EVE Search - T2 Assault Destroyer

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

T2 Assault Destroyer

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ganja Jane Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 1	Posted - 2013.12.01 08:48:00 - [1] - Quote I noticed that there was a lack of a T2 counterpart to the recent additions of the racial destroyers. Just packing an idea into my bowl, but I'm thinking this... New T2 ships with new T2 skills, reuse of library assets(maybe a few extra pieces of geometry to the models), tweaked textures... The easy stuff. Game design and balance... not so easy stuff. So expanding upon the idea via public outreach is welcomed to improve the concept so that it may prove a healthy addition into the EVE Online universe if implemented and not come across as something that doesn't provide a dynamic necessity to fleet and solo operations. Assault Destroyer - T2 Variants of the Corax, Algos, Talwar, and Dragoon. -Requires new skill: Assault Destroyers [Skill for operation of the Assault Destroyers. Can not be trained on Trial Accounts.] Role: A heavier version of the assault frigate, providing a larger damage profile than interdictors. I will provide a Corax T2 Assault Version as a template. \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Corax T2 - Caldari Destroyer Skill bonus: 5% Bonus to Rocket and Light Missile kinetic damage per level 10% Bonus to light missile and rocket explosion velocity per level Assault Destroyer Skill bonus: 5% Bonus to Rocket and Light Missile kinetic damage per level 5% Bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Explosion Radius Role Bonus: 50% bonus to light missile and rocket max velocity 8 High Slots 5 Mid Slots 3 Low Slots 310 CPU 8 Launcher Hardpoints 2 Rig Slots 68 Powergrid 350 Cargo Shield 900hp 0% Em 50% Explosive 55% Kinetic 60% Thermal Shield Recharge 625 Armor 800hp 50% EM 10% Explosive 43.75% Kinetic 45% Thermal Structure 800 Speed 260 m/s Recharge Time 290s Max Target Range 55k 7 Max targets Sig Radius 69m Scan Resolution 475mm Warp Speed 5.0 AU / Second \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Zvaarian the Red Evil Leprechaun Brigade 117	Posted - 2013.12.01 08:58:00 - [2] - Quote I love the Corax model, so a T2 version would be awesome in my eyes. I think Heavy Destroyer sounds better than Assault Destroyer though. As far as your stats go I think you would want to define a different role than the standard Corax, and all I'm seeing is a Corax with way more DPS. Even the role bonus is exactly the same.
Ganja Jane Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2013.12.01 09:05:00 - [3] - Quote Pretty much, it's going along the same lines as a T1 variant of a ship and it's T2 DPS role. Like the Gallante Incursus and Enyo variant. The incursus has 3 Small Turret hard points and has a 5% dmg bonus per caldari frigate skill level. The Enyo has 4 turrets and has double the damage bonus as the Incursus was given. So yes, this is a Corax with more dps based on the same design structure of T1 ships and their T2 Assault Version. As for the role bonus, can you think of something more fitting? Perhaps rate of fire? As for what you want to call it, I couldn't care. It's just something I was basing it off from how CCP was naming their other ships.
Ganja Jane Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 2	Posted - 2013.12.01 09:16:00 - [4] - Quote Or the 50% reduction to MicroWarp Drive Signature Radius penalty as a role.
Scatim Helicon GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation 2689	Posted - 2013.12.01 09:17:00 - [5] - Quote T1 Destroyers are already pretty tightly defined as glass cannon anti-frigate platforms, so a T2 version in the same role with more slots and more damage is just going to outperform the base hull in a manner that CCP have deliberately moved away from recently. The idea of a new range of T2 destroyers is fine, but like Interdictors, they need some specialisation which doesn't tread on the toes of the T1s too badly. CCP: Not out to ruin your game, out to ruin their game.
Arya Regnar Pator Tech School Minmatar Republic 344	Posted - 2013.12.01 09:39:00 - [6] - Quote 8/5/3 slots is absolutely no no with that kind of base damage... Your version of destroyers is nearly on par with assault cruiser with tank and it tops its damage. EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Zvaarian the Red Evil Leprechaun Brigade 117	Posted - 2013.12.01 09:55:00 - [7] - Quote Yeah it's pretty much overpowered as is and also renders the standard Corax obsolete at what it does best. My suggestion would be a tankier, shorter ranged damage dealer with tanking bonuses replacing one damage application bonus and the kinetic damage bonus, with maybe a 50% AB bonus for the role bonus. That would leave you with a tankier, faster, slightly higher DPS Corax, but with far less range.
Nalelmir Ahashion Viziam Amarr Empire 25	Posted - 2013.12.01 10:39:00 - [8] - Quote T2 destroyer with medium weapons like those T3 BC with large weapons. "What's worse than a foul-mouthed eight-year-old constantly claiming he's had relations with your mother? A foul-mouthed eight-year-old constantly claiming he's had relations with your mother who thinks he's a gangser, that's what." --áAaron Birch
Motoko Innocentius Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation 2	Posted - 2013.12.01 10:59:00 - [9] - Quote Nalelmir Ahashion wrote: T2 destroyer with medium weapons like those T3 BC with large weapons. Ovesized weaopns I too think are the only possibility to do with a new t2 destroyer if one would be made, medium sized dessys might offer a nice new doctrine also against medium and large sized opponents if made fast or tanky enough.
Tabris Katz The Ecstatic Cult of Dionysus Trifectas Syndicate 16	Posted - 2013.12.01 12:51:00 - [10] - Quote I think a good name for t2 destroyers would be Hunter-Seeker, 'heavy' and 'assault' are over used as it. No idea what role it fulfill right now, so I'll get back to you on that.
Zvaarian the Red Evil Leprechaun Brigade 117	Posted - 2013.12.01 13:02:00 - [11] - Quote Tabris Katz wrote: I think a good name for t2 destroyers would be Hunter-Seeker, 'heavy' and 'assault' are over used as it. No idea what role it fulfill right now, so I'll get back to you on that. 'Heavy' and 'assault' are also over used in real life weapons and war vehicles because they are descriptive. Word variety simply for the sake of word variety is bad. A Hunter-Seeker sounds like a specialized anti-covert ops ship (which would be cool) rather than what's actually being discussed in this thread.
David Kir Endless Winter Night The Kingdom of Heaven 362	Posted - 2013.12.01 14:22:00 - [12] - Quote T2 Destroyers should be Light Command Ships. With OGB soon to be ditched we are going to need a mobile boost platform for frigate gangs. Low boost bonus, interceptor warp speed, T" resists, no additional firepower. We'll have to wait until CCP re-balances AFs, before we start introducing a ship that's meant to pray on them. Don't know about you, but I don't want 500 DPS Catalyst/Thrashers all over lowsec. Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.
Seranova Farreach Lion Squadron 459	Posted - 2013.12.01 14:26:00 - [13] - Quote i would think to wait untill the t2 balancing cause isnt the Sabre already the most OP dictor atm? like 450ish dps and quite fast and tanky? BUT! i would liek to see more t2 destroyers
Ganja Jane Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire 3	Posted - 2013.12.01 22:38:00 - [14] - Quote These are all great points. A combat dedicated destroyer designed to provide T2 speed brawler damage. Balanced so that it delivers a damage profile that sinks in between assault frigate dps and heavy assault cruisers. To establish a direct role for the ship is important. I liked the idea of light command ships. I also believed that there should be a T2 combat destroyer role.
ShahFluffers Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance 3710	Posted - 2013.12.01 23:13:00 - [15] - Quote David Kir wrote: I think that T2 Destroyers should be Light Command Ships. With OGB soon to be ditched we are going to need a mobile boost platform for frigate gangs. Low boost bonus, interceptor warp speed, T" resists, no additional firepower. We'll have to wait until CCP re-balances AFs, before we start introducing a ship that's meant to pray on them. Don't know about you, but I don't want 500 DPS Catalyst/Thrashers all over lowsec. You might interested in this: "Light" Command Ships As for this idea... I do not support it. The concept steps on too many toes (Assault Frigates and HACs) and, in their current proposed form, has the potential to obsolete Cruisers. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
Xindi Kraid The Night Wardens Viro Mors Non Est 620	Posted - 2013.12.01 23:30:00 - [16] - Quote Currently all destroyers are classed as attack ships, so balance has their stats where they have good speed and great damage but not much tank to speak of. The T2 version out now is the interdictor which is similarly thin skinned. They are a huge threat to frigates, but the large sig but small tank means they aren't as dangerous to cruisers. I don't see much being gained by just upping the damage on a destroyer platform. What I would like to see are some destroyers that can possibly fit some tank. Something that can be just as dangerous to . Not only does this fit as many other T2s are dangerous to larger classes, but it also adds some new destroyer roles, minimizing overlap.
Harvey James The Sengoku Legacy 606	Posted - 2013.12.01 23:53:00 - [17] - Quote i think the assault line is basically adding a tanky bonus alongside an damage bonus a mwd role bonus/full T2 resists but with he tradeoff being less mobility. in terms of slots well.. the current trend is the same amount of slots as T1 versions/navy versions at a stretch .. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ..... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please.
Mr Doctor Los Polos Hermanos. Happy Cartel 77	Posted - 2013.12.02 06:13:00 - [18] - Quote I kind of want to see more manual aiming in Eve, like bomb launching but with turrets. Say a Dessy that mounts a bonused BS sized weapon, but only one, Its range and tracking are decent but only hits in a small cone out from the nose of the ship (like a 10 degree d-scan) but with highest DPS in class. Only usable in low/null because it would make jitaganks crazy just like bombs are limited to nul. They would be a second wave ship after webs are applied, aligning and raining hot death... but with the major disadvantage of not being able to get transversal up so they become very vulnerable. I guess the ability to fit two bomb launchers but not be cloaky could have the same effect, but that ** would be scary - launching off a void and a damage bomb together for example. Hell what about a bastion module type deal that immobilises you and gives you direct turret control aiming with the mouse though you still have to compensate for turret tracking (ie, you cant twitch aim like youre in CoD, if you move too fast the turret has to catch up... or slow the mouse movement to that of the turret). Yes it would be a stupid idea but it would be novel for a while :p I just want new things, new ways to play and fly and not just slight variations on old ways I guess. Or how about a link bubble. Two types, size and duration are the same as dictor bubbles- Linkerdictor Launches a bubble that stops all link boosts for all ships caught in the bubble. Leveling the playfield for small frigate gangs that cant bring links with them Linkefier** Launches a bubble that gives link bonuses to all inside it. Corax would give a combination of all caldari links at say.. half the power of current command ships but gives all 3 link boots. Each of the other dessys give the 3 links of their race when dropped. Does not stack with multiple bubbles though does with multiple races (ie 3 corax bubbles gives the same as 1 corax bubble to the ships inside, but a corax and talwar bubble give all caldari and matar bonuses to those inside. Linkerdictor bubble always wins, anywhere a linkerdictor buble intercects a linkefier bubble no bonuses are given in that section. (obviously when I say Corax I mean whatever T2 Corax would be called)

Pages: [1] :: 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.