| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Elisk Skyforge
Touring New Eden
Haven.
16
   |
Posted - 2013.12.04 00:21:00 -
[1] - Quote
I was thinking for sometime now, the only possible alternative to Tier 3 Battlecruisers (Naga, Oracle, Tornado, Talos) taking into account the adjacent classes seems to be the "Destroyers", so basically destroyers with frigate hulls and medium size cruiser weapons, these things will have lots of application in both PVP and PVE.
What do you guys think?
I think I broke your game CCP-->-áhttp://i.imgur.com/4pGZ5qJ.jpg?1 |
Zarek Moesia
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 00:28:00 -
[2] - Quote
I for see more gankers if this happens |
Naomi Anthar
160
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 00:51:00 -
[3] - Quote
it's not like thrashers are not good enough already.
But i would love to see more dessies. It's just 3 dessies per faction now , needless to say no pirate or navy variants aswell. Could use some more love to dessie class. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
730
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 04:41:00 -
[4] - Quote
I think it's kind of an interesting idea, actually. And seeing as how both destroyers and battlecruisers were afterthoughts to the original frigate-cruiser-battleship lineup, it's still in-line with that concept. I'd rather see four new destroyer hulls than another "command" or "assault" destroyer. Haven't we just about done these to death? They could even do another EVE spaceship contest (plenty of talent on Deviant Art).
So yeah, +1 to the concept of a medium weapon-based destroyer class ship. We could even call them "submarines".
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Gigan Amilupar
No Code of Conduct
Fluffeh Bunneh Murder Squad
83
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 06:27:00 -
[5] - Quote
I don't really like the idea. As much as I like the idea of more dessies in game I think that adding something like this, or an "assault destroyer" as suggested previously, would completely overshadow current destroyers uses in game, and it would tread on the toes of cruisers a bit as well. Eventually CCP is going to push boosts on grid, and for that I think we should get, yes, a new "command destroyer" to provide boosts to small gangs. That's a role that currently wouldn't be provided for in a game of on grid boosts so I think it is reasonable. And as much as I would LOVE to see faction destroyers, I think they would have the same problem overstepping roles. I would be particularly concerned about their overlap with faction frigs. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
733
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 07:39:00 -
[6] - Quote
Gigan Amilupar wrote:I don't really like the idea. As much as I like the idea of more dessies in game I think that adding something like this, or an "assault destroyer" as suggested previously, would completely overshadow current destroyers uses in game, and it would tread on the toes of cruisers a bit as well. Eventually CCP is going to push boosts on grid, and for that I think we should get, yes, a new "command destroyer" to provide boosts to small gangs. That's a role that currently wouldn't be provided for in a game of on grid boosts so I think it is reasonable. And as much as I would LOVE to see faction destroyers, I think they would have the same problem overstepping roles. I would be particularly concerned about their overlap with faction frigs.
Command Destroyer = T3.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Endovior
Osmosis Inc
Li3 Federation
127
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 10:12:00 -
[7] - Quote
Tiericide is a thing. You should expect less power-based differentiation in ships of a given category, not more... that's true of old ships as the rebalance rolls around, and will certainly be true of new ones as they get introduced.
As such, you shouldn't be thinking about 'Tier 3' anything. Instead, think "What new roles might be appropriate for a Destroyer-sized hull?" I've seen a few floating around, reposting for consideration:
-Heavy Destroyer (Destroyer w/ Medium Weapons): Possible, but ugly. It's been done before (with Battlecruisers), and so it's not really very creative... and besides, it'd step on a lot of toes. I suspect that implementing them would make Cruisers a lot less viable, and suicide ganking a lot easier... neither of these being especially healthy or needed changes.
-Command Destroyer (Destroyer w/ Command Links): Possible, and somewhat more plausible, assuming fleets and boosting get dramatically reworked at some point (which is probably a safe assumption, though the 'when' is an open question). Tricky to get them to be useful in that role without them being instantly primaried and vollied off the field, though.
-Fleet Escort (Destroyer w/ Defensive Modules): Basically, a destroyer that does something to protect other ships in the fleet. Suggestions have included remote resist boosters (reasonable, if dubiously useful in most cases due to stacking penalty), sacrificial bodyguards (taking hits for allied ships; an interesting role for normally paper-thin destroyers), or specialized anti-drone platforms (this last is probably most appropriate for the hull; I'd like to, for instance, see FOF missiles that could specifically and usefully be instructed to murder enemy drones, though that kind of thing would require a bit of work).
-Hunter-Killer (Destroyer w/Probing Bonuses): Personally, the kind of thing I'd rather see; a ship that can provide intelligence to a small gang on the move while still being useful in combat. Destroyers tend to have the free hislots to handle such utility tasks... so destroyer hulls dedicated to the task of finding targets, with the potential to actually tackle something or otherwise be useful on the scene after doing so, would be useful. |
Kane Fenris
NWP
135
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 13:34:00 -
[8] - Quote
if dessies don't need something its more damage |
Lyra Gerie
Bareback Pornstars
Carthage Empires
10
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 15:04:00 -
[9] - Quote
I would LOVE a hunter killer dessy. Even more so if they were given advanced ship probing equipment that allowed them two things.
1. To be the only ship capable of scouting out cloaked ships via new probes (only locates the grid of the cloaker)
2. A new bubble launcher that pulses every dozen ticks or so and decloaks all ships in range. Bubble range 25km T1 30km T2 The bubble also boosters sig radius of everyone inside by an amount as a drawback. |
Xindi Kraid
The Night Wardens
Viro Mors Non Est
627
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 15:10:00 -
[10] - Quote
As I mentioned in the T2 assault destroyers suggestion thread; currently the way the lineup is designed, both ships for each race are designed as Attack ships, that means they were balanced around the idea they are fast and hard hitting but don't have much in the way of defenses or staying power (though your milage may vary on how true that is for each individual ship). That also happens to be the role of the tier 3 BCs, so mimicing them isn't really the best thing.
