These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

BS and T3 crusiers
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#61 - 2015-10-26 06:41:49 UTC
Battleships need a buff, but not a damage, more ehp, or cap. Those are all useless to a bs nowadays, what a bs needs is scan ress, a tiny bit of lock range so it can lock past 100km and warp speed.


And ideally someway to avoid camps.
O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#62 - 2015-10-26 08:15:34 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Battleships need a buff, but not a damage, more ehp, or cap. Those are all useless to a bs nowadays, what a bs needs is scan ress, a tiny bit of lock range so it can lock past 100km and warp speed.


And ideally someway to avoid camps.


I dont see how this will help BS at all. But youre more then welcome to explain yourself.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#63 - 2015-10-26 09:41:06 UTC
O2 jayjay wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Battleships need a buff, but not a damage, more ehp, or cap. Those are all useless to a bs nowadays, what a bs needs is scan ress, a tiny bit of lock range so it can lock past 100km and warp speed.


And ideally someway to avoid camps.


I dont see how this will help BS at all. But youre more then welcome to explain yourself.


Ok, so at least in small scale pvp bs are incredibly powerfull (for example http://eve-kill.net/?a=kill_related&kll_id=30418634), they offer super strong neuts, mjds which flat out counter the meta, top dps and all around great stats. The hyperion has an amazing tank, the fleet phoon offers amazing dps with application and so on, nearly all bs are incredibly strong. The kiting ones need more sensor strenght as you cant lock a frig before it has you locked down (i.e scrammed and webbed). Locking range to utilize mjd dunks and warp speed to roam. Nearly al bs are super good IF they can get on grid on a fair fight.

Which they cant, which is the problem. nerfing t3s wouldnt do anything about that.




Bs counter logis, they do awesome alpha and so on. Take snuff and shadow, 2 of the best alliances if it comes to actual pvp, they all mainly utilize mainly non t3 doctines.



Bs issues arent t3s, never were.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#64 - 2015-10-26 10:39:08 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Ellendras Silver wrote:


1. ISK is irrelevant when it comes to balancing, and yes they are they do too much DPS with too much tank and way too fast and agile too pack that much tank and DPS it simply outclasses everything.





No its not, everything is balanced by isk. A worm is a way way way better tristan, and its balanced by cost (and postnerf it will still be way better).


A t2 bc costs more then a t1 bc and its balanced by cost. Everything is balanced by isk, ships that cost pirate battleship isk need to hold their own vs them in some ways to be good.


When CCP added titans they ere balanced by cost with CCP stating only one or two could be afforded. We have hundreds of them. You cannot justify an overpowered ship by cost.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#65 - 2015-10-26 10:57:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
baltec1 wrote:

When CCP added titans they ere balanced by cost with CCP stating only one or two could be afforded. We have hundreds of them. You cannot justify an overpowered ship by cost.


So you know better than CCP?

Cost is one of the primary factors when making the decision to field a ship in PVP.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
Aivlis Eldelbar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#66 - 2015-10-26 11:25:11 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

When CCP added titans they ere balanced by cost with CCP stating only one or two could be afforded. We have hundreds of them. You cannot justify an overpowered ship by cost.


So you know better than CCP?

Cost is one of the primary factors when making the decision to field a ship in PVP.


CCP have themselves admitted that cost balancing doesn't work for supercaps.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#67 - 2015-10-26 11:32:30 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Rek Seven wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

When CCP added titans they ere balanced by cost with CCP stating only one or two could be afforded. We have hundreds of them. You cannot justify an overpowered ship by cost.


So you know better than CCP?

Cost is one of the primary factors when making the decision to field a ship in PVP.


Turns out we did, they expected one or two and we wound up with hundreds of them, this is why CCP had to nerf titans massively. Balancing based upon cost never works.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#68 - 2015-10-26 11:36:27 UTC
I said it was a factor of balance, not the sole method of balancing. To say cost doesn't factor in to the ship meta balance in eve, is ignorant.

The wishlist is pretty much complete...
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#69 - 2015-10-26 11:36:52 UTC
Aivlis Eldelbar wrote:
Rek Seven wrote:
baltec1 wrote:

When CCP added titans they ere balanced by cost with CCP stating only one or two could be afforded. We have hundreds of them. You cannot justify an overpowered ship by cost.


So you know better than CCP?

Cost is one of the primary factors when making the decision to field a ship in PVP.


CCP have themselves admitted that cost balancing doesn't work for supercaps.



It would if people actually fielded them without a few hundred in support.

But the trouble is cost only works if the ships are ever lost. Stockpiling until you have the apex force breaks that completely.


If cost really were no barrier at all, people wouldn't be so shy about lobbing these ships around.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#70 - 2015-10-26 12:02:45 UTC  |  Edited by: W0lf Crendraven
baltec1 wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
Ellendras Silver wrote:


1. ISK is irrelevant when it comes to balancing, and yes they are they do too much DPS with too much tank and way too fast and agile too pack that much tank and DPS it simply outclasses everything.





No its not, everything is balanced by isk. A worm is a way way way better tristan, and its balanced by cost (and postnerf it will still be way better).


A t2 bc costs more then a t1 bc and its balanced by cost. Everything is balanced by isk, ships that cost pirate battleship isk need to hold their own vs them in some ways to be good.


When CCP added titans they ere balanced by cost with CCP stating only one or two could be afforded. We have hundreds of them. You cannot justify an overpowered ship by cost.


This is only true if a ship breaks a meta, i.e it being so amazingly good that cost no longer is a factor. For t3s it isnt true, cost (sp and isk) matters for them, it may not be for doctrines (but t3s arent the best ships there anyways), but for the shipclass overall it does. A deimos is a better thorax, if cost didnt matter the thorax would be totally pointless, but it isnt.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#71 - 2015-10-26 12:35:54 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:

This is only true if a ship breaks a meta, i.e it being so amazingly good that cost no longer is a factor. For t3s it isnt true, cost (sp and isk) matters for them, it may not be for doctrines (but t3s arent the best ships there anyways), but for the shipclass overall it does. A deimos is a better thorax, if cost didnt matter the thorax would be totally pointless, but it isnt.

Your argument breaks down in that a Deimos is MEANT TO BE a better Thorax.
Bolded to really make the point.

Though it's not quite accurate as it's more specialised, but T2 is meant to be over T1.
BS however are not meant to be over all other sub caps.

Lock range I wouldn't complain about, however warp speed negates the whole point of Battleships taking a while to get places, and scan res negates the point of them being weak against frigates.
EHP however is an area they are certainly weak, with HAC's and T3's even if they don't equal BS, pushing in moderately close to the BS on EHP's. Which the Battleship should be the king of as a slow moving ship (Relative to other subcaps.)
Personally I think the active tank of a T1 BS is also far too weak, but if you touch that the Marauder tank gets even more OP, so the only place you could probably deal with active tank is in giving them increased capacitor.
Now that CCP are also on board with giving ship classes increased warp strength you could also use that as a tool to set BS apart and give them 2 or 3 warp strength to make them a bit harder to hold as well. I'd go for 3, so you need a faction scram to hold them with just one module. Otherwise you need multiple.

But no to things that simply make BS a larger model cruiser like scan res and warp speed.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#72 - 2015-10-26 12:53:16 UTC
W0lf Crendraven wrote:
...
This is only true if a ship breaks a meta, i.e it being so amazingly good that cost no longer is a factor. For t3s it isnt true, cost (sp and isk) matters for them, it may not be for doctrines (but t3s arent the best ships there anyways), but for the shipclass overall it does. A deimos is a better thorax, if cost didnt matter the thorax would be totally pointless, but it isnt.


You comparing apples with oranges. The Thorax is a totally different boat than the Deimos bespite looking alike they only have small things in common and very different roles.

Yes cost is a factor in balance and battleships are not completly terrible - in their own shipclass. But since nobody really want to take ages to get from point a to b our beloved battleships became more of liability then a joy.

We still fly battleships, I know I do but when you want to a handful of buddies on a roam and ask them if they would like a battleship with them they are more than likely to say nay, even battlecruisers are kinda pushing it.

Now discussing sleeper cruisers and battleships is not an easy topic. Some say they are overpowered, I say they aren't but with the twist that low- and nullsec are not the only places in New Eden.

It is fine if you ignore w-space but it is a thing and some effects may really mess your tech 3 boat up. Like a Tengu in a Wolf-Rayet effect wormhole or a Legion in a Pulsar.

Maybe in the time between roam you want to make some isk in one of those and here they are the Sleepless Guardians of the blue loot - using your freshly nerfed tech 3 cruiser, you will be made aware of the error of your ways really quickly.

So take a battleship you say? My response, have you even met an unfriendly fleet of Sleepless Guardians??

They are known to come in fleets and shoot you a new one in a few seconds - no, you will not be able to warp, this is the end for your ship - if only you have a tankier smaller vessel to use here..

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#73 - 2015-10-26 13:08:57 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:


It sounds like a contradiction and admittedly hypocritical when you quote snipets of my post but not if you consider and understand the entire thing in context... But I fail to see how I lied.

I never said T3s are perfectly balanced I said t3 cruisers are not "overpowered".

I also said nothing about price acting as a "justification" for power. I said it was a balancing factor, if you acknowledge the fact that eve is a game about risk and reward, where assets have a value and can be permanently lost.




My quotes didnt take anything out of context. You expressed a disdain for people spouting opinion as fact then did the same a few lines later. And I said you lied because it seemed more likely than being oblivious. You said if CCP thought the T3's were op they'd have nerfed them like the ishtar, implying they'd never been nerfed. And yet they have been nerfed, funnily enough at the same time as the ishtar.

Saying that costs is a balancing factor is the same as saying cost balances power. And that means you believe cost is a justification for power. Same way you're saying the sp loss is a justification for power. Turns out that balancing things this way doesnt really work well. No matter how expensive a ship is, someone is eventually going to be fielding them in large numbers.

Id rather see their cost come down, the sp loss mechanic removed and their combat subsystems nerfed such that they arent just bigger tougher hacs than using their restrictions as an excuse for their current state. Its only a few subsystems that are making the t3 overpowered and T3's can afford to be nerfed without losing the Jack of all trades master of none role.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#74 - 2015-10-26 13:30:58 UTC
Rek Seven wrote:
I said it was a factor of balance, not the sole method of balancing. To say cost doesn't factor in to the ship meta balance in eve, is ignorant.


It isn't a factor to people like me. T3c have always been far too powerful for their class and contrary to what some here would have you believe they make up a good bulk of the powerblocks fleets pushing out everything from T1 cruisers to hacs to recons to command ships to battleships. They simply have too much tank and fitting room along with options that render entire lineups useless such as command ships.
W0lf Crendraven
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#75 - 2015-10-27 00:54:23 UTC
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
W0lf Crendraven wrote:

This is only true if a ship breaks a meta, i.e it being so amazingly good that cost no longer is a factor. For t3s it isnt true, cost (sp and isk) matters for them, it may not be for doctrines (but t3s arent the best ships there anyways), but for the shipclass overall it does. A deimos is a better thorax, if cost didnt matter the thorax would be totally pointless, but it isnt.

Your argument breaks down in that a Deimos is MEANT TO BE a better Thorax.
Bolded to really make the point.

Though it's not quite accurate as it's more specialised, but T2 is meant to be over T1.
BS however are not meant to be over all other sub caps.

Lock range I wouldn't complain about, however warp speed negates the whole point of Battleships taking a while to get places, and scan res negates the point of them being weak against frigates.
EHP however is an area they are certainly weak, with HAC's and T3's even if they don't equal BS, pushing in moderately close to the BS on EHP's. Which the Battleship should be the king of as a slow moving ship (Relative to other subcaps.)
Personally I think the active tank of a T1 BS is also far too weak, but if you touch that the Marauder tank gets even more OP, so the only place you could probably deal with active tank is in giving them increased capacitor.
Now that CCP are also on board with giving ship classes increased warp strength you could also use that as a tool to set BS apart and give them 2 or 3 warp strength to make them a bit harder to hold as well. I'd go for 3, so you need a faction scram to hold them with just one module. Otherwise you need multiple.

But no to things that simply make BS a larger model cruiser like scan res and warp speed.



Are you high or something, bs active tanks being to weak? You get over 2.5k out of a hyperion with heat without any faction or ded mod or links or implants (with everything 9k) , 2.1k or so for a mael with a 60mil booster and so on (with implants and links 5.7k) + marauders. Sure you arent going to get great reps out of a pest or phoon but they have other qualities instead.
O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#76 - 2015-10-30 17:57:00 UTC
Can we get this BS love soon?
Valacus
Streets of Fire
#77 - 2015-10-30 20:24:13 UTC
While battleships certainly need a role bonus, just leaving T3s as is doesn't fix any problems. T3Cs need a nerf. Buffing battleships to 2k DPS is not going to fix T3Cs. Don't revolve your battleship buff around the T3C, and don't nerf the T3C around battleships.
O2 jayjay
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#78 - 2015-10-30 20:43:52 UTC  |  Edited by: O2 jayjay
Valacus wrote:
While battleships certainly need a role bonus, just leaving T3s as is doesn't fix any problems. T3Cs need a nerf. Buffing battleships to 2k DPS is not going to fix T3Cs. Don't revolve your battleship buff around the T3C, and don't nerf the T3C around battleships.


Can you explain how this would not fix T3? It would be 2k-3k BS btw. I dont think a T3 fleet can go toe to toe with a BS fleet with my buffs. The SP loss is nessary for T3 as its a perfect balance in risk vs reward. when and if they did nerf T3 how does this help BS? What roles will T3 have? Nerf them down to ratting boats? What good does that do? Im looking at the big picture and they are fine where they sit atm. Making BS more superior then T3 fixes everything. I understand HAC are suppose to be stronger but depending on fitting, The same faction T3 will more then likely lose to a HAC of the same faction. Fitting can easily change the outcome in a solo fight. Again I dont see the need to nerf T3 and I also dont see why BS don't deserve my buff. If you dont agree please explain in detail why.
Matthew Dust
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#79 - 2015-11-18 11:13:40 UTC
OP is right, Battleships need a complete rework. Not only a buff in DPS, and HP, but let's not forget, caldari amarr ships have dedicated ewar battleships. Also, the Nestor only reps armor, there are no Shield Repping Battleships. BUFF THE BATTLESHIPS!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#80 - 2015-11-18 11:36:44 UTC
O2 jayjay wrote:
Valacus wrote:
While battleships certainly need a role bonus, just leaving T3s as is doesn't fix any problems. T3Cs need a nerf. Buffing battleships to 2k DPS is not going to fix T3Cs. Don't revolve your battleship buff around the T3C, and don't nerf the T3C around battleships.


Can you explain how this would not fix T3? It would be 2k-3k BS btw. I dont think a T3 fleet can go toe to toe with a BS fleet with my buffs. The SP loss is nessary for T3 as its a perfect balance in risk vs reward. when and if they did nerf T3 how does this help BS? What roles will T3 have? Nerf them down to ratting boats? What good does that do? Im looking at the big picture and they are fine where they sit atm. Making BS more superior then T3 fixes everything. I understand HAC are suppose to be stronger but depending on fitting, The same faction T3 will more then likely lose to a HAC of the same faction. Fitting can easily change the outcome in a solo fight. Again I dont see the need to nerf T3 and I also dont see why BS don't deserve my buff. If you dont agree please explain in detail why.


The very fact you are comparing tech three cruisers with battleships should show why t3c need a mighty nerf.