Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
1319
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 19:19:00 -
[31] - Quote
I agree with those talking about expanding the number of capitals in the game... a little diversity in the capital lineup could go a long way towards leveling the cap playing field, plus introducing them would drive a lot of trade and industry. What about T2 caps? Within the context of this thread, I'd propose a T2 dread. Give it a new launcher that fires a new class of +£ber torpedo with MASSIVE damage against caps only. Make each races T2 dread specialized so that it requires a same-race launcher that can only fire a race specific damage type. That would do a number of things: It would encourage a diverse fleet composition. It would suck up ISK as cap pilots would need several of these to have a full spectrum attack capability. It would give bittervets something new to train. It could also level out the different race Titans (potentially making the leviathan more popular). What about a capital cyno jammer ship? Kind of like a capital version of the HIC. There's a lot of ways this could be done, and I've read many threads in F&I with a lot of other great ideas.
|
Asuka Solo
Stark Fujikawa Stark Enterprises
1747
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 19:21:00 -
[32] - Quote
Gogela wrote:I agree with those talking about expanding the number of capitals in the game... a little diversity in the capital lineup could go a long way towards leveling the cap playing field, plus introducing them would drive a lot of trade and industry. What about T2 caps? Within the context of this thread, I'd propose a T2 dread. Give it a new launcher that fires a new class of +£ber torpedo with MASSIVE damage against caps only. Make each races T2 dread specialized so that it requires a same-race launcher that can only fire a race specific damage type. That would do a number of things: It would encourage a diverse fleet composition. It would suck up ISK as cap pilots would need several of these to have a full spectrum attack capability. It could also level out the different race Titans (potentially making the leviathan more popular). What about a capital cyno jammer ship? Kind of like a capital version of the HIC. There's a lot of ways this could be done, and I've read many threads in F&I with a lot of other great ideas.
This.
My god.
This. Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk! |
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 19:25:00 -
[33] - Quote
Sinzor Aumer wrote:LtCol Laurentius wrote:Sinzor Aumer wrote:Let me ask a stupid question. Why dont we see Motherships being countered by ordinary stealth bombers? A fighter-bomber can only survive after 10 bomb explosions, so a group of 15-20 SB pilots can easily incapacitate a whole super-fleet in a single bombing run. Well, firstly because you dont actually kill the ships, so at best you can achieve a small delay in their ops as they need to replenish their fighter bombers. Secondly a Fighterbomber swarm will be easiest to hit when they orbit a target. But their targets are often so big (POS, Station etc) that the spehere of fighterbombers gets pretty large. Too large to be effectievly killed by a bombing run. At best you will remove a fraction of them possibly/probably for the cost of your entire bomber wing if their dictor pilots are on the ball. You can actually kill Motherships with Dreads, provided they have protection from fighter-bombers. And what do you mean by "delay to replenish"? If we're trying to kill a supercap that is not tackled - we're doing it wrong anyway.
Sure, dreads can kill Supercarriers, but the difficulty of lining up a stealthbomber attack to take out the fighterbombers might be the main explanaition as to why we dont really see that. Besides, a supercarrier fleet will normally either have titan support or have them within jumprange. |
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
103
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 19:32:00 -
[34] - Quote
Gogela wrote:I agree with those talking about expanding the number of capitals in the game... a little diversity in the capital lineup could go a long way towards leveling the cap playing field, plus introducing them would drive a lot of trade and industry. What about T2 caps? Within the context of this thread, I'd propose a T2 dread. Give it a new launcher that fires a new class of +£ber torpedo with MASSIVE damage against caps only. Make each races T2 dread specialized so that it requires a same-race launcher that can only fire a race specific damage type. That would do a number of things: It would encourage a diverse fleet composition. It would suck up ISK as cap pilots would need several of these to have a full spectrum attack capability. It would give bittervets something new to train. It could also level out the different race Titans (potentially making the leviathan more popular). What about a capital cyno jammer ship? Kind of like a capital version of the HIC. There's a lot of ways this could be done, and I've read many threads in F&I with a lot of other great ideas.
I dont see one idea necessarily invalidating another. As I've said previosly, I support fleshing out the capital line-up somewhat. But I still feel introducing a comparatively low-cost assymetric threat might shake things up that desperately need shaking up. It is not like strategic bombers are ever going to pose an exsistential threat to the capital ships. They will inflict losses, and be a tool in the toolbox. Not the end of capital warfare. |
Lenny Snipes
Tribal Liberation Force Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2012.10.25 20:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote:Asuka Solo wrote: Humor me.
Why are we proposing yet more sub capitals that can magically gank supers... instead of expanding existing capitals to give us this pure super ganking pleasure at a fraction of the cost of a super... without further throwing rifters-online a bone....
That having been said... why don't we have capitals & supers whose only viable targets are sub caps at the expense of getting owned by capitals and other supers?
As far as I'm concerned, sub capital ship's damage and threat levels to capitals and supers should be revisited, in much the same way as the Titans and SCs were nerfed with regards to attacking sub caps.
Don't get me wrong... I'm all for capital killer hulls. But why the fek are we making them sub caps?
Although I have symphaty for the idea that CCP populate the capital class with additional ships I think there are 2 good reasons to include a sub capital capital-killer ship. Firstly, its about the continuing health of the game. Nullsec is today divided between the haves and the have-nots with regards to a super-capital fleet big enough to successfully vage sovreignty warfare. These entities have virtual monopoly on the strategic income assets (moons) that ensure that this distinction between the haves and the have-nots will continue for eternity. Breaking into the nullsec game is virtually impossible for truly new entities today, and - unless something is done about it - this situation will remain unchanged. Introducing capital class supercapital killers would not do anything to remedy this situation, as the only entities who could afford these new capabilities in significant numbers would be the same entities that would have the target ships. At a game level, nothing changes. Secondly, its about game design. Today, supercapital fleets can move about with impunity because there is no capability - save another equally big super capital fleet - than can threaten them. The strategic bomber works assymetrically. It present the super capital fleet with a threat they cannot handle on their own, neccessitating defensive measuers in the form of a proper sub-capital support fleet to protect the super capitals. This is how it SHOULD be.
This is very succinct, well done. I like your idea, its not dissimilar to what was proposed after the first world war; You needn't build ever larger naval ships to complete if a few aircraft can nullify them with a torpedo, bomb or anti-shipping missile. |
turmajin
The Scope Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 16:13:00 -
[36] - Quote
Have to say i agree that the idea for a anti capital /POS bomb ,and laucher fits far better on a black ops battleship imo.No need for a new ship at all ,As a black ops BS allready has the abilities you want ie cloak,able to jump and bridge its own covert ops support cruisies / frigates to tackle any support ships of the target capital ship / POS..Personnally i think its a marvalous idea for giving black ops BS a much needed role in game ,and giving PVP an added dimension to boot |
Tarikan
Fusion Death Inc. Black Core Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2012.11.05 16:40:00 -
[37] - Quote
I'd much prefer giving Ships that are currently in the game some bonuses to give them a more defined and sought out role than create a whole new ship and still have useless ships.
i like the idea of having a supcap ships be a weapon to fight off the Supercap blobbing, but i feel that this could be achieved with buffing or changing current ships such as the Black Ops ships. Heck i'd even enjoy seeing the frigate Ewar boats be able to affect Supercaps and bypass the supercap "immune to ewar" problem.
I'm also all for helping Dreadnoughts get a better role to play in fighting Supercaps, after the recent changes they aren't that bad but i believe they still deserve some tweaking.
Best Super is a dead Super |
Kuro Bon
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 05:10:00 -
[38] - Quote
Quote:Quote:... its about the continuing health of the game. Nullsec is today divided between the haves and the have-nots with regards to a super-capital fleet big enough to successfully vage sovreignty warfare. These entities have virtual monopoly on the strategic income assets (moons) that ensure that this distinction between the haves and the have-nots will continue for eternity. This is very succinct, well done. I like your idea, its not dissimilar to what was proposed after the first world war; You needn't build ever larger naval ships to complete if a few aircraft can nullify them with a torpedo, bomb or anti-shipping missile.
From an economic perspective, introducing constant change and flip flopping of ship strengths is a good way to try to close the gap between the haves-and-have-nots. The bigger an existing fleet, the less efficient the converstion from one tech-and-tactics fad to another. This is somewhat similar to real-world corporate cycles, where large entrenched organizations have so much momentum down a path that they can be blindsided by a much smaller org because of technology or market shifts.
Of course in the real world, the old companies stuck in a legacy mindset are not paying the bills of those who write the rules. At least not unless we're talking about Wall Street.
|
Quesa
D00M. Northern Coalition.
11
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 05:56:00 -
[39] - Quote
Gogela wrote:I agree with those talking about expanding the number of capitals in the game... a little diversity in the capital lineup could go a long way towards leveling the cap playing field, plus introducing them would drive a lot of trade and industry. What about T2 caps? Within the context of this thread, I'd propose a T2 dread. Give it a new launcher that fires a new class of +£ber torpedo with MASSIVE damage against caps only. Make each races T2 dread specialized so that it requires a same-race launcher that can only fire a race specific damage type. That would do a number of things: It would encourage a diverse fleet composition. It would suck up ISK as cap pilots would need several of these to have a full spectrum attack capability. It would give bittervets something new to train. It could also level out the different race Titans (potentially making the leviathan more popular). What about a capital cyno jammer ship? Kind of like a capital version of the HIC. There's a lot of ways this could be done, and I've read many threads in F&I with a lot of other great ideas. Capitals have and should continue to have a very limitied scope, in terms of role. Once you start expanding their role, you invalidate sub-capitals in places you can get capitals.
That's not something that is of benefit to the game or player-base. |
Iris Bravemount
Fweddit I Whip My Slaves Back and Forth
111
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 10:54:00 -
[40] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote: 3)It can mount a doomsday bomb GÇô a rocket powered device that will explode with the force of a doomsday weapon (3 million instantaneous damage), provided that the bomb hits the target. As it is not guided, and will continue in a straight line after release, the strategic bomber pilot must aim the weapon manually. 4)The doomsday bomb will only damage the target; it is not an AOE device. [/list]
Don't you feel there is a slight contradiction here? It would be much more intuitive to make it a torpedo that has the same target limitations a DDD has (ie, no subcap targets allowed), and the explosion radius/velocity you suggested, with a reasonable cooldown timer. There is no reason to make it a "bomb" (as in with the same mechanics as a stealth-bomber bomb). I accidentally... the bookmark. How much is it worth? |
|
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
107
|
Posted - 2012.11.06 19:54:00 -
[41] - Quote
turmajin wrote:Have to say i agree that the idea for a anti capital /POS bomb ,and laucher fits far better on a black ops battleship imo.No need for a new ship at all ,As a black ops BS allready has the abilities you want ie cloak,able to jump and bridge its own covert ops support cruisies / frigates to tackle any support ships of the target capital ship / POS..Personnally i think its a marvalous idea for giving black ops BS a much needed role in game ,and giving PVP an added dimension to boot
I am concerned about cost and size. In many cases this will be a kamikaze mission and heavy losses should be expected. At 700 million a pop, using Black Ops would probably rise the level of cost too high for the have-nots to effectively employ them in the necessary numbers. I also want ships that are small enough to not beeing locked in time and blapped by capital ships before the bombs goes off, because forcing a supercapital fleet to have a sizable sub-cap support fleet is one of the two main points of the entire idea.
Iris Bravemount wrote: Don't you feel there is a slight contradiction here? It would be much more intuitive to make it a torpedo that has the same target limitations a DDD has (ie, no subcap targets allowed), and the explosion radius/velocity you suggested, with a reasonable cooldown timer. There is no reason to make it a "bomb" (as in with the same mechanics as a stealth-bomber bomb).
I went with bomb because I wanted people to associate the idea with the kind of functionality allready in place in the form of stealth bombers using bombs againts densly packed sub cap ships. Besides, there are allready capital sized torpedoes in the game. But the name inst really that big of a deal.
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
5496
|
Posted - 2012.11.09 03:17:00 -
[42] - Quote
Gogela wrote:What about T2 caps?
Assuming that the cost would be similar to a jump freighter, do you honestly think that you'll see sizable fleets of these things that would only serve as 10bn ISK doomsday fodder when anyone with a brain would field supers instead? ~*a-áproud belligerent undesirable*~
TheMittani.com |
turmajin
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 15:07:00 -
[43] - Quote
LtCol Laurentius wrote:turmajin wrote:Have to say i agree that the idea for a anti capital /POS bomb ,and laucher fits far better on a black ops battleship imo.No need for a new ship at all ,As a black ops BS allready has the abilities you want ie cloak,able to jump and bridge its own covert ops support cruisies / frigates to tackle any support ships of the target capital ship / POS..Personnally i think its a marvalous idea for giving black ops BS a much needed role in game ,and giving PVP an added dimension to boot LT.COL Laurontius wrote I am concerned about cost and size. In many cases this will be a kamikaze mission and heavy losses should be expected. At 700 million a pop, using Black Ops would probably rise the level of cost too high for the have-nots to effectively employ them in the necessary numbers. I also want ships that are small enough to not beeing locked in time and blapped by capital ships before the bombs goes off, because forcing a supercapital fleet to have a sizable sub-cap support fleet is one of the two main points of the entire idea. I take your point,but i dont think there would be many players able to handle a Black Ops BS ,who havent played the game for some time,and really should have a nice ISK balance to boot .After all the 1st rule in game is dont fly want you cant afford to lose.It would however open up possiblities for small gang warfare in the form of raiding,to take out Supers or POSes.You are also overloking the fact that the differance in ISK loss between a Super or POS compard to a Black Ops BS is more to the advantage of the attacker or nearly the same.Making it a nice option for corps to engage in this type of warfare.I dont really see fleets of black Ops BS engaging in this just 1 or 2 a raid /attack..Otherwise the ISK loss balance favours the defender.,and its not as appealing to corps to engage in it then. |
Vartan Sarkisian
Inner Visions Of Sound Mind
7
|
Posted - 2012.11.16 16:34:00 -
[44] - Quote
Ive not had any experience fighting titans but I like the sound of this idea. Perhaps though it could be set up more like a torpedo run in WW2, the would have to be launch from some distance, they would only run in a straight line and the target would need to employ maneuvering and counter measures in order to avoid all/some of the damage... the smaller ships that should be protecting the titan would need to then hunt the bombers.
OK, maybe not an ideal solution but you never know :P |
LtCol Laurentius
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
107
|
Posted - 2012.11.17 03:21:00 -
[45] - Quote
turmajin wrote:I take your point,but i dont think there would be many players able to handle a Black Ops BS ,who havent played the game for some time,and really should have a nice ISK balance to boot .After all the 1st rule in game is dont fly want you cant afford to lose.It would however open up possiblities for small gang warfare in the form of raiding,to take out Supers or POSes.You are also overloking the fact that the differance in ISK loss between a Super or POS compard to a Black Ops BS is more to the advantage of the attacker or nearly the same.Making it a nice option for corps to engage in this type of warfare.I dont really see fleets of black Ops BS engaging in this just 1 or 2 a raid /attack..Otherwise the ISK loss balance favours the defender.,and its not as appealing to corps to engage in it then.
The point here is to provide not-so-spacerich alliances comprised of people without 100 million skillpoints an option to inflict painful losses on your typical sov grinding supercapital fleet, but I dont see making 1-2 black ops powerful enough to kill a titan in any way balanced.
With a 3 million damage weapon you could need 30 strategic bombers to take out a really well tanked and linked Avatar for example. To pull it off in a high Tidi environment like a serious sov fight is likely to be happening in will require planning, coordination and good execution. It should be possible, but not a walk in the park. I see you have a pet in making the Black Ops more useful in small gang warfare, but I think the Black ops is best employed as a covert bridge in this scenario tbh. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |