+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Discovery Development (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Forum: Discovery Mod General Discussion (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Discovery Mod Balance (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=31)
+---- Thread: Battlecruiser Rework (/showthread.php?tid=154868)
Battlecruiser Rework - DarkTails - 10-29-2017
I have to wonder who thought this was a good idea. The hull size and hitpoint increase along with removal of nanobots I can understand and accept. The entire weaponry rework, most of it worse than BCs previously had is what I fail to understand at all. The BC Heavy Primary turrets are not a good replacement for the BS primaries they used to house. They lack the punch needed and most likely have already been ditched by most for either missiles or BC Cerberus turrets. The standard BC turrets do seem fine, so point there.
The next issue is the BC mortar. This is what largely reduces any sustained combat effectiveness Battlecruisers had. BC mortars require half or whole powercore to fire, depending on whether you have one or two. Any more and the third will simply not fire as the powercore does not support it. This revokes the BCs ability to be a legitimate threat to Battleships. Without the reliable use of mortars, BCs are forces to get incredibly close to enemy warships to perform any meaningful damage. In a scenario where it's solely a BC vs BS, the BC no longer has a feasible chance to provide any form of threat to the BS. If you manage to crack the shield before losing too much hull you decide it's not worth it or are destroyed, your secondary weaponry, unless you decided on a full cerberus heavy loadout, will only annoy the BS pilot more than harm him.
Another severe handicap the furthers the new disadvantage BCs are at, is their shield. Their shield is laughably weak now in comparison to their hull strength. While this would be a minor handicap should the BC class have proper firepower to provide a credible threat to the shipclass it is primarily used to counter, the lack of firepower behind BC guns and severe handicap of using heavy artillery only amplifies the disadvantage BCs are now at.
What would I do?
Adjust the BC mortar stats so that choosing to use them doesn't effectively remove you from the battle after two shots. (One salvo if used in dual capacity.)
Rebalance the BC Heavy Primary turrets so they provide an actual threat to enemy battleships/dreadnoughts
Shield: This I'm split on. With proper firepower the shield seems like a good equalizer, but if it will continue to lack firepower, it needs to be able to survive a punch, and the shield currently can't take one.
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - Titan* - 10-29-2017
Good to see this balance working as intended
Battlecruiser efficiency reduced against Battleships and Dreadnought but Increased against Cruisers, that was the plan.
That doesnt mean Battlecruisers totally useless against Battleships. Things can be different in fleet scenario.
Battlecruisers have huge damage potential compared to old Battlecruisers. Which can go up to more than 150K DPS
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - DarkTails - 10-29-2017
Deliberately removing capabilities to counter battleships, one of the primary rolls the ship is utilized for, is a bad move. It reduces the combat dynamics by enforcing the idea of "if you want to take on that line battleship alone, you require your own battleship", at which point the fight dynamic is reduced to who can out tank the other. Fleet comparison wise, battlecruisers performed well but still required support.
All I've seen as being done is removing the combat dynamic by enforcing the rule of battleships. This leads to boring repetitive combat fields which will rapidly get boring. Their potential DPS is negated by the fact that for such they must get so close the cruiser will, unless cloaked or manages to sneak around, which few times happens, will be out-gunned and destroyed before having a meaningful effect on the battle, especially if alone.
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - Enkidu - 10-29-2017
It works as intended, but isn't very fun for Unioners, who have only two battleships and are being mobbed by battlecruisers if we log so much as one hel.
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - Felipe - 10-29-2017
(10-29-2017, 02:41 AM)Titan* Wrote: Good to see this balance working as intended
Battlecruiser efficiency reduced against Battleships and Dreadnought but Increased against Cruisers, that was the plan.
That doesnt mean Battlecruisers totally useless against Battleships. Things can be different in fleet scenario.
Battlecruisers have huge damage potential compared to old Battlecruisers. Which can go up to more than 150K DPS
BC efficiency against BS wasnt reduced, was nullified. As ive said when you first posted the idea. All you wanted (and done) is to effectively make BS's invulnerabble to anything under BS class (unless overwhelmed in numbers). As range been cut, LM arent a thing anymore and BC core sucked dry by new guns, well, seems BC been really nerfed.
But ive been told those things may be balanced in near future, while i dont really believe it will be (unless that means be more nerfed) hope is the last to die. Lets wait and see...
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - Hubjump - 10-29-2017
(10-29-2017, 03:01 AM)DarkTails Wrote: Deliberately removing capabilities to counter battleships, one of the primary rolls the ship is utilized for, is a bad move. It reduces the combat dynamics by enforcing the idea of "if you want to take on that line battleship alone, you require your own battleship", at which point the fight dynamic is reduced to who can out tank the other. Fleet comparison wise, battlecruisers performed well but still required support.
All I've seen as being done is removing the combat dynamic by enforcing the rule of battleships. This leads to boring repetitive combat fields which will rapidly get boring. Their potential DPS is negated by the fact that for such they must get so close the cruiser will, unless cloaked or manages to sneak around, which few times happens, will be out-gunned and destroyed before having a meaningful effect on the battle, especially if alone.
This BC change sounds great!
damned bias, go away!
Right ive ranted enough in the past, but battle cruiser pilots, the majority of them, are ignorant to the stress and difficulty which is group fighting a majority BC force.
its so much more difficult to fight a BC in a BS then it is for the BC to kill the BS
i don't care if it takes you 30 mins, you've had it SOO much easier as its so easy to not get baited into a double mortar, like seriously i could make a girlfriend trap meme out of this!!!
if the fight is quicker, and the skill required is more even for either side to win, i am happy.
but for the majority of the BC classes existence all us BS pilots just get depressed at the sight of a fleet comprised of 5 BC's with the "oh not this **** again we need a CD'er to try to group EK one atleast one of them" and this isnt fun for the BS's or the BC pilots, on one likes an EK gank.
TL;DR this change is in the right direction, the issue is how easy it was to kill a BS with a BC regardless of the time it takes... the skill cap for a BC is so low compared to any battleship bigger then a light.
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - Hubjump - 10-29-2017
also if a BC were to strafe with TS to tighten or extend turns, STS as i call it, strafe turret steering, it would be unstoppable as it would have full control over every plain of its movement which in turn gives the BC control of the fight against a BS and gives it an easier time dodging other BC and cruiser fire.
this combination of strafing alongside TS seems to be a lost art, i need to review what ive posted tomorrow when i wake up atm its 4am lmao g'night
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - Felipe - 10-29-2017
(10-29-2017, 05:06 AM)hubjump Wrote: TL;DR this change is in the right direction, the issue is how easy it was to kill a BS with a BC regardless of the time it takes... the skill cap for a BC is so low compared to any battleship bigger then a light.
As ive said, all you accomplished with that is to make BS's invulnerable to anything but other BS or numbers. Thanks fam! I hope i can convince ppl to make BC's gank squads to give you what you want. You made it impossible to counter BS if not with numbers. Never was "easy' to kill a BS with a BC, one or two mistakes from the BC pilot was enough to be dead, while BS taken 20mins of constant hammering to be killed.
You ppl want all the benefits and no risk or weak point "look at me: 3million hull, hugeloads of core, faster impulse, flak" Oh no, that damm BC can evade my fire at 3k and still deal 1/5 of damage i can! What should i do, log some cruisers and snubs as support too, instead my nice justcapfleet? No, lets nerf em to death, lets render BC's useless so ppl dont fly em anymore
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - Giorgio - 10-29-2017
(10-29-2017, 05:20 AM)Felipe Wrote:(10-29-2017, 05:06 AM)hubjump Wrote: TL;DR this change is in the right direction, the issue is how easy it was to kill a BS with a BC regardless of the time it takes... the skill cap for a BC is so low compared to any battleship bigger then a light.
As ive said, all you accomplished with that is to make BS's invulnerable to anything but other BS or numbers. Thanks fam! I hope i can convince ppl to make BC's gank squads to give you what you want. You made it impossible to counter BS if not with numbers. Never was "easy' to kill a BS with a BC, one or two mistakes from the BC pilot was enough to be dead, while BS taken 20mins of constant hammering to be killed.
Are you really not trolling right now? BSs have always been the most vulnerable class, and they still are. You talk about the LM nerf but omit the cruiser cerb buff which is why the LM was nerfed in the first place. As someone who flew cruisers exclusively among other things I can assure you the BSs are anything but "invulnerable", especially to cruisers and BCs.
RE: Battlecruiser Rework - Spectre - 10-29-2017
Firstly, I'm going to put the disclaimer out right here. I prefer BCs to any other class, hands down. Yes, that's bias, but tbph I could give two damns.
Now, not even touching the generous 'Battleshipping' of the BCs by making their hull a boss amount but removing nanobots, I'm putting it out that the patch more-or-less ruined BCs as a viable fleet weapon against the main foe they were designed to take on: Battleships.
Sure, you can argue that they were never intended as it, but the very fact that they were given at best four heavy cruiser slots, two battleship turrets and that beautiful flak just showed where the thought was.
The fact that all of that was removed to be replaced by a lackluster 'battlecruiser weapons' group is ridiculous. A mixed class should not have weapons of its own, and adding to that, should not have a mortar that has less range does less damage, but costs more energy than the BS standard mortar.
Battlecruiser Mortar -|- Damage: 350000h/175000s - Energy: 2.1 mil - Range: 3000m
Battleship Mortar -|- Damage: 390000h/195000s - Energy: 1.56 mil - Range: 5495m
Even more to that, the fact that the main armament was replaced with four amazingly useless heavy slots is really just backwards logic. It's a mixed class. It should be able to play the part of both ships, not have to be the odd man out by being a fat, armored gun platform that can't hit anything without essentially committing suicide. If a BC closed in to gun range, any competent BS captain would just light them up, and BOOM. No more BC.
If I were a dev, and I saw this on my plate, I'd rather just remove BCs altogether than just flat ruin them.