These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Any incoming changes to battleships?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ChromeStriker
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#61 - 2015-07-29 15:09:17 UTC
Switch Savage wrote:
Imo the addition of them into the meta poses one of the greatest threats to solo BS pvp thus far in New Eden.

That arguments come up before. Until the addition of the MJD you could kite Heavy neuts and webs.

No Worries
Switch Savage
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2015-07-29 15:34:40 UTC
ChromeStriker wrote:
Switch Savage wrote:
Imo the addition of them into the meta poses one of the greatest threats to solo BS pvp thus far in New Eden.

That arguments come up before. Until the addition of the MJD you could kite Heavy neuts and webs.


Well technically you still can :p. You just run the risk of them sailing off into the sunset like the beautiful over sized hulks of metal they are.
Alric Rosenthal
Black Fox Marauders
Pen Is Out
#63 - 2015-07-30 23:31:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Alric Rosenthal
Shrike Crendraven wrote:
I am well aware that as new player i know little about the current balance, but, for me, the battleship is the most disappoint ship type in eve.


Starting in the common sense area(or as much common sense as we can predict the technology in 1000s years):

Why are battleship so big with so few tech systems onboard?

Given a cruiser can have X slots, a battleship that is 5x the size (or more), should have slightly more equipment slots than the "30% more than cruiser"....

Difference in armor, hull, shield is not staggering either. Not to mention some of the t3 cruiser can get several times over effectiove hitpoints of a battleship.

Weapons. Are a.... Sad joke? Given Eve balance, Han Solo could have solo'd (har har) the imperial dreadnought/battleship instead of running away from it.

I know that precariously constructed and heavily patched balance is hard to keep - but please for the love of god give each battleship 5ish more high-slots (WAIT!) that can fit only *small* guns. So it adds very little to the effective high end pve/pvp dmg, BUT fixes the horrible unfairness of frig/destroyer/cruiser vs battleship fights.

Can u imagine the engineers of current battleships - while designing its battle potential.

- "So this frigate goes under our guns and slowly kills us, while keeping us unable to move fast or jump...."
- "And it slowly kills us? yes, thats the plan, junior! Now go fetch those blueprints to the factory!"


Utility slots - I guess that more than half a kilometer of high tech ship is hardly enough space to fit some (obvious?!) electronic warfare toys.... I mean, really, every single one should have a tractor beam, target painter, scrambler and a web. Dedicated slots, or just built in t2ish version(the hull has requirements, add more requirements to fly it)

Yes i know, balance. You put yourself in a tough position, and its very hard to fix battleships without completely destroying the "game-of-cruisers".

Increase the price, 5times, 10 times... Add some little gun slots, give each BS 2-3 more utility slots. Please.


No way to balance this but the OP does make a point. A battleship is a large asset that gives no specific advantage in any situation. Most T3s will have comparable EHP and take less damage due to their smaller signature. There are some instances where a particular bonused battleship will do well. Bhaalgorn, Bhaalgorn lite, and others but you still sacrifice mobility and tank for the ability. Before you going totting how much EHP you can load your Navy Apoc or Bhaalgorn with just realise that any battleship will be hit harder and go down faster than a comparable T3 after reduction of damage caused by the smaller signature and often better resists of the T3. Battleships are damage sponges.

Giving battleships more high slots to fit undersized guns will not maintain the status quo of balance. In doing so you could potentially add 150 - 350 damage to these ships. Do not confuse small guns with point defenses. We already have a type of point defense system in the game, defender missiles. No one uses them because they currently take up a high slot. CCP could easily create a new slot category specifically for battleships and call it point defence systems. Say battleships get four PD slots each. These mods would require ammo or power per cycle and defend against a portion of a single direct damage source type. These would "intercept" a portion of the damage from that source type up to a certain amount per cycle or a certain number of "strikes" per cycle. You can't target anything with them. You can't do damage with them. They can only be used against a specific type of damage source. I am not talking EM, HEAT, KIN, EX. I am talking lasers, missiles, hybrids, and projectile weapons.

Perhaps battleships gets 4 point defence slots. This is their special deal. Deflector Arrays, Inertia Nets, Defender Missiles, etc. Just an idea. Do with it what you will.

