Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 05:29:00 -
[1] - Quote
now I have been in and out of playing eve for the last several years, and I quickly ran up the ship hulls till I found one I like, battleships. I love them and I have used all of them and there many uses, I am working for a marauder, the Paladin, to be specific. And what's after that.. what? Capitals? But what if I still want to roam around freely, without having someone help. I think there needs to be a **** ton more ships in all the current hulls and many others as well. Tech 3 frigates, destroyers, battle cruisers and battleships and tech 2 capital ship's and more variety among capitals, thus bringing me to my first suggestion.
Idea 1: drone specific carrier. Now I get that is what everyone thinks that carriers main goal is used to deploy fighters, well wrong. Their main role is RD remote repair. But how about me? I going to be using my carrier for pve and I will never waste a high slot on RR module. Now I think there needs to be a drone specific carrier that all races get certain bonuses for "ALL" drones. And will not have the RR bonus that is an utter waste. I have a Nidhoggur for pure sexyness but I will never use the two bonus the ship gets.
Second idea. Something to bridge the gap between sub caps and capital ships, the difference between the two are staggering in cost and skills, there needs to be ships in between that are either larger than battleships and still smaller than a carrier. Warships that are capable of fitting an entire rack of XL guns without a siege mode needed, kinda like the new battle cruisers, but the next size up. And also a miniature carrier capable of deploying the same amount of drones as a carrier 15 or even more, but not able to deploy fighters.
Third idea. Now this one I'm going to need a little help with. tech 2 capital ships..
And this one even more such. Tech 4 ships, clearly way way in the future.
And please, don't just say overpowered! Overpowered!! If you think that, help with feedback to help "balance". |
Hra Neuvosto
FinFleet Northern Coalition.
175
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 05:35:00 -
[2] - Quote
no |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 05:36:00 -
[3] - Quote
Wow. And the award goes to.... |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
3742
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 05:53:00 -
[4] - Quote
Old ideas. Still saying no.
- We already have drone carriers; Ishtar, Dominix, Armageddon, Dominix Navy Issue, Rattlesnake.
- The gap between sub-cap and capital is not as large as you think it is. Most the player skills you learn in either a Drone/Logistics Ship and Battleship directly translate into Carriers and Dreadnoughts respectively.
- No matter what... the main difference between capitals and sub-capitals, the need for assistance, is going to be a major hurdle. You can introduce all the ships you want "in between" but that gap is still going to exist because very few people want to be reliant on alts or other players... which is actually the entire point behind capitals in the first place; if you want a major "force multiplier" you have to pay for it in multiple ways. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:03:00 -
[5] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Old ideas. Still saying no.
- We already have drone carriers; Ishtar, Dominix, Armageddon, Dominix Navy Issue, Rattlesnake.
- The gap between sub-cap and capital is not as large as you think it is. Most the player skills you learn in either a Drone/Logistics Ship and Battleship directly translate into Carriers and Dreadnoughts respectively.
- No matter what... the main difference between capitals and sub-capitals, the need for assistance, is going to be a major hurdle. You can introduce all the ships you want "in between" but that gap is still going to exist because very few people want to be reliant on alts or other players... which is actually the entire point behind capitals in the first place; if you want a major "force multiplier" you have to pay for it in multiple ways.
Ok well then make them better, they are no better than any other ship with any amount of drone capacity. They try to fit the roll into something that wasn't meant to be drone depending in the first place, when I think of battleships, drones are the last on my mind. Either do a true drone boat or not at all.
And the fact that a battle ship and a carrier is nearly a 1100x more isk isn't a small gap? And don't even bring up dreadnoughts. There needs to be more ships.. point blank. 30+ sub caps and really only 4 capital ships? Like really. |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
2219
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:08:00 -
[6] - Quote
killer persian wrote:And the fact that a battle ship and a carrier is nearly a 1100x more isk isn't a small gap? Confirming the OP knows what he's talking about.
I have an Archon I can sell to you for 100b, that's only 500x the price of a battleship! |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:10:00 -
[7] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:killer persian wrote:And the fact that a battle ship and a carrier is nearly a 1100x more isk isn't a small gap? Confirming the OP knows what he's talking about. I have an Archon I can sell to you for 100b, that's only 500x the price of a battleship! I ment 100x obviously.. dip tard. |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
2219
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:12:00 -
[8] - Quote
Alrighty, I'll sell the Archon to you for 10b. The low low price of 50 battleships! |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:16:00 -
[9] - Quote
Abdiel Kavash wrote:Alrighty, I'll sell the Archon to you for 10b. The low low price of 50 battleships! A battleship ranges from 130 to nearly 200, carriers all range around 1b and Dreadnoughts 2b. That is about 8 to 10 times as much. Your irrelevant comments are distasteful and a waste of bits. |
Abdiel Kavash
Paladin Order Fidelas Constans
2223
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:18:00 -
[10] - Quote
killer persian wrote:Abdiel Kavash wrote:Alrighty, I'll sell the Archon to you for 10b. The low low price of 50 battleships! A battleship ranges from 130 to nearly 200, carriers a all around 1b and Dreadnoughts 2b. That about 80 to 100 times as much. Your irrelevant comments are distasteful and a waste of bits. Uhhh. Math. It is hard. |
|
Drake Doe
Flatulaction
299
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:22:00 -
[11] - Quote
killer persian wrote:Abdiel Kavash wrote:Alrighty, I'll sell the Archon to you for 10b. The low low price of 50 battleships! A battleship ranges from 130 to nearly 200, carriers all range around 1b and Dreadnoughts 2b. That is about 80 to 100 times as much. Your irrelevant comments are distasteful and a waste of bits. Try putting those numbers in a calculator, you're only making yourself seem dim witted. "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:24:00 -
[12] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:killer persian wrote:Abdiel Kavash wrote:Alrighty, I'll sell the Archon to you for 10b. The low low price of 50 battleships! A battleship ranges from 130 to nearly 200, carriers all range around 1b and Dreadnoughts 2b. That is about 80 to 100 times as much. Your irrelevant comments are distasteful and a waste of bits. Try putting those numbers in a calculator, you're only making yourself seem dim witted. 10!!!! I ment 10x Damn phone keyboard. Whatever. |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:30:00 -
[13] - Quote
How about we all just take it back to eve beta because apparently no one likes anything new an this game should be the exact same until it FAILS from being static. |
Drake Doe
Flatulaction
299
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:35:00 -
[14] - Quote
Exactly what niche could a new class between caps and subcaps fill that isn't already filled, the same goes for T2 capitals. Also, how do you come up with statements like "30+ subcaps and really only 4 capital ships?" When for gallente alone there are 6 counting freighters and 43 sub caps not counting industrial ships? "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
3742
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:38:00 -
[15] - Quote
killer persian wrote:[Drone ships] are no better than any other ship with any amount of drone capacity. They try to fit the roll into something that wasn't meant to be drone depending in the first place, when I think of battleships, drones are the last on my mind. Either do a true drone boat or not at all. Look at the bonuses.
- With all level 5 skills and 125 m/bit of bandwidth a regular ship's drones act as ~10 drones in terms of damage and ~6.5 drone in terms of health.
- With all level 5 skills, 125 m/bit of bandwidth, and the a 50% bonus to damage and health (on all drone-centric ships) five drones act as ~15+ with the combined health of 7.5+
(NOTE: apologies if my math is off)
With most ships, drones act as fairly significant supplementary damage to its normal weapon systems. Drones ships generally flip that around or, at the very least, even out the disparity between the two.
killer persian wrote:And the fact that a battle ship and a carrier is nearly a 1100x more isk isn't a small gap? And don't even bring up dreadnoughts. There needs to be more ships.. point blank. 30+ sub caps and really only 4 capital ships? Like really. I was talking skill gap (which has been lowered and made far smaller than it ever has been).
