Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Saint Tekitsu
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.07.05 14:48:23 -
[1] - Quote
I have been saying this for a while and I would now like to propose this idea due to Fanfest. Developers mentioned at Fanfest the idea of the Gurista Dread and Titan possessing both guns and fighters. My proposition is this, make this idea a separate capital class of ship.
First you can make a dreadnought/carrier class ship, you can make it smaller than the dreadnought and possess both guns and 2 wings of fighters or you can make it a go between a Titan/Super carrier and Dreadnought class.
- If you make the ship smaller then the dread I would propose it being like a battlecruiser III, Lighter, faster, less tank, built for quick engagements and produce a lot of DPS both dread guns as well as fighters - No siege module required. - If they ship is made a go between super capital and dreadnoughts. Dread guns - 2-3 fighter wings, more of a Battleship class carrier, slower than the dread, more tank, good dps but not extreme and utilize siege modules.
-Reasons, if you make the Gurista dread this way it will be unbalanced, the cost of the dread will be very high and lopsided as far as faction dreads. - My proposal keeps the ship affordable and will be more widely used - creating a more balanced environment and accessible to all players through capital ship parts and building.
- Proposed Gurista changes, Guristas have a bonus to hitpoints and damage with drones. Use one wing of fighters but with the Gurista bonus plus the guns for the faction titan and Dreadnought. CCP can have its faction ship with bonus, and eve can have a new class of ship. Will be multi-purpose so solo pilots can easily utilize this and be effective while possessing practical fleet uses and support. |
Old Pervert
Perkone Caldari State
131
|
Posted - 2017.07.05 15:11:50 -
[2] - Quote
Why make it a separate class of ship?
The class of the ship determines the overall role, not how it fulfills that role.
A Dread's role is to kill caps. If it has bombers and guns, it fills its role as a dread.
A Titan's role is to kill "big things". If it has bombers and guns, it fills its role as a titan (allowing for all the other titan stuff like bridging and phenom gens).
They aren't expensive as it is. A dread costs a couple bil tops. A faction dread will and should cost more for the exceptionally higher capabilities it provides.. especially if you can add fighters to it. |
Saint Tekitsu
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.07.05 15:19:49 -
[3] - Quote
A new class of ship means a new role. In WW2 there existed all kinda of midclass ships with different roles, even today we have such things. I am proposing a new role. In the subclass we have these ships. T3 - Battlecruisers, Black Ops Battleship, and Marauders. I do not see this being an inconceivable concept. |
Old Pervert
Perkone Caldari State
131
|
Posted - 2017.07.05 15:56:32 -
[4] - Quote
Okay, and what niche would this new class fill that is not already filled and missing something?
Battlecruisers already exist with Large guns. If you make it smaller than a dread but with XL guns, it would stand to reason that it would have to be a spinal mount weapon on a Battleship not a Battlecruiser (something I personally had suggested a long while ago). The lack of a siege module, however, all but guarantees it will either be useless or stupidly OP.
If it goes between a capital and a supercapital, that effectively makes it still a capital, in which case, why not a dread?
Your idea is disjoint entirely from the concept of a dread or titan having fighters. |
Saint Tekitsu
Enlightened Industries Goonswarm Federation
0
|
Posted - 2017.07.05 16:25:52 -
[5] - Quote
How is it disjoint, you sound short minded to me. Failing to even reason outside the box. Failure to see change in a game is fatal. I didn't limit it to anything specific and there is plenty of roles it could, would, and should fill. You are already trying to twist what I said and exampled it with and what I actually said and proposed. I appreciate your eagerness to shoot down a new proposal as though it was a finished proposal. Fly safe.
|
grgjegb gergerg
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
66
|
Posted - 2017.07.05 18:27:36 -
[6] - Quote
Saint Tekitsu wrote:How is it disjoint, you sound short minded to me. Failing to even reason outside the box. Failure to see change in a game is fatal. I didn't limit it to anything specific and there is plenty of roles it could, would, and should fill. You are already trying to twist what I said and exampled it with and what I actually said and proposed. I appreciate your eagerness to shoot down a new proposal as though it was a finished proposal. Fly safe.
Aaaaand now you start in with the ad hominem attacks.
You just lost the discussion. Sorry.
You never did explain what this entire concept is even for. And as someone said in another thread, cost is not a good factor in balancing. Making something cost a "million billion dolla," just so it can one-shot anything alive, is not a good way to balance ships in a game. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |