open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Battleship class needs a buff.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic

Ulstan
Posted - 2010.12.03 16:47:00 - [31]
 

The removal of the AOE DD, and near instant on grid warp ins from probing, have also made BS less popular.

BC's and AHACS can go quick enough to avoid bad situations, BS really can't. When speed counts for so much, being slow is a huge handicap.

Asuka Smith
Gallente
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
Posted - 2010.12.03 18:25:00 - [32]
 

What the OP is trying to do is show how a buff like this would be ABSURD for a battleship, yet a Supercarrier is the exact same thing except with a carrier, no?

More minerals required to produce, more than double EHP/DPS... IMO supercarriers and titans were a mistake and should be simply removed from the game. They offer no positive gameplay elements.

Anubis Xian
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.12.03 18:31:00 - [33]
 

I have to laugh at the people who think doubling hp of BSes means that the ehp would be doubled for pvp fits.

Battleships were fine before capital ships.

Frankly the only buff I think they need is to overall slot count. Give them 3.

Mutant Caldari
Caldari
Percussive Diplomacy
The Phoenix. Consortium
Posted - 2010.12.03 20:57:00 - [34]
 

Just bring back Nano BS of the old days. Twisted Evil

Mistress Ingrid
Minmatar
Pator Tech School
Posted - 2010.12.04 03:18:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Anubis Xian

Frankly the only buff I think they need is to overall slot count. Give them 3.


This.

Or find a way to allow bs to fit medium/small high slots with bonuses. Being able to trade large high slots for more medium/small slots would be cool too.

Proxyyyy
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.04 03:52:00 - [36]
 

Battleships do need a boost! Blanket damage increase sounds good...

night sentry
Amarr
Posted - 2010.12.04 05:22:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: night sentry on 04/12/2010 05:23:36

agreed

bc pwns cruisers, destroyers and frigates.
cruisers pwns destroyers and frigates.
bs does not pwn bc, cruisers and frigates. WTF?!

The logical trend has been broken, this must be fixed!

My BS should do 2000dps with .1 rad tracking so i can hit those pesky frigates, so the balance of eve can be restored.

Harotak
Malicious Destruction
Posted - 2010.12.04 06:06:00 - [38]
 

My philosophy on battleships is that they are so slow and have such poor targeting speed that they can never catch anything small than them that doesn't want to be caught and then can never escape from anything smaller than them that doesn't want to let them go, so they should at least be able to properly defend themselves. IMO if you want to be able to get under a short-range battleship's turret tracking you should need some ewar (aka tracking disruptors) in order to do so. You SHOULD be able to reduce the damage you take from BS sized guns by orbiting with a small hull, but once you are down to around 30% of normal dps being applied it should be more difficult to evade the remaining 30%.

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2010.12.04 09:22:00 - [39]
 

It is mostly the poor damage projection at close ranges and the sub standard agility and speed of BS what makes them a undesirable ship class today.

Also BCs are to cheap to rig since the rig patch.


Sphit Ker
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2010.12.04 09:48:00 - [40]
 

oh my! I'm full of ideas about that!

I believe the problem with battleships is they are far too slow and clumsy.

Boosting they mobility without denaturing them is part of the solution. Maybe we can dissociate top speed from align time for warps and mass from acceleration rate and top speed? All these should be independent variables (are they not already?).

I'd give Battleships a far greater top speed. I'm thinking at least 500%. Yup, 575+ m/s Abaddons before speed mods. Acceleration rate stay very low yet it can reach an impressive top speed over time. OVER TIME. Disassociate speed from align time meaning it enter warp at 33% top speed instead of 75% (or what it takes to prevent really, really loooong aligns).

So, who's gonna be the first to state how stoopid I am for thinking this out?

1600 RT
Posted - 2010.12.04 11:47:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Anubis Xian
I have to laugh at the people who think doubling hp of BSes means that the ehp would be doubled for pvp fits.

Battleships were fine before capital ships.

Frankly the only buff I think they need is to overall slot count. Give them 3.


a standard abaddon w/o slaves would from 170K EHP to 270K EHP still too much of a boost imho

Korell Nova
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:20:00 - [42]
 

"Battleships combined large size, powerful guns, heavy armour, and underwater protection with fairly high speed"-- taken straight from Encylopaedia Britannica.

Now nowhere there does it say that they are only allowed twice the armor/shield of a battlecruiser.
We all know that EVE doesnt follow any known laws but can anyone actually give me a GOOD reason as to why battleships shouldn't be given the armor/shield boost that the OP suggested.
Why shouldnt a bs fight be a slugging match between heavyweights, yes they would take longer to die, yes they might be able to actually survive quick gank attacks long enough for friends to come and help them, yes they might actually be a challenge to kill in some cases, why would that be a bad thing????

Zilberfrid
Posted - 2010.12.04 12:44:00 - [43]
 

It's because a 100% tank and gank increase over a whole ship class which now just lacks in power in many occasions will be silly.

A 100% increase in tank would be silly. It now would be almost impossible for sub bs ships to do anything about them.

A 100% increase in gank would be silly. It now would, even with reduced damage due to sig/speed impossible to not get alpha'd in anything below BS.

A 10% increase in tank might be defendible, as might a 10% increase in gank. Increases just don't work in 100% increments.

Korell Nova
Posted - 2010.12.04 13:21:00 - [44]
 

i agree thats increasing their gank by 100% would be idiotic, maybe 10% but tbh i dont think they even need that.
But in no way would increasing their tank mean that they are untouchable by smaller targets it would just take them twice as long to get through it all and might actually give them a fighting chance (in some suitations) of winning.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2010.12.04 13:39:00 - [45]
 

Originally by: Arthur Frayn
Supercaps will still be wrecking them after the fighter-bomber nerf and battlecruisers(Drakes, obviously)/armored hacs are more useful in subcap fleets.

I think all battleships need their hitpoints and damage doubled with all other ships remaining the same. Double their mineral requirements for construction too if balance is an issue.

And for BS in the 80% of remaining cases where its not 0.0 blobs butting heads in Drake/HAC swarms?

Might work as a "fix" for BS viability in lag-town but would utterly ruin the class balance everywhere else. Poor idea.

Rastigan
Caldari
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2010.12.04 14:45:00 - [46]
 

Edited by: Rastigan on 04/12/2010 14:45:52
Battleships can already win or force to disengage any t1,t2,t3 ship class smaller than them, its more of getting FC's to commit to them and pilots with enough SP to use them properly...

There are already incredibly proven BS setups, 1200 DPS perma-running pos shot geddons and RR Dominix fleets, Apoc anti-support pulse ships, 1400mm Insta-Pests.

It also only takes a few neuting BS's with 2 logistics outrunning fighters to take out a capital ship.

Techno Panda
Posted - 2010.12.04 14:49:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Techno Panda on 04/12/2010 14:51:54
So a Well skilled and implanted Vindicator gets 300k EHP and 3.5k DPS.... You sir are a troll, and a bad one at that.

Edit: Go tell the Machariel its slow, I have terrible nav skills and it still outruns all my friends T3's with just an AB.

Carniflex
StarHunt
Fallout Project
Posted - 2010.12.04 15:07:00 - [48]
 

Why would all fleets need to be battleship class ? I don't see what is wrong with fleets composed mostly of battlecruiser or (T2) cruiser hulls. Current situation is more or less fine, battleships are used just usually a bit different setups than few years ago, when 200 km was standard fleet engagement range. Nowadays it seems standard is roughly 100 km for battleship fleet and about 50-60 km for BC blobs.

The new probing system making it possible to get warpin on long range opponent in ~10 seconds and stealth bombers being good at nuking slow blobs have changed the battlefield and I'm not seeing all the changes as bad ones. Yes there are some problems, some FOTM stuff as well, but overall the situation in my opinion in fleet warfare is better than 2-3 years ago.

TimMc
Brutal Deliverance
Gypsy Band
Posted - 2010.12.04 15:47:00 - [49]
 

Battleships already win against anything else already. Only problem is you tend to not be able to lock before your targets run away.

Eg every time russians camp my station with hacs, recons and bcs we just undock in battleships. We grab 1 or 2, but the 10 others get away.

Battleships are fine, they just aren't fun.


Pages: 1 [2]

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only