by a stabber because you cant hit him at 20km+. Id rather they buff target range so its alittle easier to mjd snipe (so much fun, good job on mjd CCP). But thats a relatively minor issue.

Mjd can be an escape button, or used for tactical orientation. It should not be confined to only one role, thats bad for sandbox gameplay. Adding more targeting range to bcs and giving their weapons some extra range would benefit them greatly in both roles.

That means in the current kite meta, people need to start fitting scrams to effectively "hold" a BC/BS. They cant fly around in kitey maulus/keres gangs and orbit for GG. Makes gang compositions more interesting.

Another thing id like to remind everyone on (CCP), change the hurricane fleet issue! It is not the "old" cane anymore. It has the same slots and layout, but will never be able to do what the old cane could. Mainly since TE/speed nerfs. Give minny another ship with a tracking bonus. Should look like this:

10% damage per level
7.5% tracking per level

Role bonus: Can fit warfare links
Role bonus: 50% bonus to fall-off range

Id even consider dropping a high for another low or mid. Make it what the muninn should have been , and change the muninn into something else. Or keep the muninn the way it is, since it gets RoF and optimal bonus, instead of falloff/double dmg.

Bottom line, for me anyway, the fleet cane is an overpriced husk of the "old cane", give me a reason to buy/fly one other than extra grid and a 2nd utility high (that normally cant be used, especially with arty).
Iroquoiss Pliskin
9B30FF Labs
#110 - 2015-05-12 15:55:51 UTC
Johny Tyler wrote:
[
I agree that the BC needs better projection. I would rather just project the whole ship rather than simply add some range to weapons. But I would be happy to see either one get implemented.


"Add some range"

Yeah, puny, puny range.

How'd that work out with the Ishtar?

Cruisers Online
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#111 - 2015-05-13 01:03:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Mjd functions well in both roles, no need to bring bcs back to getting solo'd by a stabber because you cant hit him at 20km+. Id rather they buff target range so its alittle easier to mjd snipe (so much fun, good job on mjd CCP). But thats a relatively minor issue.

Mjd can be an escape button, or used for tactical orientation. It should not be confined to only one role, thats bad for sandbox gameplay. Adding more targeting range to bcs and giving their weapons some extra range would benefit them greatly in both roles.

That means in the current kite meta, people need to start fitting scrams to effectively "hold" a BC/BS. They cant fly around in kitey maulus/keres gangs and orbit for GG. Makes gang compositions more interesting.

Another thing id like to remind everyone on (CCP), change the hurricane fleet issue! It is not the "old" cane anymore. It has the same slots and layout, but will never be able to do what the old cane could. Mainly since TE/speed nerfs. Give minny another ship with a tracking bonus. Should look like this:

10% damage per level
7.5% tracking per level

Role bonus: Can fit warfare links
Role bonus: 50% bonus to fall-off range

Id even consider dropping a high for another low or mid. Make it what the muninn should have been , and change the muninn into something else. Or keep the muninn the way it is, since it gets RoF and optimal bonus, instead of falloff/double dmg.

Bottom line, for me anyway, the fleet cane is an overpriced husk of the "old cane", give me a reason to buy/fly one other than extra grid and a 2nd utility high (that normally cant be used, especially with arty).


I would love to see the Fleet Cane and the rest of the Fleet BCs altered in this fashion +1. Other than being a trophy ship, this Fleet Cane would find many uses and actually be worth the 150+ mill for the hull. Would be a discussion on giving it a 50% falloff or optimal range bonus as an arty Cane is better off with Optimal range than Falloff. Also Slot layout like either a 7-5-5 or 8-4-6 (H-M-L)

For the mobility factor I would also love to see an option for range jumping using the MMJD. Like you posted earlier in this thread about using a script or a similar charge to adjust the jump range b/t 50/100 km. Or they can add metas or T2 to the MMJD modules with different jump ranges and giving the smaller 50km MMJDs faster re-activation cooldowns than the 100km versions.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#112 - 2015-05-13 02:35:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Stitch Kaneland
Daniela Doran wrote:
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Mjd functions well in both roles, no need to bring bcs back to getting solo'd by a stabber because you cant hit him at 20km+. Id rather they buff target range so its alittle easier to mjd snipe (so much fun, good job on mjd CCP). But thats a relatively minor issue.

Mjd can be an escape button, or used for tactical orientation. It should not be confined to only one role, thats bad for sandbox gameplay. Adding more targeting range to bcs and giving their weapons some extra range would benefit them greatly in both roles.

That means in the current kite meta, people need to start fitting scrams to effectively "hold" a BC/BS. They cant fly around in kitey maulus/keres gangs and orbit for GG. Makes gang compositions more interesting.

Another thing id like to remind everyone on (CCP), change the hurricane fleet issue! It is not the "old" cane anymore. It has the same slots and layout, but will never be able to do what the old cane could. Mainly since TE/speed nerfs. Give minny another ship with a tracking bonus. Should look like this:

10% damage per level
7.5% tracking per level

Role bonus: Can fit warfare links
Role bonus: 50% bonus to fall-off range

Id even consider dropping a high for another low or mid. Make it what the muninn should have been , and change the muninn into something else. Or keep the muninn the way it is, since it gets RoF and optimal bonus, instead of falloff/double dmg.

Bottom line, for me anyway, the fleet cane is an overpriced husk of the "old cane", give me a reason to buy/fly one other than extra grid and a 2nd utility high (that normally cant be used, especially with arty).


I would love to see the Fleet Cane and the rest of the Fleet BCs altered in this fashion +1. Other than being a trophy ship, this Fleet Cane would find many uses and actually be worth the 150+ mill for the hull. Would be a discussion on giving it a 50% falloff or optimal range bonus as an arty Cane is better off with Optimal range than Falloff. Also Slot layout like either a 7-5-5 or 8-4-6 (H-M-L)

For the mobility factor I would also love to see an option for range jumping using the MMJD. Like you posted earlier in this thread about using a script or a similar charge to adjust the jump range b/t 50/100 km. Or they can add metas or T2 to the MMJD modules with different jump ranges and giving the smaller 50km MMJDs faster re-activation cooldowns than the 100km versions.


Yea, those bonuses for only the faction BCs would work wonders as anti-cruiser. This makes the fleet/navy BC's very desirable, and would pull them out from being just a mantle piece.

It depends on the fall-off/optimal discussion. The 2 interact with artillery differently. With optimal bonus, you can do more damage under 35km, where as with fall-off you do more damage past 35km, using short range ammo. Long range ammo, its still the same story (just bigger ranges), but the optimal bonus is better in 85% of your engagement range, and the last 15% isn't much of a difference between the 2 in applied damage.

For slot layout, 7/5/5 may work, but is pretty much the same as the sleip. I think 7/4/7 could be interesting. Or 6/6/5 and give it 5 guns. That way its not always better than the muninn with artillery, but gives it more alpha compared to a muninn.

Also different meta modules sounds nice too. Differing spool-up's matched with range scripts could be very appealing to certain fits and help expand the meta alittle bit.
Wynta
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#113 - 2015-05-13 10:03:13 UTC
I'm open to any solution that makes Drakes and DNI's a valid fleet boat. But the problem with EvE ship balance comes from the lack of complete reworks to ship and weapon types. Drakes and DNI's will always be bad if Heavy Missiles remain weak. Drone boats will be strong if Drones remain strong. I think that cruiser down balance outside the Ishtar and T3's are as good as they are going to be. What needs to happen is that kind of balance needs to be extended up to BC's and BS's. A projection role bonus and missile and drone balance would fix BC's, and BS warp speed buff and a rework of bombs would balance BS's and encourage their use as a BC counter. Than once BS down balance happens the same method can be slowly extended upwards to capitals.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#114 - 2015-05-13 14:02:53 UTC
Wynta wrote:
I'm open to any solution that makes Drakes and DNI's a valid fleet boat. But the problem with EvE ship balance comes from the lack of complete reworks to ship and weapon types. Drakes and DNI's will always be bad if Heavy Missiles remain weak. Drone boats will be strong if Drones remain strong. I think that cruiser down balance outside the Ishtar and T3's are as good as they are going to be. What needs to happen is that kind of balance needs to be extended up to BC's and BS's. A projection role bonus and missile and drone balance would fix BC's, and BS warp speed buff and a rework of bombs would balance BS's and encourage their use as a BC counter. Than once BS down balance happens the same method can be slowly extended upwards to capitals.


Agreed. In a non-fleet role, the HAM DNI has potential as a solo boat. HML needs a buff for sure. And the DNI could be a very good fleet missile ship with its application bonus.

If we extend projection bonuses as described in OP, it will buff the navy drake and remove many of its issues it has now. The few glaring issues i have with it, is fairly low fitting and no utility high like the t1 drake.

With my proposal, the navy drake's velocity bonus will become its role bonus. This frees up a trait for RoF/damage bonus. So, it would look like this:

Drake Navy Issue
5% bonus to Heavy assault and heavy missile launcher rate of fire
5% bonus to heavy assault and heavy missile explosion radius

Role bonus: 50% bonus to missile velocity
Role bonus: Can fit warfare links

Now, with the RoF bonus, we can drop a launcher or 2 which means we have a couple utility highs to work with. This frees up needed fitting and makes the ship more flexible.

In its current configuration it cant even fit a link and do more damage than a t1 drake. CCP allows bcs to fit links, then makes ships with no utility highs.. kinda counterproductive to the design. Some of the design choices on faction BCs seem like an after thought (looking at you fleet cane, and DNI).
Leonardo Adami
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#115 - 2015-05-13 16:21:17 UTC
I support this!
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#116 - 2015-05-13 22:00:07 UTC
Very Good Stitch you know your stuff. What revamp setups would you recommend for the other faction BC hulls?
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#117 - 2015-05-14 15:53:55 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Very Good Stitch you know your stuff. What revamp setups would you recommend for the other faction BC hulls?



Well the other hulls make more sense. BNI and HBI both having bonuses to tracking. Havent heard any complaints from BNI pilots, and havent heard anything good or bad from HBI pilots. Im not very experienced with amarr stuff. I think HBI has good slot layout for amarr though, since you have room for CB+tackle and w/e else you want to add.

All that would happen is they gain projection bonus.

Brutix Navy Issue
10% bonus to medium hybrid turret damage per level
7.5% bonus to medium hybrid turret tracking speed per level

Role bonus: 50% bonus to medium hybrid turret fall-off
Role bonus: Can fit warfare links

Harbinger Navy Issue
10% bonus to medium energy turret damage per level
7.5% bonus to medium energy turret tracking per level

Role bonus: 50% bonus to medium energy turret optimal
Role bonus: Can fit warfare links

Now, those are faction BCs that merit their price.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#118 - 2015-05-14 22:36:28 UTC
I'm still thinking 25% bonus would be enough, however it should be to both Fall off & Optimal. Lets stop this 'Only Optimal' or 'Only Falloff' which causes especially for Minmatar real issues.
25% bonus to optimal is not actually a full 25% increase in effective range for a turret, 25% bonus to both is what's needed for a full 25% increase in range.
Unlike missiles where 25% to velocity is a real 25% increase in range (and often far more than 25% in effective range since missiles must chase their target, so overtake velocity is what really defines range in a lot of cases)
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#119 - 2015-05-15 01:10:48 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
I'm still thinking 25% bonus would be enough, however it should be to both Fall off & Optimal. Lets stop this 'Only Optimal' or 'Only Falloff' which causes especially for Minmatar real issues.
25% bonus to optimal is not actually a full 25% increase in effective range for a turret, 25% bonus to both is what's needed for a full 25% increase in range.
Unlike missiles where 25% to velocity is a real 25% increase in range (and often far more than 25% in effective range since missiles must chase their target, so overtake velocity is what really defines range in a lot of cases)



Very interesting. I wish someone from CCP would experiment with these implementations on SiSi.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#120 - 2015-05-15 02:01:57 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
I'm still thinking 25% bonus would be enough, however it should be to both Fall off & Optimal. Lets stop this 'Only Optimal' or 'Only Falloff' which causes especially for Minmatar real issues.
25% bonus to optimal is not actually a full 25% increase in effective range for a turret, 25% bonus to both is what's needed for a full 25% increase in range.
Unlike missiles where 25% to velocity is a real 25% increase in range (and often far more than 25% in effective range since missiles must chase their target, so overtake velocity is what really defines range in a lot of cases)


Lets discuss. Care to elaborate on what you think would cause a 50% bonus to projection to make BC's too powerful?

Their DPS doesn't change, brawler fits will still be short ranged for the most part, and long range weapons will still track slowly (on t1 hulls).

Meaning, a fast cruiser could still technically out track its guns, or speed tank the missiles. The cruiser pilot has to be good at piloting though, as getting complacent and just orbiting might mean that BC can still get good shots in if you aren't careful.

As per my OP and previous posts, the comparison between BC's and destroyer's should be more similar. If you're concerned that cruisers will be killed by BC's easier after the propasal, well thats kind of the point. Cruisers need a better hard counter. Would you fly destroyers if they had a 25% optimal and no application bonus? And would they be as good as they are now at killing frigates?

The ONLY ships that are getting application/range bonuses are the faction BC's. However, i'd be willing to consider them only getting 25% range bonus. As mentioned, they would probably need to be tested to see if 50% range + tracking would be too strong.

I do need to correct you on something though. If i'm understanding it correctly anyway.

Quote:
Lets stop this 'Only Optimal' or 'Only Falloff' which causes especially for Minmatar real issues

Actually with your proposal, that would hurt minmatar more than my proposal. Since i mentioned minmatar (hurricane) would receive a 50% fall-off bonus as per its role bonus, not optimal. This goes well with minmatar being the fall-off race. A/C's operate strictly in fall-off, and arty operates more in fall-off than hybrids/lasers.

Some could consider it powerful, and thats something ill have to consider. At the same time though, it lacks tracking bonuses like a destroyer. So cruisers still have a way to outtrack/range depending on fit.

And if you're talking in general for all falloff/optimal bonuses, then that would definitely make minmatar a/c's even more crap. If vagabond/stabber had 25% optimal + fall-off, then it might as well only brawl, since the damage applied at point range would be pathetic. Plus it can't fit artillery well.. soo.. the optimal is useless.