Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 12:35:00 -
[1]
Class - Flagship - T2 Battleship
Flagships are top of the range battleships, normally only used by high ranking officers in most navies due to their cost. While cumbersome and slow compared to marauders they make up for this with their increased tank and DPS potential.
Example - Tsunami
Hull: Maelstrom Minmatar BS bonus: 5% Turret RoF + 7.5% shield boost/level Flagship bonus: 5% Turrent Damage + 5% drone damage/level Rolebonus: 15% shield resists Slot Layout: 8/6/6 Turret HPs: 8 Launcher HPs: 2 Upgrade HPs/Calibration Points: 2/300 Structure/Resists: 8500/0/0/0/0 Armor/Resists: 8000/70/10/25/43 Shield/Resists: 10000/25/50/40/30 Maximum Targeting range: 75Km Sensors: Ladar 16pts Resolution 90mm Sig. Radius: 460m Max Speed: 100m/s
Currently the only two T2 BSes are a mission runner boat (marauder) and black ops, there is nothing just as a combat boat. These are highly specalised boats, why isn't there a boat specalised for the main function of a BATTLEship, ie Battle!. Its silly something like this doesn't exist already. It's slow speed make it unlikely to be a solopwn mobile as even enemy BSes can likely escape it and it's weak sensors make it vunverable to ECM (althrough not as badly as a marauder)
Comments?
|
Lord Gary
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 12:57:00 -
[2]
I like the idea but I don't think Minmatar should be the only race to get them.
|
Robert Caldera
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 13:13:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Rhinanna hy isn't there a boat specalised for the main function of a BATTLEship, ie Battle!. Its silly something like this doesn't exist already.
what do you think regular BS are designed for?? Hauling? Mining?
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 13:14:00 -
[4]
Generally EXAMPLE means this wouldn't be the only one!!!! :)
OFC all races would get one for their unused Tech1 BS
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 13:18:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Robert Caldera
Originally by: Rhinanna hy isn't there a boat specalised for the main function of a BATTLEship, ie Battle!. Its silly something like this doesn't exist already.
what do you think regular BS are designed for?? Hauling? Mining?
Nope, they are generalised vessels like all the Tech 1s, and that still doesn't address the issue of there not been a Tech 2 BS to fill this role.
|
ShadowDraqon
The Quantum Company
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 14:28:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Rhinanna
Originally by: Robert Caldera what do you think regular BS are designed for?? Hauling? Mining?
Nope, they are generalised vessels like all the Tech 1s, and that still doesn't address the issue of there not been a Tech 2 BS to fill this role.
Having all bonuses geared towards weapons and/or tank is not being generalized. If you look at it, most T1 ships are geared towards some specific role, like the caracal towards missile attacks, exequror towards cargo hauling, navitas towards mining, etc. T2 ships are focused on some very specific roles (interceptors to go fast and tackle, logistics ships to remote repair) and are rather useless for any other role.
~ MED-SEC ~ AND The Blatantly Obvious |
Bibbleibble
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 16:23:00 -
[7]
Edited by: Bibbleibble on 17/05/2009 16:22:51 I, too, would like a solopwnmachine that is a battleship, but better.
Does anyone else see the problem here?
The point of T2 ships is that whilst they are better than their T1 counterparts, at a role that needs filling. There is no need for a better battleship, as the current ones can do their job fine!
As much as you would want a ship that can do 1500+Dps with a tank that could perma run against the universe, it is not going to happen. Mainly because, it will just become the new standard for fleet fights, and almost nobody would use the normal BSs.
These are real flagships >>> Linkage
________________________________________________ Check out my ideas! New Destroyers |
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 16:37:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Bibbleibble The point of T2 ships is that whilst they are better than their T1 counterparts, at a role that needs filling. There is no need for a better battleship, as the current ones can do their job fine!
You do realize that the whole point of advancing in tech is to make the previous techs obsolete right?
Tech 2 BS that aren't geared for pve or have some obscure role, must happen.
We already know the skills needed would be insane.
Just because a T2 BS is better than its T1 counterpart, doesn't mean the T1 BS is useless. Not everyone wants to jump into a capship, and a decent T2 BS is a nice alternative. Course, I'd rather have a T3 BS, but maybe that is just me.
Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.17 23:02:00 -
[9]
Its got it's weaknesses (low speed + reduced sensors) that in many circumstances, particually solo would make a T1 BS superior.
As for completely replacing T1 BSes for fleet warfare, no more so than HACs replaced cruisers or AFs replaced frigates. They would be MUCH more expensive than BSes (700+ million compared to 125million for a Mael, and don't forget insurance) so they are quite likely to be left at home when it looks like their may be losses. A fleet using soley them might be more powerful than a T1 BS fleet but their loses will cost a HELL of a lot more.
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.18 21:43:00 -
[10]
No more comments? Really? :)
Well I think its a good idea anyway! :)
|
|
Private Marcus
|
Posted - 2009.05.19 09:53:00 -
[11]
Edited by: Private Marcus on 19/05/2009 10:04:29 Edited by: Private Marcus on 19/05/2009 09:57:31 Flagship in my Opinions if there would be a new shiptype needed, then a ship to fill the hole between Sniper BS's and Dreadnoughts.
in many fights in 0.0 the Dread is greatest to shoot poses, but its abit expensive, so the most guys come only in BS's.
so what about a Flagship: 100% Turret Damage on 6x Turret Slots 20% Range per Level Rolepenalty 33% Tracking Penalty to all Turrets (to submit that nonone try to fly solo a lvl5 with it, too easy...)
150km Targeting Range 60mm Scan Resoution 30 Points in Sensor Strengh
6 Highslots 2 Med Slots 2 Lowslots
and an about effektive 120k HP Tank
Try to imagine a Double Sized Tier III BS
build with T1 Capital construction Parts with Matirial costs about 350 to 450 Mio ISK no jumpdrive but with ability to get into highsec (so POS shooting in Highsec would be a bit easyer)
|
Sergeant Marcus
|
Posted - 2009.05.19 10:03:00 -
[12]
or u try more med and lowslots for fitting abilitys without this extreme range bonus
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.19 12:41:00 -
[13]
While a double size BS is probably a bad idea (thats capital sized) a sniper boat probably isn't.
2 lows and mids is way too low however. Remove the range bonus, let it fit 2-3 XL guns (tracking avoids solopwnmobile problem) and you have a 'Arty BS' not a bad idea for a new class.
Back to flagship topic, any more comments? :)
|
Sytoru Hiroshyma
SkillzKillz
|
Posted - 2009.05.19 12:52:00 -
[14]
Battleships that are better than your standard T1 BS jobbies? Could I interest you in a faction battleship perchance? These things tank better and put out more DPS than a regular BS.
In fact, the description "normally only used by high ranking officers" sounds somewhat familiar.
Only downside is that they don't get that little " mark in the upper left of their icon....
|
Private Marcus
|
Posted - 2009.05.19 14:08:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Private Marcus on 19/05/2009 14:11:53 Edited by: Private Marcus on 19/05/2009 14:09:34 The Problem Battleships for BATTLE* is:
most wanted would be a Sniperboat wich is able to do not only 350 to 400 dps like the typical fleed snipers Apoc Mega Pest or Rokh. i thought about 900dps to 1100dps to let the dread's their role
so i would say a ship is needed to give more firepower and a bit greater Buffertank able to work best over 150km to 200km's wich can be easyly reimbursed by insurance, also it could be build only by more normal minerals. can fly between T1 BS's and give not too much fitting abilitys like Marauders, i dont want to see a totaly Imbalanced 2500dps shortrange boat.
Skills needed would be not a T2 BS's and not a Cap. Battleship V Adv. Spaceship Command IV Flagships I (Rank 10)
* i mean snipergangfights with more then 300 to 500++ BS's up to 1200 in local
|
Syreniac
|
Posted - 2009.05.19 15:43:00 -
[16]
People don't quite get it. There is no need for this ship, as it either makes Battleships obsolete or is useless, and CCP have said that they will not make a Battleship sized HAC.
If you want a better battleship that is vulnerable to ECM, but outclasses the normal battleship, buy a marauder. Otherwise buy a faction battleship, or live with it. |
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 13:00:00 -
[17]
Originally by: Syreniac People don't quite get it. There is no need for this ship, as it either makes Battleships obsolete or is useless, and CCP have said that they will not make a Battleship sized HAC.
If you want a better battleship that is vulnerable to ECM, but outclasses the normal battleship, buy a marauder. Otherwise buy a faction battleship, or live with it.
Apparently this will make BSes useless, just like HACs make cruisers useless right? Cos we never see any cruisers about these days do we???? /sarcasm
If the hull for this costs 500+ million, a lot of people will still use BSes, particually in Blobs since the difference after insurance when you lose it will be over half a billion ISK! Risk vs reward.
Marauder serves a completely difference purpose, Faction ships are Tech 1 and are generalised ships not specific role ships like Tech 2 ships. Besides as minmatar who wants a 'pest or a fleet 'pest, they are ugly ships with crap stats.
As for the 'need' for the ship, there is no 'need' for any tech 2 ship in the game except perhaps the cloaking ships. It would be a useful role for the ship to cover, its that simple really.
|
Dav Varan
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 19:13:00 -
[18]
Nice Idea about time we had T2 Tier3's and T2 Caps. The argument about not making pwnsolowtfmobiles went out the window when they made T3 cruisers.
I'd like to see the sensor res penalty removed from mauruders as well so they can be PvP'd There not so much greater than bs and loseing one cost 690M Isk more.
If Mauraders start dying then maybe the industry chars can start making profits on them again. |
Syreniac
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 19:30:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Rhinanna
Originally by: Syreniac People don't quite get it. There is no need for this ship, as it either makes Battleships obsolete or is useless, and CCP have said that they will not make a Battleship sized HAC.
If you want a better battleship that is vulnerable to ECM, but outclasses the normal battleship, buy a marauder. Otherwise buy a faction battleship, or live with it.
Apparently this will make BSes useless, just like HACs make cruisers useless right? Cos we never see any cruisers about these days do we???? /sarcasm
If the hull for this costs 500+ million, a lot of people will still use BSes, particually in Blobs since the difference after insurance when you lose it will be over half a billion ISK! Risk vs reward.
Marauder serves a completely difference purpose, Faction ships are Tech 1 and are generalised ships not specific role ships like Tech 2 ships. Besides as minmatar who wants a 'pest or a fleet 'pest, they are ugly ships with crap stats.
As for the 'need' for the ship, there is no 'need' for any tech 2 ship in the game except perhaps the cloaking ships. It would be a useful role for the ship to cover, its that simple really.
You have just said that they are outclassed by t1 battleships for fleet work, and you said in your opening post that they are worst for solo, with lower scan res and sensor strength. And remember that cost is not a suitably limiting factor enough. And I don't see how the tempest's sub-par nature is relevant when the discussing a T2 Maelstrom.
|
Balor Haliquin
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.05.20 19:46:00 -
[20]
Interesting idea, But i find it rather close to the idea that has been going on here. I know it was mentioned earlier. But I was stuck by a lot of the similarities between the two.
The ship designs here are nothing more then super sized HACs. Which if you do a bit of math would make them rather easy to solo around the universe. I'm not really sure the ships as specified here would much of anything to fill a void. More then likely they would simply out mach everything they come across. Slow speed and poor sensors are easily delt with by putting the right modules on the ships. A very important thing you have to remember about EVE is that there is really no way to force a pilot to fit a specific way. You can only make the incentive to fit a set group of modules as tempting as possible. Even then, pilots are absolutely notorious for coming up with fits that are amazing but don't use the formula intended.
I would invite you to put your ideas on my forum thread. it has been going for about a year and a half now. A lot of people have helped refine the idea down to a rather nice set of ships.
|
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.21 10:47:00 -
[21]
No offence but the ships you describe in your thread are a bit silly ;)
1: They are oversized command ships 2: 25% sig reduction? For the whole fleet! Can you imagine how much more powerful that would make any sniper fleet with it in compared to a fleet without!
Look at real life, there are dedicated C&C ships and there are the flagships which are the biggest badest fighters cos they do nothing else. The DPS on these ships would hardly be greater than a Marauder's (4 guns at 2x damage + 2 launchers vs 8 guns) , its the tank that it excels in.
As for people fitting sensor boosters and overdrives, fine thats good. They are still slower than a BS, have lost 2 slots in doing this which will reduce their DPS and tank... It wouldn't be overpowered in these fits either.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2009.05.22 21:37:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Rhinanna
2: 25% sig reduction? For the whole fleet! Can you imagine how much more powerful that would make any sniper fleet with it in compared to a fleet without!
Actually i cant imagen that, even tho iv seen several posts in the past claiming that sig reduction would greatly enhance the survivability of a sniper fleet.
Maybe you could explain it to me?
|
Balor Haliquin
Amarr
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 01:43:00 -
[23]
The Theory: A small signature radius makes a ship harder to hit with guns and missiles. The small signature radius means the guns miss more often and missiles have a reduced damage.
The Reality: Signature radius reduction on most ship classes does little to nothing. It may reduce the incoming damage by some percentage but it usually is not significant enough to prevent ships from dying under heavy fire. You are looking at about 30 seconds at best more time before your ship evaporates. They really benefit small ships because they make really hard to hit ships even harder. Shield tanked battleships have such a huge signature radius (Shield Extender) and thus really don't get a benefit. Armor tankers don't get the signature radius reduced enough, they get down to about the size of a tier 2 battlecruiser. Which unfortunately for them take a good pile of damage from sniper ships and don't get to have any damage reduction from signature size.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 02:15:00 -
[24]
So what your saying is that people, that think sig radius reduction would help a sniper fleet, dont know how turrets & tracking work? Or are they refering to something else, like fleets orbiting eachother with long range t2 ammo loaded or something? Im no experienced fleet pilot, so im kinda curious about this,,
|
Typhado3
Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Aeternus.
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 06:35:00 -
[25]
Edited by: Typhado3 on 23/05/2009 06:39:34
Originally by: Akiba Penrose So what your saying is that people, that think sig radius reduction would help a sniper fleet, dont know how turrets & tracking work? Or are they refering to something else, like fleets orbiting eachother with long range t2 ammo loaded or something? Im no experienced fleet pilot, so im kinda curious about this,,
small sig radius offers 2 advantages for sniping fleets.
- lock time (kinda useless if you call out secondary you'll already have your target locked)
- reduction in hit chance??
The second one is pretty much a load of crap as at sniper ranges the small amount your moving means average ship tracking is far more than enough. Since extra tracking allows you to hit smaller ships (stationary targets don't react well to 1400's) you would have to do some insane sig reduction on sniper bs's to be worth anything. And if ccp changed it so it was worth something you'd see claymore + implants + boosters + ragnarok + flagship comboes (reincarnation of nano age/nano nerf). In short, if small sig radius is useful for the average bs then it is too powerful.
ccp fix mining agent missions % pls
|
Xorth Adimus
Caldari The Perfect Storm Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 08:03:00 -
[26]
Edited by: Xorth Adimus on 23/05/2009 08:07:18 All wasted ideas sorry flagships should either be command ships/battlecruisers with mindlinks or faction BS, caps or well tanked 'logistic' battleships.
I think there is a fleet command/logistics ship gap for battleships, it would need high resists and more importantly hps! Command ships/battlecruisers/battleships in large fleet engagements are easy to insta pop and not every fight can(cynojam)/should involve caps.
The problem with tank and damage buffed ships is that macro carebears on missions will always use them driving up the demand/ price. It will have to be a cap/sub cap ship which cannot enter high sec and has lower damage then a T1 equivelent.
Same as teir3 battleship for bonus's for each race plus: racial T2 resists +2% resists per level +20% hps per level +20% range/amount on armor/shield rep and or cap Mindlink bonus's Large cargohold (hence fleet logistics/fuel) Large dronebay (hence fleet logistics/defence) Larger bandwidth for each race (125 gall/min 100 amarr/caldari) Higher sensor strength, range and resolution
Possible disadvantages: 6 turrets (8 highs) Lower speed Lower agility Larger signiture radius Unable to fit cloaking device No rig slots High skill requirements (battleship5 /command ship /leadership /logistics) Price It would be nice if they had anti capital abilities (heavy anticap bomb launcher?).
Would also be nice if they could do a short range limited size jump bridge, this ship would HAVE TO ENTER the bridge with the fleet (fleet commander clicks jump fleet to ..).
How about a tiny corp hanger for some spare dictors/interceptors?
This would be a good match (in your face fleet command combat ship) to the more 'sneaky' black ops (when it is fixed! ).
Basicly what a marauder really should have been (not some high sec carebear boat ffs)
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 12:17:00 -
[27]
Why should Flagships be command/logistics ships. A fleet's flagship is normally it's biggest baddest, most impressive looking show of force.
Lets look at some examples: Real world - American Flagship Current - A carrier (think of it's planes as drones) so it's basically a drone boat BS WW1 - Almost every navy's flagship was it's biggest, newest battleship. Not a ship specifically designed for C&C
Other sci-fi: Star Trek - Federation: USS Enterprise - Not a logisitics ship or C&C ship, it normally functioned solo in fact Klingons: Neg'var class (excuse the bad spelling) Battleship, again not logisitics or C&C Romulans: Another battleship...
Babylon 5 - Earth Alliance: Battleship
Your getting the picture now :)
As for sig radius's effects, the longer the range the larger the difference between the sig radius and sensor res of the attacking guns matters in my experience. I could be wrong but in addition to the increased locking time, I THINK (not 100% without testing) that a 25% reduction in sig radius would probably be about equal to another 10-15% extra ships on that team. Thats why I think its OP, particually on a ship which would be one of the hardest to destroy in the enemy fleet.
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 12:22:00 -
[28]
Also why would mission runners use this over a marauder? Its got more tank sure but a marauder has plenty for Lvl 4s, maybe a few might use them for Lvl 5s..... A marauder will run missions quicker however due to been able to salvage as it goes... A far better choice for mission runners.
|
Akiba Penrose
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 13:02:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Rhinanna
As for sig radius's effects, the longer the range the larger the difference between the sig radius and sensor res of the attacking guns matters in my experience.
I think you misunderstand how turrets and tracking work. Here you can see the formula ; http://wiki.eve-id.net/Tracking
I guess flaggships could be cool, but not just battleship with more dps and tank. The Tier 3 BS have enough of that imo. I would like them to add something new.
Area of effect weapons/EW maybe. Make it a battle about controlling the attributes of the battlefield,, or something like that.
|
Rhinanna
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.05.23 13:11:00 -
[30]
errrr: 1: That formula is complete nonsense in any mathematical sense. 2: The formula shows that sig radius is a factor so even if the formula made any sort of mathematical sense then what I said would still be right.....
The real formula would be something like:
Damage = (tracking/transversal)*(sensor res(gun)/sig rad)*(range modifier based on falloff) * base damage. As the rang gets longer, tracking/transveral stays high been less of a factor meaning sensor res + range modifier affect the damage more.....
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |