These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Vanguard] Combat and Navy BC Rebalance

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arec Bardwin
#261 - 2015-09-12 15:34:42 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
afkalt wrote:
And mines is that missiles are the only weapon system harshly penalized because they don't have the options all others do for their weapon fittings. Therefore those are the only ships forced into fitting mods, or just not bothering.

Downsizing from 425 to 220 or 180 is a far smaller hit than losing a BCU for a fitting mod, for example.


I love to bring this up as often as I can, muahahaha

The reason for this "punishment" was as you might have guessed - 100% application. I didn't bring it up the last few times but it was implied.

Can you see now why I want it back?

Missiles has 100% damage application? It is clear you have 0% understanding of this.
Mad Abbat
Talon Swarm
#262 - 2015-09-12 15:47:02 UTC
Dear Fozzie, pls don't forget to revisit ship fitting space. It is outdated as it is.

Addition of MJD and kite meta made it desirable to have mwd+mjd+cap booster+guns+plate/dual rep setup. Can't fit it in my ship sorry, also can't downgrade guns and make my range horrendous, so, I predict, CBC will stay noobish PVE boats afrer the patch as they are of this moment.


I also don't like proph bonuses, that ship is laking in my oppinion, I'd rather have minigeddon or fattycurse on its place.
Spugg Galdon
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#263 - 2015-09-12 16:18:28 UTC
Ferox looks like it will be a lot of fun to fly. A buffer tanked fit with Neutrons and null loaded will push effective dps out to 23km and then another 11km of secondary falloff after that! It will still have a medium neut too with MJD + MWD and scram and web. Not sure which is the better blaster boat now. The Ferox or the Brutix.
Captain Megabyte
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#264 - 2015-09-12 16:47:13 UTC
Id really like to see the Caldari Naga changed to a Cruise missile ship/
Great Creator
State War Academy
Caldari State
#265 - 2015-09-12 17:59:50 UTC
Lol - rly lol. why anythere is 25% for opti and fallof?
give 50... oh no, ok - give 37.5% (i know CCP you like dat numbers) of nation bonuses - as 37,5 falloff fpr hurri and 37,5 opti for harbi. Same goes for brutix/ferrox pair. It`s rly obvious.

and dat 12.5% dronespeed bonus - it`s good, but 12.5% - not a speed buff to take myrm or proph if u can Ishtar/VNI - not even close to their bonuses. It`s like a t1 dronespeed rig - qutie useless w/o dron navi comp. But it`s better than nothing. More MWD dronespeed or light tracking bonuses.

And i also thing about bonuses for mjd like on maradeur... or on t2 bcs
Alghara
Les chevaliers de l'ordre
Goonswarm Federation
#266 - 2015-09-12 18:04:43 UTC
Remove this bonus on Amarr

10% bonus Medium Energy Turret capacitor use ......

This is not a bonus
Kelsey Auditore
The College Dropouts
#267 - 2015-09-12 18:08:39 UTC
I made a post about wanting to shorten the train of t2 bc's already, but I do have a more complex idea.

What if we separated the role of t2 bc's into their own category and skill train

Certain T2 BC's aren't used as actual boosters at all, like the sleipnir or absolution now a days. Wouldn't it make sense to make one section of t2 bc's be combat only and not have such a long train as the actual booster t2 bc's? Make the combat bc's like the sleipnir just be minmatar battlecruiser 5 only so you don't have to train all the boosting skills. Then if you really want a t2 bc booster like the astarte, then make people do the 90 day train to run them. It's the reason why you don't see t2 bc's being used that much other than lowsec boosting or large on grid fleet fights, like the damnation.

Gneeznow
Ship spinners inc
#268 - 2015-09-12 18:31:03 UTC
Kelsey Auditore wrote:
I made a post about wanting to shorten the train of t2 bc's already, but I do have a more complex idea.

What if we separated the role of t2 bc's into their own category and skill train

Certain T2 BC's aren't used as actual boosters at all, like the sleipnir or absolution now a days. Wouldn't it make sense to make one section of t2 bc's be combat only and not have such a long train as the actual booster t2 bc's? Make the combat bc's like the sleipnir just be minmatar battlecruiser 5 only so you don't have to train all the boosting skills. Then if you really want a t2 bc booster like the astarte, then make people do the 90 day train to run them. It's the reason why you don't see t2 bc's being used that much other than lowsec boosting or large on grid fleet fights, like the damnation.



That's similar how it used to work probably less than two years ago. There were fleet command and field command ships. If CCP followed your suggestion they'd be largely undoing a balance pass done less than 24 months ago, where you had booster commands and combat commands.

I think your idea is bad, command ships should retain their high skill requirements, their purposes is bonuses, if anything OGB is the problem not the high skill req
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#269 - 2015-09-12 18:32:28 UTC
Kelsey Auditore wrote:
I made a post about wanting to shorten the train of t2 bc's already, but I do have a more complex idea.

What if we separated the role of t2 bc's into their own category and skill train

Certain T2 BC's aren't used as actual boosters at all, like the sleipnir or absolution now a days. Wouldn't it make sense to make one section of t2 bc's be combat only and not have such a long train as the actual booster t2 bc's? Make the combat bc's like the sleipnir just be minmatar battlecruiser 5 only so you don't have to train all the boosting skills. Then if you really want a t2 bc booster like the astarte, then make people do the 90 day train to run them. It's the reason why you don't see t2 bc's being used that much other than lowsec boosting or large on grid fleet fights, like the damnation.


They used to be that way, it was terrible.

Also the 3% to links is a 3rd t2 skill bonus, they all have decent combat bonuses not, and if you only want to use them for combat, all you need to do is not train the warfare specialization skills.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Kelsey Auditore
The College Dropouts
#270 - 2015-09-12 18:36:30 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Kelsey Auditore wrote:
I made a post about wanting to shorten the train of t2 bc's already, but I do have a more complex idea.

What if we separated the role of t2 bc's into their own category and skill train

Certain T2 BC's aren't used as actual boosters at all, like the sleipnir or absolution now a days. Wouldn't it make sense to make one section of t2 bc's be combat only and not have such a long train as the actual booster t2 bc's? Make the combat bc's like the sleipnir just be minmatar battlecruiser 5 only so you don't have to train all the boosting skills. Then if you really want a t2 bc booster like the astarte, then make people do the 90 day train to run them. It's the reason why you don't see t2 bc's being used that much other than lowsec boosting or large on grid fleet fights, like the damnation.


They used to be that way, it was terrible.

Also the 3% to links is a 3rd t2 skill bonus, they all have decent combat bonuses not, and if you only want to use them for combat, all you need to do is not train the warfare specialization skills.



You still need to train the warfare skills to even fly a t2 bc.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#271 - 2015-09-12 18:39:03 UTC
Kelsey Auditore wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Kelsey Auditore wrote:
I made a post about wanting to shorten the train of t2 bc's already, but I do have a more complex idea.

What if we separated the role of t2 bc's into their own category and skill train

Certain T2 BC's aren't used as actual boosters at all, like the sleipnir or absolution now a days. Wouldn't it make sense to make one section of t2 bc's be combat only and not have such a long train as the actual booster t2 bc's? Make the combat bc's like the sleipnir just be minmatar battlecruiser 5 only so you don't have to train all the boosting skills. Then if you really want a t2 bc booster like the astarte, then make people do the 90 day train to run them. It's the reason why you don't see t2 bc's being used that much other than lowsec boosting or large on grid fleet fights, like the damnation.


They used to be that way, it was terrible.

Also the 3% to links is a 3rd t2 skill bonus, they all have decent combat bonuses not, and if you only want to use them for combat, all you need to do is not train the warfare specialization skills.



You still need to train the warfare skills to even fly a t2 bc.

Which are useful in any fleet with or without links.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#272 - 2015-09-12 19:04:48 UTC  |  Edited by: W0lf Crendraven
Baali Tekitsu wrote:
No it wasnt. All of them had some super niche traplord fits for solo pvp (2x ASB Ferox, Kite shield or Armor brawl Harbinger for frig blapping comes to mind for example) just like the Cyclone does now. If the Cyclone is good they are aswell. If they are bad then the Cyclone is aswell.


Execpt those were trap fits, like a light neutron talos or similar. The cyclone and the myrm were/are legit good pvp ships due to their active tank + slots + decent dps. Triple rep myrm and either single or dual rep cyclone are still good ships.


They however arent good in gangs nor are they good at pve, which is why you dont really see them very much.
DR BiCarbonate
Doomriders.
Ragequit Cancel Sub
#273 - 2015-09-12 19:11:11 UTC
Yo fozzie, great changes so far. Loving the Fleet cane.

Myrm is great for tanking and all but dat drone bay is atrocious. Any semi competent gang with just kill your drones and then you are just sitting there tanking all the things and dying a slow death. PLEASE double the drone bay to 400m3. Why does the stratios A CRUISER get 400 and a Myrm gets **** on with 200? really? Even the prophecy gets 25m3 more?

As for the cyclone, sure its can be strong in the right hands but you need all the bells and whistles to make it worth it. maxed skilled pilot who knows wtf they're doing with HG crystals (MG can work) Blue pill and maxed tengu/loki booster alt. Please take another look at it. It needs a tad more CPU. there are few viable fits for the cyclone and they all require fitting mods/rigs. Either swap it back to a turret boat (YES PLEASE, HAMs are pretty garbage) or give it more damage and some more cpu.

Also they all need a good chunk extra cargo space. Especially the active tanked ships.

As some have mentioned they also need that lock range to 100km. You know you ****** up when you have to introduce a mod that lets larger ships get away from the risk averse kite ships. As of right now MJD is probably 90% used to only get away from kite ships.

Just throwing this out there but how about a special rig/subsystem slot for CBC for only fitting MJD? Add another role bonus for MJD use either reduced fittings requirements or like 50% reduced reactivation time or even 50% reduced spool up time?

This pass is a step in the right direction to making BC relevant again but they could use a bit more love.
Ransu Asanari
Perkone
Caldari State
#274 - 2015-09-12 20:19:19 UTC
DR BiCarbonate wrote:
Myrm is great for tanking and all but dat drone bay is atrocious. Any semi competent gang with just kill your drones and then you are just sitting there tanking all the things and dying a slow death. PLEASE double the drone bay to 400m3. Why does the stratios A CRUISER get 400 and a Myrm gets **** on with 200? really? Even the prophecy gets 25m3 more?


This is actually a good point - the Myrmidon could use more drone bay space. It won't be OP since the bandwidth still limits it to 4 Heavies/Sentries. Right now you can't fit any spares if you want a flight of heavies to take advantage of the new drone speed bonus if you carry a full complement: 4 Heavies, 5 Mediums, 5 Smalls, 5 Utility/ECM. Even if you drop the utility, that would only give you room for one more Medium. Having a bit more drone space to be able to pull in damaged drones and swap out is good gameplay since you have to do a lot of micromanaging, which is already tough on an active tanked ship.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#275 - 2015-09-12 21:00:13 UTC
sooo...Does this mean we're stuck with missiles the way they are???
Nafensoriel
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#276 - 2015-09-12 23:37:19 UTC
Lets not drag the missile crap into this thread. While I personally didn't approve of the way the missile rebalance was handled the BC changes so far have been handled infinitely better with good information transfer and feedback. They are well thought out and define the roll far better than previously.

Post Vanguard BCs will be one of the defacto defense doctrine ships. Enough EHP to slug with the agility to zip around. Invading cruiser gangs will actually have to fight well or bugger off.
Quesa
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#277 - 2015-09-13 00:09:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Quesa
Rivr Luzade wrote:
Jeremiah Saken wrote:
Rename Missiles skills to kinetic damage skills. FFS non missiles races are better in missiles than Caldari. If you want to keep kinetic lock on Caldari, make Minmatars missiles boats - explosions lock, an Amarr EM lock. That would be interesting distinction, don't you think? You are denying your own missiles philosphy - selectable damage.

I do not understand the ruckus about the Kinetic damage bonus. The difference on a Cerb with 3 BCU between CN Scourge and CN Mjolnir is 90 DPS. Considering that some races have extremely high Kinetic resistances, they can reduce your applied kinetic DPS and if you chose another damage type, you can apply more DPS.

90 DPS difference on a Cerb is an entire launcher's worth of effective DPS. Add in that the base resists for Kin on both shields and armor, T1 and T2 hulls alike, starts out rather high, pigeon-holing that damage boost into a single damage type restricts the uses. With those kinetic being innately high (comparatively to other without resist mods) it effectively removes a great deal of what the damage boost provides, not just on specific ships or races either.

What if the Zealot only got it's damage bonus while shooting Minmatar?

Comparing the missile weapon system to turret based systems is problematic because of the application differences.
Quesa
Macabre Votum
Northern Coalition.
#278 - 2015-09-13 00:24:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Quesa
Stitch Kaneland wrote:

The whole kinetic being the less desirable damage type is bullsh**. Its less desirable now because gallente is master race and has arguably recieved way too many buffs. So everyone and their mother flies them. If you take a step back and look at other ships, then kinetic is still quite useful. In my arty ships i still prefer sabot over depleted uranium.

Save Minmatar, shield tankers generally have a high kin resist. Armor tankers, kin is usually 2nd or 3rd but I can't find any T1 or T2 ship where kin is lowest, again, save Minmatar.

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Kinetic is lowest resist for any t2 minmatar ship, most t1 ships have kinetic holes, the svipul and loki have kinetic holes. Yes you cant engage a deimos or ishtar in a t1 drake.
Sure but Minmatar is also very flat in their resist profiles so while Kin may be the weakest, it's very close to the other damage resists. Also, every race has another that shoots damage designed for the target's resist hole and at the same time, there is always one race that is very efficient in absorbing the primary damage type of another race.

General vulnerability list:
Kin -> Minmatarr
EM -> Caldari
Therm -> Amarr
Expl -> Gallente

Generall best-resist list:
Minmatarr -> EM
Caldari -> Thermal
Amarr -> Explosive
Gallente -> Kinetic

(if memory serves)

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
But guess what, the navy drake certainly has the potential to.
Admitting defeat by saying, lol use another ship.

Stitch Kaneland wrote:
Its no different if you compare amarr vs t2 minmatar, or gal vs t2 caldari (which have shield resist bonus on top of t2 resists). A deimos would struggle vs a nighthawk for example. Kinetic certainly has its uses, but is not the swiss army knife everyone wants it to be. A drake is not going to counter everyship in the game, accept it.

Amarr, Gallente and Minmitar primary weapon systems have the ability to, through ammo selection, shift their damage profile from one damage type to another....not by 100% but that is supposedly a benefit to using a missile system.


Put it this way, list any T1 ship that is traditionally a shield tanker/buffer and you'll be listing off ships that are prime targets for Lasers and decent targets for Hybrids (shields generally have a relatively low therm resist). Now, take that same list and look at the kin resists.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#279 - 2015-09-13 00:31:37 UTC
Nafensoriel wrote:
Lets not drag the missile crap into this thread. While I personally didn't approve of the way the missile rebalance was handled the BC changes so far have been handled infinitely better with good information transfer and feedback. They are well thought out and define the roll far better than previously.

Post Vanguard BCs will be one of the defacto defense doctrine ships. Enough EHP to slug with the agility to zip around. Invading cruiser gangs will actually have to fight well or bugger off.



I realize that, but I'm worried that this will make the issue of heavies go ignored.
Drake and drake Navy have been popular for reasons other than Heavy missile systems.
I'm afraid CCP doesn't see this only because the ships get used.
How many of them are HAM fit vs HML?
How many are flown solo vs fleets?
How many are used in fleets due to their innate nature to fit well into shield comps vs their raw dps?

I realize they're used more than others, but I rarely see one out on their own running solo compared to some of the better hulls such as brutix..
I'm just wondering if their usage is hindering the fact that heavy missiles are kinda bad.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#280 - 2015-09-13 01:06:15 UTC
I don't think there is anything wrong with damage locks as long as that specific ship is extremely good at dealing that specific damage type.

In the case of Amarr ships for instance this works because they generally have good raw DPS which makes up for their lack of damage selection. Also stealth bombers again are similar as they can punch through targets which may resisted against their specific damage type due to the fact that they deliver very good damage for their size and price.

I think the problem with the Drakes kinetic lock is that it is only just up to par with the other battlecruisers when dealing its preferred kinetic damage type, and is far behind when dealing any other type of damage.

I'm pretty confident the main reason your not seeing the Drake in PvP is entirely due to the kinetic lock as that really limits your target options without giving any tangible benefit.