Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
knobber Jobbler
Executive Intervention Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 17:31:00 -
[31]
No need for new class of anything right now, other than more customisable ships.
What is needed is a complete rework of Dreadnaughts, make them useful and viable PVP ships which are more than just titan targets.
|
Paikis
Blue Republic
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 17:33:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Ebisu Kami Edited by: Ebisu Kami on 09/11/2010 16:33:38
Originally by: Paikis
Originally by: Ebisu Kami There was a time, when people didn't pull out silly overpowered ship-stats out of their arse, but really tried to improve the game instead.
Just a bit of fun. We all know that there is exactly 0 chance of CCP actually putting anything we come up with into the game.
Um, plainly spoken? You're dead wrong. They may take some quite long time and ignore some really awesome proposals, but they do implement things with which we come up. A salvage-boat, for example, was a long-asked-for addition (although I think the Noctis will be a high-sec pet due to it's cost). The same is true for faction capitals (though I have a bad feeling about these, but I'm looking forward to these, too) and these are just two (really soon to be) recent additions, which were asked for by players.
However a more agile long-range quasi-battleship, de-facto battlecruiser (due to sig reduction bonus) with the equivalent of 16 battleship-sized turrets or, even worse, missile-launchers and an actually above-battleship tank is hopefully one of the never even remotely considered player-proposals. That thing outdamages un-sieged Dreads and has a range bonus... The only way to make this ship even more overpowered is by adding cov-ops cloak and/or a jump-drive...
OK, way to over-react. A salvage ship has been asked for *BY MANY PEOPLE* and *FOR A LONG TIME* I was in no way asking for this, it was just a bit of fun, and you'd have to be atleast half ******ed to seriously think this ship has ANY chance of making it into the game. I know it is OP, you know it is OP and I'm sure CCP knows it is OP.
|
Illwill Bill
Svea Rike Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 17:33:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Ebisu Kami
Originally by: Illwill Bill From a historical point of view, battleships are the step before dreadnoughts.
Not that I'm an expert on naval history, mind you.
Actually not. Dreadnaughts were just battleships with a distinct new design-philosophy compared to pre-dreadnaught battleships.
You learn something new everyday.
Originally by: CCP Navigator Great story but you probably want this in CAOD so feel free to post there with your main.
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 17:35:00 -
[34]
There was also a nichT for a salvage ship. So far I've seen no such useful/balanced role for anything suggested here. Quite the opposite in fact... _________________________________
ROCKET STATUS: FIX IN PROGRESS... |
Ehranavaar
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 17:55:00 -
[35]
Originally by: knobber Jobbler
Battlecruisers for instance were a failed design/idea. They were meant to hit like a battleship but fast like a cruiser & also cheaper to produce. In practice they failed because they didn't have that much speed difference with full on battleships and couldn't take the punishment from one. Most were scrapped, sunk in combat or turned into carriers while still on the slipway.
most battlecruiser problems were caused by battleship admirals sticking them in the line of battle with the battleships. when used according to the doctrine they were designed for they did their jobs well. at the end of the battleship era battleships like the iowa class were as fast as battlecruisers like the alaskas were. not so much a failure of battlecruiser doctrine as improvements in power plant design.
|
Ehranavaar
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 17:57:00 -
[36]
there might be space for a Monitor class warship. big tank, big firepower with minimal speed/agility. monitors were used for bombarding targets ashore in eve that would be pos bashing in high sec.
|
Buzz Killingdon
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 18:01:00 -
[37]
I would like to point out that there is a class of ship between battlecruiser and battleship. This class of vessel also falls in between battleship and capitals. A T3 cruiser will pwn a battleship any day of the week, and is about halfway (costwise) between a battleship and capital.
What puts this ship between battlecruiser and battleship is that a properly fit battleship could take out a T3 Cruiser, but a battlecruiser could not (Assuming the T3 cruiser is not failfit). However, the T3 should usually win against a Battleship.
ALSO, there is the Maurader class. Even though they are a battleship hull, I would not consider these battleships.
I think there are plenty of options out there, no need to introduce more ships that don't get used. Remember the Ferox? Nor do I.
|
Anyura
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 18:07:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Anyura on 09/11/2010 18:08:07 Oh if we're pulling random ideas out of the air....I've been giving a little thought to the idea of a Stealth fighter.
Probably a T3 frigate, it combines cov-ops technology with electronic warfare, with a specific role to hunting down interceptors and other cov-ops ships. With a speed of approx 75% of an interceptor, meaning that a pilot has to get right on top to get it, yet a determined inty pilot can still out run a SF if needed. The DPS would be low, given that a SF should be going after lightly armoured targets and a tank that receives damage if the capsuleer farts too loudly.
Thoughts? Flames?
Originally by: Buzz Killingdon Remember the Ferox? Nor do I.
What's a Ferox?
|
knobber Jobbler
Executive Intervention Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 18:30:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Ehranavaar
Originally by: knobber Jobbler
Battlecruisers for instance were a failed design/idea. They were meant to hit like a battleship but fast like a cruiser & also cheaper to produce. In practice they failed because they didn't have that much speed difference with full on battleships and couldn't take the punishment from one. Most were scrapped, sunk in combat or turned into carriers while still on the slipway.
most battlecruiser problems were caused by battleship admirals sticking them in the line of battle with the battleships. when used according to the doctrine they were designed for they did their jobs well. at the end of the battleship era battleships like the iowa class were as fast as battlecruisers like the alaskas were. not so much a failure of battlecruiser doctrine as improvements in power plant design.
true, I think they failed though, not many were built after after 1918, most if not all British ones were cancelled, converted or scrapped and barely any existed after the Washington naval treaty (not that anyone other than Britain honoured that).
I don't think any british or Japanese battle cruiser had a successful war record. I might be wrong. the Germans proved the pocket battleship and commerce raider to be a better concept for a fast light battleship.
|
Warezmy Carr
Extortion Unlimited
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 19:26:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Anyura ...and a tank that receives damage if the capsuleer farts too loudly.
Spraying Mountain Dew out of my nose did NOT feel good ... but it was worth it!
Anyway. What class does EVE need?
Superdreadnoughts.
Dreadnoughts would remain the anti-structure capital ships they are now. Superdreadnoughts would be the anti-capital-ship capital ships. ----------
|
|
Bernard Schuyler
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 19:28:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Ultim8Evil Edited by: Ultim8Evil on 09/11/2010 15:15:44 The OP has a point imho.
It would be nice to have something above BS but still sub-cap. Able to enter hi-sec, use gates, no jump drive etc
Maybe expand the Marauder "class" so that there is an entirely PVP bonused ship to complement the entirely PVE ship we have atm? Afterall, no-one in their right mind PVPs in a Golem or Paladin!
Maybe prevent it from using accel gates to prevent people from using it to macro-gank lvl4s?
Perhaps have a role bonus allowing it to use oversized (capital) weapons much like the torps on a stealth bomber?
I am with you except that Marauders should have Jump Drives. Their stated (RP/in game philosophy) purpose is they are supposed to be battleships that can operate behind enemy lines, etc.
Translated into game terms, that would mean either Stealth or a Jump Drive so they can bypass gate camps. We already have the Stealth class with Black Ops.
Honestly, I think that a Battleship class Jump ship is a good bridge vessel between sub caps and caps, for pilot experience if nothing else.
|
Brynhilda
Amarr Gun Metal Clones
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 19:49:00 -
[42]
Assault Battleships
T2 Versions of the Abaddon, Rokh, Hyperion and Maelstrom
|
Megan Maynard
Minmatar Native Freshfood
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 19:53:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Paikis
Originally by: Ebisu Kami There was a time, when people didn't pull out silly overpowered ship-stats out of their arse, but really tried to improve the game instead.
Just a bit of fun. We all know that there is exactly 0 chance of CCP actually putting anything we come up with into the game.
