open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Tier 3 Battleships discussion
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (31)

Author Topic

Ryn0
Cruoris Seraphim
Exalted.
Posted - 2006.11.05 18:52:00 - [421]
 

Originally by: Mysterlee
Edited by: Mysterlee on 26/10/2006 11:02:27
Edited by: Mysterlee on 26/10/2006 10:54:53
The reason I think the Hyperion, Abaddon and Maelstrom have turned out so bad is because CCP is trying to give them roles that are already filled.

I personally think the hyperion should become a sensor dampening bs. 8-7-4 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 4 missile hardpoints, 5% large hybrid damage and 5% sensor damp effectiveness per level, it should have a limited grid but plenty cpu.

The abaddon should become a big arbitrator but not so good that it outclasses the dominix. 8-6-5 slot layout with 5 turret hardpoints and 5 missile hardpoints, 10% laser cap reduction (or 10% drone damage) and 5% tracking disruptor effectiveness per level with a 200m3 drone bay.




I'd like something like that but i'd like to see the Maelstrom be a webber/painter ship. And i like the Rokh how it is so no touching it Wink

killerco
Gallente
Incompertus INC
Fatal Ascension
Posted - 2006.11.05 19:33:00 - [422]
 

I'm disappointed in the looks of the hyperion ccp Crying or Very sad
Was it so hard too come up with new looks instead of the megathron look Confused

source
Viziam
Posted - 2006.11.05 19:48:00 - [423]
 

Read most of the thread, but couldn't go through all that with my short attention span.

Got to thinking a little about the tier 3 Bs's and came to the conclusion (who hasn't) that the Gallente/Amarr tier 3's are both a little too redundant for most players taste.

Also that got me thinking about how to possibly give them more bonus' with out overpowering them. Perhaps give them a ROLE BONUS like with destroyers/battle cruisers only more geared towards their race's personal flavor. e.g. Abbadon role bonus: 50% bonus to cap use with lasers. Gallente role bonus: 25/50% reduction in mwd cap. needs (just place holders. Don't want to make other ships (geddon) obselete.

Anyways, just something I thought of. 99% sure it is too late now and there is some flaw (like giving the rokh another bonus) but like i said. Just a thought
Very Happy

Lirt
Ceratias Holboelli
Posted - 2006.11.05 21:02:00 - [424]
 

Edited by: Lirt on 05/11/2006 21:03:28
Edited by: Lirt on 05/11/2006 21:03:10
Originally by: Ishina Fel
Edited by: Ishina Fel on 05/11/2006 15:40:59
Yes, a full rack of 425mm's fits... if you use tech 1 guns. The poster you responded to was talking about tech 2 guns in his post. Those do not fit without grid mods, regardless of what skills you have.

That said, if you are properly skilled, one single fitting mod or grid rig will be enough to fit a standard t2 fleet gank setup with full offensive focus. Only if you want a tank as well as 8x 425mm t2, then you need two or more fitting mods. So I guess it's quite okay as it is.


I think even with awu 4 and a pg mod you can still fit 8 turrets + your rest fitting, thus making awu 5 obsolete.
(Im talking about 8 x 425 Railgun II).

Ath Amon
Posted - 2006.11.05 22:09:00 - [425]
 

Originally by: Ishina Fel
Originally by: Ath Amon
to balance all the mods that it save with its weapon/sensor range and res bonus it really need to lose something or to make fitting comparable to other BS.


It does.
It has no offensive bonuses whatsoever (range is a tactical bonus).
It is the slowest of all battleships in the game.
It is the heaviest of all battleships in the game.
It has the biggest signature of all battleships in the game.
It has the smallest drone bay of all battleships in the game.
It has the worst scan resolution (i.e. worst locking time) of all battleships in the game.

People only look at slot layout and powergrid when judging a ship's capabilties, and in this they fail to see the full picture. Rolling Eyes


i'm speaking in fleet/long range config... in such situation all these cons are meaningless

is not a problem of full picture, the problem is that in its role it have almost no cons and make everything else obsolete.

the damage is lower than other fleet BS, but imo not enought to make it balanced and its better range is more than enought to balance it out not to say that also it will probably be able to fit an additional damage mod so the difference will be lower than the one shown on graphs


murder one
Gallente
Death of Virtue
MeatSausage EXPRESS
Posted - 2006.11.05 22:27:00 - [426]
 

I just had a brilliant idea: reduce the Hyperion's turret slots to 6, leaving 8 highs. And change the damage bonus per level for Gallente BS to 16.5% per level. And then add enough grid to allow for 6x Ion 2s, 2x heavy nos, and 2x t2 large reps w/ a mwd and heavy cap injector. Might work fine then.

Tiuwaz
Minmatar
No Paradise
Posted - 2006.11.05 22:49:00 - [427]
 

Edited by: Tiuwaz on 05/11/2006 22:48:53
Originally by: murder one
I just had a brilliant idea: reduce the Hyperion's turret slots to 6, leaving 8 highs. And change the damage bonus per level for Gallente BS to 16.5% per level. And then add enough grid to allow for 6x Ion 2s, 2x heavy nos, and 2x t2 large reps w/ a mwd and heavy cap injector. Might work fine then.



LOL ShockedLaughing

Zarch AlDain
GK inc.
Posted - 2006.11.05 23:03:00 - [428]
 

Originally by: Lirt
Edited by: Lirt on 05/11/2006 21:03:28
Edited by: Lirt on 05/11/2006 21:03:10
Originally by: Ishina Fel
Edited by: Ishina Fel on 05/11/2006 15:40:59
Yes, a full rack of 425mm's fits... if you use tech 1 guns. The poster you responded to was talking about tech 2 guns in his post. Those do not fit without grid mods, regardless of what skills you have.

That said, if you are properly skilled, one single fitting mod or grid rig will be enough to fit a standard t2 fleet gank setup with full offensive focus. Only if you want a tank as well as 8x 425mm t2, then you need two or more fitting mods. So I guess it's quite okay as it is.


I think even with awu 4 and a pg mod you can still fit 8 turrets + your rest fitting, thus making awu 5 obsolete.
(Im talking about 8 x 425 Railgun II).


It's not obsolete - think how bad it would be if you didn't have AWU!

Ishina Fel
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2006.11.06 00:07:00 - [429]
 

Edited by: Ishina Fel on 06/11/2006 00:08:39
Originally by: Lirt
Originally by: Ishina Fel
Yes, a full rack of 425mm's fits... if you use tech 1 guns. The poster you responded to was talking about tech 2 guns in his post. Those do not fit without grid mods, regardless of what skills you have.

That said, if you are properly skilled, one single fitting mod or grid rig will be enough to fit a standard t2 fleet gank setup with full offensive focus. Only if you want a tank as well as 8x 425mm t2, then you need two or more fitting mods. So I guess it's quite okay as it is.


I think even with awu 4 and a pg mod you can still fit 8 turrets + your rest fitting, thus making awu 5 obsolete.
(Im talking about 8 x 425 Railgun II).


You are thinking wrong, unfortunately. Now, this has been posted before in this thread, but allow me to demonstrate again:

Rokh: 15'000 base powergrid.

Engineering 5:
15'000 * 1.25 = 18'750

425mm Railgun II large hybrid turret, 2'625 grid.

8 Turrets:
2'625 * 8 = 21'000

Advanced Weapon Upgrades 5:
21'000 * 0.9 = 18'900

Balance:
18'750 available - 18'900 need = -150 final

To fit just a full rack of 425mm t2's, you are invariably short on grid, regardless of your skills. At best you can reduce the additional grid needed to 150, allowing you to get by with only one fitting mod or grid rig (provided you don't want to fit a tank).

Ath Amon
Posted - 2006.11.06 01:07:00 - [430]
 

here an example of rokh uberness...

rokh vs mael in fleet config

graph

rokh is using 4 damage mods
mael is using 3 damage mods and 3 tracking comp/enh

so we have a situation with 4 vs 6 mods, on top of that the mael need 2 sensor boosters to fight in 150-200km range, while the rokh need just 1

so the rokh is saving 3 slots and as you can see the dps difference is minimal (under 7%), also i alredy added the 5% damage boost that should be implemented to "balance" the lack of alpha, whitout that boost the dps is almost identical.

both ships will probably need 1 fitting mod, expecially if they want to use damage rigs

so after the that fitting, with results shown in graph, we have 5 free slots + 25% to res for the rokh to fit an uber tank, while the mael have 2 free slots and a useless shield boost

a similar discussion can be done for the abaddon, while the res bonus, dps, and tankage will be better than the mael, it will need to fit cap rechargers to run its lasers, so what it will eventually gain in slots will be used to fit tons of cap rec

note: i'm using old T2 ammos, so situation should be even better for the rokh with new ones

Urza Rast
Viziam
Posted - 2006.11.06 01:59:00 - [431]
 

Please rework the Abaddon, most everything that has needed to be said is already posted. So I am voicing my support for the reworking of this ship.

Thanks

SkyCrane
Posted - 2006.11.06 08:10:00 - [432]
 

Why not just reduce the overall capusage on energy turrets? That unimaginative 10% capusage on energu turrets per level is getting boring. Time for a rethink me thinks...
I liked the Abaddon's bonuses up untill I tested her on SiSi. I ran out of cap almost instantly.

Nemtar Nataal
Demonic Retribution
Posted - 2006.11.06 10:20:00 - [433]
 

Originally by: starship enginer


eg: 3200mm tungston, [2x HP of 1600mm] with 1.5k PG and 30 odd cpu [i think this is needed since we are seeing crusiers and BC with more than BS native HP


Hmm i might just bee mistaken but dont plates already give you about 30% more hp then a shield extender. I know that a lot of the new things in kali favore shield appose to armor especially caldari but a 3200mm plate whould be like 70% more then the corrosponding shield tanking equipment. Faster shield recharging with the extenders do make up for some om the 30% lost ground but extending that even further sounds like it would favore armor tanking a little to much...

Ishina Fel
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2006.11.06 10:37:00 - [434]
 

Well, you could introduce an XL Shield Extender at the same time while you're at it. After all, the biggest extenders at the moment are battlecruiser sized. You can't fit a proper passive shield tank on a caldari/matari battleship or bigger, those all need active shield tanks (or go armor, in the Minmatar case).

Not sure how Kali changes that, but I personally wouldn't mind some extra-large plates and extenders being added, as there is a distinct lack of true BS sized HP boosters. Contributes to the whole "make fights last longer" idea anyway.

Nemtar Nataal
Demonic Retribution
Posted - 2006.11.06 11:18:00 - [435]
 

Originally by: HankMurphy
Edited by: HankMurphy on 26/10/2006 22:38:07
Regarding the minnies vs others:

Hyperion shouldn't be faster than Maelstrom. Not w/o a MWD.

Rokh should be as equal of a sniper as temp and mega, NO better. Yeah, they wanted a sniper but why make it better than all the others? We dont have any 6 msl turret bs's or 8 midslot bs's, no one gets an equivelent to Caldari, why should Caldari get an equivelent/better ship than our best?

Maelstrom's SB bonus is crap, i think we all (including tux) can agree on that. A HP boost is kinda dumb too. I guess it will stick though unless they can find a more appropriate bonus, (plz god dont change it to TP bonus)


Because the caldari have the BIGGEST HUMP of flying scrap metal (next to minmatars dread/carrier/titan), snipers rely on shooting a couple of targets and then getting the F*** out of there...lets see what happens when you have a ship with about twich the over all size as all the other sniping ships in EVE....afcause its goig to be vulnable just in another way then the tempi or the mega...arguing that one rases ship can be bether the another is not really a good argument as a lot of ships in eve rivel each other and people tend to forget that Evil or Very Mad

Nemtar Nataal
Demonic Retribution
Posted - 2006.11.06 11:20:00 - [436]
 

including a XL extender would properly just give caldari a upper hand with bether pasive tanking aswell....i still say that xl shield extenders should be left out of the game after all caldari have got a XL booster to compensate for the "lack" of shield HP.

Ishina Fel
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Intrepid Crossing
Posted - 2006.11.06 11:50:00 - [437]
 

Edited by: Ishina Fel on 06/11/2006 12:17:20
Edited by: Ishina Fel on 06/11/2006 12:15:06
Edited by: Ishina Fel on 06/11/2006 12:13:02
Originally by: Nemtar Nataal
including a XL extender would properly just give caldari a upper hand with bether pasive tanking aswell....i still say that xl shield extenders should be left out of the game after all caldari have got a XL booster to compensate for the "lack" of shield HP.



No, in all seriousness: a passive tanked battleship will have either some 30% less peak recharge or a 25% equivalent less resistances than a passive tanked battlecruiser, while having about 30% to 40% more shield HP. (I can give you the math on this if you wish)

EDIT: Or not, that would be too offtopic. But quickly here:

Drake or Ferox with 3 extenders, 2 invul, 4 relays:
20016.25 in 460.8, 108.59 peak recharge @ 55.00% EM, 82.00% EX, 73.00% KN, 64.00% TH, signature 360
-------------
Rokh with 4 extenders, 2 invul, 2 shield relays, 1 cap relay, 1 tracking mod, 1 signal amp:
28500 in 960, 74.22 peak recharge @ 55.00% EM, 82.00% EX, 73.00% KN, 64.00% TH, signature 600
-------------
Raven with 4 extenders, 2 invul, 4 relays, 1 signal amp:
27000 in 614.4, 109.86 peak recharge @ 40.00% EM, 76.00% EX, 64.00% KN, 52.00% TH, signature 560

Thus it may seem that the BS has the slight advantage in short duration fights (a minute or two). However, the battlecruiser has only half its signature, which directly translates into taking considerably less damage. Therefore the battlecruiser /always/ clearly outtanks a BS when we're talking passive shield tank. In all other modes of tanking, battleships are equal to or outperform their smaller cousins. Therefore it makes sense to allow for some way to at least make them equal passive tankers as well.

Also. Has it occured to you that maybe, that XL extender could be suitably balanced against new plates to NOT totally pump passive tanking off the scale? Rolling Eyes Less crying murder, more logic, please.

And now, back to the t3 battleships Smile

Nifel
PAX Technologies
Posted - 2006.11.06 13:02:00 - [438]
 

Originally by: Ishina Fel

Drake or Ferox with 3 extenders, 2 invul, 4 relays:
20016.25 in 460.8, 108.59 peak recharge @ 55.00% EM, 82.00% EX, 73.00% KN, 64.00% TH, signature 360
-------------
Rokh with 4 extenders, 2 invul, 2 shield relays, 1 cap relay, 1 tracking mod, 1 signal amp:
28500 in 960, 74.22 peak recharge @ 55.00% EM, 82.00% EX, 73.00% KN, 64.00% TH, signature 600
-------------
Raven with 4 extenders, 2 invul, 4 relays, 1 signal amp:
27000 in 614.4, 109.86 peak recharge @ 40.00% EM, 76.00% EX, 64.00% KN, 52.00% TH, signature 560



You're forgetting the reistance bonus on the Rokh.

Ithildin
Gallente
The Corporation
Cruel Intentions
Posted - 2006.11.06 13:26:00 - [439]
 

1. Do the passive tank comparison on the Maelstrom (it's got 75% the recharge rate of the Rokh, iirc)

2. While smaller signature radius usually translates to less damage taken, bear in mind that a signature radius of 360m will mean very very little in terms of damage reduction. Except if the opponent is using torpedoes, which most ships do not.

3. He didn't forget the resistance bonus on the Rokh Wink

Nifel
PAX Technologies
Posted - 2006.11.06 13:36:00 - [440]
 

Looks so to me. 2 inv fields on all ships and the same resitances on all of them. Did I miss something?O_o

Zarch AlDain
GK inc.
Posted - 2006.11.06 13:49:00 - [441]
 

Originally by: Nifel
Looks so to me. 2 inv fields on all ships and the same resitances on all of them. Did I miss something?O_o


Drake, Ferox and Rokh all have the same resistances. Raven has lower.

Ithildin
Gallente
The Corporation
Cruel Intentions
Posted - 2006.11.06 13:49:00 - [442]
 

Originally by: Nifel
Looks so to me. 2 inv fields on all ships and the same resitances on all of them. Did I miss something?O_o

Yup. Drake, Rokh, and Ferox have the same resist (55% EM) while Raven has lower (40% EM). Drake, Rokh, and Ferox has the resistance bonus, Raven does not.

Nemtar Nataal
Demonic Retribution
Posted - 2006.11.06 13:55:00 - [443]
 

Edited by: Nemtar Nataal on 06/11/2006 13:57:47
Originally by: Ishina Fel

Also. Has it occured to you that maybe, that XL extender could be suitably balanced against new plates to NOT totally pump passive tanking off the scale? Rolling Eyes Less crying murder, more logic, please.



Arrow first of all dont quote me as a cry baby...really doesnt soot this discusion...

Arrow Second have you considered that a XL extender might just be used on a BC add the room for extra modules which will give way for more whining from pilotes who do not try and pasive tank a caldari ship?

Arrow Third we really dont need to add modules to the game that potentially will allow a BS to tank like if it was a capital ship. Ships in eve can tank so much and if thats not enough you need to move up to another ship level.

After adding 3200mm plate and a XL extender i suppose that people will start complaning about why there are not a XL armor rep... Evil or Very Mad

Nifel
PAX Technologies
Posted - 2006.11.06 13:56:00 - [444]
 

Originally by: Ithildin
Originally by: Nifel
Looks so to me. 2 inv fields on all ships and the same resitances on all of them. Did I miss something?O_o

Yup. Drake, Rokh, and Ferox have the same resist (55% EM) while Raven has lower (40% EM). Drake, Rokh, and Ferox has the resistance bonus, Raven does not.


Right... I'll go shoot myself in the head o_O. The resists are wrong anyway btw :s. Should be 61.77% em on rohk/ferox/drake and 48.27% on raven.

/me wanders off muttering about the virtues of food

Zarch AlDain
GK inc.
Posted - 2006.11.06 16:10:00 - [445]
 

Originally by: Nemtar Nataal
Edited by: Nemtar Nataal on 06/11/2006 13:57:47
Originally by: Ishina Fel

Also. Has it occured to you that maybe, that XL extender could be suitably balanced against new plates to NOT totally pump passive tanking off the scale? Rolling Eyes Less crying murder, more logic, please.



Arrow first of all dont quote me as a cry baby...really doesnt soot this discusion...

Arrow Second have you considered that a XL extender might just be used on a BC add the room for extra modules which will give way for more whining from pilotes who do not try and pasive tank a caldari ship?

Arrow Third we really dont need to add modules to the game that potentially will allow a BS to tank like if it was a capital ship. Ships in eve can tank so much and if thats not enough you need to move up to another ship level.

After adding 3200mm plate and a XL extender i suppose that people will start complaning about why there are not a XL armor rep... Evil or Very Mad


Unless of course the power requirement on XL shield extenders made them very hard to fit on a battlecruiser...

Nova Beta
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2006.11.06 18:32:00 - [446]
 

WHAT THE HELL


the new caldari is getting 10% per lvl to optimal range!

at same time T2 ammo is reduced to 80%?

are we looking for 250km engagements now? or was the deal to cut down sniper range?

THRASHER23
Gallente
Sniggerdly
Pandemic Legion
Posted - 2006.11.06 18:56:00 - [447]
 

Evil or Very Mad Twisted Evil

What I don't like about the hyperion is the lack of agility and speed. If the boat is suppose to travel quickly and beat the hell out of its target then it really needs to be fixed. Whats w/ ccp nerfing the tracking and the dmg mod for the blaster ammo? Why nerf something thats in the primary role of a ship? Its defeating the purpose to nerf the blaster ammo on a blaster ship. I mean people train for months to get t2 weapons and ccp slaps you in the face and makes them less effective. But staying on track, the Hyperion needs to be able to fit all 8 blasters, mwd, standard pvp setup in the mids and have dual reps w/ a dcu, and a few mag stabs. Along w/ fixing the agility and speed issue it would fit is purpose as an excellent blaster boat. Idk how ccp gives caldari a great Tier 3 bs can can completely jack up the other races. Caldari pilots basically have a fleet ship handed to them and it fits its role to the "T" for its duty in the battlefield. Get it together CCP and stop coveting 1 race.:P

FalconHawk
Amarr
Shadow Rebellion
Posted - 2006.11.06 21:37:00 - [448]
 

thought it would be funny to try my normal bhaal mission fitting (i know waste of ship for missions but i donīt care) at abaddon ...

Bhaal:3*cap recharge t2, cap relay 25%
Abaddon: 2* cap recharge T2, pds t2 8.5% recharge 5% more cap (needed a bit grid to fit), 2* turret cap usuage rigs each 15%, 10% cap recharge rig

with my not so bad skills and rest of fitting (damage mod etc) bhaal produces 24.9 cap every second

same damage mod at abaddon produces a cap recharge of 16,26 every second (one less cap recharge, thought the rigs would compensate it a bit ..."thought")

now i have fitted 6 mega beams T2:
cap usuage at bhaal 24,85 per second (great i gain cap when i only use guns)
at abaddon cause of bs5 and this nice refire rate bonus : 47,87 cap usuage every second Shocked you loose 31 cap every second without even using an armor repair Question
come on ccp you can only use 2 (yes TWO) Mega Beams T2 at an abaddon without loosing cap? isnīt that a bit insane?

so pls when someone spot me in abaddon donīt shoot back, i cannot use an armor repair and i will run out of cap refore i reach your hull anyway Evil or Very Mad

Parallax Error
Amarr
Imperial Dreams
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2006.11.06 22:47:00 - [449]
 

Edited by: Parallax Error on 06/11/2006 22:48:28
The big problem here is the start point CCP has taken for the design of these ships. The Caldari range of ships has been the template for this change, the best place for a 3rd Caldari BS is as a tier 3 ship so the decision has been made to shoe horn a tier 3 BS in for the other 3 races whether they like it or not.

This start point is the cause of all the issues as it is flawed.

What should be done (from a pure ship balance point of view) is to standardise the 3 tiers of Battleships in much the same way that frigates and to a greater extent, cruisers have been done.

I will stick my neck out and say that the majority of EVE players would not want all of the new BS to be tier 3 just for the sake of it. They need to fit in with the design precedents already set.

The design precedent for the new battleships should follow roughly that of the cruisers eg.

Tier 1 = Electronic Warfare
Tier 2 = Racial Offensive Trait
Tier 3 = Fleet Orientated Racial Defensive Trait

So for Amarr,

Tier 1 = Abaddon (In the mold of a bigger Arbitrator)
Tier 2 = Armageddon (Omen style)
Tier 3 = Apocalypse (Maller equivalent, change the cap amount bonus to armour resists)

Gallente,

Tier 1 = Hyperion (Celestis equivalent)
Tier 2 = Dominix (Vexor on steroids)
Tier 3 = Megathron (Thorax)

Minmatar

Tier 1 = Typhoon (Big Bellicose with Target Painter bonus, unpopular I know but thats a function of TP's being junk not the ship.)
Tier 2 = Tempest (Alter it to be a larger Stabber)
Tier 3 = Maelstrom (Modified to be a big Rupture style hard hitting boat, like the tier 2 BC)

Yes, before anyone jumps on me I did suggest a bigger Bellicose for the Minmatar. I also think that Target Painting should be reworked somewhat, I don't think a BS sized Bellicose would be bad it's just that Target Painters need work.

Also, any ships that have moved up a tier should be boosted slightly to be on a par with its peers. The big issue created here is one of sudden increases in mineral value of ships that get boosted a tier.

AlexCA
Amarr
De Valken BV
Orange Alliance
Posted - 2006.11.06 22:50:00 - [450]
 

Originally by: Parallax Error

Tier 1 = Abaddon (In the mold of a bigger Arbitrator)
Tier 2 = Armageddon (Omen style)
Tier 3 = Apocalypse (Maller equivalent, change the cap



Switch the apocalypse and abaddon hull around there IMO. Shame to let those nicely modeled turret hardpoints on the abaddon model go to waste.


Pages: first : previous : ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... : last (31)

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