“War is cruelty. There's no use trying to reform it. The crueler it is, the sooner it will be over.” - William Tecumseh Sherman
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#64 - 2015-07-31 01:39:34 UTC
Alric Rosenthal wrote:


No way to balance this but the OP does make a point. A battleship is a large asset that gives no specific advantage in any situation. Most T3s will have comparable EHP and take less damage due to their smaller signature. There are some instances where a particular bonused battleship will do well. Bhaalgorn, Bhaalgorn lite, and others but you still sacrifice mobility and tank for the ability. Before you going totting how much EHP you can load your Navy Apoc or Bhaalgorn with just realise that any battleship will be hit harder and go down faster than a comparable T3 after reduction of damage caused by the smaller signature and often better resists of the T3. Battleships are damage sponges.

Giving battleships more high slots to fit undersized guns will not maintain the status quo of balance. In doing so you could potentially add 150 - 350 damage to these ships. Do not confuse small guns with point defenses. We already have a type of point defense system in the game, defender missiles. No one uses them because they currently take up a high slot. CCP could easily create a new slot category specifically for battleships and call it point defence systems. Say battleships get four PD slots each. These mods would require ammo or power per cycle and defend against a portion of a single direct damage source type. These would "intercept" a portion of the damage from that source type up to a certain amount per cycle or a certain number of "strikes" per cycle. You can't target anything with them. You can't do damage with them. They can only be used against a specific type of damage source. I am not talking EM, HEAT, KIN, EX. I am talking lasers, missiles, hybrids, and projectile weapons.

Perhaps battleships gets 4 point defence slots. This is their special deal. Deflector Arrays, Inertia Nets, Defender Missiles, etc. Just an idea. Do with it what you will.


The answer is to nerf T3 cruisers down to the level of cruisers.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#65 - 2015-07-31 02:33:06 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Alric Rosenthal wrote:


No way to balance this but the OP does make a point. A battleship is a large asset that gives no specific advantage in any situation. Most T3s will have comparable EHP and take less damage due to their smaller signature. There are some instances where a particular bonused battleship will do well. Bhaalgorn, Bhaalgorn lite, and others but you still sacrifice mobility and tank for the ability. Before you going totting how much EHP you can load your Navy Apoc or Bhaalgorn with just realise that any battleship will be hit harder and go down faster than a comparable T3 after reduction of damage caused by the smaller signature and often better resists of the T3. Battleships are damage sponges.

Giving battleships more high slots to fit undersized guns will not maintain the status quo of balance. In doing so you could potentially add 150 - 350 damage to these ships. Do not confuse small guns with point defenses. We already have a type of point defense system in the game, defender missiles. No one uses them because they currently take up a high slot. CCP could easily create a new slot category specifically for battleships and call it point defence systems. Say battleships get four PD slots each. These mods would require ammo or power per cycle and defend against a portion of a single direct damage source type. These would "intercept" a portion of the damage from that source type up to a certain amount per cycle or a certain number of "strikes" per cycle. You can't target anything with them. You can't do damage with them. They can only be used against a specific type of damage source. I am not talking EM, HEAT, KIN, EX. I am talking lasers, missiles, hybrids, and projectile weapons.

Perhaps battleships gets 4 point defence slots. This is their special deal. Deflector Arrays, Inertia Nets, Defender Missiles, etc. Just an idea. Do with it what you will.


The answer is to nerf T3 cruisers down to the level of cruisers.


Is Nerf T3, Nerf T3, Nerf T3 all you ever think about? Why don't to try to use your imagination for a change and come up with a proper balancing mechanism for BSs like Mr. Rosenthal did. You think if T3Cs get nerfed down to your satisfaction that BSs will miraculously improve? News flash for you baltec1, IT WON'T. Instead your chant will just change from "nerf T3Cs down to cruiser ehp" into "nerf HACs down to T1 Cruisers ehp".
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#66 - 2015-07-31 02:49:06 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:


Is Nerf T3, Nerf T3, Nerf T3 all you ever think about? Why don't to try to use your imagination for a change and come up with a proper balancing mechanism for BSs like Mr. Rosenthal did. You think if T3Cs get nerfed down to your satisfaction that BSs will miraculously improve? News flash for you baltec1, IT WON'T. Instead your chant will just change from "nerf T3Cs down to cruiser ehp" into "nerf HACs down to T1 Cruisers ehp".


T3 invalidate or heavily encroach upon 57 ships.

Nerfing 4 ships to help 57 ships become much more viable to use is a no brainer especially when said 4 ships are are overpowered as t3 cruisers are.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#67 - 2015-07-31 03:09:36 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


Is Nerf T3, Nerf T3, Nerf T3 all you ever think about? Why don't to try to use your imagination for a change and come up with a proper balancing mechanism for BSs like Mr. Rosenthal did. You think if T3Cs get nerfed down to your satisfaction that BSs will miraculously improve? News flash for you baltec1, IT WON'T. Instead your chant will just change from "nerf T3Cs down to cruiser ehp" into "nerf HACs down to T1 Cruisers ehp".


T3 invalidate or heavily encroach upon 57 ships.

Nerfing 4 ships to help 57 ships become much more viable to use is a no brainer especially when said 4 ships are are overpowered as t3 cruisers are.


If you were the only one saying that T3Cs needed a nerf, I would never accept it. But apparently there are many others (unbiased) who feel that T3Cs in their current state are OP, so I've come to accept the fact that they'll eventually get nerfed. To what extent, should be open for discussion (one that I hope you're not able to participate in).

The question is what's next for BSs? I'm waiting to hear some productive feedback from you on the rebalancing of the BSs cause I'm looking into them and also I hear you're the man when it comes to BSs. But so far, all I ever hear from you is Nerf T3s, etc, etc,............
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#68 - 2015-07-31 03:30:15 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


Is Nerf T3, Nerf T3, Nerf T3 all you ever think about? Why don't to try to use your imagination for a change and come up with a proper balancing mechanism for BSs like Mr. Rosenthal did. You think if T3Cs get nerfed down to your satisfaction that BSs will miraculously improve? News flash for you baltec1, IT WON'T. Instead your chant will just change from "nerf T3Cs down to cruiser ehp" into "nerf HACs down to T1 Cruisers ehp".


T3 invalidate or heavily encroach upon 57 ships.

Nerfing 4 ships to help 57 ships become much more viable to use is a no brainer especially when said 4 ships are are overpowered as t3 cruisers are.


If you were the only one saying that T3Cs needed a nerf, I would never accept it. But apparently there are many others (unbiased) who feel that T3Cs in their current state are OP, so I've come to accept the fact that they'll eventually get nerfed. To what extent, should be open for discussion (one that I hope you're not able to participate in).

The question is what's next for BSs? I'm waiting to hear some productive feedback from you on the rebalancing of the BSs cause I'm looking into them and also I hear you're the man when it comes to BSs. But so far, all I ever hear from you is Nerf T3s, etc, etc,............


They don't need one.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#69 - 2015-07-31 04:02:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


Is Nerf T3, Nerf T3, Nerf T3 all you ever think about? Why don't to try to use your imagination for a change and come up with a proper balancing mechanism for BSs like Mr. Rosenthal did. You think if T3Cs get nerfed down to your satisfaction that BSs will miraculously improve? News flash for you baltec1, IT WON'T. Instead your chant will just change from "nerf T3Cs down to cruiser ehp" into "nerf HACs down to T1 Cruisers ehp".


T3 invalidate or heavily encroach upon 57 ships.

Nerfing 4 ships to help 57 ships become much more viable to use is a no brainer especially when said 4 ships are are overpowered as t3 cruisers are.


If you were the only one saying that T3Cs needed a nerf, I would never accept it. But apparently there are many others (unbiased) who feel that T3Cs in their current state are OP, so I've come to accept the fact that they'll eventually get nerfed. To what extent, should be open for discussion (one that I hope you're not able to participate in).

The question is what's next for BSs? I'm waiting to hear some productive feedback from you on the rebalancing of the BSs cause I'm looking into them and also I hear you're the man when it comes to BSs. But so far, all I ever hear from you is Nerf T3s, etc, etc,............


They don't need one.


Only those who rides in BSs all the time in Blobs would think this way, but I wonder how would the majority agree with this logic?
Daerrol
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#70 - 2015-07-31 05:04:19 UTC
I have never had issues with any of Napoc apoc abandon or bhaalgorn that I fly in PPP from solo to medium gang with caps
Valkin Mordirc
#71 - 2015-07-31 05:23:07 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:


Only those who rides in BSs all the time in Blobs would think this way, but I wonder how would the majority agree with this logic?



