These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Why Battleships?

First post
Author
Shesuj Shayiskhun
Doomheim
#181 - 2016-11-15 05:48:49 UTC
So far the dominix and megathrons are doing very well in pvp.
Steffles
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#182 - 2016-11-15 08:36:20 UTC
Korhaka wrote:
In the real world, there is a reason why we don't use battleships anymore. Why make this huge expensive battleship when any smaller ship can just launch a missile through the side and sink it just as easily. It is reasonable to expect as technology changes, combat doctrine would also change.

There are battleships still active they're simply renamed to heavy missile cruisers - Kirov class is the size of a WW2 battleship and when it was introduced the US reactivated a number of its own battleships in response, during the 1990's I think.

Russia also has a battleship / aircraft carrier hybrid.

The main reason battleships (guns) are no longer used is that missiles / planes are so much cheaper. The argument that a huge heavy ship is not viable is incorrect given there are plenty of huge aircraft carriers floating around. Its just cheaper to launch planes / missiles from extreme range while your vessel is out of range of return fire than to sail into a red zone and fire large calibre guns.

I think we'll see the reintroduction of large battleship type vessels again in the future with large offensive missile payloads. As the Kirov showed, if one large player re-introduces them other nations will respond and reintroduce them as well. If they thought they were inneffective they wouldn't react at all.

Hey CPP - Time we put highsec back to how it was originally designed - http://i.imgur.com/GT0T0oS.jpg

The Tigress
#183 - 2016-11-15 12:44:05 UTC
Man as a PvPer who uses mainly battleships and nothing else, in solo sometimes 2-3 man gangs you lot make me sick, they do perfectly fine just learn to Fly them correctly christ...
Steffles
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#184 - 2016-11-15 17:13:10 UTC
The Tigress wrote:
Man as a PvPer who uses mainly battleships and nothing else, in solo sometimes 2-3 man gangs you lot make me sick, they do perfectly fine just learn to Fly them correctly christ...

Looking at your first page on Zkill you are flying mainly Proteus, Tengu, Eos, Legion. You did lose a Maelstrom sure but that's not flying perfectly. You have a kill with a Vargur but its not exactly what we're talking about here, they're Marauders. If all batttleships had T2 resists, the bonuses that Marauders get and could mini seige this thread likely wouldnt' exist.

Hey CPP - Time we put highsec back to how it was originally designed - http://i.imgur.com/GT0T0oS.jpg

Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#185 - 2016-11-15 18:01:19 UTC
Shesuj Shayiskhun wrote:
So far the dominix and megathrons are doing very well in pvp.

'Geddons too.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs

baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#186 - 2016-11-16 06:58:55 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
Shesuj Shayiskhun wrote:
So far the dominix and megathrons are doing very well in pvp.

'Geddons too.


All of them do well, even the rokh which is still lord of the pipe bomb. The problem comes when you get people who only fly around in ships like the svipul who try a battleship, die horribly and blame the hull rather than themselves.
Beast of Revelations
Multiverse Trading
#187 - 2016-11-16 13:08:09 UTC
After reading the discussion for the last week I decided to train the skill and buy one of these things and put it through some trials just to get more of a personal perspective on it.

But first, a story. I'm probably the only person on these forums to have ever been on a battleship. And not just in a museum or decommissioned. I mean an actual real-life fully-functional fully-refurbished (basically brand-new) battleship on sea trials at sea. Not once, but several times in fact. My uncle was Senior Logistics Analyst for a major shipbuilding company in the USA. During the 80's, under Reagan, the USA took the old mothballed WWII battleships (or at least some of them) and brought them back into service. They were completely stripped-down and redone from the bare metal on up. Fully modern, advanced electronics and targeting systems, the whole 9 yards. One of these was the Battleship Iowa. It originally had a hardwood deck. And they actually restored the wood deck for historical reasons. When the thing was recommissioned, then VP Bush came and spoke at the recommissioning ceremony. I had free passes, courtesy of my uncle. After the speech, the guests got to crawl all over the thing. Then it was put in the water and went out for sea trials. Again, I was allowed to be on it. Despite what most people would think, the thing wasn't slow by any means. It was like a sea tiger. It could go really fast, and would cut right through the water. I was also amazed at how the thing could turn. They did donuts with the thing at full speed, and the ship would lean into the turns. Stirred up quite the wake and some good waves, heh. They also fired all the guns broadside once, and the whole ship moved sideways the other direction in recoil (I was later told that the shells were blanks).

Now onto the topic at hand. My first comment is that in-game these things seem to be saddled with what I will term 'arbitrary' drawbacks. It's like the developers said 'hmmm... we need to add some drawbacks here just for the sake of having some drawbacks,' as if they didn't already have enough.

For instance, the slow warp speed. I see no reason, neither in lore aspects, nor for gameplay or balance reasons, why it is there. As for lore or sci-fi, yes it is a bigger mass, but naturally it would also fit a bigger warp drive, so it isn't necessarily going to be slower than another ship in warp. Possibly slower to charge-up or initiate warp - sure. But not slower once warp is reached.

As for top impulse speed - no reason for it to be slow here. Slow in reaching top speed (i.e. slow in acceleration)? Sure, that's possible. Slow in maneuvering at top speed? Sure, that's possible. But not a slow top speed. Just because something is bigger or heavier, doesn't mean it is slower. I will submit examples now. A Boeing 747 is way bigger and heavier than a Corvette or Ferrari or whatever sports car you want to imagine. It is also much, much faster. For that matter the Saturn V (or was it a Titan? I forget the name) rocket that blasted men to the moon was much bigger and heavier than a 747, by orders of magnitude. It was also much faster, as even when still in the earth's atmosphere it broke the sound barrier, and if I'm not mistaken it achieved multiples of the sound barrier while still in the earth's atmosphere.

Also, no reason whatsoever for a battleship to take so long to target other ships. A ship's size or heaviness would have nothing to do with it's speed of targeting, it is purely a function of equipment, electronics, etc. An actual modern-day battleship would target something as fast as a frigate.

To conclude, I'd say that, as a start, remove the 'arbitrary' drawbacks which make no sense, neither lore-wise nor for balance. I've listed a few of these arbitrary drawbacks above. I'm sure there are more.

Also, if someone who is familiar would present a history of the balance of these things over the years, and the reasons for various changes over time, I'd be interested in hearing it.
mkint
#188 - 2016-11-16 13:38:59 UTC
IRL boats with a displacement hull, have a top hull speed based on their length. The longer the hull, the longer the period of the wave their wake makes, the faster they can go. So yeah, the Titanic had a hull speed of 25ish knots, and a 30ish foot sailboat has a hull speed of about 7 to 8 knots. However, you're missing the whole "fiction" part of science fiction. Game balance comes before realism. Though it would be interesting if we could get CCP to do a "realistic hull speeds" patch on sisi for a day, and see what happens when a titan is faster than a ceptor.

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#189 - 2016-11-16 13:48:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Beast of Revelations wrote:
After reading the discussion for the last week I decided to train the skill and buy one of these things and put it through some trials just to get more of a personal perspective on it.

But first, a story. I'm probably the only person on these forums to have ever been on a battleship. And not just in a museum or decommissioned.

-snip-

To conclude, I'd say that, as a start, remove the 'arbitrary' drawbacks which make no sense, neither lore-wise nor for balance. I've listed a few of these arbitrary drawbacks above. I'm sure there are more.

Also, if someone who is familiar would present a history of the balance of these things over the years, and the reasons for various changes over time, I'd be interested in hearing it.



I underlined the 2 main problems you have.

#1 This is EVE not real life. It's easy to see how you got stuck on the idea of what "battleships" should be, because you are confusing EVE Battleships (BS) with the real world Battleships (BB) you are familiar with. Sorry if this is harsh but that's silly as all hell. It would be like disliking EVE Carriers because you served on a real carrier and no real carrier could fit 2 Battleships inside them.


But the second part I highlighted (your last sentence) is the actual important thing. Battleships were the original 'solopwnmobiles' of EVE Online, occupying the same really screwed up place Super-Capital ships occupy now ie the only way to beat them was with another battleship OR crap loads of dudes in smaller ships who were willing to take hideous losses to kill one.

So CCP introduced the balance features you ignorantly call 'arbitrary', because without them EVE would be 'Battleships Online' and totally not fun for anyone else.

Last night a guy (Guillejejeje XDD) rolled a hull tanked Megathron (Gallente BS) into the constellation I play in. Can't post KMs here but you can look up the guy's name (he came back in a Dominix and cyno dropped a Thanatos on us, which my Alliance's response fleet killed).

It took us a small gang to kill him, and he still killed one of our HACs, a Curse, before we could kill him. So even after all of CCP's balance measures that still happens. Somehow you seem to want things to be different, you think that Mega should have been able to wipe the floor with 9 of us in Cruisers and Battlecruisers. \

But that wouldn't have happened, we'd have all just been in battleships ourselves. Balance exists for a reason, and you'd do better learning why rather than posting about things admit you don't know about.

You can start at YouTube.
Steffles
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#190 - 2016-11-16 14:09:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Steffles
Beast of Revelations wrote:


*Snipped for brevity*

Also, if someone who is familiar would present a history of the balance of these things over the years, and the reasons for various changes over time, I'd be interested in hearing it.

Hey Beast. I actually mentioned the recommissioning of those battleships a few posts up. Very cool you got to sail on one.

What you say in regards to speed of battleships (and we can include aircraft carriers as well) is entirely true. Interestingly at the current time the majority of frigates, destroyers and cruisers serving in navy's all around the world are not faster than the Kirov class "battlecruiser" that the ship you got to sail on and its sister ships were reactivated in response to.

Even the newer type ships, the tri-hulled stealth vessels like the Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) are only 8 knots faster than the Kirov and the 6 -7 knots faster than modern aircraft carriers.

Why CCP did what they did to battleships is anyones guess. When first started playing the game battleships locked quite well, warped and aligned okay, they were in a good spot. Unfortunately being battleships (at that time the most powerful ships in the game) there emerged two groups of thought:

1: Battleships are fine, they can instapop frigs and two pop cruisers but they're 10 times more expensive so everything is fine.
2: Battleships are evil, just because they're 10 times more expensive doesn't mean they should beat my frigate.

And so it was that a developer didn't think about this and proclaimed: "Battleships should not be solopwnmobiles"

I believe at that point battleships got a scan resolution nerf followed by sig and speed tracking nerfs etc.

From that point onwards it became a CCP and player theme that battleships must not be buffed or made into scary ships again all the while ignoring the fact that they are 10 times more expensive, and over time had declined to the point they were really not being used because almost everything was better than them due to buffs, new T2 hulls, T3 hulls etc.

Years later some developer decided that interceptors should be bubble immune and warp horribly faster because interceptors were in a bad place (they weren't but hey) but they couldn't have all ships warp faster because the no buffs to battleships thing would prevent that so they started at cruiser hulls, anything below would warp faster, anything above would warp slower. Not for any reason of balance just because.

Welcome to the world of CCP development, its a 5 year plan that changes weekly.

Oh and Jenn is a resident troll, has no idea what its talking about most of the time so its probably best to ignore. I doubt it was around in 2003.

Hey CPP - Time we put highsec back to how it was originally designed - http://i.imgur.com/GT0T0oS.jpg

Beast of Revelations
Multiverse Trading
#191 - 2016-11-16 14:13:20 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:

Battleships were the original 'solopwnmobiles' of EVE Online, occupying the same really screwed up place Super-Capital ships occupy now ie the only way to beat them was with another battleship OR crap loads of dudes in smaller ships who were willing to take hideous losses to kill one.


Perhaps you think a couple of frigs or cruisers should be able to take out a super-capital?

Quote:
So CCP introduced the balance features you ignorantly call 'arbitrary', because without them EVE would be 'Battleships Online' and totally not fun for anyone else.


The stuff I called 'arbitrary' is not what's making Battleships suck. Well, let me rephrase that. Sure, it makes them suck worse than they would, but it's incidental suck (slow warp speed, etc). Other issues are bigger, or suckier, if you will. I was simply saying that eliminating the arbitrary stuff would be a start to balancing them.

Anyway, I get it. Obviously you like smaller ships and hate battleships. Fine, to each his own. But hateful trolling does nothing to state your case and is rather pointless. So hopefully one of the more intelligent, more well-spoken chaps posting here will chime in with more input to my post above.

Thank you, and have a nice day :)
Beast of Revelations
Multiverse Trading
#192 - 2016-11-16 14:19:53 UTC
Steffles wrote:

Hey Beast. I actually mentioned the recommissioning of those battleships a few posts up. Very cool you got to sail on one.


I didn't see you mention it, I'll go up and check - thanks. And thanks for the history lesson - very enlightening. I guess it's just like every other game I'm familiar with - talented developers who don't have a clue as far as game design, balance, etc.
Lan Wang
Knights of the Posing Meat
Hell's Kitchen.
#193 - 2016-11-16 14:26:38 UTC
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Steffles wrote:

Hey Beast. I actually mentioned the recommissioning of those battleships a few posts up. Very cool you got to sail on one.


I didn't see you mention it, I'll go up and check - thanks. And thanks for the history lesson - very enlightening. I guess it's just like every other game I'm familiar with - talented developers who don't have a clue as far as game design, balance, etc.


Maybe its just you who doesn't have a clue about game design...maybe send them your resume if you are such good at the job. What?

Domination Nephilim - Angel Cartel

Calm down miner. As you pointed out, people think they can get away with stuff they would not in rl... Like for example illegal mining... - Ima Wreckyou*

Beast of Revelations
Multiverse Trading
#194 - 2016-11-16 14:28:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Beast of Revelations
Jenn aSide wrote:

It took us a small gang to kill him, and he still killed one of our HACs, a Curse, before we could kill him.


What a tragedy. I'm sure you think you should have gotten out with no losses, and should have been able to take him on with even less than a small gang.

As for me, my BS was attacked upon undocking from a station by two cruisers, one was Amarr, the other was Caldari. They attacked me completely without fear. At first I simply docked back up at the station (somehow the warp scrambler didn't scramble on one of the attempts). But then I said "waitaminute... I bought this thing to put it through trials, so let's put it through trials, losses be damned!" So I undocked again several minutes later. The two clowns were gone, but I just sat there outside the station and within a minute they warped right back and attacked me.

They won fairly easily. Then again, I'm no elite PvP'er, so take it with a grain of salt.
Cookie
Snakeoil Industries Ltd.
#195 - 2016-11-16 14:32:28 UTC
A 747 is a plane, a ferrari is a car, and the Saturn V was a rocket.
Maybe better compare a 747 to a F-14, or the Saturn V to a sidewinder rocket, and if you insist on bringing cars into the equation, compare a garbage truck with a ferrari in terms of size, agility and speed.
Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#196 - 2016-11-16 14:38:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It took us a small gang to kill him, and he still killed one of our HACs, a Curse, before we could kill him.


What a tragedy. I'm sure you think you should have gotten out with no losses, and should have been able to take him on with even less than a small gang.

As for me, my BS was attacked upon undocking from a station by two cruisers, one was Amarr, the other was Caldari. They attacked me completely without fear. At first I simply docked back up at the station (somehow the warp scrambler didn't scramble on one of the attempts). But then I said "waitaminute... I bought this thing to put it through trials, so let's put it through trials, losses be damned!" So I undocked again several minutes later. The two clowns were gone, but I just sat there outside the station and within a minute they warped right back and attacked me.

They won fairly easily. Then again, I'm no elite PvP'er, so take it with a grain of salt.


This is an example of someone who donesn't want to understand something.

It took NINE of us to kill that guy in one ship (a TECH 1 ship that was, btw , LESS EXPENSIVE than some of the ships it took to kill it),.

Even with a 9 to 1 advantage (in terms of players, something like 11 to 1 in terms of ship value) he still killed one of us and almost killed 2 others. 1 Less DPS ship on our part and the outcome would have been different.

Yet somehow you think these kinds of ships need to be even stronger. What you don't get is that if that happens people will jsut start flying battleships all the time, and in short order the gameplay will become stale and stagnant for all of us, but especially for people who don't like battleships.

I'm starting to understand that you aren't interested in good gameplay, but rather you just want the game to match your (real life based) expectations.
Othran
Route One
#197 - 2016-11-16 14:40:18 UTC
Much as I hate to say it, there was some justification to the warp speed changes - and more importantly acceleration/deceleration from warp changes.

For some time before that I had some fun running geddons(bulkheads/inertia stabs) alongside armoured cruiser gangs - the geddon kept up fine (it was faster than a Deimos into/out of warp Roll) and provided heavy neuts/sentries/MJD to the gang without any penalty to fleet movement. That's clearly a stupid situation and the changes dealt with it.

However the acceleration/deceleration changes to warp were too much for me, couldn't deal with the tedium on even moderate length roams so about the only BS I've flown since is the Mach.

Initially the first BSs were so OP that it required GM intervention - j0rt in the first Dominix was moved 50 systems away from Mara-Passari (where m0o had a long running gatecamp - like weeks long).

Then it was all laser BSs - BoB days.

Then it was megas in your face Lol

Then TE2's turned minnie BSs into god mode (well all AC ships really).

Everything changes.....
Jenn aSide
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#198 - 2016-11-16 14:45:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Jenn aSide
Beast of Revelations wrote:


Anyway, I get it. Obviously you like smaller ships and hate battleships.


This is where people like this start lying. I explained in a previous post that Battleships are my favorite class. I use battleships almost exclusively in PVE. and I use battleships where I can in pvp.

And it's because I like battleships (and unlike you, I have actual experience in EVE battleships) that I'm glad CCP has kept them from being unreasonably strong. They are ships that are good in the right hands but utterly terrible in unskilled hands (like your own).

They are imo perfectly situated. And they should stay that way.


Beast of Revelations wrote:
I guess it's just like every other game I'm familiar with - talented developers who don't have a clue as far as game design, balance, etc.


This (and your starting a thread about a ship class you didn't even have experience with until 3 days ago) tells us everything we need to know.
Specia1 K
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#199 - 2016-11-16 14:59:42 UTC
Jenn hate battleships?!?
Bwahahaha...

Champion of the Knights of the General Discussion

Thunderdome

Starrakatt
Celtic Anarchy
Dead Terrorists
#200 - 2016-11-16 15:42:24 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
Beast of Revelations wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:

It took us a small gang to kill him, and he still killed one of our HACs, a Curse, before we could kill him.


What a tragedy. I'm sure you think you should have gotten out with no losses, and should have been able to take him on with even less than a small gang.

As for me, my BS was attacked upon undocking from a station by two cruisers, one was Amarr, the other was Caldari. They attacked me completely without fear. At first I simply docked back up at the station (somehow the warp scrambler didn't scramble on one of the attempts). But then I said "waitaminute... I bought this thing to put it through trials, so let's put it through trials, losses be damned!" So I undocked again several minutes later. The two clowns were gone, but I just sat there outside the station and within a minute they warped right back and attacked me.

They won fairly easily. Then again, I'm no elite PvP'er, so take it with a grain of salt.


This is an example of someone who donesn't want to understand something.

It took NINE of us to kill that guy in one ship (a TECH 1 ship that was, btw , LESS EXPENSIVE than some of the ships it took to kill it),.

Even with a 9 to 1 advantage (in terms of players, something like 11 to 1 in terms of ship value) he still killed one of us and almost killed 2 others. 1 Less DPS ship on our part and the outcome would have been different.

Yet somehow you think these kinds of ships need to be even stronger. What you don't get is that if that happens people will jsut start flying battleships all the time, and in short order the gameplay will become stale and stagnant for all of us, but especially for people who don't like battleships.

I'm starting to understand that you aren't interested in good gameplay, but rather you just want the game to match your (real life based) expectations.

That's a Megathron? Off a Stargate/Station where he can't de-agress, one long point t1 cruiser (with ranged weapons) and a couple of Tracking Disruptor can kill it. But then, everything has a counter. The thing is a brawler, ofc you going to lose **** if you get in scram/web range.