| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Corey Grim
   |
Posted - 2005.08.21 11:57:00 -
[1]
i just want to know what ppl think their role would/should be?
I Would like to see that they are faster (read:more agile) with additional med slot and no ROF penalty or decreased ROF penalty (related to destroyer skill or frigate skill)... of course bonuses are race related also.
resistance imo should be as it is but it would be nice if they have more shield/armor/structure HP (not plenty just some) i see their place is taking enemy scouts out while they also can do scouting. also some bonus to mwd (smaler sig radius or smaler cap penalty) would be nice to have.
|
Klaryssa
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 12:45:00 -
[2]
Racial bonuses to things like webbers, nosferatu/neuts, scramblers etc. Theyre an anti-frig ship, so giving them the ability to hold and pound frigs would be good, while keeping them vulnerable to cruisers and other bigger ships.
|
J Ryan
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 12:57:00 -
[3]
Am I the only one who thinks an anti-stealth ship would be a good idea. Perhaps a module that can only fit on T2 Destroyers, that can uncloak stealth ships within a certain radius.
|
RedClaws
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 13:11:00 -
[4]
why would you like anti-stealth when the cloak itself it useless except on a covert ops (and that the only usefullness about it)
|
Taketa De
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 13:50:00 -
[5]
 Originally by: Corey Grim
resistance imo should be as it is but it would be nice if they have more shield/armor/structure HP (not plenty just some) i see their place is taking enemy scouts out while they also can do scouting. also some bonus to mwd (smaler sig radius or smaler cap penalty) would be nice to have.
They are supposed to be anti-frig boats, so I would hope they can take out tech 2 frigs. Withouth higher resistances that would be impossible however.
|
Douglas McCracken
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 14:01:00 -
[6]
Think these would have been best as bombers to be honest, slow sluggish but deadly. Sadly they have already tried that and created stealth bombers, which suck.
|
Sarleena
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 14:23:00 -
[7]
I'd like to see covert assault ships. Blockade-runner resistance bonuses, substantial sensor recalibration time bonus, near-AF base resists, something that 2-3 can pop up and decimate a Tech-1 frig fleet, or take 1.5x or even twice their number of T2 frigs
ex bonuses:
per Destoryer skill level: +10% race's primary +5% race's secondary resists, Standard destroyer bonuses
per T2 Destroyer Skill Level: -15% sensor recalibration time, -92%to-100% cov ops cloak CPU usage.
leave them sluggish and with a large sig radius, and maybe lower their top speed a little bit, but give them a bit more hull/armor/shield, someone did the calculations on the % bonus that assault frigs got, I'd say they should get about 2/3 the % increase. It would be deadly against frigs, probably kill tech 1 cruisers, die hiedously to HACs and probably not fare too well against BSs either due to the large sig radius, low agility, and low speed.
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, champagne in one hand, strawberries in the oth |
dantes inferno
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 14:45:00 -
[8]
it would be nice to see more ew type bonuses ratehr the usual dmg/weapons..more rance on webbers, scramblers..more range/effectivnes on painters/nos..dampners/jammer bonuses have the tech 2 dd specilise in tackling.
we got af for dmg, hacs for dmg, i would imagines the tech 2 BC's to be used in fleet comand (as tech 1 have the bonus to use gang warfare mods), intys are good nippy ships which can be used for tackling but have no relevant bonuses. so a dedicated tackler would be nice.
_____
|
Plim
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 14:47:00 -
[9]
Destroyers, only good.
-----------------
|
Ceratin
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 14:57:00 -
[10]
What should t2 destroyers be?
Simple answer-Worth flying.
|
Edhel
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 15:39:00 -
[11]
i see destroyers are anti-tackling they take out fast t1 frigs and intys.. i don't see them as anti AF, then they'd be exactly like an AF except with more guns.. AF's are vulnerable enough to larger ships.
|
Rafein
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 16:42:00 -
[12]
a 2nd round of bonuses, another 7.5% tracking bonus, and a 5% damage bonus.
It won;t be that much more sturdy, but it can hit everything.
|
Dark Shikari
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 16:44:00 -
[13]
A T2 destroyer should be the bane of the frigate blob.
--
Proud member of the [23].
Want your POS to make money? Call me up. I've designed POSs that make upwards of 50m a day. |
Corey Grim
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 17:07:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Taketa De
Originally by: Corey Grim
resistance imo should be as it is but it would be nice if they have more shield/armor/structure HP (not plenty just some) i see their place is taking enemy scouts out while they also can do scouting. also some bonus to mwd (smaler sig radius or smaler cap penalty) would be nice to have.
They are supposed to be anti-frig boats, so I would hope they can take out tech 2 frigs. Withouth higher resistances that would be impossible however.
i kinda agree with this but i was hoping to see other solution than huge resistance bonuses. they should be about same level with AF imo so in 1v1 fight it would be evenly matched or mayby little to t2 destroyer advandage. It DEFINETLY should can kill t1 cruisers and make trouble for battlecruisers. but shouldnt be able to take HAC alone.
Quote:
leave them sluggish and with a large sig radius, and maybe lower their top speed a little bit, but give them a bit more hull/armor/shield,
i really dont think that it would be good idea to make them slow and sluggish they are supposed to kill frigates... right?... ok i dont want them to catch IC but still they have to had good (i mean very good) agility and little bit boosted speed compared t1 destroyers. if they have increased sig radius it would mean: T1 cruisers with med guns and there goes BOOM... not good.... i would like to see that T2 destroyers still uses small guns. Scouting and tacler killing should be their job
|
Joshua Calvert
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 17:35:00 -
[15]
I decently setup Destroyer is nearly as good as an AF at handling 2 or 3 inties but they do take a lot of skills and you pretty much have to go for gank rather than tank.
I'd like to see T2 Destroyers given some powergrid love and some resistances love, of course, so we can get some variation on setup.
LEEEEERRRRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY! |
Ice Shard
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 17:48:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Ice Shard on 21/08/2005 17:49:53
there is currently no ship that is designed to kill ceptors, im hoping the t2 destroyer will be...
the annoying fleet orbitting one
|
Sarleena
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 18:38:00 -
[17]
hmm, maybe a 7.5% reduction in small *racial* turret signature resolution per level and up the tracking bonus to 15%/level? at level 5, the turret's sig res would be 25, and the inty's sig radius would be 26.25, so you've got a gun that will never miss the inty as long as it can track it, and the tracking speed bonus would mean that you're an inty's worst nightmare
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, champagne in one hand, strawberries in the oth |
Commander Zipsu
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 18:47:00 -
[18]
a good picture site what contains pictures of normal and T2 ships. click here!
|
Friehgt
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 19:00:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Ice Shard
Edited by: Ice Shard on 21/08/2005 17:49:53
there is currently no ship that is designed to kill ceptors, im hoping the t2 destroyer will be...
the annoying fleet orbitting one
Assfrigs ???
|
CitzNo 097864
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 19:54:00 -
[20]
As a destroyer pilot I'd love to see a massive increase in speed and the firing rate penalty dropped. I wouldn't mind 8 midslots and maybe even no lows. (With the CPU to use them too)
|
Icarus Starkiller
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 20:23:00 -
[21]
Edited by: Icarus Starkiller on 21/08/2005 20:25:19
Originally by: Ice Shard
Edited by: Ice Shard on 21/08/2005 17:49:53
there is currently no ship that is designed to kill ceptors, im hoping the t2 destroyer will be...
the annoying fleet orbitting one
Hmmm.... 'designed'?
Try the Thrasher. Even with a modest kitup and no T2 weapons skills a Thrasher can shred inties in a heartbeat in a typical encounter (close range orbit). Sniper inties pwn it, but those are relatively rare, and a single weapon disruptor nullifies that advantage. A cormorant can be similarly fitted.
Also the new plated cruiser designs (1600mm plate & T2 frig guns) pwn 2 or 3 inties in a group, sometimes even a similar sized pack of AFs.
Inties are far from invulnerable to smartly outfitted dessies & T1 cruisers... or even T1 frigs depending on pilot ability & brains.
Life is pain...anyone who says differently is selling something. |
Xaat Xuun
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 23:06:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Xaat Xuun on 21/08/2005 23:12:02
Edited by: Xaat Xuun on 21/08/2005 23:11:28
well I have been thinking this one over. and here is my thoughts of 2 T2 destroyer's (would they be called Battle Destroyers ??)
EW bonus
1 extra slot for mid AND low
20 more points in the powergride (at least 20)
maybe a cap bonus, race related
race damage bonus
= = = = = =
T2 two-
more a escort role
Speed bonus
larger powergrid
no penalty for ROF
race damage bonus
|
Derron Bel
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 23:24:00 -
[23]
More agile is out. They arn't supposed to be super-frigates. Their agility is fine.
All destroyers (even T1) do need the ability to web, though; only having the one medium slot is really far too limiting!
Destroyers are also excellent level 2 mission boats- they're faster than a cruiser, tougher + more firepower than a frigate, and have big enough cargo bays to carry a lot of loot.
I think a Tier 2 Destroyer should have extremely limited endurance (bad recharge on everything) but able to kick a whole lot of frigate butt in the meantime- AB in, web, blast, kill. A short range gank-boat.
T1 Cruisers should be able to kill T2 destroyers, though, barring huge inequalities in skill and equipment.
Before Destroyer balance can be sorted out, I think armor plate balance needs to be sorted out, though.
-==-
Holy-Jim> as you know, surprise is the key to victory.....surprise!
LooseCannoN> ahh!
LooseCannoN> my plans have been foiled! |
slip66
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 23:36:00 -
[24]
Edited by: slip66 on 21/08/2005 23:43:02
Originally by: J Ryan
Am I the only one who thinks an anti-stealth ship would be a good idea. Perhaps a module that can only fit on T2 Destroyers, that can uncloak stealth ships within a certain radius.
nope I mentioned the same b4. Something that works like a sonar would be cool.
IMO they dont need any dmg, rof etc based upgrades. If they get those then they become slow intys or less tankable assaults. Give them more hp. This gives them a greater advantage over intys since the destroyers can do enough dmg to make a inty think twice atm. It also keeps them below the assault frigs with out the tanking ability.
|
Shin Ra
|
Posted - 2005.08.21 23:38:00 -
[25]
If your going to have the with AF resistances and more mid slots, they should be slot and have really big sig radius (IE over 200)
-----------------------------------------
wts all new "burberry" warp core stab II's |
PaulAtreides
|
Posted - 2005.08.22 00:02:00 -
[26]
I say exactly as they are now, 1 extra slot in the primary function area (amarr/gallente = low, caldari = med, minnie = mid/low), a bonus increase be it damage / resistances, and a slight increase in GP so we don't have to fit Micro Aux units to make the setup usefull.
Thanks.
|
Abe LeRoy
|
Posted - 2005.08.22 00:16:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Abe LeRoy on 22/08/2005 00:18:20
Originally by: J Ryan
Am I the only one who thinks an anti-stealth ship would be a good idea.
Nope 
For such a ship I'd like to see a "sonar" module that emits an omni directional wave out to a certain distance at regular intervals. Any cloaked unit within range of this sonar would be at risk of showing up on the DD pilot's HUD as well as on the HUDs of any gang members. The chances of a cloaked unit being detected would be calculated once per cycle and based on range; the closer, the better. If the sonar user "wins the lottery" for a given cycle and gets a hit, everybody in the gang can then lock on and go to work on the target. The cloaked starship pilot wouldn't know he was detected until he saw his vessel decloaked from all the target locks and the accompanying yellow and red brackets 
The sonar module itself, which would occupy a high slot, would require an exorbitant amount CPU and the tech II "sub hunting" DDs would include a fitting bonus for sonars.
"Love yer enemies and drive 'em nuts!"
-Brother Dave Gardner |
Nac MacFeegle
|
Posted - 2005.08.22 00:52:00 -
[28]
Hmm... if Destroyers are Anti-Frigate vessels, I would say that a T2 Destroyer would go after T2 frigates. Beefed-up defensive capability to match Assault Frigs, bonus for webbers to match Interceptors.
All opinions expressed in this message are personal and don't necessarily reflect those of the poster's corp or alliance. |
Wild Rho
|
Posted - 2005.08.22 02:01:00 -
[29]
Edited by: Wild Rho on 22/08/2005 02:02:26
How about giving them unique modules such as bubble warp jammers and webbers.
I.e instead of locking when the modules are activated anything within their range is affected as if hit with a webber and/or scrambler unless they move out of range.
Would make them truely leathel against inties if they get close enough to get the inty inside the bubble and having some sitting close to friendly ships would make them very suitable for anti frig defence.
Heck there are options for all sorts of "bubble" modules they could use such as ew based ones as well etc.
Tech 2 destroyer skills could reduce fitting requirements and boost the bubbles ranges.
Would probably allow standard and advanced versions. Standard affects anyone in range whereas the advanced versions (tougher fitting requirements and more skill intesnsive) would have built in IFF abilites so gang and corpmates arent affected.
Would make them truely leathel frigate defences since they don't require target locks to mess up their targets, they just need to get in close enough.
|
The Slayer
|
Posted - 2005.08.22 02:20:00 -
[30]
One word - AEGIS
_______________________________________________________
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |