These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Fixing battleships
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#41 - 2015-12-11 18:53:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
I alpha'ed a MWDing bomber using citadel cruise missiles. Close range turret BS will also work on frigates if you fly and fit your battleship so it can do the job.

I am very curious how this was accomplished? Was the bomber stationary? How many target painters did you have on it? Did you hit its resist hole? Did it have any tank fittings at all, even a damage control? Did you use tech 2 precision citadel cruise missiles? Or perhaps when you say "using citadel cruise missiles" what you really mean is that the volley did contain citadel cruise missiles, among other things?

Or perhaps those things really do apply better than I am aware? I'll admit I haven't flown a Phoenix, and who knows how bad the one that shot at me was.



baltec1 wrote:
All battleships are viable and there are a lot of options for things to do with them from solo to small gang to fleet engagements. The only problem is frigate and cruiser pilots don't want to take the time and spend the isk learning how to fly battleships

I would agree that almost all battleships are viable...there's just one that I wouldn't call viable. That one is the Scorpion.






It isn't merely viable. It is extraordinarily powerful for how cheap it is. Viable is an understatement of epic proportions. Be very afraid of the armor Scorpion because it heralds a time when Caldari ships can drop their shields and still kill you harder than you've ever been killed before.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Linna Excel
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#42 - 2015-12-11 18:56:46 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
The only problem is frigate and cruiser pilots don't want to take the time and spend the isk learning how to fly battleships


For PvP purposes, using a battleship when you aren't in the richest alliance in the game that can reimburse anything short of a supercarrier or titan is very risky. If you can make 100 million isk/hour or more, sure you can afford to lose a battleship or two in pvp.

Look at it like this, a good L4 will get you a cruiser hull. A battleship hull costs about 20 cruiser hulls. That's a lot. Exploration is hit and miss. Mining is so boring it makes grown men cry. Ratting in null in a BS isn't something everyone does. Not everyone can afford to plex a PvP battleship. Not everyone is a scammer.

ISK is the engine that runs PvP for many players and until you get to the point where you can afford to lose more than 1 million on a T1 frigate or 12 million + fittings for a cruiser, making that jump is just too much.

But you are right about how long it takes to skill up. I don't have T2 heavies. If I started today, it'd take me over a month to get them. It doesn't make much sense for someone like me to head out in a battleship with T1s (assuming I can afford it), when I know the guy with T2s will blow me away.

Now I could bring a friend sure. But then the other guy brings a friend. So maybe I could bring another friend in a logi. Then the other side brings a friend with a logi. Next thing I know, I've got a null alliance opposing another one and everyone is starved for content because neither side wants to commit to a fight until they know they've got X+1 and then goonswarm comes in and kicks both of our butts because they are starving for content as well.

I can has blogging skills!
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#43 - 2015-12-11 19:03:24 UTC
Linna Excel wrote:
For PvP purposes, using a battleship when you aren't in the richest alliance in the game that can reimburse anything short of a supercarrier or titan is very risky. If you can make 100 million isk/hour or more, sure you can afford to lose a battleship or two in pvp.

It's not hard to get into an alliance rich enough to reimburse, but they will only reimburse what they want you flying. It can be a little tricky to get into reimbursible battleship fleets these days. Insurance helps but it helps best when you intend to lose the battleship.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Cara Forelli
State War Academy
Caldari State
#44 - 2015-12-11 19:04:46 UTC
Just fix MJDs.

Want to talk? Join my channel in game: House Forelli

Titan's Lament
Linna Excel
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2015-12-11 19:15:26 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Linna Excel wrote:
For PvP purposes, using a battleship when you aren't in the richest alliance in the game that can reimburse anything short of a supercarrier or titan is very risky. If you can make 100 million isk/hour or more, sure you can afford to lose a battleship or two in pvp.

It's not hard to get into an alliance rich enough to reimburse, but they will only reimburse what they want you flying. It can be a little tricky to get into reimbursible battleship fleets these days. Insurance helps but it helps best when you intend to lose the battleship.


Not everyone wants to join an alliance though. I mean even some of the established null sec alliances have thrown in the towel awhile back because thanks obama-fozzysov. Even if you do join an alliance there's that "fly what they want you to fly" deal. So if I want to fly domis and they want to fly apocs, or baltec megathrons, or that pirate one I'm forgetting the name of, I'm screwed. Then there's that deal when they expect you to form up for a fleet fight that may or may not happen when it's late and you just want to go to bed but because of the timers of the guys you may or may not be fighting, that's when you have to fleet up.

So yes you can get free battleships (or BCs or whatever) but there's that extra chore and drama at times you might not be up for it.

It's not a solution for everyone.

I can has blogging skills!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#46 - 2015-12-11 19:37:53 UTC
Linna Excel wrote:


For PvP purposes, using a battleship when you aren't in the richest alliance in the game that can reimburse anything short of a supercarrier or titan is very risky. If you can make 100 million isk/hour or more, sure you can afford to lose a battleship or two in pvp.



[/quote]

I don't get strategic ship replacement and I earn my isk in highsec level 4s and level 3s.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2015-12-11 19:51:59 UTC
Linna Excel wrote:
So yes you can get free battleships (or BCs or whatever) but there's that extra chore and drama at times you might not be up for it.

It's not a solution for everyone.

It's not really that hard. The bigger your alliance, the more time zone options you have. You also won't usually have very high activity requirements. If you are an active player, you can hop into a fleet engagement every now and then when you want to go, just fly one of the multiple ship options. Sometimes you have multiple fleets to choose from, and a few of the fleets are planned in advance.

My corp is required to police members to be something like 2% active, meaning each member must participate in at least 2% of official fleet actions, or the corp must make a net average across all its players of 2% activity. Sometimes I'll get in a handful of fleets, then just not play for several weeks. I'm probably below par, but I'm not far below it. If I recruit anyone who is more active than I am, that gives me bonus points.

My point here is that being a member of a large alliance isn't as much a chore as you may have heard.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Vic Jefferson
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#48 - 2015-12-11 21:04:50 UTC
The cost argument is not very valid, both due to what baltec1 is saying (there are currently huge income streams in Hi Sec), and after insurance, T1 Battleships actually don't cost anywhere nearly as much as they seem, especially compared to other hulls commonly used for sport.

There are some really good solo or micro gang fits out there; its not entirely an issue of weapons application. Rapid Heavy Armageddon seems to be in style, for example. It's a problem of warp speed, lock speed, speed on grid, etc. If more people fielded battleships in the first place, then it would be a good time to start fitting and flying battleships with weapons designed to fight other battleships.

If I want to solo or small gang, generally I would pick things that have some control over what fights they take. Battleships just ask to be caught and subsequently dropped on, whereas faster things can both find more fights faster, and have the option of whether to engage or not.

Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X.....XI.....XII?
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2015-12-11 21:52:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
Yes, I can atTEST to what he said. Battleships are best flown when you are hoping to get into a fight. In a medium gang or larger, they tend to win fights. Some of us mostly fly medium or larger gangs, that's just how we roll in the bigger alliances. It can be a blessing or a curse.

edit: I'm tired, I should drink coffee and go outside.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Valacus
Streets of Fire
#50 - 2015-12-12 03:38:47 UTC
Regardless of whether battleships are actually expensive to the wallet, they're expensive on the killboard and they're big and slow. They beg to be dropped on and they are worth dropping on. They're easy to drop on and they don't excel at fighting anything other than other battleships, of which there are already too few.

And it's not that frig/cruiser pilots have no wish to learn how to pilot battleships, but they have no need to. Cruisers and frigs can take on anything in appropriate numbers and setups and they can decide what they fight. You can't force them into it, unlike battleships which you can force into a fight easily. Cruisers like the Cerb can fight from well outside 100km, so short range battleships are completely out of the questions. Cruiser gangs are typically kiting gangs, and battleships make easy kiting prey. They couldn't catch you in their dreams.

Then you have t3 cruisers, with battleship tank, cruiser speed, and cruiser sig. They outclass battleships by a mile, especially in large gangs. They are notoriously hard to bomb because you can't apply enough damage to them because of their sig, and their fitting options are more plentiful. They're a much better option than battleships.
Frost Journeaux
Sub--Zero
#51 - 2015-12-12 05:34:08 UTC
Valacus wrote:
So battleships have been more than lackluster since the warp nerf, with the obvious exception aside. What can be done to fix them other than just undoing the nerf? What if battleships received their weapon bonus not just for the weapon size they employ, but for that entire weapon class? IE, the Raven now receives a rate of fire bonus to torpedoes, cruise missiles, rapid heavies, HAMs, heavy missiles, rapid lights, lights, and rockets, as well as a velocity bonus to all of the same. The Raven is now literally king of the missiles. This would open up the small ship killing ability of battleships without making them too anti-small ship, because obviously they aren't getting any faster. Now small ships have to think twice before engaging a battleship. It could be, and probably is, fit to kill you. Good luck sig tanking that Raven. He's got your number. Run or feel his wrath. This would also make battleship sized weapons viable again, because now there might actually be other battleships around to shoot, like the ones looking to kill frigates and cruisers.

Other suggestions are also welcome.

i think the problem more lies in ehp than anything else.

battleships are big bulky and barely more ehp than other ships. (i can brink tank a Proteus to more ehp than an abaddon.)
Linna Excel
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#52 - 2015-12-12 05:42:55 UTC
Frost Journeaux wrote:
battleships are big bulky and barely more ehp than other ships. (i can brink tank a Proteus to more ehp than an abaddon.)


What are the EHPs of various ships for comparison?

I can has blogging skills!
Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#53 - 2015-12-12 09:00:34 UTC
Frost Journeaux wrote:
Valacus wrote:
So battleships have been more than lackluster since the warp nerf, with the obvious exception aside. What can be done to fix them other than just undoing the nerf? What if battleships received their weapon bonus not just for the weapon size they employ, but for that entire weapon class? IE, the Raven now receives a rate of fire bonus to torpedoes, cruise missiles, rapid heavies, HAMs, heavy missiles, rapid lights, lights, and rockets, as well as a velocity bonus to all of the same. The Raven is now literally king of the missiles. This would open up the small ship killing ability of battleships without making them too anti-small ship, because obviously they aren't getting any faster. Now small ships have to think twice before engaging a battleship. It could be, and probably is, fit to kill you. Good luck sig tanking that Raven. He's got your number. Run or feel his wrath. This would also make battleship sized weapons viable again, because now there might actually be other battleships around to shoot, like the ones looking to kill frigates and cruisers.

Other suggestions are also welcome.

i think the problem more lies in ehp than anything else.

battleships are big bulky and barely more ehp than other ships. (i can brink tank a Proteus to more ehp than an abaddon.)

That's not a problem with the Battleships... Blink

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#54 - 2015-12-12 09:37:34 UTC
Gabriel Karade wrote:
That's not a problem with the Battleships... Blink

While strategic cruisers could use a hit point nerf, battleships could stand to gain some hit points. Buffer-tank battleships don't have all that much higher EHP than equivalent buffer-tanked combat battlecruisers, and a large part of the problem is due to the battlecruisers using the same buffer modules that the battleships use. Easy fix: add larger shield extenders and armor plates.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#55 - 2015-12-12 09:37:39 UTC
Valacus wrote:
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Howabout let's not marginalize smaller ships and instead push for design changes that maintain battleship's niche? More weapons to shoot little ships just crushes the usage of little ships while causing battleships to be better overall. Why don't we instead capitalize on what battleships already do best, and make them do that even better? For instance, battleships have the most hit points. Problem is, they just don't have a lot more than battlecruisers. So howabout buff battleship hit points?


Nothing is going to crush little ships, because speed is still the king of EVE and battleships don't have it. Giving battleships the ability to deal with them just makes little ships select their target more carefully, as opposed to just blobbing Tristans on anything and everything.

I dont have time to write a more comprehensive reply at the moment, but giving BS frigate sized weapon bonuses is a terrible idea that will screw up the meta. Battle ships need unique abilities (like the mjd and heavy neut) to counter smaller stuff, and then make them better at what they already do (raw dps and ehp). Giving them frigate size weapons simply means it comes down to a calculation of dps vs tank for a pvp encounter without a lot of the nuance which makes pvp fun and unpredictable.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#56 - 2015-12-12 09:42:42 UTC
Gabriel Karade wrote:
Frost Journeaux wrote:
Valacus wrote:
So battleships have been more than lackluster since the warp nerf, with the obvious exception aside. What can be done to fix them other than just undoing the nerf? What if battleships received their weapon bonus not just for the weapon size they employ, but for that entire weapon class? IE, the Raven now receives a rate of fire bonus to torpedoes, cruise missiles, rapid heavies, HAMs, heavy missiles, rapid lights, lights, and rockets, as well as a velocity bonus to all of the same. The Raven is now literally king of the missiles. This would open up the small ship killing ability of battleships without making them too anti-small ship, because obviously they aren't getting any faster. Now small ships have to think twice before engaging a battleship. It could be, and probably is, fit to kill you. Good luck sig tanking that Raven. He's got your number. Run or feel his wrath. This would also make battleship sized weapons viable again, because now there might actually be other battleships around to shoot, like the ones looking to kill frigates and cruisers.

Other suggestions are also welcome.

i think the problem more lies in ehp than anything else.

battleships are big bulky and barely more ehp than other ships. (i can brink tank a Proteus to more ehp than an abaddon.)

That's not a problem with the Battleships... Blink

When you are running at 400 + sig radius and using your mids and lows for damage and application mods then that EHP doesn't last long. It may look good on paper, but in reality more base HP would be a massive boost, and this is coming from some one that actually uses solo and small gang BSs in the current meta which I am guessing a lot do not.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#57 - 2015-12-12 09:58:47 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
All of these ideas are terrible.

Battleships are fine, the reason why a lot of people think they are no good is because they don't take the time to learn to use them.

Agreed, most the people commenting need to figure out how to use battleships first before suggesting such sweeping changes. Battleships can be used very successfully against smaller ships, they just take a lot more skill and understanding of mechanics to unleash their raw DPS. I want to see some BS buffs, but a lot of the suggestions in this thread are way off the mark.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#58 - 2015-12-12 10:05:11 UTC
And just to add, the biggest nerf to solo and small gang pvp is going to be the new 37km hic scram. If you want to help BSs then first thing is you need to nerf that, or at least make mjds immune to its affect.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2015-12-12 20:09:19 UTC
Moac Tor wrote:
And just to add, the biggest nerf to solo and small gang pvp is going to be the new 37km hic scram. If you want to help BSs then first thing is you need to nerf that, or at least make mjds immune to its affect.

It's not going to affect battleships much because almost nobody flies HICs. Before MJDs came out, HICs could easily have been tackling battleships but they weren't. We know from experience that all the HIC buffs simply are not enough to make people want to fly HICs, because they would rather pay 1/3rd less for a HAC which has the same combat power but lacks an attribute they'll almost never use.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#60 - 2015-12-12 20:19:00 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Moac Tor wrote:
And just to add, the biggest nerf to solo and small gang pvp is going to be the new 37km hic scram. If you want to help BSs then first thing is you need to nerf that, or at least make mjds immune to its affect.

It's not going to affect battleships much because almost nobody flies HICs. Before MJDs came out, HICs could easily have been tackling battleships but they weren't. We know from experience that all the HIC buffs simply are not enough to make people want to fly HICs, because they would rather pay 1/3rd less for a HAC which has the same combat power but lacks an attribute they'll almost never use.

Wait a few months for people to cotton on and then train up skills (which is already happening) and I am certain that we will see solo and small gang HIC use rise massively. You'd be crazy not to use them, particularly considering the fact that the ISK cost is trivial for a lot of players.