EVE Search - My idea to turn eves universe upside down

All Channels

Ships and Modules

My idea to turn eves universe upside down

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Audri Fisher	Posted - 2006.03.02 21:50:00 - [1] I know that it will probably never come to pass for several reasons, most importantly that it would take a long time to code, and it would require a complete rebalance. It is still fun to speculate though. These ideas would do several things; It would give frigates, destroyers, and intercepters a new and very valuble role in fleet combat. It would also open up a door for tech II Battleships that wouldn't be a "wtfpwnmobile" One final thing before I get into the meat and potatoes, I am a US Marine, which is a branch of the naval service, so I use standard Naval designations for ships. CVA = Fleet carrier BB = Battleship CL = Cruiser DD = destroyer FF or FFG = frigate We already have stealth bombers in eve, and used correctly, they can be very useful in scirmish and ambush warfare. They are the eve equilivent of B-2's and F-117's. Long before Airforces around the war started toying with these ideas though Navies had used there NAutical equilivent, the submarine, which comes in 2 flavors, attack submarines, and Missle boats. Attack submarines, are large ships worst nightmare that make them wish for the four horseman to come instead. They are very hard to detect, and require constant viligence in case they might be out there. That is why destroyers and to a lesser extent frigates exist, to protect your cruisers, Battleships, and carriers from these monsters from the deep. Balistic Missle submarines avoid contact with othe naval units at all cost, there only mission is to wreak havoc on the support structure that supports the enemies navy. In Eve that would be POS and stations. Destroyers are small escort ships that are primarily tasked with anti sumbarine warefar. Right now, tech I destroyers do one thing well, they are effiecint tech I frig killers, however, that role is extremely limited. similer to the bonuses that stealth bombers get to cruise missle launchers, destroyers could get bonuses to large or extra large smart bombs. maybe they could get a bonus to extend a smartbombs range as well... It is a very crude method, and like depth charges, "smart"bombs are pretty indiscriminate, but hey, they get the job done. A destroyer dedicated to anti sub work is very vulnerable to other threats, that is why they are escorted in turn by frigates, who's job is to keep drones and intercepters off of them. There has to be balance in these new "sub" classes, so here is a rough outline. Attack subs: can carry torpedo racks, say up to 4-5, very long reload time though, they also can fit a special module that allows them to reduce ther sig radious drasticaly, this however can't be used withen 30 seconds of fireing.... Ballistic Missle submarines: can carry up 20, yes I said 20 citidel torpedo's and they get bonuses to range. There are however no reloads. once the bolt is shot, its shot, you have to redock to reload. they naturaly have a tiny sig radious, smaller than an inties, but they can't recloak with 5 mins of shooting there torpedoes, that many launchers going off at one is the biggest neon sighn in the world. anyway, these are very rough ideas, but like I said, it is fun to specualte isn't it?
Kyozoku	Posted - 2006.03.02 22:00:00 - [2] I coudln't be bothered to read that but can I have a giant space squid to counter the submarines?
Daivasth	Posted - 2006.03.02 22:41:00 - [3] wrong forum, post in ideas forum.
Abraxas Glyf	Posted - 2006.03.02 22:55:00 - [4] I really like your idea about giving destroyers a bonus to smartbombs; it would go a long way to making this ship a viable member of a gang/FB and not an amusing detour from frigate to cruiser. But the previous poster was right, it's in the wrong forum
Alan Freshley	Posted - 2006.03.02 23:16:00 - [5] Finally I find someone else who uses BB for battleship. Been waiting long for that one. Semper Fi
The Knight	Posted - 2006.03.02 23:19:00 - [6] Originally by: Kyozoku I coudln't be bothered to read that but can I have a giant space squid to counter the submarines? Its too bad you couldn't be bothered to move onto another thread instead of making a dumb comment in this one.
Exogene	Posted - 2006.03.02 23:49:00 - [7] I suppose they don't teach US Marines how to spell
War Drumb	Posted - 2006.03.03 00:03:00 - [8] Ok well lets start with your ideas.... I like the smart bomb idea a Desy with MWD and Smart bombs...I can see them now covering an area after a SB has warped in.... trying to hunt it down.... Maybe give them a Ping system that gives a chance to blipping the SB on the scanner for a sec. All in all not to bad. But the rest of it I will leave to CCP as they are always working on the balance of the game. For the rest of you flammers.... get a life! at least he is thinking. All your flamming takes is a keyboad and no "date night" =¦ Don't fret precious I'm here, step away from the window... Go back to sleep... Lay your head down child I won't let the boogeyman come, Counting bodies like sheep To the rhythm of the war drums
Gray Carmicheal	Posted - 2006.03.03 00:04:00 - [9] Originally by: Exogene I suppose they don't teach US Marines how to spell(.) But appearently they've also stopped teaching punctuation in grade school... My sig was CONCORDOKKENED. I blame Wrangler H4x.
Deja Thoris	Posted - 2006.03.03 00:15:00 - [10] Originally by: Gray Carmicheal Originally by: Exogene I suppose they don't teach US Marines how to spell(.) appearently Karma police
Sarmaul	Posted - 2006.03.03 00:16:00 - [11] some good ideas in there
Exogene	Posted - 2006.03.03 00:35:00 - [12] Originally by: Gray Carmicheal But appearently they've also stopped teaching punctuation in grade school... I usually use a smiley for 2 purposes
Hamatitio	Posted - 2006.03.03 00:41:00 - [13] Ah, the grammar, spelling, and punctuation police have arrived. But in short, no. This is not the military. --- I Post on the forums for Fate. Im cool. Industrialists wanted
KittyPilot	Posted - 2006.03.03 00:54:00 - [14] Audri, I posted (on the "Ideas" forum) a quick message asking readers to come here and read this. I applaud your sound thinking about how DDs might be gainfully employed(finally!!) in Eve. Such a 'picket screen' would be extremely effective against ANY cloaked vessels...4 DDs in front of a fleet kicking off SBs would force them to either flee or uncload FAR earlier than they want to... I hope the Developers make something happen with this...I think it's a great idea. KittyPilot now where is my "Destroyer" destroyer?
Exogene	Posted - 2006.03.03 00:55:00 - [15] It was supposed to be a joke. Guess some people don't have a sense of humour
Cade Morrigan	Posted - 2006.03.03 03:36:00 - [16] I'd like to see Defenders used on small ships as a screen to defend larger fleet ships from incoming missiles and torps.
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2006.03.03 10:57:00 - [17] Originally by: Gray Carmicheal Originally by: Exogene I suppose they don't teach US Marines how to spell(.) But appearently they've also stopped teaching punctuation in grade school... Convention is not to use a period when the sentence is ended by a smiley. WRT the OP, while I'd love destroyers to be more effective, I don't understand the reasons for turning Eve into a modern naval combat sim with space graphics.
Bbllaarrgg	Posted - 2006.03.03 11:50:00 - [18] Originally by: Exogene I suppose they don't teach US Marines how to spell They do teach them how to kick geeky pc nerds arses tho _________________________________________________ Insert fnord here.
Tyler Lowe	Posted - 2006.03.03 11:58:00 - [19] Well expressed, but I can't agree with the proposed roles for any of the ship classes indicated. I think the "attack sub" role is sufficient for stealth bombers. Thay exist, IMO, to give some punch to covert ops groups so they can take down a large (BB sized) target quickly once a vulnerable target is located by a covert ops frigate, which is very good at scouting, but lacks the firepower neccesary to deal with targets of opportunity it may locate. I'd rather not see a virtually unstoppable first strike capability against POS be put into effect. I do think the tech I DD needs a real purpose in game beyond giving new players a taste of what a ship with more than 4 high slots can do. I also like the notion of a screen of destroyers clearing out potential hidden menaces in the form of those "attack subs". Perhaps a new high slot module for DD which could disrupt cloak within a burst radius of say, 20km?
Gariuys	Posted - 2006.03.03 12:00:00 - [20] Originally by: Joerd Toastius WRT the OP, while I'd love destroyers to be more effective, I don't understand the reasons for turning Eve into a modern naval combat sim with space graphics. Well said. ~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~ A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool
Boris2k	Posted - 2006.03.03 12:21:00 - [21] in reply to the destroyer/smartbomb idea, ofcoarse no one in their right mind in an intie or frigate are gonan want to orbit the destroyer... so give the destroyer 2-3 tractors.... and a smart bomb bonus :D and a tank, then nerf its gunning abilities
War Drumb	Posted - 2006.03.03 16:07:00 - [22] Edited by: War Drumb on 03/03/2006 16:07:14 The cool thing is that a manitore can wipe a DD with one salvo... The dule would be in its favor if it can keep range... cheep and fun on the DD side.... I like it. Don't fret precious I'm here, step away from the window... Go back to sleep... Lay your head down child I won't let the boogeyman come, Counting bodies like sheep To the rhythm of the war drums
Susa Ou	Posted - 2006.03.03 17:39:00 - [23] Originally by: Alan Freshley Finally I find someone else who uses BB for battleship. Been waiting long for that one. Semper Fi Its Navy speak. Saddly, BB is used to designate the Black Bird EW cruiser a lot here - which throws me off - but once you fell the effects of EW in fleet, you stop asking questions.
Cierst	Posted - 2006.03.03 19:42:00 - [24] Though I think implementing all of those ideas would be seriously unbalanced (particularly the POS-destroying boomer ), some of those ideas are really nice. I would like to see the stealth bomber get a boost in firepower, and if the destroyers also get a ping-like ability, it wouldn't be too unbalanced. In the spirit of the topic though, I have a new idea. Since you're basing these ideas off real world ships, how about we make pods more like life boats? In other words, a buddy has to come pick you up, you can't really get anywhere on your own power.
Montero	Posted - 2006.03.03 20:22:00 - [25] Edited by: Montero on 03/03/2006 20:22:31 this isn't the navy, this is imaginary spaceships. remember that guys, this isnt aserious military action it's us pretending we're spacemen. we're all incredibly sad people. btw i didnt like your ideas much, especially using US navy abreviations for ships, because this isn't the US navy, it's eve. edit: and you don't get submarines in space. now leave my sig alone damn ISD
Audri Fisher	Posted - 2006.03.03 20:24:00 - [26] Originally by: Montero Edited by: Montero on 03/03/2006 20:22:31 this isn't the navy, this is imaginary spaceships. remember that guys, this isnt aserious military action it's us pretending we're spacemen. we're all incredibly sad people. btw i didnt like your ideas much, especially using US navy abreviations for ships, because this isn't the US navy, it's eve. syas the person with a hacked up version of the rifleman's creed in there sig. edit: and you don't get submarines in space.
Montero	Posted - 2006.03.03 20:33:00 - [27] Edited by: Montero on 03/03/2006 20:33:37 yea it's a joke dude, im a pacifist in rl ;) if i ever found myselrf saying that about a rifle and meaning it i'd end myself. ps. you stacked the quote. now leave my sig alone damn ISD
Vandar Broheem	Posted - 2006.03.03 20:39:00 - [28] Originally by: Montero Edited by: Montero on 03/03/2006 20:22:31 this isn't the navy, this is imaginary spaceships. remember that guys, this isnt aserious military action it's us pretending we're spacemen. we're all incredibly sad people. btw i didnt like your ideas much, especially using US navy abreviations for ships, because this isn't the US navy, it's eve. edit: and you don't get submarines in space. True this isn't the Navy... However, and this goes for just about everybody, think for a bit about pretty much every space show/game/etc. all use Naval armed forces for a guideline. From ship classes and use to officer designations it all has a Naval theme.
wierchas noobhunter	Posted - 2006.03.03 20:45:00 - [29] can we have giant space slug plz ? join soar angelic
Montero	Posted - 2006.03.03 21:11:00 - [30] i fought a smartbombing dessie in my autoclaw once. i loled him back to his clone vat. now leave my sig alone damn ISD
Joerd Toastius	Posted - 2006.03.03 22:49:00 - [31] Originally by: Vandar Broheem Originally by: Montero Edited by: Montero on 03/03/2006 20:22:31 this isn't the navy, this is imaginary spaceships. remember that guys, this isnt aserious military action it's us pretending we're spacemen. we're all incredibly sad people. btw i didnt like your ideas much, especially using US navy abreviations for ships, because this isn't the US navy, it's eve. edit: and you don't get submarines in space. True this isn't the Navy... However, and this goes for just about everybody, think for a bit about pretty much every space show/game/etc. all use Naval armed forces for a guideline. From ship classes and use to officer designations it all has a Naval theme. Yes, they have a naval theme, but that does not entail exactly duplicating the terminology.
Tauruz	Posted - 2006.03.03 23:23:00 - [32] Easiest way to turn the EVE universe upside down is to rotate the map 180 degrees...
Weirda	Posted - 2006.03.03 23:36:00 - [33] maybe a mod can move this to idea forum and clear all the trolling out of it (man some ppl have some serious inferiority complex around here). as with most idea - not all is great, but there are some interesting element and food for thought in there to improve, expand the role of some of the ship. weirda is always for that! good ideas Audri - as a marine am sure that you don't let the Bull**** in this thread get you down... don't succumb to the trolls! __ Weirda Assault Ship deserve a 4th Bonus and More!
Audri Fisher	Posted - 2006.03.03 23:46:00 - [34] ok, enough about the terminology. I put that in there becuase I has this nice beutifully written piece that I was going to post, and I was trying to save char space. However my assistnat manager called and like usual coouldn't find his but if I duct tapped both ahnds to it, and I had to go in and straiten things out. So I had to rush through it and it came out someone disjointed.
Karl Shade	Posted - 2006.03.03 23:46:00 - [35] Originally by: Abraxas Glyf I really like your idea about giving destroyers a bonus to smartbombs; it would go a long way to making this ship a viable member of a gang/FB and not an amusing detour from frigate to cruiser. The Destroyer is an excellent ship when in it¦s proper environment. Originally by: Vandar Broheem However, and this goes for just about everybody, think for a bit about pretty much every space show/game/etc. all use Naval armed forces for a guideline. From ship classes and use to officer designations it all has a Naval theme. Ofcourse but a theme is an overarching inspiration used primarily to let people experience new things while retaining a sense of familiarity. Eve borrows naval terms because they feel right not because a spacegame really needs them. Saying that something should exist in Eve because it does in the Navy is faulty logic. To the OP. Well presented but not very fresh. Eve is more than it¦s similarities with Naval warfare and so it should stay. Interested in a Swedish corp? Wasteland Industries
Ai'nen Spiritstar	Posted - 2006.03.03 23:55:00 - [36] Good discussion concerning terminology, space vs planetary-bound, etc. My(probably faulty) logic rus thus: A spacefaring pilot, having plunked down good credit to get a ship, will go out and try to maximize that ship's abilities. If limitations are encountered, that pilot will either live within the limitation dump the ship in favor of a better one attempt to modify the ship to suit a need So here we are in the forum trying to 'modify' the ship. For those pilots who don't want to improve Destroyers, that's ok, but let those of us who do want to make them better have an uncluttered forum for expressing and critiquing our ideas. If enough of us Destroyer Pilots voice our ideas on improvement to the manufacturers, change will occur. Ai'nen Spiritstar Now where is my Destroyer destroyer?
ardanach Maighdean	Posted - 2006.03.04 00:15:00 - [37] I like the idea of SmartBombs on Dessies. Here's a basic layout idea 4 hislots are for non-turret/non-missile only. This requires a minimum of 'change' to the ship design, and allows some flexibility. If one wishes to put a high-module other than a weapon or SB they can, provided CPU and power are available of course. Average PG on dessies is 65, CPU is 178. A basic small SB requires 8MW and 30tf. If the cost of an SB were reduced to 75% power and 50% CPU, then one could easily fit 4 small SBs, using a total of 24MW and 60tf CPU. This is well within the capabilities of both ship and equipment flexibility. On average, 41MW and 118tf remain for other equipment. Another limitation is range. If we are to increase the range 50%, our SB-equipped destroyer can now be effective out to 4500M basline.

Pages: 1 2 :: [one 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.