I personally feel most BS need tweaked. Not rebalanced. Minor fixes to minor problems.

The T3's are a major problem that need a major fix.
#DeleteTheWeak
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#72 - 2015-07-31 09:21:06 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Daniela Doran wrote:


Only those who rides in BSs all the time in Blobs would think this way, but I wonder how would the majority agree with this logic?


What makes you think I only fly them in blobs? I have spent the last few weeks roaming around solo or in 10 man Corp roams in a mega and I am looking at getting a few geddons and ravens soon for solo work. There is nothing biased in what I say, if the mega was as overpowered as the T3s are I would calling for nerfs on that too.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#73 - 2015-07-31 13:37:15 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


Only those who rides in BSs all the time in Blobs would think this way, but I wonder how would the majority agree with this logic?


What makes you think I only fly them in blobs? I have spent the last few weeks roaming around solo or in 10 man Corp roams in a mega and I am looking at getting a few geddons and ravens soon for solo work. There is nothing biased in what I say, if the mega was as overpowered as the T3s are I would calling for nerfs on that too.


Yea, it's starting to look that way since people are continuing to agree with you. If this really is the case with T3Cs, then someone needs to make a major thread regarding their rebalance ASAP, so CCP get can their act together and fix them. CCP is making matters worst by putting this off.
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#74 - 2015-07-31 13:38:54 UTC
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


Only those who rides in BSs all the time in Blobs would think this way, but I wonder how would the majority agree with this logic?



I personally feel most BS need tweaked. Not rebalanced. Minor fixes to minor problems.

The T3's are a major problem that need a major fix.


This. Minor tweaks to BS is all they need. T3C get the nerf hammer and all would be well. Look at the pest, a minor RoF tweak and its improved it enough to be semi-viable. I still am not a huge fan, since its still a little unfocused in design, but there are fits that work better now.

Id say another thing that needs rebalance before we see BS fleets again are bombs. Id say thats almost just as important as nerfing t3c.

Give Battlecruisers range to fullfil their Anti-Cruiser role - OP SUCCESS

Make the Muninn great again!
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#75 - 2015-07-31 13:51:57 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
Alric Rosenthal wrote:


No way to balance this but the OP does make a point. A battleship is a large asset that gives no specific advantage in any situation. Most T3s will have comparable EHP and take less damage due to their smaller signature. There are some instances where a particular bonused battleship will do well. Bhaalgorn, Bhaalgorn lite, and others but you still sacrifice mobility and tank for the ability. Before you going totting how much EHP you can load your Navy Apoc or Bhaalgorn with just realise that any battleship will be hit harder and go down faster than a comparable T3 after reduction of damage caused by the smaller signature and often better resists of the T3. Battleships are damage sponges.

Giving battleships more high slots to fit undersized guns will not maintain the status quo of balance. In doing so you could potentially add 150 - 350 damage to these ships. Do not confuse small guns with point defenses. We already have a type of point defense system in the game, defender missiles. No one uses them because they currently take up a high slot. CCP could easily create a new slot category specifically for battleships and call it point defence systems. Say battleships get four PD slots each. These mods would require ammo or power per cycle and defend against a portion of a single direct damage source type. These would "intercept" a portion of the damage from that source type up to a certain amount per cycle or a certain number of "strikes" per cycle. You can't target anything with them. You can't do damage with them. They can only be used against a specific type of damage source. I am not talking EM, HEAT, KIN, EX. I am talking lasers, missiles, hybrids, and projectile weapons.

Perhaps battleships gets 4 point defence slots. This is their special deal. Deflector Arrays, Inertia Nets, Defender Missiles, etc. Just an idea. Do with it what you will.


The answer is to nerf T3 cruisers down to the level of cruisers.


Is Nerf T3, Nerf T3, Nerf T3 all you ever think about? Why don't to try to use your imagination for a change and come up with a proper balancing mechanism for BSs like Mr. Rosenthal did. You think if T3Cs get nerfed down to your satisfaction that BSs will miraculously improve? News flash for you baltec1, IT WON'T. Instead your chant will just change from "nerf T3Cs down to cruiser ehp" into "nerf HACs down to T1 Cruisers ehp".


He thinks about me in that commercial on the beach with my horse. Maybe a little too much if you ask me. Ask him the color of my bikini - he'll just blurt it out because he thinks of me so often.

He doesn't come up with a proper balancing idea because he's flown them enough to understand they aren't in a bad spot as far as balance goes. He's been flying them successfully for years. (that's years as in multiple). He's either just that totally freaking awesome and doesn't realize it OR he's right and other ships need some CCP love more desperately.

As much as Baltec would like me to say 'he's just that much better than thousands of other players' I'm going to pick the lesser of two evils and just say that he's right - BS are in an good spot right now.
Mira Chieve
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#76 - 2015-07-31 16:26:45 UTC
I do not think battleships to be worthless.

Just for fun I fit a Maelstrom with 8 small turrets. It melts frigate gangs with ease. Extremely fun to see the little buggers trying to get under your guns get melted by 600 dps of fully applied epicness.
Gh0stBust3rs
Templars HIghsec
Stellar Fusion
#77 - 2015-07-31 16:26:57 UTC
T3 Cruisers are just too flexible for their own good.


So your telling me I can have 150k ehp(Low End) Do 400+ dps to 90km(low end again) and have a sig of only 100m and with my ab running completely negate 80% of your dps? HML tengus got nerfed initially for a reason.

Nothing Op about that at all.

HML tengus got nerfed initially for a reason.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#78 - 2015-08-01 02:43:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Daniela Doran
Mira Chieve wrote:
I do not think battleships to be worthless.

Just for fun I fit a Maelstrom with 8 small turrets. It melts frigate gangs with ease. Extremely fun to see the little buggers trying to get under your guns get melted by 600 dps of fully applied epicness.



LOL, soo funny.

I can use small projectiles (Svipul) maybe I should give it a try, lol.
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#79 - 2015-08-01 02:57:16 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Valkin Mordirc wrote:
Daniela Doran wrote:


Only those who rides in BSs all the time in Blobs would think this way, but I wonder how would the majority agree with this logic?



I personally feel most BS need tweaked. Not rebalanced. Minor fixes to minor problems.

The T3's are a major problem that need a major fix.


This. Minor tweaks to BS is all they need. T3C get the nerf hammer and all would be well. Look at the pest, a minor RoF tweak and its improved it enough to be semi-viable. I still am not a huge fan, since its still a little unfocused in design, but there are fits that work better now.

Id say another thing that needs rebalance before we see BS fleets again are bombs. Id say thats almost just as important as nerfing t3c.


I guess that clinches it then, the T3Cs are nerf bound. Now all that's left is for CCP to begin the T3C dissection process and put them back to together correctly. The sooner CCP does this the better so the T3C users can get over their mourning periods and move on.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#80 - 2015-08-01 03:27:58 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
What makes you think I only fly them in blobs? I have spent the last few weeks roaming around solo or in 10 man Corp roams in a mega and I am looking at getting a few geddons and ravens soon for solo work. There is nothing biased in what I say, if the mega was as overpowered as the T3s are I would calling for nerfs on that too.


May I steer you to youtube and Suitonia's solo geddon? Should work nicely with your gang and you know I love the Raven, I'm just not fan of the rapid launcher madness but you should be fine whatever you choose to do.

Speaking of battleships, I just had to try out the Megathron myself and since I tried it once for pve - which turned out to be a terrible idea - I went to lowsec last fall with said Megathron, looking for a fight somewhere in Genesis.

Lot's of empty systems so I tried one of those besieged mordus sites - also a terrible idea - and I bailed with 33% structure and docked.
I was giving up at this point and on my way back I got someone's interest, a navy augruor. He kept me interested long enough for two buddies of his to arrive and thought I would be an easy killmail. I kinda didn't rep that structure damage, so I was on fire the hole time.
Minutes later I ganked the logi and 2x navy augruor. So you are right, the Megathron is awesome for solo roams if you avoid places like Huola or Amamake.

The Tengu wasn't nerfed, heavy missiles were. How dare missiles compete with other long range guns?? Must not happen.

In their finite wisdome CCP nerfed heavy missiles because people are too unbright to change their behavior. A people problem, not a mechanics problem.
Now the not so long range missiles are barely able to poke someone if they even maange to get in to their destination in the first place.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever