EVE Search - Updating Destroyers

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Lygos	Posted - 2005.04.09 07:05:00 - [1] The tech2 ships will be interesting, but I was always hoping the ship would be vulnerable mostly to cruisers, battlecruisers, assault frigs and HACs. They are still kind of pointless so long as battleships can hit everything except perhaps as secondary battleship escorts.. Even the tech1 version of destroyers should be a genuine threat to interceptors currently. There does seem to be a gap where tech2 destroyers should be.. but what role should a tech2 destroyer occupy that a tech1 destroyer can't fill in? A tech2 frigate, unlike a tech2 cruiser, isn't just "more of the same." It should attain a specialized role and as far as I see it, and destroyers already have, or are supposed to have, this. I believe most people regard the destroyer as being largely incompetent against anything but a tech1 frigate at the moment. Perhaps Destroyer IIs could get the ability to mount 1 or 2 assault missile launchers if small missiles were ever fixed. Somehow I think they are just going to follow the assault frigate development at this pace, i.e. slower and with more range and maybe some more HP. We can ruminate about slots all day, but ultimately it is the boosts that define the purpose of a ship. Perhaps 5% accelerated locking speed per level would be a good one. I'd like to see it get away from the generic damage boost. The current accuracy boost should be plenty in that field using frigate sized weapons unless they roll out a microdrone swarm. How about a shrinking signature radius?
Lygos ISS Navy Task Force	Posted - 2005.04.09 07:05:00 - [2] The tech2 ships will be interesting, but I was always hoping the ship would be vulnerable mostly to cruisers, battlecruisers, assault frigs and HACs. They are still kind of pointless so long as battleships can hit everything except perhaps as secondary battleship escorts.. Even the tech1 version of destroyers should be a genuine threat to interceptors currently. There does seem to be a gap where tech2 destroyers should be.. but what role should a tech2 destroyer occupy that a tech1 destroyer can't fill in? A tech2 frigate, unlike a tech2 cruiser, isn't just "more of the same." It should attain a specialized role and as far as I see it, and destroyers already have, or are supposed to have, this. I believe most people regard the destroyer as being largely incompetent against anything but a tech1 frigate at the moment. Perhaps Destroyer IIs could get the ability to mount 1 or 2 assault missile launchers if small missiles were ever fixed. Somehow I think they are just going to follow the assault frigate development at this pace, i.e. slower and with more range and maybe some more HP. We can ruminate about slots all day, but ultimately it is the boosts that define the purpose of a ship. Perhaps 5% accelerated locking speed per level would be a good one. I'd like to see it get away from the generic damage boost. The current accuracy boost should be plenty in that field using frigate sized weapons unless they roll out a microdrone swarm. How about a shrinking signature radius? --- Private Investment should preceed Public Investment
Lygos	Posted - 2005.04.10 05:02:00 - [3] Edited by: Lygos on 10/04/2005 05:03:49 As much as I like the idea of destroyers being restricted in ability against only other destroyers, ordinary frigates, drones, and interceptors one on one, (not counting pilot skill) I believe that such limitations are still kind of pointless so long as smaller ship classes don't have greater envelope of immunity from significantly larger hulls. (Currently that envelope is either in a safespot or farther than 150 km away from any battleship sized foe. The impropriety in that is both obvious and staggering.) If destroyers can only hurt frigates, or badly piloted interceptors, and battleship sized weapons can knock frigates and even drones out of the sky with ease.. then there is really no role for destroyers. This easily trumps my contention that wealthier people are better than others. Wealth is only a tool for maintaining good habits and bringing order to the frontiers of society. The chain of purpose in ship classes is essential for order on the battlefield and jus ad bellum as well as jus in bello. Cruisers should obliterate all frigate classes and contend with other cruisers. The assault frigs and HACs are the only ones which should cross the line slightly. Battleships should only be able to obliterate cruiser classes, and contend with one another provided they fit to do one or the other. Likewise, single frigates should have a pretty hard time breaking the ordinary passive shield regen on battleships when solo while contending with anti-frigate drones. (heavier drones are wanted against other battleships and cruisers) Hence the great circle of consumption that makes all ship classes useful provided CCP spaces them out. When dreadnaughts come out, or whichever ship hull carries XL turrets, they should have a hard time scratching cruisers, pwn battleships solo, and contend with one another if they are fitted properly with an anti-dread setup. (mega drones) Solo cruisers should have a hard time breaking the passive shield tank on a dread or XL turret platform. That way the great chain would be continued.
Lygos ISS Navy Task Force	Posted - 2005.04.10 05:02:00 - [4] Edited by: Lygos on 10/04/2005 05:03:49 As much as I like the idea of destroyers being restricted in ability against only other destroyers, ordinary frigates, drones, and interceptors one on one, (not counting pilot skill) I believe that such limitations are still kind of pointless so long as smaller ship classes don't have greater envelope of immunity from significantly larger hulls. (Currently that envelope is either in a safespot or farther than 150 km away from any battleship sized foe. The impropriety in that is both obvious and staggering.) If destroyers can only hurt frigates, or badly piloted interceptors, and battleship sized weapons can knock frigates and even drones out of the sky with ease.. then there is really no role for destroyers. This easily trumps my contention that wealthier people are better than others. Wealth is only a tool for maintaining good habits and bringing order to the frontiers of society. The chain of purpose in ship classes is essential for order on the battlefield and jus ad bellum as well as jus in bello. Cruisers should obliterate all frigate classes and contend with other cruisers. The assault frigs and HACs are the only ones which should cross the line slightly. Battleships should only be able to obliterate cruiser classes, and contend with one another provided they fit to do one or the other. Likewise, single frigates should have a pretty hard time breaking the ordinary passive shield regen on battleships when solo while contending with anti-frigate drones. (heavier drones are wanted against other battleships and cruisers) Hence the great circle of consumption that makes all ship classes useful provided CCP spaces them out. When dreadnaughts come out, or whichever ship hull carries XL turrets, they should have a hard time scratching cruisers, pwn battleships solo, and contend with one another if they are fitted properly with an anti-dread setup. (mega drones) Solo cruisers should have a hard time breaking the passive shield tank on a dread or XL turret platform. That way the great chain would be continued. --- Private Investment should preceed Public Investment
Lygos	Posted - 2005.04.10 11:01:00 - [5] Edited by: Lygos on 10/04/2005 11:03:26 Well, I agree that there is no point in making the Destroyer substitute for an assault frigate. Hence, if we want the lowest common denominator setup, and less skill intensive, then we are probably looking for a frigate that hits close to as well as an assault frigate, but moves a good deal more quickly and with more nimbleness. But finally it has a reduced signature radius though little armor and unremarkable resistances. Hence, prey to cruisers and assault frigates (and torpendoes). If we do that though, it is impinging on the domain of both the assault frigate and the interceptor, perhaps doing neither function well. I see such a destroyer as a defacto interceptor killer. It is unfortunate that the current destroyer doesn't fill this roll well though, but it is only a tech1 ship I suppose. It's not much fun, but I guess that makes enough sense to pass muster.
Lygos ISS Navy Task Force	Posted - 2005.04.10 11:01:00 - [6] Edited by: Lygos on 10/04/2005 11:03:26 Well, I agree that there is no point in making the Destroyer substitute for an assault frigate. Hence, if we want the lowest common denominator setup, and less skill intensive, then we are probably looking for a frigate that hits close to as well as an assault frigate, but moves a good deal more quickly and with more nimbleness. But finally it has a reduced signature radius though little armor and unremarkable resistances. Hence, prey to cruisers and assault frigates (and torpendoes). If we do that though, it is impinging on the domain of both the assault frigate and the interceptor, perhaps doing neither function well. I see such a destroyer as a defacto interceptor killer. It is unfortunate that the current destroyer doesn't fill this roll well though, but it is only a tech1 ship I suppose. It's not much fun, but I guess that makes enough sense to pass muster. --- Private Investment should preceed Public Investment

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.