See: Khanid ship revamp. That was a direct player input to ship design.
Originally by: F'nog
Originally by: Stareatthesun No no no ... Polaris is where CCP keeps the death star that will destroy eve when the servers shut down.
Thankfully I've got Interceptors trained to V. S |
Lady Skank
Ban Evasion inc
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 20:07:00 -
[44]
Originally by: knobber Jobbler
I don't think any british or Japanese battle cruiser had a successful war record.
The earlier British Battlecruisers performed reasonably well the only one that was destroyed in ship to ship combat was due to poor ammunition management not bad design, they where deployed with far to many shells and propellant charges than they where designed to carry and bulkheads and flash doors where not closed.
In the run up to the battle of Jutland the admiralty insisted that ships where equipped with huge stores of ammunition, and ROV exploration in recent years showed the huge amount of propellant still stacked in corridors and open bulkheads aboard the wreckage of HMS Invincible. If they followed procedure and where not overloaded its possible that she would not have instantly exploded when she took the hit to her turret.
|
Toot Maimington
Caldari SLEEPLESS VANGUARD SOUL CARTEL
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 21:22:00 -
[45]
Any discussion of real life surface naval warfare is moot since the invention of the torpedo, submarine fired to a lesser extent but more notably - the aerial torpedo.
Any surface vessel that wasnt an AA platform, Anti Sub platform or Aircraft carrier was obsolete from the outset of WW2, nobody even realised this until the Bismarck was sunk. After that Battleships were more or less command vessels or shore bombardment platforms.
tl;dr - RL should never ever be mentioned in equivalents to EVE.
|
Kail Storm
Caldari
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 21:48:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Kail Storm on 09/11/2010 21:49:19 Eve could use a few new ship classes, If we agree that Bombs in Eve are the Equiv to Torpedo`s of the WW2 era it all works nicely.
1] is a true dessy, a paper tanked fast ship like now with oversized [Cruiser Guns] and ability to launch bombs. the Key to balance is no CLoak bonus`s, so it would be a suicide version.
In its T2 Form besides Dic the Suicide Dessy would have a HUGE TORP 3-4x the size of a bomb but able to fit no other weapons. The japanese fit th Oka`s which were giant bomb carrying ships that died very often but huge dmg. You could even cal the Cald`s the Oka.
2] Blackops need to be Huge bombers similiar to Night bombers of the RAF, Mixed with WW2 submarine skills and have them able to launch "Spread formation" bombs, 4 Bombs in a square pattern and have similiar mechanics to SB`s, but we all know SB`s escape because there fast align times which is why Hound is best. So it would be risky but pure devastation.
3] Pocket Dreads are definitely needed just like Pocket BS in WW2, 8 Hi SLot Turrets with a Good/Great BS tank [180k ehp] But with Dread sized Torps/Guns all unbonused so it would amount to 2500 DPS but only applicable to Huge targets and ontop of it have 3 min Siege cycles.
4] Support Carriers were very much winners of Pacific combat able to use 1/5th of planes a carrier could but in emergency`s like the battles with Laffy Detachment, they were able to achieve 1/2 of a normal carrier. Make Orca sized ships with 800-1k DPS and 300k EHP but faster and more agile, When they enter "Extreme" mode they get double there flights of Drones/Fighters but since all hands are on deck on the launch crews can not Repair DMG locally and must rely on friends/support. They need to cost 500 Mil fitted.
These ships would change alot about blobbing warefare and ontop of it Would help fight Drake Blobskies by making these Mid to small caps able to hit BC`s.
I know we need to fix current ships but TBH I have given up on that and realized CCp wants to keep drawing more New players and sucking new ones back in, so they will make new ships before fixing old ones so If I cant have old ships fixed We might as well have roles fileld that current ships should tak care of.
I really do love a Spread "Bomb Black ops" that can either take out a gang or die horribly for alot of ISK.
I also love Dessy with the HUGE BOMBS that can do 500kDPS to Cap`s and very little to sub caps.
But then again I love Pocket Dread/Carriers.
