open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked The Elimination of the Battleship from EVE.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (14)

Author Topic

Joss56
Gallente
Unleashed' Fury
Posted - 2010.12.09 23:13:00 - [151]
 

Edited by: Joss56 on 09/12/2010 23:18:38
Originally by: Cutslawn2
DHB and some others in Burn Eden were in unprobable Mach's today, hitting at over 160-200km out instapoping bc's... think BS's need a nerf to be honest.


With basis ratio of 2.26 i can't see how you can make an Machariel improbable, i'm not saying it's impossible but i would like to see his fit/implants.

http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1427937

Murtific
Caldari
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2010.12.09 23:28:00 - [152]
 

Edited by: Murtific on 09/12/2010 23:29:04
Originally by: DHB WildCat
Edited by: DHB WildCat on 07/12/2010 05:09:37
Problem - Probing. Yes Battleships are the longest hitting sub cap ships in the game. However a prober can literally probe down a Battleship and be on top of it before it can get out of warp and turn around to warp out. Thus bringing the rest of the fleet ontop of the snipers.
Solution - Nerf the living crap out of probing. It is very overpowered. Make the time it takes to scan longer. Make it so that people have to work to get a position on snipers and thus a sniping BS fleet would be viable again.




You my friend are not the uber pilot everbody thinks you are and you have clearly not met my Assassin Class Battleships (tm).....

-Gl in your troll on forum xD

P.S. Ur nightmare vid rocks!!!

DHB WildCat
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.10 03:18:00 - [153]
 

Originally by: Murtific
Edited by: Murtific on 09/12/2010 23:29:04
Originally by: DHB WildCat
Edited by: DHB WildCat on 07/12/2010 05:09:37
Problem - Probing. Yes Battleships are the longest hitting sub cap ships in the game. However a prober can literally probe down a Battleship and be on top of it before it can get out of warp and turn around to warp out. Thus bringing the rest of the fleet ontop of the snipers.
Solution - Nerf the living crap out of probing. It is very overpowered. Make the time it takes to scan longer. Make it so that people have to work to get a position on snipers and thus a sniping BS fleet would be viable again.




You my friend are not the uber pilot everbody thinks you are and you have clearly not met my Assassin Class Battleships (tm).....

-Gl in your troll on forum xD

P.S. Ur nightmare vid rocks!!!


Agreed I am not an uber pilot by ANY means. The only thing I think I may have ever contributed was the invention of the Nano CNR, and some of the earlier Nightmare fits when they changed from armor tanking to shield.

I could be wrong on those but thats not the point. Also as for the idea of people thinking I want an uber pwn machine back from the statement...."from a guy who used to solo in a battleship" please keep in mind that was said to try to let people know that I have know the battleship characteristics and what they are capable of for years.... nothing more.

However yes I still fly battleships with tactics rarely thought of. My corp are great innovators and some of the best minds around, however it is a super specialized scenario with no flexability. The Battleship needs flexability, thats the point of this thread. Please try to remove personal feelings against this pilot out of the thread.

I am loving some of the new ideas btw and discussions. I feel its good for the cause. Listen to ephemeron too if you do not know him he is a vet and was once a hell of a battleship pilot back in the day!

Carniflex
StarHunt
Fallout Project
Posted - 2010.12.10 11:47:00 - [154]
 

Originally by: Furb Killer
Originally by: Billy Kidd
What about something as simple as letting a dread's siege module deactivate instantly but disallowing re-activation until the full cycle is up? This would make dreads much more mobile and hopefully would be a viable counter to supercarriers. Of course, battleships are a great counter to dreads so a nice rock-papers-scissors situation would be setup.

Minus that dreads would still not be a viable counter to supercarriers, they would still get ****d by them.


I do think that SC's are bit too uber in their current form, however there are counters available if you know to expect the SC drop. Keep your dreads in tight cluster and have 5 bombers on standby. When SC's stick their FB's on your dreads just nuke em with bombers. Does not prevent SC's bailing out ofc but removes them as a serious threat. They do put out considerable damage even with regular drones ofc but not quite as scary amounts as with FB's. Another option is carrier firewall around your dreads.

Main thing making SC's uber in my opinion is their ability to gank single / small amount of capitals and GTFO before your side can run over there with HiC's to spank them for it. Plus inability of POS of keeping one around if it comes to your JB to gank something.

I do not think we have seen yet in EVE proper capital fleet conflict with supers fielded on both sides. There has been some skirmishes, ganking of smaller groups by dropping 20 supers on them and that kind of stuff, but not anything where both sides have been fully commited in 'do or die' style. With increasing average age of pilots in EVE I do not think that something on the lines of 300 - 400 capitals commited per side would be impossible nowadays.

Furb Killer
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.10 13:36:00 - [155]
 

Hmm forum might have started eating posts again :/

Quote:
Oh please, even the carrier has infinitely more flexibility than the dread. The dread isn't even great against other capitals. Carriers can at least spider tank and apply DPS to moving targets, even BCs, unlike the dread, which couldn't hit its own nose. This argument "It's ok for sub-caps to pwn caps, but not visa versa" is still outdated. Carriers were always good vs. sub-caps. Yes, in large numbers carriers get owned, but dreads get owned regardless. They have no real defense against sub-caps. The advent of the super carrier just completed the phasing out of the dread. Now only broke players who were gullible enough to train up dreads instead of carriers still fly them, simply because A) they can't afford a super carrier, B) they can't fly a super carrier, and C) they don't want to be married to a super carrier. Everyone else buys a Nyx pilot. Super carriers will never go away, so wishing that things were back to the days of "dreads = the win" is just nativity. Adapt dreads to the new environment instead of pining over the old one. It's blatantly obvious that they aren't balanced.

You now exactly described why the dread is balanced and the SC is not. The dread has no real defense against sub caps, but it has a well defined role (anti-cap / anti structure, sadly not anti supercap), which makes it a very balanced ship class. It counters stuff and can be countered.

Now your solution is that since the SC is horribly unbalanced by being able to pwn everything that moves, we are going to balance it by also making dreads PWN everything that moves. That doesnt really solve the issue, you just introduce a mini-SC for poor people. The issue is that SCs have no counters, you dont solve that by adding a ship class that also has no counters, besides the SC.

Target Painter
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.12.10 13:55:00 - [156]
 

Edited by: Target Painter on 10/12/2010 13:56:56
Originally by: Joss56
With basis ratio of 2.26 i can't see how you can make an Machariel improbable, i'm not saying it's impossible but i would like to see his fit/implants.


Look at it holistically. Halo implants, X-Instinct boosters, a Gallente T3/CS providing sensor strength bonuses, local and projected ECCM. Avoiding shield rigs and extenders. It's not just about what's on your ship or in your head, you can boost performance to an absurd degree if you look at the gang as a whole and not as individuals.

SoMeDuDe904
Fear Inc
Narwhals Ate My Duck
Posted - 2010.12.10 16:45:00 - [157]
 

ive seen bombs **** BSs just think that should have been mentioned in your post. lowsec its not a problem but moving together as a fleet in 0.0 is.

Infinity Ziona
Minmatar
Cloakers
Posted - 2010.12.10 18:05:00 - [158]
 

I don't see why they couldn't be boosted some, locking time especially, its outdated and pointless now.

We have T3's with close to BS damage and tank but cruiser lock time, tracking, sig, speed and agility.

They obviously shouldn't be boosted that much since they're 1/5 the price of a T3 or less but boosted a little wouldn't hurt the game at all.


Nuniki
Percussive Diplomacy
Posted - 2010.12.10 18:33:00 - [159]
 

I still bring a megathron out on cruiser/bc roams from time to time (fit so it can align at the same/faster ofc :P) just because I miss it so much.

Joss56
Gallente
Unleashed' Fury
Posted - 2010.12.10 18:38:00 - [160]
 

Originally by: Target Painter
Edited by: Target Painter on 10/12/2010 13:56:56
Originally by: Joss56
With basis ratio of 2.26 i can't see how you can make an Machariel improbable, i'm not saying it's impossible but i would like to see his fit/implants.


Look at it holistically. Halo implants, X-Instinct boosters, a Gallente T3/CS providing sensor strength bonuses, local and projected ECCM. Avoiding shield rigs and extenders. It's not just about what's on your ship or in your head, you can boost performance to an absurd degree if you look at the gang as a whole and not as individuals.


Thank you for youre explanation Wink

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.10 19:20:00 - [161]
 

Originally by: Target Painter
Edited by: Target Painter on 10/12/2010 13:56:56
Originally by: Joss56
With basis ratio of 2.26 i can't see how you can make an Machariel improbable, i'm not saying it's impossible but i would like to see his fit/implants.


Look at it holistically. Halo implants, X-Instinct boosters, a Gallente T3/CS providing sensor strength bonuses, local and projected ECCM. Avoiding shield rigs and extenders. It's not just about what's on your ship or in your head, you can boost performance to an absurd degree if you look at the gang as a whole and not as individuals.
if someone puts that much money and team effort into making 1 ship unscannable, surely they deserve it?

It's a none issue. Scanning is too good already, allowing you to get bs sniper warp point in seconds.

Joss56
Gallente
Unleashed' Fury
Posted - 2010.12.10 19:40:00 - [162]
 

Originally by: Ephemeron
It's a none issue. Scanning is too good already, allowing you to get bs sniper warp point in seconds.


you can also add:

Warp time of some mining barge Laughing

Agillity of an elephant Laughing

Tracking speed ridiculous with rails
Blasters in my case have ridiculous range... when you shoot at 50km with pulses?wtf? -on top of this any cruiser/bc/frig that orbit at 30km is untouchable wile he's abble to scram you and blow you ease

DPS should have a real boost, ok if i can't track your frig or your cruiser on 100% cut at least when i touch i would like to see the guy make some in his pants insted of laugh Laughing

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.10 20:01:00 - [163]
 

Damage is definitely disappointing. Especially now that bc, t2, and t3 are so widely used and they all have comparable 'real' damage output. The differences in damage output are just not significant enough to consider seriously when choosing a ship to fly.

When choosing a ship to fly (generic PvP, not specialized ship), first thing you ask is how fast and agile you want to be, then you consider your tank (speed and sig radius is part of tanking ability) then you consider tackling ability (scan res, slots for tackle gear), and only after all that you consider damage output.
Costs also enter consideration, while bs is pretty cheap after insurance, the cost of rigs makes it comparable to t2

How exactly do we want to differentiate battlecruisers from battleships in PvP?
aside from long range sniper setups, are battleships batter than battlecruisers in any way?
I suppose ability to fit heavy neut is a definite advantage, but that's just 1 thing. How many advantages does BC have over battleship? sig radius, scan res, shield recharge rate (while having comparable buffer), agility, speed, very low usage of cap by MWD - major advantage in combat. BS MWD is a a ***** to keep running.

Damage output of BC against other battleships may be lower than damage output of battleship against battleship. But since majority of targets are non-battleships, the average across the board damage out of battlecruiser is often higher or equal to that of battleship.

Zyress
Posted - 2010.12.10 21:58:00 - [164]
 

Edited by: Zyress on 10/12/2010 22:03:14
I don't fly battleships but I imagine they hit BC's very well, and they can mount weapons systems that BC's can't. If you are counting shield recharge rate as an advantage then you really shouldn't count smaller sig ratio as an advantage because you are clearly talking about a Drake which has no signal size advantage over a Battleship. Its very easy to do over 1000 Dps with a torp raven, don't know other Battleships, haven't come close to that with a BC.

Steppa
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.10 22:29:00 - [165]
 

Originally by: DHB WildCat
Edited by: DHB WildCat on 07/12/2010 05:09:37Lets face it, if you roleplay you know the battleship has the most syphistacated* (spelling 8)) electronic sysytems around!


I made a lot of hay about this back when Red Moon Rising hit and I got my hands on my shiny new carrier...only to find out that it took forever to lock anything small. This didn't make any sense at all as you've got TONS of real estate inside that thing to find room for the same exact hardware that one could cram into any frigate in New Eden. The bigger the combat ship, the better the combat lock times should be.

Obviously, I didn't get anywhere with it.

I've always thought that there should be some usefulness in allowing a battleship to mount smaller weapons for anti-frig/drone but it never really caught on. No applicable bonuses, I suppose.

Ulstan
Posted - 2010.12.10 22:43:00 - [166]
 

Big ships locking smaller ones fast would be highly imbalanced. Suddenly you don't need small stuff with your BS at gate camps.

Big ships *should* lock other big ships extremely quickly, I think. Both for balance reasons but also because of the aforementioned 'realism' issue.

We kind of have two different discussions going on. I think there are more problems with BS than them not being very good solo platforms, and the problems aren't necessarily the same.

DHB WildCat
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.12.11 01:06:00 - [167]
 

A lot of well said things so far.... One thing that was said to me today that I think somes up a lot of issues other than the capitals of course is this.

To CCP....

You have a ship class that is outperformed by many other ship classes that take 1/10 of the skill training time. Not to mention many other benefits... cost / agility / ect....

T2 is supposedly better than T1 because of the stats and you are rewarded for skilling up for these items. There is no reward for skilling up Battleships when the Hurricane / drake / zealot / and gallente weapons stink anyways so no need to mention them.... do better!

Btw stealth whine, boost blasters / rails pls 8).

Target Painter
Minmatar
Posted - 2010.12.11 01:47:00 - [168]
 

Originally by: Ephemeron
if someone puts that much money and team effort into making 1 ship unscannable, surely they deserve it?


I wasn't complaining about it. I was explaining how it's done. "Absurd" was probably a bad word to use, but it seemed the best way of describing the performance you can get if you look at everything available. 51m sig radius Loki anyone?

Quote:
It's a none issue. Scanning is too good already, allowing you to get bs sniper warp point in seconds.


I agree, which is why BE looks unstoppable doing it.

Glyken Touchon
Gallente
Independent Alchemists
Posted - 2010.12.11 12:06:00 - [169]
 

Originally by: Furb Killer
Right now it is pretty much exactly the same time as jumping through a gate takes. Capital jumping needs to first broadcast the cyno after which they can jump to it, which takes a bit more time than jumping through a gate. However at the same time they dont need to get rid of jump cloak, so that 'balances' out.

Difference obviously is that the other side of a gate is easily scouted, those supercarriers can be anywhere within 1.5 region radius and can jump anywhere, not just to gates.


Give all jump drives, excluding BOs, 15 second warmup timer, make it longer for supercaps. Then you need to have proper tackle in place and a strong ship + logistics if you want to cyno them on grid.

That and just severely reduce their jump range since it is ******ed that they can travel so much faster than conventional ships.


For Black Ops, make it a skill-based reduction. Add mass-deterioration to cynos as well.

Zenrir
Posted - 2010.12.11 12:35:00 - [170]
 

Edited by: Zenrir on 11/12/2010 12:35:10
I agree on some of your points however making the bs closer to a bc is not the solution I think. The problem is the bc's are too close to the cruisers especially since they use the same weaponsystems.

Logistics are one of the few things in eve that makes the battlefield interesting in small gang pvp and bigger gangs instead of being a dps vs tank slugfest. However I do agree that it needs abit of tweaking but not much.
Your point that bs's should be able to hit tackled frigs with guns I do not agree with as bs's have their drones to rid them of (dramiels etc can kite these hence the point below)

The angel factionships needs a speednerf (some of the other factionships needs some tweaking aswell but these are horribly out of line with the rest)
ECCM needs a buff, its too easy to jam a target with 1 eccm on.
Drake tank needs a nerf (yes this will upset the general horde of missionrunners but its needed)
Medium rails needs a buff (both in alpha and dps)
LR t2 blaster ammo needs a rangeincrease (a tad bit to make it useful)


Infinity Ziona
Minmatar
Cloakers
Posted - 2010.12.11 13:25:00 - [171]
 

Originally by: Ulstan
Big ships locking smaller ones fast would be highly imbalanced. Suddenly you don't need small stuff with your BS at gate camps.

Big ships *should* lock other big ships extremely quickly, I think. Both for balance reasons but also because of the aforementioned 'realism' issue.

We kind of have two different discussions going on. I think there are more problems with BS than them not being very good solo platforms, and the problems aren't necessarily the same.

I disagree. Big ships locking small ships makes perfect sense. A small ship still has its speed and sig radius to counter a battleship. Wheres the threat of being locked by a battleship in a reasonable amount of time if its not able to hit you.

Also I can't see battleships with a more realistic locking time eliminating tacklers, tacklers are not tacklers purely for their fast locking and I doubt anyone is suggesting giving battleships the lock time of a frigate.


Tryaz
Gallente
Posted - 2010.12.11 14:14:00 - [172]
 

Edited by: Tryaz on 11/12/2010 14:18:09
Originally by: Infinity Ziona
Originally by: Ulstan
Big ships locking smaller ones fast would be highly imbalanced. Suddenly you don't need small stuff with your BS at gate camps.

Big ships *should* lock other big ships extremely quickly, I think. Both for balance reasons but also because of the aforementioned 'realism' issue.

We kind of have two different discussions going on. I think there are more problems with BS than them not being very good solo platforms, and the problems aren't necessarily the same.

I disagree. Big ships locking small ships makes perfect sense. A small ship still has its speed and sig radius to counter a battleship. Wheres the threat of being locked by a battleship in a reasonable amount of time if its not able to hit you.

Also I can't see battleships with a more realistic locking time eliminating tacklers, tacklers are not tacklers purely for their fast locking and I doubt anyone is suggesting giving battleships the lock time of a frigate.



If you expand that idea though doesn't the BS become an ultimate tool for gate camps (able to tackle and hold multiple targets for a long time until support arrives)?

Actually forget all of the above. I wouldn't have a problem with a BS having fast enough lock time to effectively gate camp, as long as they couldn't trap frigates or fast cruisers. If you were stupid enough to jump through without first sending a scout there's no reason why a BS camping a gate shouldn't be able to lock you quickly enough to tackle.

Mr Dilkington
Posted - 2010.12.11 14:50:00 - [173]
 

Un unprobable ship is lacking either tank or gank somewhere along the line, 3 or maybe more modules.

Ranka Mei
Caldari
Posted - 2010.12.11 15:29:00 - [174]
 

The BS is essentially a relic from the old days, in which EVE appeared subject to a more linear approach to progress: from frig, to cruiser, battlecruiser, and finally battleship (with some steps of the progression inserted later on). Nowadays, EVE has grown from being less linear to being broader: HAC's, Command Ships, Heavy Interdictors, Navy Issue ships, T3, you name it. A typical glass half empty/half full situation. You can say the battleship has lost some of its initial appeal. And it has. You can also look around and acknowledge how much more variety EVE allows now.

I'm in this game for a good 1-and-a-half year now; and I still only have Battleship 2. :) People have come up to me, and asked: "I can't believe you still not flying a battleship! I figured you'd long since be in a Raven by now." But why would I want to fly a crappy Raven, when I was perfectly fine in my maxed out Drake, and training the real cool stuff like the Tengu and assorted interesting, non-BS ships? Upping battleships is still on my list, of course; but primarily -- before I remap towards drones, in two years or so -- because I want to fly a Rattlesnake one day. Or the Scorpion Navy Issue. Or Black Ops stuff. But a 'plain' battleship, meh, I can't be interested enough to care.

'Lean and mean' is the new cool. I guess battleships really are on their way out. Can't say I'm losing much sleep over it, though.

Letifer Deus
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2010.12.11 16:14:00 - [175]
 

I'd say going a flat lock time would be a poor decision. "Condensing" the range from battleship to frigate from the battleship end (meaning keep the frigs more or less the same but move everything else closer) might be a better idea.

Ling Vyr
Posted - 2010.12.11 17:54:00 - [176]
 

BS are not the tool for hit and run games (solo pvp) and have good purpose in fleet figths. it looks good and logical as it is.
if you want to kill frigs without support there are many options like warrior 2 drones , heavy neut, target painter,web, tracking enhancer,... eveen through BS are not the tool to kill frigs. capital bridges should be another topic.

Joss56
Gallente
Unleashed' Fury
Posted - 2010.12.11 18:33:00 - [177]
 

Edited by: Joss56 on 11/12/2010 18:34:01
Originally by: Ranka Mei
'Lean and mean' is the new cool. I guess battleships really are on their way out. Can't say I'm losing much sleep over it, though.


Well when i read you i don' know why loosing my time training for BS and skills related, i mean t2 rails and t2 blasters are a big piece of cake training.

Any t2 frig cruiser battle cruiser with a skilled pilot and solo can blow it, you think it's normal, well i don't.

You can say "train your t2/t3 cruiser well i'm not very lucky in my choice, i fly gallente Crying or Very sad
My final goal is the Nyx but for the meanwhile i cant say my self just train directly for it and leave bs's away, wy should i loose some important (most important) part of the game because i cant small pvp with my battleship?

1st i don't like frigs, i hate those mosquitoes
2nd i hate cruisers and battle cruisers
3rd i like big ships

So to have some fun must we all fly frigs cruisers bc's or Mom's?

"Noes" would say pappyLaughing

The Djego
Minmatar
Hellequin Inc.
Posted - 2010.12.11 19:20:00 - [178]
 

Originally by: Ling Vyr
BS are not the tool for hit and run games (solo pvp) and have good purpose in fleet figths.


Wrong.

Hiroshima Jita
Posted - 2010.12.11 21:51:00 - [179]
 

Battleships are actually pretty nice solo/tiny gang/with a scout alt, mostly because of heavy energy neutralizers. Anything smaller than a battleship is going to lose the cap war. This gives the battleship the advantage in tank, tackle, and DPS for cap dependent weapons. Also a capped out ship is not going to be running its MWD or AB so you can probably get good tracking solutions if you pilot right.

The Nano Pest and the Neut Domi are good examples. They can take on a small number of lesser enemies and can win 1v1s with pretty much anything you might expect to encounter roaming regularly (BCs, Recons, Hacs, T3s, CS, frigates, Ratters). I prefer the Nano Pest because its speed means you can generally keep things tackled once you're engaged.

The problems are tackling things that want to run, getting jammed, and accidentally running into a fleet and getting blobbed. The counters to these problems are having a frigate buddy to tackle, using yourself as bait so that other pvpers in lesser ships attack you thinking you're a carebear, fitting eccm if you're really worried about jams, using ewar drones yourself (you can generally fit a set + a set of damage drones), having one buddy scout you around, and avoiding the really hot spots where its much more likely to run into a gang.

A solo BS can't hit frigates with its main guns but neuts and a good set of drones will kill a frigate.

On that note frigates ARE battleships defensive AA-type weapon systems.

My point is, battleships still have a niche role for solo/tiny gang/falcon alt pvp. They do pretty well in that niche and that niche is large enough to have some breathing room.

I completely agree, and I posted earlier that battleships seem a little lacking in fleets.

Anubis Xian
Ministry of War
Posted - 2010.12.12 00:21:00 - [180]
 

Giving all ships the same base scan resolution would go a long way toward balancing ships better.

Another potentially good idea would be standardizing max velocity, with AB/MWD being extreme acceleration mods.

MWD could actually be used the way its name implies and let you warp to 15km from any ship on grid as long as it is at least 100km away. Probably would need to make it passive after such a change.


Pages: first : previous : ... 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 ... : last (14)

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