But if you want to talk price...
A Tech 1 battlecruiser hull costs ~70 million ISK... a Tech 1 battleship costs ~200+ million. Taking mods into account... that is respectively 90 to 100 million versus 300 to 350 million... a nearly 300 to 400%+ cost disparity. The gap closes as you go further down the ship classes. This is on purpose. Linear increases in power come at exponentially higher costs.
You PAY for those extra edges and force multipliers. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:45:00 -
[16] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:Exactly what niche could a new class between caps and subcaps fill that isn't already filled, the same goes for T2 capitals. Also, how do you come up with statements like "30+ subcaps and really only 4 capital ships?" When for gallente alone there are 6 counting freighters and 43 sub caps not counting industrial ships? I don't include freighters or jump freighters to be true "capital" ships bases on their one role. Along with industrial ships. That is also why I said 30+ dip tard. 43 last time I checked is larger than 30 and that was just a buffer. Your comment even further hardens what I'm saying. If there are 43 sub caps and only 4 "true" capitals that is a 10:1 ratios.. not exact but the point is there..
And as I have said for tech 2 capitals. More drone oriented carriers and about the other 2 I'm not sure.. And what is the damage difference between a battleship and a dreadnought in siege mode? Hugely different. The same goes for the sudor drone boats and the two carriers. |
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
684
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:49:00 -
[17] - Quote
killer persian wrote:
Ok well then make them better, they are no better than any other ship with any amount of drone capacity.
Do you actually play this game? Or do you just sit in a station and dream up terrible ideas? Go look at a killboard, or even, outside of highsec.
Drone ships (ishtar and dominix mainly) are doing VERY well. |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:killer persian wrote:[Drone ships] are no better than any other ship with any amount of drone capacity. They try to fit the roll into something that wasn't meant to be drone depending in the first place, when I think of battleships, drones are the last on my mind. Either do a true drone boat or not at all. Look at the bonuses. - With all level 5 skills and 125 m/bit of bandwidth a regular ship's drones act as ~10 drones in terms of damage and ~6.5 drone in terms of health. - With all level 5 skills, 125 m/bit of bandwidth, and the a 50% bonus to damage and health (on all drone-centric ships) five drones act as ~15+ with the combined health of 7.5+ (NOTE: apologies if my math is off) With most ships, drones act as fairly significant supplementary damage to its normal weapon systems. Drones ships generally flip that around or, at the very least, even out the disparity between the two. killer persian wrote:And the fact that a battle ship and a carrier is nearly a 1100x more isk isn't a small gap? And don't even bring up dreadnoughts. There needs to be more ships.. point blank. 30+ sub caps and really only 4 capital ships? Like really. I was talking skill gap (which has been lowered and made far smaller than it ever has been). But if you want to talk price... A Tech 1 battlecruiser hull costs ~70 million ISK... a Tech 1 battleship costs ~200+ million. Taking mods into account... that is respectively 90 to 100 million versus 300 to 350 million... a nearly 300 to 400%+ cost disparity. The gap closes as you go further down the ship classes. This is on purpose. Linear increases in power come at exponentially higher costs. You PAY for those extra edges and force multipliers.
