Battleships

[Bass_masta992]

NO ON BOTH SIDES.

---

[Eppy]

Much as it contradicts my nature, I'm going to vote 'no' on both counts, and here's why:

Frankly, in the current climate, paying for two Battleships is a nightmare. How you could AFFORD two unless you're one of those nutjobs like Kindred or Yoda who have more money than God is beyond me, the way the trading system is right now. Moreover, how are you going to RP the second one? A Battleship is a big RP responsibility, and while some people can and have done it well in the past, it's infrequent to see it, and if any of them really feel the need for two they can ask for an exception (which, when BS Licenses were implemented, Igiss said was permissible, so I think it's one of those things filed under Special RP Request).

Second, U R doin it wrong! A turret speed increase wouldn't help fend off the bombers all that much; the turret speed used to be 1600 m/s, I was a BETTER pilot back then (a damn good one, if I do say so myself) and we all STILL had almost as much trouble swatting the bombers. Battleships are arguably more powerful now; I'd agree they need better bomber defenses, but upping the primary turret speed (which is strictly anti-cap) and the secondary turret speed (which is strictly useless) isn't going to do anything for it. We need real point-defense guns to take down the bombers - think a really high-speed Razor. Higher turret speed isn't going to do anything except marginally improve efficacy against Gunboats (which does need doing, I think, because right now they're possibly harder to hit than they were last version, and the Razor isn't effective against them, as it's touted to be. One shot for a quarter of your powerplant that has only a marginal chance of hitting? Naaaaaah). I'll be honest, this doesn't look like the post of an experienced cap pilot or a balancer, this looks like the post of somebody who wants More Dakka.

---

Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen

Which Dreadnought was that?

One of your nine.

[Cellulanus]

I say we make battleships absolutely uber powerful, but make their top impulse speed 30 and make their cruise charge time really, really long.

[guitarguy]

I think that the idea here is to make bombers less effective at their role. Battleships already have the capacity to take on almost every other capship. If we held bombers back, the battleship would dominate the server.

---

| BAF Faction Information | BAF War Bonds | BAF Training Program | BAF Combat Training Manual |

[atlantis2112]

For the anti-bomber one.. I shall quote the decline of video gaming.

OH GOD NO, EJECT! EJECT!!

[Eppy]

I think that the idea here is to make bombers less effective at their role. Battleships already have the capacity to take on almost every other capship. If we held bombers back, the battleship would dominate the server.

If you want my opinion (of course you do!) bombers DO need to be held back...the reason why is that they're nigh impossible to shoot down with FIGHTERS in time to prevent a capship from being destroyed; escorts are not nearly as effective as they need to be. I want to see one of two things:

• Battleships receive effective anti-bomber point-defense weapons with a range of 1K. They need to have at least a 30% hit rate with an average BS pilot, they need to do at least half-hull damage, and they cannot take more than a fourth of the Battleship's powercore. Essentially, a Razor optimized for taking out Bombers as well as Gunboats (with a shorter range than the current ones).
  
• Bombers need to be stunted in such a way that they become easy, easy prey for fighters, fast. Not Battleships, jut fighters. Escorts - average pilots, not the fighter jockeys - need to be able to do their job quickly before the requisite number of bombers can pump Supernovas into the target capship.
  

Frankly, I'm partial to number two. As much as I love Battleship Jousting (a dead art) they need to be used in cooperative play outside of their home space.

---

Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen

Which Dreadnought was that?

One of your nine.

[Elsdragon]

NO, DONT NERF BOMBAHS!!!!!

Take your PD weps

---

No longer a slave to the man!

[Eppy]

NO, DONT NERF BOMBAHS!!!!!

Take your PD weps

Actually, that would involve a minor agility nerf, too, though certainly less than option two.

---

Quick comment - we thought that Panzer was the Leader, Swift. -Agmen

Which Dreadnought was that?

One of your nine.

[farmerman]

Not sure on any weapon adjustments, but the 1 Battleship thing is pretty odd to me. Especially when there isn't a limit on Cruisers, which bring nearly the same problems as Battleships.

So, I don't think increasing the number is necessarily a bad thing. A middle ground should be reachable overall - perhaps the 1 allowed but extras are able to be applied for approach, for instance.

---

Faction info links: Samura Heavy Industries : LWB : Watchers

[Canadianguy]

BS do not need any buff vs fighters and bombers.
They are SUPPOSED to be bad against them.

It is supposed to like that

BS = Destroy other BS and Cruisers. Maybe long range missile launcher vs the rest.
Cruisers = Destroy Cruisers and GBs
GBs = Destroy Fighters and Bombers
Bombers = Destroy Cruisers and BS
VHF = Destroy VHF and Bombers

---