| Author |
Topic |
 Erotic Irony 0bsession
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 14:30:00 - [ 1]
Edited by: Erotic Irony on 22/05/2008 15:53:37 Quote: Is it safe to assume the gains a black ops like the Redeemer enjoys over the Armageddon should be in parity with the gains a Pilgrim gets over the Arbitrator? If so, then there are some serious gaps I don't follow.
I had to use these two links to get a side by side view but surely you have more sophisticated spreadsheets:
http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/item_compare.php?share=643-22428 http://www.battleclinic.com/eve_online/item_compare.php?share=11965-628
The least controversial is the cap difference I think, for the recons, the gain is 20%, for the battleships, no gain for using tech two. Is this unprecedented in comparing tech one to tech two hulls? No other t2 ship has the same or less cap than its t1 counterpart. This is a crippling deal breaker.
As the Ewar powerhouse, pilgrim justifiably enjoys double the sensor strength of the t1, Black ops again have no difference. Same for locked targets, pilgrim gains one, redeemer is identical to tech one.
On scan res, pilgrim locks 12% slower than arby but has over 100% more lock range. Redeemer comes out ahead initially, 20% faster scan res but for reasons unknown only has 4% more lock range than the geddon--figure in the cloak and again we have a deal breaker. Running the cloak practically means dampening yourself.
On both shield and armor the numbers don't make sense. Both pilgrim and redeemer lose approximately the same amount of shield hit points by upgrading to tech two, 22% and 20% respectively, but this difference is heightened by the resistance gains of the pilgrim to explosive and kinetic, 20% and 15% increases; redeemer on shield gains a paltry 4% and 3% respectively. The redeemer's shield recharge is even longer than the geddon's despite having less hit points.
On armor, the pilgrim gains about 30% more armor and bigger native explosive and kinetic bonuses, 40% and 18.75% while the Redeemer has -20% less hit points than the tech one version and virtually no bonus armor resistance to explosive and kinetic. The only area where the redeemer comes out ahead vis a vis the pilgrim and arbitrator is on hull, the cruiser loses nearly 40% of its hull in choosing tech two while the bs only loses about 20%.
Although I use two Amarr ships to demonstrate this point, it is safe to say all black ops are suffering from this balancing crisis. If these ships are to be so ineffectual relative to recons, their invention costs should be wildly reduced with their skill requirements as no rational person would ever even consider flying one given the current state of recons.
TL;DR ***got: There is not incentive to use these ships for any form of pvp. -Need scan resolution and recalibration bonus -More cap, 10-5% more fitting -Battleship lockrange -Double base jump range -Reduced fitting for bridge, cheaper jumps. -Remove restriction on jump harmonics and implement a module to enable covert bridge movement. |
 Papa Ina GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 14:35:00 - [ 2]
I'm going to support a look into balancing of blackops in general and not actually read your post, 'kay?
|
 Heartstone Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 14:44:00 - [ 3]
Whilst Black Op ships certainly do need a rebalance in general I think it is dangerous to try to copy one type of ship design across to another. So I support a look at the rebalancing of Black Ops but not your exact points. |
 Erotic Irony 0bsession
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 14:53:00 - [ 4]
Originally by: Heartstone Whilst Black Op ships certainly do need a rebalance in general I think it is dangerous to try to copy one type of ship design across to another. So I support a look at the rebalancing of Black Ops but not your exact points.
I mentioned it to contextualize my point and reinforce how limited they are not to justify making battleship recons. |
 Damion Zyne Queens of the Stone Age Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 15:06:00 - [ 5]
I support rebalancing black op ships esp. in regards to cyno jammer. |
 hammyhamm GoonWaffe SOLODRAKBANSOLODRAKBANSO
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 15:43:00 - [ 6]
Edited by: hammyhamm on 22/05/2008 15:43:21 Making BlackOps ships able to bridge Jump Harmonics 2 ships into cynojammed systems via COVERT cynos would be an interesting new way to allow BlackOps ships to be utilised.
I'm definately in favour of a rethink of the BlackOps class in general. |
 Phil Exon Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 15:44:00 - [ 7]
i support this message, black ops need some loving |
 Gorobom
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 16:22:00 - [ 8]
Black Ops definitely need some love indeed. |
 Lord WarATron Amarr Shadow Warri0rs
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 16:23:00 - [ 9]
Edited by: Lord WarATron on 22/05/2008 16:24:58 Someone needs to scrap Black ops and remake it with a role in mind. I have yet to have anybody actually come up with how exactly I am meant to use my Redeemer in a non-comedy way.
Needs to be sc****d and rebuilt with real world pvp in mind. |
 Darahk J'olonar Gallente Trans Eve Organization
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 16:38:00 - [ 10]
Anything to make a Black Ops BS worth half the ISK you currently pay for one would be good right now. So yeah I support it! |
 White Ronin Gallente Aliastra
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 16:41:00 - [ 11]
Edited by: White Ronin on 22/05/2008 16:42:30 supported
edit... Make it a deep space exploration ship. Solo focus. Forget that crazy idea you have now for a cloaked hauler that you cant afford to take out of drydock. |
 Yorda Battlestars GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 16:50:00 - [ 12]
Originally by: Lord WarATron Edited by: Lord WarATron on 22/05/2008 16:24:58 Someone needs to scrap Black ops and remake it with a role in mind. I have yet to have anybody actually come up with how exactly I am meant to use my Redeemer in a non-comedy way.
Needs to be sc****d and rebuilt with real world pvp in mind.
The panther is the only one worth anything, and I guess the widow actually has a roll so it's worth the isk (maybe). They really need a roll definement. Panther has it's speed, widow has it's ecm, but the sin and redeemer are arguably worse than their T1 counterparts save the ability to jump bridge / cyno. |
 Cailais Amarr Nasty Pope Holding Corp Talocan United
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:20:00 - [ 13]
Supported in general - Black Ops are over priced for their ability.
C.
|
 Mystic Twilight
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 17:29:00 - [ 14]
I endorse the above product and/or service |
 Jalmari Huitsikko Caldari draketrain
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 19:41:00 - [ 15]
Blackops are way too expensive for their primary use in covert operation type things. Also some of their stats need to be looked at. Mostly cyno jump distance/fuel consumption etc. I'd love to use blackops for moving my recon/covops gang relatively fast in 0.0 but hey 500mil for going over like 50-100 jumps and most likely dying as a result. Meh.
|
 Zakgram POW ZAP THWAPP
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 20:00:00 - [ 16]
Edited by: Zakgram on 22/05/2008 20:00:03 Yes please. |
 Lance Fighter Amarr
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 20:41:00 - [ 17]
woah cool. |
 El Yatta 0utbreak
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 21:06:00 - [ 18]
Im not sure about making them "comparable to recons" - whatever that means. They need to stay as the DPS of a cloak gang, as well as its secret jumpgate. what they DO need is more HP (as much as t1, ffs), a fuel bay, no scanres penalty on cloaks and a better bonus on Sin and Redeemer.
|
 Aleis Minmatar Playboy Enterprises Dark Taboo
|
Posted - 2008.05.22 22:42:00 - [ 19]
they definatly need something |
 Zadren Radek The Scope
|
Posted - 2008.05.23 00:09:00 - [ 20]
Edited by: Zadren Radek on 23/05/2008 00:11:22 Please, for the love of all that is sane, fix these puppies up.
We spend huge amounts of training time and Isk for a ship that is utterly naff. |
 Jade Constantine Gallente Jericho Fraction The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.05.23 00:18:00 - [ 21]
Yep agreed, these ships do need improvement. Covert Cyno being immune to Cyno Jammers is only the start of the fix to these vessels. Agree with the general motion.
|
 Kinkie Yuuki
|
Posted - 2008.05.23 01:24:00 - [ 22]
Give something, anything. |
 Suitonia Gallente Genos Occidere HYDRA RELOADED
|
Posted - 2008.05.23 01:55:00 - [ 23]
Originally by: Jade Constantine
Yep agreed, these ships do need improvement. Covert Cyno being immune to Cyno Jammers is only the start of the fix to these vessels. Agree with the general motion.
Quoting this! this is the key issue tbh. Giving them better jump range/fuel costs etc. would be helpful too! |
 J'Mkarr Soban |
Posted - 2008.05.23 08:37:00 - [ 24]
Black Ops ships are not the next in line in the covert ops family of ships, just as Marauders are not the next in line in the HAC family.
However, I do support the general rebalancing of them, with the possibility to shift them so that they are the next in line with covert ops family.
|
 Mr Ignitious Aperture Harmonics K162
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 00:07:00 - [ 25]
*applause* |
 James Lyrus Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 01:36:00 - [ 26]
Do I actually need to post to support something?
OK. I'd like to support looking at them again, in terms of a role. And then a bit of adjustment to their stats to fill that role. At the moment the jumprange is unusably small, the fuel use is crippling. |
 AtomizerX Supernova Security Systems
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 01:44:00 - [ 27]
Re-balance the new ships, CCP! |
 Damir36 Gallente PPN United Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 09:50:00 - [ 28]
. |
 Hitoshi Yamadori
|
Posted - 2008.05.26 10:03:00 - [ 29]
I support this. Please have a look into Black Ops. |
 Inanna Zuni Minmatar The Causality Electus Matari |
Posted - 2008.05.26 11:46:00 - [ 30]
In general I'm not into the "ship needs buff / ship needs nerf" thing (see link below sig) but I will agree that *as a class* Black Ops needs some clarification as to its purpose and benefits over other classes. Its stated role just isn't met with the current spec.
What is needed though is some 'this needs to be done for the class of ships to make sense' proposal, rather than a 'look at it please' suggestion. Not an overkill of detail but something us CSM members can bring to the discussion table with the Devs.
IZ
|