I know its not Real Naval warefare but the principles seem to be the same, also a good idea in a game is ok if its inspired from RL. -------------------------------------------------- "If Eve Was P*rn, It would be a Snuff film, First you get screwed then you get killed" -Me
|
Shiho Weitong
Caldari Koa Mai Hoku
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 21:51:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Toot Maimington Edited by: Toot Maimington on 09/11/2010 21:29:03 Any discussion of real life surface naval warfare is moot since the invention of the torpedo, submarine fired to a lesser extent but more notably - the aerial torpedo.
Any surface vessel that wasnt an AA platform, Anti Sub platform or Aircraft carrier was obsolete from the outset of WW2, nobody even realised this until the Bismarck was sunk. After that Battleships were more or less command vessels or shore bombardment platforms.
tl;dr - RL should never ever be mentioned in equivalents to EVE.
On topic - dedicated hacking ship - a bubbler that blocks weapon fire allowing fleets to dictate range? Suicide ship (fireship)
GIEF FIRESHIP! ----------- Why is it called common sense, when it's clearly very rare.
I had a mind once, but alas, I seem to have forgotten where I left it.
Originally by: Tchell Dahhn You win, and thank you. |
Steppa
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 21:59:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Steppa on 09/11/2010 22:01:25 Point defense ships. Not quite sure how you make that work given the realities of the Eve client, physics, etc, but I'd base it on destroyer platforms and give em tons of guns and tracking. Very little use for anything else except active missile defense, though.
Add pocket carriers that can use gates, but not jump, have much better scan res and at least one turret/missile hardpoint.
|
Lurana Lay
Gallente
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 22:50:00 -
[49]
Originally by: Steppa Edited by: Steppa on 09/11/2010 22:01:25 Point defense ships. Not quite sure how you make that work given the realities of the Eve client, physics, etc, but I'd base it on destroyer platforms and give em tons of guns and tracking. Very little use for anything else except active missile defense, though.
Add pocket carriers that can use gates, but not jump, have much better scan res and at least one turret/missile hardpoint.
Only if they also provide a PD ship that shoots down your lazors ac,s arties and lolrails.
|
EdTeach
|
Posted - 2010.11.09 23:47:00 -
[50]
Not that anything will come of this, but I like the Monitor concept.
POS killing, Gate/Station camper.
Slow as a dread but weaker tank.
DPS comparable to slightly more than non-siege dread.
Medium ranged, absolutely hideous tracking/etc. If a target moves faster than a 120 m/sec it cannot be hit by this ship for any appreciable damage.
No jump drive.
1 AU/sec warp.
Can be scrammed, jammed, neuted, etc.
Can fit 5 sentries or large drones. 125/125
Slightly larger in proportions than a battleship.
----------
If they gave Carriers and SCs the proper love they deserve in ths 'apparant size' dept. Then Monitors could fill in the current carrier size niche.
----------
|
|
Baraka Saibot
|
Posted - 2010.11.10 09:04:00 -
[51]
A battleship with a bonus to speed and a special module that disrupts the enemy Anti-collision sub system... Oh, and it's own.
...Ramming speed!
|
Diesel47
|
Posted - 2010.11.10 13:32:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Brynhilda Assault Battleships
T2 Versions of the Abaddon, Rokh, Hyperion and Maelstrom
This. x20 this. T2 Rokh, YES.
|
Quendishir
Caldari The Immortal Dawn
|
Posted - 2010.11.10 15:41:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Lady Skank
Originally by: knobber Jobbler Dreadnoughts should be that gap. But they are useless targets right now.
The whole comparison with naval warfare is void because EVE works differently. There are some similarities but not many.
Battlecruisers for instance were a failed design/idea. They were meant to hit like a battleship but fast like a cruiser & also cheaper to produce. In practice they failed because they didn't have that much speed difference with full on battleships and couldn't take the punishment from one. Most were scrapped, sunk in combat or turned into carriers while still on the slipway.
Until carriers, the all big gun battleship was king of the hill, no single other ship or even group of smaller ships could take one down unless they got very lucky. Most were lost to due to design problems/compromises or human error.
Even several heavy cruisers couldn't take down a modern battleship as they'd have to close to make there smaller guns and torpedos count...6 inch guns don't penetrate battleship grade armour until very close whereas a battleship could destroy a cruiser in 1 salvo at 20 miles plus. The cruiser would have to get within a few miles to start doing damage and could only slow it down if it could get within torpedo range and cause a hit on the rudder or shafts.
Funniest thing though was that an obsolete bi-plane was instrumental in the sinking of one of the most powerful battleships of its era, the Bismarck, thats how much aircraft changed the face of naval warfare.
The ship's guns were built to have better tracking against faster moving aircraft. Not so much a flaw in the design of the Bismarck as it was just stupid lucky.
|
Andrea Griffin
|
Posted - 2010.11.10 18:30:00 -
[54]
I would like a mini jump freighter. Current jump freighters are extremely expensive. Something that could jump and hold maybe 50k m3 would be great. Perhaps a third Blockade Runner type ship? Fix Rockets in '08 '09 2010 2011 2012?! |
Indeterminacy
THORN Syndicate Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2010.11.10 19:52:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Shiho Weitong
GIEF FIRESHIP!
fit smarties on your bs and go go go.
|
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2010.11.10 20:34:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Marexlovox After couple years playing EvE I still feel something is missing between Battleship's and Capital Ship's. What its missing I still haven't figured out, if you think the same post your thoughts.
Only because CCP should redesign all the ships to be closer to their 'class'.
Titan Dreadnought - Supercarrier Battleship - Carrier Battlecruiser Cruiser Destroyer Frigate Corvette
Granted each major class has minor subclasses too. IE: Cruiser = Heavy Cruiser, Endurance Cruiser, Escort Cruiser, Light Cruiser, etc.
Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
upthe bum
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 19:17:00 -
[57]
I think the Germans got it right...............Pocket Battleships (Admiral Graf Spee)
But before we get new toy's like faction carriers ect ect how about we fix the game |
Anubis Xian
Reavers
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 19:30:00 -
[58]
The only thing that wrong with the HMS Hood design philosophy was British Pride. Otherwise it was a perfect example of what potential battlecruisers had. The German versions' only real claim to fame came from the thorough and finished design and the effort it took to kill one.
Originally by: CCP Oveur The client handles no logic, it is simply a dumb terminal.
|
Ebisu Kami
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 21:01:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Ebisu Kami on 11/11/2010 21:02:07
Originally by: Anubis Xian The only thing that wrong with the HMS Hood design philosophy was British Pride. Otherwise it was a perfect example of what potential battlecruisers had. The German versions' only real claim to fame came from the thorough and finished design and the effort it took to kill one.
There were far more things wrong with Hood then just pride, namely: Easy to kill, not sufficiently fast enough, compared to larger units, and wrong usage. Beyond that, battlecruisers were pretty much obsolete by the moment they were comissioned and all their potential was lost when battleship-propulsion got several upgrades and killed the one big advantage BCs had, leaving them as weaker and cheaper pseudo-battleships.
Originally by: Anubis Xian Only because CCP should redesign all the ships to be closer to their 'class'.
No. We're in space, not on the seven seas of ancient earth. The current classifications work perfectly as intended and really need no rethought, except for getting rid of the tier-system.
|
Chris Bailey
|
Posted - 2010.11.11 21:09:00 -
[60]
[Abaddon, Citadel Torp Abaddon] Reactor Control Unit II Reactor Control Unit II Reactor Control Unit II Reactor Control Unit II Reactor Control Unit II Reactor Control Unit II Reactor Control Unit II
Empty Empty Empty Empty
Citadel Torpedo Launcher I Empty Empty Empty Empty Empty Empty Empty
Large Ancillary Current Router I Large Ancillary Current Router I Large Ancillary Current Router I
Ogre II
Works pretty good
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |