EVE Search - Thoughts on Red Moon Rising's new ships

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Thoughts on Red Moon Rising's new ships

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Sobeseki Pawi	Posted - 2005.10.24 01:03:00 - [31] Originally by: Nafri Originally by: Idara Originally by: KilROCK Originally by: Idara Originally by: KilROCK I cry just thinking about this... stuff In the good way or the bad way? Bad way, I hate patches because they usually make the game suck Errr....you'd rather be playing with the original launch client? then I would pwn with my tempest What tempest? ~Captain Cutie, HFS Event Horizon Biomass fears me. Sovereignty 2.0
Aneskha	Posted - 2005.10.24 09:17:00 - [32] I see a lot of shiny new toys coming for pvpers, and some for miners, but I'm a little disappointed by the lack of usefull new hardware for npc hunters. So, to resume, we have: -Interditors, usefull for pvp, useless for pve -Cloaking EW cruisers. What will they do, that a covert ops frigate can't already do? If they're only add a cynosural field bonus, they will be useless for 99% of the population. useless for pve. -command battlecruisers: not enough info on these to see how they'll be used. -Fleet command battlecruisers: usefull for pvp, useless for pve. - T2 battleships: moved back so far away that they become sort of an abstraction, like "maybe one day, if you're still there"... - Tier3 battleships, Tier2 batlecruisers: same things. - T2 ammos and NPC changes: about the only things in the coming expansion that will change something for me. I was expecting at least one new class of ships that would be worth flying for pve purposes :/
Laocoon	Posted - 2005.10.24 10:05:00 - [33] Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu Edited by: Istvaan Shogaatsu on 23/10/2005 23:39:37 I want the Caldari one. It looks so butch. First time in a long time the design of a Caldari ship has appealed to me. Don't be cruel.... any link pleeeeeeease? aaanyone?!?!? --------------- Originally by: Oveur Jesus Christ. The Freighter ate the Stargate god and the Dreadnought didn't! [quo
Nafri	Posted - 2005.10.24 10:07:00 - [34] Originally by: Sobeseki Pawi Originally by: Nafri Originally by: Idara Originally by: KilROCK Originally by: Idara Originally by: KilROCK I cry just thinking about this... stuff In the good way or the bad way? Bad way, I hate patches because they usually make the game suck Errr....you'd rather be playing with the original launch client? then I would pwn with my tempest What tempest? I have bought mine in a store, version was with tempest -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Put your panties on your head!
Khaldorn Murino	Posted - 2005.10.24 10:14:00 - [35] Im quite agreed with the man on this point. I want to take a carrier to Amarr and disgorge rapid death to slavers. Plus. It would be cool. Plus. It would be very useful by the sounds of it. - Just a simple warrior.
Sarmaul	Posted - 2005.10.24 10:14:00 - [36] Originally by: KilROCK Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu Edited by: Istvaan Shogaatsu on 23/10/2005 23:39:37 I want the Caldari one. It looks so butch. First time in a long time the design of a Caldari ship has appealed to me. You mind linking to the image of it? I didn't see how it looks then buy E-ON like the rest of us Originally by: Chowdown We camp a lot
Denrace	Posted - 2005.10.24 11:08:00 - [37] Originally by: KilROCK Originally by: Idara Originally by: KilROCK I cry just thinking about this... stuff In the good way or the bad way? Bad way, I hate patches because they usually make the game suck Then leave Can i have your stuff? ____________________________________________
Derron Bel	Posted - 2005.10.24 11:08:00 - [38] what IS known: -Carriers will not have any sort of turrets. Fighter drones will be their only combat units. -There are currently 2 kinds of carriers. Carriers, which apparently just have fighters and will cost in the range of Dreadnoughts, and Motherships, which reportedly also have ship maintenance arrays, enhanced logistics capabilities, and presumably will also have cloning chambers with project rebirth. -Titans will be like ubar carriers with superweapons and wormhole generators and fun stuff and things. there would be no point to a jumpgate-capable carrier because noone would use anything else. -==- Holy-Jim> as you know, surprise is the key to victory.....surprise! LooseCannoN> ahh! LooseCannoN> my plans have been foiled!
hired goon	Posted - 2005.10.24 11:08:00 - [39] I have a link to pics of carriers I scanned. But I'm not going to post them! For those of you that care, the Tier 3 caldari BS will be a rail platform. Booo. Personally I can't wait for the Tier 3 Amarr bs! Going to do some sweet mining in that baby, oh yeah. -omg-
Helmut 314	Posted - 2005.10.24 12:49:00 - [40] The carrier is such a cool concept. If they are priced right, say around the 1 billion isk mark, they will be used a lot in PvP. The dreadnaughts are a tad expensive to use in fleet battles.... ___________________________________ Trying is the first step of failure - Homer J Simpson
Antic	Posted - 2005.10.24 12:51:00 - [41] Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu Edited by: Istvaan Shogaatsu on 23/10/2005 23:39:37 I want the Caldari one. It looks so butch. First time in a long time the design of a Caldari ship has appealed to me. where can we see pictures or concepts on these?
Istvaan Shogaatsu	Posted - 2005.10.24 14:19:00 - [42] Edited by: Istvaan Shogaatsu on 24/10/2005 14:19:24 Quote: there would be no point to a jumpgate-capable carrier because noone would use anything else. I hafta disagree. There'd be pretty big differences between the two: STRIKE CARRIER - Can use Jumpgates - Can use Jump Drives (perhaps at lower efficiency than SC/Dread) - Can use Rebirth - Cannot use maintenance arrays - Much weaker defensively - Lower ship and drone capacity (can launch inty wings at best, maybe a HAC or two, defends itself modestly, once wings go down it has to leave) - Emphasis on mobility SUPERCARRIER - Cannot use Jumpgates (too big) - Can use Jump Drives - Can use Rebirth - Can use maintenance arrays - Tough cookie defensively - Huge capacity for ships and drones (craps out a small fleet, with full rearm and repair ability, and defends itself very well with tons of drones) - Emphasis on stabbing faces If you're in 0.0 there's no reason whatsoever to use the Strike Carrier because a few interceptors will pin it down long enough for it to get beat to death. Supercarrier on the other hand can conceiveably fend off a small group of hostile battleships by itself. Dig?
Haniblecter Teg	Posted - 2005.10.24 15:33:00 - [43] Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 24/10/2005 15:35:50 Where's this dev blog? I go to the Dev Blog button on the side and the most recent update I get is for pictures from fanfest. Can anyone give me a link? EDIT: OOOOOOOOOOOOh, you 'tards need to tell us that its the dev blog IN EON, and not onsite. Friends Forever
Shadowsword	Posted - 2005.10.24 15:44:00 - [44] Edited by: Shadowsword on 24/10/2005 15:44:55 By Definition, a Dev BLOG can't be on a paper magazine. The link is on a sticky on the general section of this forum. Edit: Here's the link: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=239245
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2005.10.24 16:13:00 - [45] Originally by: Haniblecter Teg Edited by: Haniblecter Teg on 24/10/2005 15:35:50 Where's this dev blog? I go to the Dev Blog button on the side and the most recent update I get is for pictures from fanfest. Can anyone give me a link? EDIT: OOOOOOOOOOOOh, you 'tards need to tell us that its the dev blog IN EON, and not onsite. Yes, that's because they've published TWO dev blogs since the fanfest. ZOMGWTFBBQ??????!?!?!?!?!11
Ithildin	Posted - 2005.10.24 17:29:00 - [46] Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu Edited by: Istvaan Shogaatsu on 24/10/2005 14:19:24 Quote: there would be no point to a jumpgate-capable carrier because noone would use anything else. I hafta disagree. There'd be pretty big differences between the two: STRIKE CARRIER - Can use Jumpgates - Can use Jump Drives (perhaps at lower efficiency than SC/Dread) - Can use Rebirth - Cannot use maintenance arrays - Much weaker defensively - Lower ship and drone capacity (can launch inty wings at best, maybe a HAC or two, defends itself modestly, once wings go down it has to leave) - Emphasis on mobility SUPERCARRIER - Cannot use Jumpgates (too big) - Can use Jump Drives - Can use Rebirth - Can use maintenance arrays - Tough cookie defensively - Huge capacity for ships and drones (craps out a small fleet, with full rearm and repair ability, and defends itself very well with tons of drones) - Emphasis on stabbing faces If you're in 0.0 there's no reason whatsoever to use the Strike Carrier because a few interceptors will pin it down long enough for it to get beat to death. Supercarrier on the other hand can conceiveably fend off a small group of hostile battleships by itself. Dig? Copy, paste and edit for the win. I'll use CCP's DevBlog thingy to illustrate how I feel they could do it. CARRIER (Attack Carrier) - Can use Jumpgates - Can use Jump Drives (perhaps at lower efficiency than SC/Dread) - Cannot use Rebirth - Cannot use maintenance arrays - Strong defensively - No or small ship capacity (Destroyer sized at best) - Large drone capacity with supporting bonuses - Emphasis on combat. It's a combat capital ship. MOTHERSHIP (Beehive Carrier) - Cannot use Jumpgates (too big) - Can use Jump Drives - Can use Rebirth - Can use maintenance arrays - Extremely tough, but poor tanking (100k+ hit points, but not much in terms of tanking) - Huge capacity for ships (up to about 10 battleships or several more smaller ships) - Huge/indefinate drone capacity, but without supporting bonuses - Emphasis on MOTHERSHIP Essentially, one will be a nightmare to face while the other must have escort (shouldn't be a problem) in order to survive an attack from a Velator (playing on extremes, but it'd probably have problems tanking T2 gank-friggies or larger). The Mothership'd survive for a few minutes of sustained beating, but it'd not be able to tank. The other bugger, however, would be able to sustain quite a bit of beating by tanking, but would succomb to focused fire of a larger group due to lack of buffert HP. It would be able to fight effectively against larger targets, however. Sigh... and we're going to need a T2 friggy focused on taking on LARGE ships. We really don't need any more anti-frigate T2 frigates (of 4 Elite Friggies, 1 can't fight and the other 3 are anti-frigate. WTF!?) wheat barley kill anything? are you oats of your mind? I corn belive you just said that, rice I'm off to bed
Istvaan Shogaatsu	Posted - 2005.10.24 18:02:00 - [47] Edited by: Istvaan Shogaatsu on 24/10/2005 18:06:15 I'm not sure if a carrier without Rebirth would be effective at all, Ithildin. If it doesn't have the ability to act as a mobile spawn point for a force of small ships, it's not a carrier, it's a battleship that uses drones to fight. Also, without Rebirth, there's no point of moving forces in the carrier at all - they're safer moving separately, and taking the strike carrier's ship capacity into account (interceptors at best), probably faster too.
Nafri	Posted - 2005.10.24 18:09:00 - [48] I would like mothership which doesnt dissapear you should need it to park it at a moon and then you can anchor weapons around it, when you want to travel you use your jumpdrive to bring a whole fleet into enemy territory -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Put your panties on your head!
Ithildin	Posted - 2005.10.24 18:20:00 - [49] Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu Edited by: Istvaan Shogaatsu on 24/10/2005 18:06:15 I'm not sure if a carrier without Rebirth would be effective at all, Ithildin. If it doesn't have the ability to act as a mobile spawn point for a force of small ships, it's not a carrier, it's a battleship that uses drones to fight. Also, without Rebirth, there's no point of moving forces in the carrier at all - they're safer moving separately, and taking the strike carrier's ship capacity into account (interceptors at best), probably faster too. More or less. Carriers would be big and rather slow battleships with added hitpoints and jump drive capability. It's like a Moros, but a bit more agile and no siege module (no uber-tank). For the rebirth project to work you really need a strong and tough target location. Strong enough that you can make it persistent. I'm not sure I'd really like to see such a strong ship capable of combat (beyond emergency defence) to be honest. It's going to be a movable station, more or less, and we all know how boring it is to shoot at a station. Just imagine that the station is now able to use stargates, warp scramblers, and massive amounts of drones for offence. P.S. the theorized small ship carrier capacity of the small carrier was added as an after thought. Naturally some kind of rebirth or in-space docking would be necessary. wheat barley kill anything? are you oats of your mind? I corn belive you just said that, rice I'm off to bed
Ranger 1	Posted - 2005.10.24 19:13:00 - [50] I do believe our esteemed comrad Istvaan has coined the phrase though... Strike Carrier and Super Carrier both have a nice ring to it.
Raem Civrie	Posted - 2005.10.24 19:34:00 - [51] Better than Carrier and Mothership, at least. Note that the SUPER WEAPON was shown fired from a Mothership. The thing is though, that the carrier didn't look much bigger than maybe a battleship. But I agree, rebirth and frigate-sized ship storage should be in for the Strike Carriers. --- God-King of Geminate
FalloutBoy	Posted - 2005.10.24 19:48:00 - [52] Edited by: FalloutBoy on 24/10/2005 19:54:43 here is the way I see it. Carriers should be a great platform to mount attacks from deep in enemy space. Strike Carrier: Moros like drone bay too defend itsself able to carry 10 af/intys/tech 1 frigs No Rebirth (people would dock with it and ride it to its destination) able to jump 2-3x farther than a dread in its current form. ( something like being able to Jump from Hed to Fat area to give you an idea of range i'm thinking) slot layout of: 2/5/8 for an armor tanking one. and no weapon slots those top two slots would be utility only. How it would be used: the new covert ops cruiser sneaks into the desierd system. the carrier loads up its pilots and jumps to system. ship undock gank everything in site and redock and leave. a true hit and run ship. Super Carrier: AKA mothership Able to move a small fleet (10BS or say 10Hacs 5BS and 10 Frigs). No Rebirth again (think this should be a titan only thing) Same Long range jump ability as the Strike Carrier Has repair and refiting facility simlar slot layout to strike carrier and also a large drone bay to deal with its defence. need a sig? Gallery Contact me for more info
Istvaan Shogaatsu	Posted - 2005.10.24 19:57:00 - [53] FalloutBoy, ask yourself this. You have 10 interceptors. You have a carrier that costs a couple billion ISK. You need to get your 10 interceptors somewhere. Do you set autopilot and just go, or do you use a multi billion ISK carrier to deploy them? Of course you set autopilot, because using a multi billion ISK carrier to deploy 100 million worth of tech 2 frigates is foolish. A carrier is not a carrier without rebirth.
Levin Cavil	Posted - 2005.10.24 20:00:00 - [54] Yes, whatever he said, yes. Currently Training: Suicidal Tendencies [Rank 8] 1,947,276/2,048,000 SP
Ithildin	Posted - 2005.10.24 20:03:00 - [55] Edited by: Ithildin on 24/10/2005 20:06:05 Originally by: Istvaan Shogaatsu FalloutBoy, ask yourself this. You have 10 interceptors. You have a carrier that costs a couple billion ISK. You need to get your 10 interceptors somewhere. Do you set autopilot and just go, or do you use a multi billion ISK carrier to deploy them? Of course you set autopilot, because using a multi billion ISK carrier to deploy 100 million worth of tech 2 frigates is foolish. A carrier is not a carrier without rebirth. I think the key is that people can dock and undock with those carriers, riding with it as it makes the jump drive. Of course it'll go faster with MWD and AP, but it's a lot cooler with the Carrier. Also, they'd serve as a backup ship carrier thingy thing... er... In retrospect, limiting it to either low capacity and rebirth or high capacity and no rebirth seem more logical. Rebirth being a kind of less harmful clone-jump, you'd actually have to travel to/with the Strike Carrier as opposed to the functionality of the Mothership (mommie Seleene! Carry me!). With the Mothership you'd just go to an empire station and then deploy in space. And there's this thing about a rebirth ship having to be persistent so that people rebirthing to it will find themselves in a ship as opposed to in middle of cold space (because the Mothership pilot logged off an hour earlier). I can't help but stress this point. Seleene will go from having one kid to having to take care of 50+ babies (MC)! wheat barley kill anything? are you oats of your mind? I corn belive you just said that, rice I'm off to bed
Derron Bel	Posted - 2005.10.24 20:12:00 - [56] Edited by: Derron Bel on 24/10/2005 20:14:13 If normal carriers have most of the feature set of motherships, are better in combat, and can use jump gates, noone will use motherships. I swear on a stack. Regular carriers would proliferate and you would see 10-carrier strike groups without any of the inconvenience of fueling or cynosural fields. You aint seen nothing until you've seen a Titan ganked by 50 Fighters. The problem is that they would be turned into upscale battleships rather than being capital ships. Freighters only work because they have many restrictions on them. EDIT: A big point of ship storage is that they function as replacements. You're fighting for a system and get your interceptor blown out from under you. Warp to the carrier and grab a new ship. Under Project Rebirth you could do this even if you got podded, but there wouldn't be infinite ships stored at the carrier, so there are still reasonable limitations on it. -==- Holy-Jim> as you know, surprise is the key to victory.....surprise! LooseCannoN> ahh! LooseCannoN> my plans have been foiled!
Farjung	Posted - 2005.10.24 20:15:00 - [57] I just hope there's mini-games on board, so you can pass the time riding the carrier by destroying your gangmates at pong ;D.
NTRabbit	Posted - 2005.10.24 20:19:00 - [58] I fully endorse this event or product. Seriously though, its how things should be --------
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2005.10.24 20:48:00 - [59] Carriers with jump drive bypass gatecamps and the majority of transit risk. That alone is reason to use them to deploy ships. You hop between safes on the route down, bust out the frigates at your target from another safe, cause some carnage, collect your frigs up again and hop out. That's a pretty damn lethal bit of functionality all on its own - doubly so if you're deploying behind enemy lines to say utterly destroy a heavy mining op. Also, Titans should have the ability to "deploy", becoming POS-like with the shield, ability to deploy auto defense turrents etc. That'd be nifty.
Istvaan Shogaatsu	Posted - 2005.10.24 22:36:00 - [60] Heh, Joerd... if your frigs and interceptors are having a tough time getting through a gate camp, something's probably wrong ;)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

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.