But what if you had 10 or 15 drones with those same bonuses in any of those ships? That is what you're missing. A carrier has 10 to 15 drones with most skills maxed. SC having 20 to 25. Your right that having good skills in a drone boat makes them more effective. But then you add more and thus the damage is there. |
Drake Doe
Flatulaction
299
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:51:00 -
[19] - Quote
killer persian wrote:Drake Doe wrote:Exactly what niche could a new class between caps and subcaps fill that isn't already filled, the same goes for T2 capitals. Also, how do you come up with statements like "30+ subcaps and really only 4 capital ships?" When for gallente alone there are 6 counting freighters and 43 sub caps not counting industrial ships? I don't include freighters or jump freighters to be true "capital" ships bases on their one role. Along with industrial ships. That is also why I said 30+ dip tard. 43 last time I checked is larger than 30 and that was just a buffer. Your comment even further hardens what I'm saying. If there are 43 sub caps and only 4 "true" capitals that is a 10:1 ratios.. not exact but the point is there.. And as I have said for tech 2 capitals. More drone oriented carriers and about the other 2 I'm not sure.. And what is the damage difference between a battleship and a dreadnought in siege mode? Hugely different. The same goes for the sudor drone boats and the two carriers. That's just one race, meaning there are closer 182 subcaps not counting pirate/special edition ships and 16 of what you consider true caps, so you should try thinking about what you post before doing sp. What is the exact need for drone only carriers other than for your convenience? Why does the dps difference matter if there isn't a need for a ship between them? "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:53:00 -
[20] - Quote
Astroniomix wrote:killer persian wrote:
Ok well then make them better, they are no better than any other ship with any amount of drone capacity.
Do you actually play this game? Or do you just sit in a station and dream up terrible ideas? Go look at a killboard, or even, outside of highsec. Drone ships (ishtar and dominix mainly) are doing VERY well. ... But they can do better. Or are they at there maximum. Is it all down hill from here? Or should we be radical with ideas? Like the tech 3 cruiser. Should there be more tech 3 ships? Or is that just fine? Not to shake your pretty game of risk there bud. |
|
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
3744
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:54:00 -
[21] - Quote
killer persian wrote:If there are 43 sub caps and only 4 "true" capitals that is a 10:1 ratios.. not exact but the point is there. The reason there are only 8 capitals and 8 supercapitals is because, again, they are already [more or less] VERY good at what they do.
Adding more ships for the sake of having more ships is not a very good reason unless you have a more specific role for them that does not step on the toes of other ships.
edit:
killer persian wrote:But what if you had 10 or 15 drones with those same bonuses in any of those ships? That is what you're missing. A carrier has 10 to 15 drones with most skills maxed. SC having 20 to 25. Your right that having good skills in a drone boat makes them more effective. But then you add more and thus the damage is there. Cool... so I can potentially have a Dominx that has 15 to 25 drones... which deals about ~1500 to ~3700 damage per second... not even a carrier can get that much damage!
Now make a 100 man fleet composed entirely of this type of ship... that doesn't have to be put into Triage or Siege Mode. As if the Pantheon (remote repping carriers), Das Boot (Dominixs), and Mini-boot (Ishtars) fleets were not already wildly popular! Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Astroniomix
Cryptic Meta-4
685
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 06:55:00 -
[22] - Quote
It's also worth noting that even though the dominix lost it's ability to field more than 5 drones, the changes to it's skill bonus make the 5 drones it launches equal to the 10 it used to be able to field. |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:00:00 -
[23] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:killer persian wrote:Drake Doe wrote:Exactly what niche could a new class between caps and subcaps fill that isn't already filled, the same goes for T2 capitals. Also, how do you come up with statements like "30+ subcaps and really only 4 capital ships?" When for gallente alone there are 6 counting freighters and 43 sub caps not counting industrial ships? I don't include freighters or jump freighters to be true "capital" ships bases on their one role. Along with industrial ships. That is also why I said 30+ dip tard. 43 last time I checked is larger than 30 and that was just a buffer. Your comment even further hardens what I'm saying. If there are 43 sub caps and only 4 "true" capitals that is a 10:1 ratios.. not exact but the point is there.. And as I have said for tech 2 capitals. More drone oriented carriers and about the other 2 I'm not sure.. And what is the damage difference between a battleship and a dreadnought in siege mode? Hugely different. The same goes for the sudor drone boats and the two carriers. That's just one race, meaning there are closer 182 subcaps not counting pirate/special edition ships and 16 of what you consider true caps, so you should try thinking about what you post before doing sp. What is the exact need for drone only carriers other than for your convenience? Why does the dps difference matter if there isn't a need for a ship between them?
So let's just say there are 200 sup cap ships in the game right now. Probably more. And there are 17 capital ships. The one faction carrier. So that's ok with you? You don't want anything more?
My convenience? How about every solo pve player out there that uses any of the carriers? And what else is there? Marauder? But hey look it got something new and shiny that wasn't necessary needed. But it got it. And now it's better than ever.
You don't need them, that doesn't mean everyone else has to suffer. |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:02:00 -
[24] - Quote
Astroniomix wrote:It's also worth noting that even though the dominix lost it's ability to field more than 5 drones, the changes to it's skill bonus make the 5 drones it launches equal to the 10 it used to be able to field. BUT WHAT IF IT COULD STILL HAVE 10! With those bonuses what would those 10 be?? |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:05:00 -
[25] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:killer persian wrote:If there are 43 sub caps and only 4 "true" capitals that is a 10:1 ratios.. not exact but the point is there. The reason there are only 8 capitals and 8 supercapitals is because, again, they are already [more or less] VERY good at what they do. Adding more ships for the sake of having more ships is not a very good reason unless you have a more specific role for them that does not step on the toes of other ships. edit: killer persian wrote:But what if you had 10 or 15 drones with those same bonuses in any of those ships? That is what you're missing. A carrier has 10 to 15 drones with most skills maxed. SC having 20 to 25. Your right that having good skills in a drone boat makes them more effective. But then you add more and thus the damage is there. Cool... so I can potentially have a Dominx that has 15 to 25 drones... which deals about ~1500 to ~2200 damage per second... not even a carrier can get that much damage! Now make a 100 man fleet composed entirely of this type of ship... that doesn't have to be put into Triage or Siege Mode. As if the Pantheon (remote repping carriers), Das Boot (Dominixs), and Mini-boot (Ishtars) fleets were not already wildly popular! Ok, what about the new battle cruisers? They can use battleships sized guns.. "stepping on the battleships toes" Why not have a battleship capable of using capital guns? Why? Cause why not. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
3744
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:06:00 -
[26] - Quote
Around 1500 damage per second with potential for more. Again... carriers don't even deal that much damage. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
3744
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:07:00 -
[27] - Quote
killer persian wrote:Ok, what about the new battle cruisers? They can use battleships sized guns.. "stepping on the battleships toes" Why not have a battleship capable of using capital guns? Why? Cause why not. Because Attack Battlecruisers should be removed from the game entirely. They step all over Heavy Assault Ships in sniper and skirmishing roles. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective. |
Drake Doe
Flatulaction
300
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:08:00 -
[28] - Quote
So what exactly is the point of adding dozens of carbon copy ships other than to waste developer time that could be used to actually add content to the game? Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm almost certain that carriers, like other cap ships, are built around a pvp purpose and are meant to be used in fleets, hence the dependence on cynos, so again, why should dev time be wasted on what you want if a ship already does it fine? "The homogenization of EVE began when Gallente and Caldari started sharing a weapon system."---Vermaak Doe-- "Ohh squabbles ohh I love my dust trolls like watching an episode of Maury with less " Is he my Dad " but more of " My Neighbor took a dump on my lawn " good episode! *pops more corn*" ---Evernub-- |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:10:00 -
[29] - Quote
ShahFluffers wrote:Around 1500 damage per second with potential for more. Again... carriers don't even deal that much damage. 1500 dps is the max.. Without going absolutely apeshit..
They don't even deal that much damage... THAT'S MY WHOLE POINT. |
killer persian
Veldspar United
1
|
Posted - 2013.12.09 07:12:00 -
[30] - Quote
Drake Doe wrote:So what exactly is the point of adding dozens of carbon copy ships other than to waste developer time that could be used to actually add content to the game? Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm almost certain that carriers, like other cap ships, are built around a pvp purpose and are meant to be used in fleets, hence the dependence on cynos, so again, why should dev time be wasted on what you want if a ship already does it fine? So am I just bound to sub caps for the rest of my eve career? I hate pvp and that ALL the capital ships service only part of the eve community irritates me. Why can't there be pve oriented capitals?? |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |