# \[Idea exploration\] Further Battlecruiser Tiericity **URL:** \ **Category:** Player Features & Ideas\ **Created:** [September 24, 2021, 8:38am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510 "2021-09-24T08:38:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:12am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/21 "2021-09-25T00:12:54Z")
did you just ignore the rest of what i posted? I would not bring Storks to the same fights I would bring a Corax. I definitely would not bring manticores to the same fights i would kestrels. If I need a black bird a Falcon is not going to be a viable replacement. being focused into a singular role is not the same as just doing the same thing but better ---
**Author:** ![CaCi-A\_001Me](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/caci-a_001me/32/279826_2.png) [@CaCi-A\_001Me](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/CaCi-A_001Me)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:13am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/22 "2021-09-25T00:13:42Z")
ya, I did, since it’s irrelevant for this thread, just like most of what you’ve posted this far ---
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:15am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/23 "2021-09-25T00:15:06Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > To start off, I think it’s fair to say that most T1 ships have T2 counterpart that fill their roles better or improves on certain things filling that role. So, if we have Attack BCs for example, why not have Heavy Attack BCs that do that job a bit better? And what role boni would be useful and feasable for such ships? MJD’s. But i bet it’d be OP. > [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > BCs are rather sluggish compared to Cruisers. So why not have a type of BC that has far better mobility, either through speed or use of modules, that makes it easier for them to catch up with cruisers and destroy them with their better armaments. So if there is a BC that is as fast as as cruisers but stronger; why ever use cruisers? > [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > How about specilized BCs that deal in drone eWar? Keeping in mind that BCs are rather slow, using drones - especially eWar drones, to give it a unique flavor - might be a great way to get a new T2 BC branch and to breath new live into eWar drones as well. I’d love an overhaul of ewar drones but overhauling the drones themselves would be better than making a ship _just_ for them. I still think we should gecko-ise ewar drones. ---
**Author:** ![Dior\_Ambraelle](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/dior_ambraelle/32/393685_2.png) [@Dior\_Ambraelle](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Dior_Ambraelle)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:19am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/24 "2021-09-25T00:19:13Z")
I do remember seeing something like this before, I’m not sure if it was here or on the old forums. Basically, take the ABCs, and turn them into heavy bombers. They are already glass canons, so that perfect, give them 6 or so torpedo launchers and maybe the ability to fit more than one bomb launchers. ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:19am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/25 "2021-09-25T00:19:24Z")
> [@Daichi\_Yamato](#): > > I’d love an overhaul of ewar drones but overhauling the drones themselves would be better than making a ship _just_ for them. making EC, Damp, and TD drones 1 big drone for each size so 1 light is the size and strength of 5 current ones. would be a good start then making the nuet drones a bit stronger and increasing the speed of web drones would fix most issues with them. Only “issue” is now you need at least 25m3 use utility EC drones. > [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > ya, I did, since it’s irrelevant for this thread, just like most of what you’ve posted this far Except what I posted isn’t irrelevant. You may think “more ships more better” but thats not the case as they all need to be balanced with every other ship in the game. They need to be useful and not make other ships useless. ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/original/4X/9/2/8/9288750a627374a32b7502097149b00c91b53fda.jpeg) ---
**Author:** ![CaCi-A\_001Me](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/caci-a_001me/32/279826_2.png) [@CaCi-A\_001Me](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/CaCi-A_001Me)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:19am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/26 "2021-09-25T00:19:30Z")
> [@Daichi\_Yamato](#): > > So if there is a BC that is as fast as as cruisers but stronger; why ever use cruisers? Price would be a factor. But I mean you would have to sensibly balance this type like all the other ships. > [@Daichi\_Yamato](#): > > I’d love an overhaul of ewar drones but overhauling the drones themselves would be better than making a ship _just_ for them. I think making a ship for it could be way more interesting from a gameplay aspect. Also, T3BCs might be worth exploring. But what would they be about? ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:20am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/27 "2021-09-25T00:20:30Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > Price would be a factor. price should never be used to balance a ship. 100m to you might be the same as 100b to me. ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:21am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/28 "2021-09-25T00:21:42Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > Also, T3BCs might be worth exploring. But what would they be about? again this is backwards. Find something the game needs then build a ship for that. don’t make a ship then try to find something it could do. ---
**Author:** ![CaCi-A\_001Me](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/caci-a_001me/32/279826_2.png) [@CaCi-A\_001Me](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/CaCi-A_001Me)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:23am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/29 "2021-09-25T00:23:17Z")
> [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > You may think “more ships more better” but thats not the case […] And where did I say I wanted that? I said I wanted to explore the idea, meaning discussing among other things balance, viability, need. But so far all you’ve done is be negative towards this whole concept and act like I wanted something specific added to the game no questions asked. ---
**Author:** ![CaCi-A\_001Me](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/caci-a_001me/32/279826_2.png) [@CaCi-A\_001Me](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/CaCi-A_001Me)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:25am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/30 "2021-09-25T00:25:55Z")
> [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > again this is backwards. Find something the game needs then build a ship for that. don’t make a ship then try to find something it could do. Well, maybe to you. And no, I like to imagine something that could in whatever way be useful and fun and then see if it works. ---
**Author:** ![Daichi\_Yamato](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/daichi_yamato/32/252995_2.png) [@Daichi\_Yamato](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Daichi_Yamato)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:28am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/31 "2021-09-25T00:28:17Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > Price would be a factor. But I mean you would have to sensibly balance this type like all the other ships. Price doesn’t balance well on it’s own. Nullsec use faction battleships as doctrine and drop disposable structures. Even the tech3 SP penalty didn’t stop them becoming doctrine. > [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > Also, T3BCs might be worth exploring. But what would they be about? I hate tech 3’s. Both times they were impossible to balance. ---
**Author:** ![ZY123](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zy123/32/327374_2.png) [@ZY123](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/ZY123)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:36am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/32 "2021-09-25T00:36:07Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > I like to imagine something that could in whatever way be useful and fun and then see if it works. Would just like to add that while it’s a good approach for innovation, brainstorming, all that, it’s really not as good for when you’d rather look at EVE as less of a toy and more of an ecosystem. An addition that’s fun is not necessarily an addition that’s considerate of what it’s being added to. ---
**Author:** ![CaCi-A\_001Me](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/caci-a_001me/32/279826_2.png) [@CaCi-A\_001Me](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/CaCi-A_001Me)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:39am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/33 "2021-09-25T00:39:23Z")
Ya. With “[…] and then see if it works.” I didn’t mean to throw it into the game tho, but whether it would work as a ship - like for example, the eWar drones ship. ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:41am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/34 "2021-09-25T00:41:16Z")
> [@ZY123](#): > > Would just like to add that while it’s a good approach for innovation, brainstorming, all that, it’s really not as good for when you’d rather look at EVE as less of a toy and more of an ecosystem. An addition that’s fun is not necessarily an addition that’s considerate of what it’s being added to. ^ this. The level of freedom and the sandbox nature of the game requires a different approach. remember I didn’t say “CCP should never add another battle cruiser” I asked Why and asked you to give me aspects of the game that needed filling. I pointed out that siege and cruiser killing already had roles filled by existing BC. ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:43am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/35 "2021-09-25T00:43:31Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > like for example, the eWar drones ship. but in this case why would that need to be or even make sense as a battle cruiser over say a frigate or a cruiser. frigates and cruisers are the multi role class that have more support options added. Frigates probably would have a limited drone bay so best bet would be a cruiser. the roles DD and BC fill are ones of tank and/or spank ---
**Author:** ![ZY123](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zy123/32/327374_2.png) [@ZY123](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/ZY123)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:48am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/36 "2021-09-25T00:48:37Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > eWar drones ship There’s the navy griffin, and while my opinions aren’t exactly based in fleet-pvp-experience, I say we have enough ewar drone ships. ---
**Author:** ![CaCi-A\_001Me](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/caci-a_001me/32/279826_2.png) [@CaCi-A\_001Me](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/CaCi-A_001Me)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:53am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/37 "2021-09-25T00:53:04Z")
> [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > I asked Why and asked you to give me aspects of the game that needed filling. Why would I need a reason or specific need filled to explore the idea of ships filling not yet discovered needs? > [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > I pointed out that siege and cruiser killing already had roles filled by existing BC. And what would be so bad about having ships that do it better of have more versatility/specialization to them while doing this job? We have T1 Cruiser that can rep and we have T2 Cruisers that rep with added perks. I don’t see the problem here. > [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > but in this case why would that need to be or even make sense as a battle cruiser over say a frigate or a cruiser. > [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > the roles DD and BC fill are ones of tank and/or spank I think you answered in part your own question. Also, what’s wrong thinking about/imagining such a ship? > [@ZY123](#): > > There’s the navy griffin, […] I say we have enough ewar drone ships. That’s one ship with one bonus to one type of drone. 🤔 ---
**Author:** ![Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lugh_crow-slave/32/441552_2.png) [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lugh_Crow-Slave)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 12:59am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/38 "2021-09-25T00:59:14Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > We have T1 Cruiser that can rep and we have T2 Cruisers that rep with added perks. I don’t see the problem here. They don’t though T1 cruisers while they don’t rep as well they are more efficient with those reps. T2 rep a lot harder but are more cap intensive. This is why I said they were geared for repping fleets with higher buffer. You use them on ships with low buffer then you’re just using extra cap for no reason. > [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > I think you answered in part your own question. Also, what’s wrong thinking about/imagining such a ship? how… i asked why you would add the E-war frigs to a BC and pointed out that BC aren’t generally focused around that type of support role. Even their links aren’t added based on them being a natural support ship but rather they have the high Tank needed on a ship that would be running links. If I wanted to make a new BC i would take from the existing lines and split them So ships like the Claymore Damnation Eos Nighthawk rather than being command ships and giving links I would further go down the tank and damage path giving them bonuses to hardener and weapon heat bonuses. Problem is Eve also already has that role filled with T3C ---
**Author:** ![ZY123](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/zy123/32/327374_2.png) [@ZY123](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/ZY123)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 1:03am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/39 "2021-09-25T01:03:23Z")
> [@CaCi-A\_001Me](#): > > That’s one ship with one bonus to one type of drone. Fair enough. Just look at how drone-based e-war would be applied and countered instead. Ship-originating ecm forces you to attack the ship while drone-based ecm forces you to just wait for the cycle to be over unless the victim has smartbombs or the time or patience to wait 10-20 seconds or w/e. Then there’s neuting drones which while I admit could be interesting, would add a significant change if they all of a sudden had meaningful magnitudes. Numbers aside I think the bigger question is how being able to attack capacitors at 60km or whatever would influence solo, small, and large engagements. TP drones, just… no Damping straight up doesn’t need to be done with drones because it already has ridiculous range. On top of that the point of damps is to take advantage of said range which drone’s kinda don’t do (although some kind of range damp sentry does sound funny) What else? Web drones? Very difficult to predict the effects imo. ---
**Author:** ![CaCi-A\_001Me](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/caci-a_001me/32/279826_2.png) [@CaCi-A\_001Me](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/CaCi-A_001Me)\ **Post date:** [September 25, 2021, 1:14am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510/40 "2021-09-25T01:14:34Z")
> [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > T1 cruisers while they don’t rep as well they are more efficient with those reps. T2 rep a lot harder but are more cap intensive. And that’s just getting overly specific when there isn’t even a real concept for any ship yet. What does it matter what the difference between T1 and T2 Logi is when the question is whether there is room and need for the broad concept of a Heavy Attack BC? Fact is there is T1 and T2 Logi. So then there could also be room for a T2 Attack BC. > [@Lugh\_Crow-Slave](#): > > how… i asked why you would add the E-war frigs to a BC and pointed out that BC aren’t generally focused around that type of support role. Because BC are higher up on the ladder. They provide far more tank and they would provide higher eWar strenght through the use of up to heavy drones. The question then just is would it be in any way usefull? How could it be made useful? [Previous page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510.md?page=1) [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/idea-exploration-further-battlecruiser-tiericity/329510.md?page=3)