I agree, battleships need little more scan resolution, if you compare them to capital ships they’re almost the same in scan res department.
15-20% more scan res wouldn’t hurt t-1 battleships.
1 Like
I am right with you here and have been saying this for years. 120-150mm should be fine and won’t break EVE (more).
I’m totally vote for ammo bay vs. increased cargo bay. Warp speed and agility is also some thing to consider.
You know battleships are supposed to be slow and ponderous, right?
1 Like
Yeah, im not sure why people want battleships to warp around like cruisers. Its supppsed to be a bit tedious to fly around in a BS. Its slow, but not unmanageable.
The only thing i would change as far as battleship warping goes is the time it takes to actually exit warp. Sitting on grid for 5-6 seconds while still stuck in the warp animation can be annoying sometimes. However, its not something that is a pressing issue imo.
2 Likes
Cargo bay increase is probably easier to code than ammo bays for every battleship. Also, its nice to have more cargo space for deployables.
It’s a weird thing, yeah?
Personally, I think CCP’d be better served breaking up the ship classes and consolidating ship skills. Replace ‘Racial Frigate’ and ‘Racial Destroyer’ with ‘Racial Small Hull’. Same with Cruiser/BC. That’d free them up to actually present a greater variety in roles in the T1s (note: Not necessarily provide a greater variet, but present a greater variety).
Current:
Minmatar Cruiser - Bellicose, Rupture, Scythe, Scythe Fleet Issue, Stabber, Stabber Fleet Issue
Minmatar Battlecruiser - Cyclone, Hurricane, Tornado.
Rework:
Minmatar Medium Hulls
Cruiser (CC) - Rupture, Scythe Fleet Issue
Support Cruiser (CS) - Scythe
Light Cruiser (CL) - Bellicose, Stabber, Stabber Fleet Issue
Heay Cruiser (CH) - Hurricane, Cyclone
Battlecruiser (CB) - Tornado
It also has the advantage of aligning ship types and expectations with, you know, actual ship types and expectations (let’s face it, a lot of EVE players are current or former military).
Cruisers represent the baseline of ‘standard speed/defenses/firepower’. Support cruisers are basically tenders, providing repair and resupply capability. Light cruisers are faster, sacrificing either defenses or firepower to get that speed. Heavy Cruisers (or if you prefer, Armored or Proteced Cruisers) are slower than ‘normal’ cruisers, because of improved defenses. Battlecruisers are lightly-armored, faster ships (on-par with the speed of a ‘cruiser’) that carry battleship-scale weapons. And yes, this means the only true battlecruisers EVE has are the ABCs. The CBCs are just bigger, slower, more armored… cruisers.
(Really, if you wanted to get it right, you’d move the ABCs up to ‘Large Hull’ and just make them lightly-armored, faster, more maneuverable hulls (as they are now, compared to ‘normal’ battleships).
Then you could even actually differentiate between ‘Battleship’ and ‘Fast Battleship’ (as opposed to Battlecruiser).
Primarily it has to do with home defence doctrines being weak to Battleships, and roamers wanting to be able to bring ships that have an advantage in that respect to help them fight outnumbered, in the guise of “it’ll create more content”.
I’m personally in favour of a return to old 3 AU/s for BS and just making the other ships stay as fast relative to that baseline if needs be. 2.5 AU/s is just cripplingly slow. It’s the Jump Fatigue of subcaps.
2 Likes
I agree that if BS warp speed is buffed, all other ship warp speed should increase to keep the same difference between ships. Its not so much the warp speed that is too slow, its the coming out of warp that is too slow. Idk if that value specifically can modified, or if its directly tied to warp speed.
I solo roam battleships and battlecruisers in null, and ive been able to escape most home defense fleets that are sent after me (though the plan is to get in, get a few kills and get out, lingering gets you killed). I roam in plated torpedo typhoons or raven navy issues/pests. So not the most agile of ships.
It may not be the most popular opinion, but setup, safes and bounces are a battleship’s best friend when youre roaming, not faster warp speed. You can fake out defense fleets very easily by warping to the gate theyre on at 100km (or a bounce) and then warp to a safe that is 2-10AU off the gate but inline with another gate (20-40AU) away. Youll pull 75-100% of them away, can jump gate no problem as most tackle is chasing your ghost. This works because people know BS warp slowly, so seeing you linger on dscan for 10s after you warp isnt uncommon.
Long warp times also help in some cases, reloading weapons, cap boosters, ancil reps, letting shield recharge, repping etc before you land on your next gate to fight.
I feel a faster warp speed isnt strictly tied to home d fleets and small gang. A battleship going 3AU/S doesnt mean it can outrun an interceptor/HAC/AF/HIC that wants to tackle it. Its just less time consuming to roam in. So its more a convienence buff than something that would change the meta.
3 Likes
Cruisers travel at 3AU.
Its not rational to reduce BS AU down to that.
Did you forget also about BC sandwiched between the two classses?
What you are proposing would require a complete adjustment of AU on all classes below BS, leading to all of them warping much faster than they do now, in proportion.
This possibility has been discussed extensively many times before, and always comes up negative.
1 Like
He already addressed the fact that it would impact other ships and how he would deal with that. You even quoted that bit! Maybe you don’t like the proposition, but don’t make it look like he forgot about other ships…
2 Likes
Run through the ship class/type increase in AU cascade to accommodate BS at 3 AU.
Show me.
So, basically the DNI has been placed into pretty much the OLD drake state, with 7 launchers and that odd one high for a drone aug or command burst or neut if you’re feeling ballsy.
Not overly fond of the Mach change, essentially relegating it from “armor-based fleet brawler” to “shield-based fleet brawler” and with the falloff nerf pretty much locking it into a brawler set-up. You might want to garner some good will from the community by removing the rigs fit to it, on the off chance that anyone has installed tri-marks or some other armour rig.
In my honest opinion, leveling the playing field across the board of ships is a horri-awful idea, essentially breaking down the individuality of each race into 4 different shades of grey.
New warp speeds, took me like 2min to figure out.
Battleship - 3AU
BC - 3.7AU
Cruiser - 4 AU
Destroyer - 5.5 AU
Frigate - 6AU
Interceptor - 9AU
Not hard to change those values. Basically everything goes up 1AU.
Im not saying it would be a big deal to change warp speed, but its not a meta change, its a convienence change.
Preferably id rather CCP focus on far more glaring flaws in battleship design, like scan res and sensor strength, instead of making battleships warp faster.
3 Likes
And what about the non-combat classes?
Also a +1AU across the board?
Up till which ships?
Across the board means across the board. All ships get a 1AU increase, except capitals or anything larger than BS (though caps would still see the same difference in speed if they went up +1AU). You would see the exact same difference in all ships you do now, they would just go faster.
BS: 2AU/s -> 3 AU/s
BC: 2.75 AU/s -> 3.75 AU/s
Cruisers: 3 AU/s -> 4 AU/s
Linear increase, makes everyone travel a tiny bit faster but affects slowest ships more due to the way the Warp calc works.
Looks good I’d be happy with those change’s but doubt we will see something like that anytime soon.
Any love for the industrials?
Note that Jin’s commenting on a hypothetical increase proposed by another commenter in the thread, not an incoming change that will actually be in the patch.