What the destroyer lineup is lacking is a set of combat ships (and other stuff like EWAR, support, etc that only seem to appear in cruiser and frigate sizes). I'd rather see CCP make some destroyers that are designed to have more staying power than to just have them copy some glass cannons 2 sizes up. |
Endovior
Osmosis Inc
Li3 Federation
129
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 22:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
Lyra Gerie wrote:I would LOVE a hunter killer dessy. Even more so if they were given advanced ship probing equipment that allowed them two things.
1. To be the only ship capable of scouting out cloaked ships via new probes (only locates the grid of the cloaker)
2. A new bubble launcher that pulses every dozen ticks or so and decloaks all ships in range. Bubble range 25km T1 30km T2 The bubble also boosters sig radius of everyone inside by an amount as a drawback.
I don't support anti-cloaking systems... largely, because it's really difficult to balance an anti-"AFK Cloaking" fix that doesn't stomp on the legitimate use of cloaking. For instance, you wouldn't want your bubbled gatecamps to be able to perfectly spot and kill Blockade Runners, just because they've got a Hunter-Killer orbiting the gate AFK with his decloaker on; manual decloaking is a real skill requiring effort, and any fix shouldn't trivialize that... or make it too easy for a gatecamp to murder everyone that arrives. |
Seranova Farreach
Lion Squadron
478
|
Posted - 2013.12.04 23:13:00 -
[12] - Quote
i would love tier 3 dessy with medium weapons. make it glasstank like tier 3 BCs, but fast and powerful but since they are medium weapons they shouldnt get any tracking bonuses on the hull, just cpu and pg use bonuses and for weapon systems that use energy a energy use bonus for fireing the guns. |
Saeger1737
Pod Repo
353
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 00:32:00 -
[13] - Quote
Corvettes would and should be the next in line ships. In between cruiser size hulls and dessies making them nibble fast hard hitting, troop transporting ships. |
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
CAStabouts
1375
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 00:37:00 -
[14] - Quote
But we don't have troops. |
Saeger1737
Pod Repo
353
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 00:39:00 -
[15] - Quote
Alvatore DiMarco wrote:But we don't have troops.
That's where dust comes into play |
Markku Laaksonen
EVE University
Ivy League
225
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 00:41:00 -
[16] - Quote
Wouldn't corvettes fit between fighters and frigates? |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
757
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 00:41:00 -
[17] - Quote
Markku Laaksonen wrote:Wouldn't corvettes fit between fighters and frigates?
I was just going to say... corvettes are smaller than destroyers.
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Markku Laaksonen
EVE University
Ivy League
225
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 00:46:00 -
[18] - Quote
I mean, there's no reason CCP can't introduce a ship line between destroyers and and cruisers and call them corvettes like Saeger suggests. To my knowledge, EVE does a good job of matching modern naval class terminology with the size of their space ships, but it's just that. There's no 'standard' that a sci-fi internet spaceship game has to follow modern naval convention.
But like I said, EVE already does a decent job of doing that anyway, except for the fact that fighters can't hit anything smaller than your mom. OH! BURN! (They have a hard time hitting anything smaller than BSs, right?) |
Saeger1737
Pod Repo
353
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 01:21:00 -
[19] - Quote
I was thinking more like corelian corvettes from star wars. A ship similar could be used to drop dust players off at contested factional warfare stations to fight for dominance of the system. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
758
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 01:24:00 -
[20] - Quote
Saeger1737 wrote:I was thinking more like corelian corvettes from star wars. A ship similar could be used to drop dust players off at contested factional warfare stations to fight for dominance of the system.
Can we choose to vent them into space as an option? 
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Markku Laaksonen
EVE University
Ivy League
225
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 01:25:00 -
[21] - Quote
I had actually restrained myself from mentioning that Star Wars' ship classification is totally wonky.
Edit: I like the idea of more EVE-DUST interaction, but I don't think EVE players transporting DUST players is the way to go. I do think EVE players should transport something to do with DUST, but not the players themselves. |
Saeger1737
Pod Repo
353
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 01:30:00 -
[22] - Quote
Arthur Aihaken wrote:Saeger1737 wrote:I was thinking more like corelian corvettes from star wars. A ship similar could be used to drop dust players off at contested factional warfare stations to fight for dominance of the system. Can we choose to vent them into space as an option?
Yes, or dock with an unsuspecting ship and drop off an awox party of dustbunnies |
Saeger1737
Pod Repo
353
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 01:32:00 -
[23] - Quote
Markku Laaksonen wrote:I had actually restrained myself from mentioning that Star Wars' ship classification is totally wonky.
Edit: I like the idea of more EVE-DUST interaction, but I don't think EVE players transporting DUST players is the way to go. I do think EVE players should transport something to do with DUST, but not the players themselves.
What else would you have me compare it to, troop transports seem like the next thing to make this game interesting. |
Arthur Aihaken
The.VOID
758
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 01:37:00 -
[24] - Quote
Markku Laaksonen wrote:Edit: I like the idea of more EVE-DUST interaction, but I don't think EVE players transporting DUST players is the way to go. I do think EVE players should transport something to do with DUST, but not the players themselves.
The concept of venting Dust 514 mercs into space really holds a lot of appeal for me. 
I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week. |
Markku Laaksonen
EVE University
Ivy League
225
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 01:44:00 -
[25] - Quote
Too much appeal for all of us, I think, for anyone to ever make it to a match in DUST again. |
Radhe Amatin
Shadow State
Fatal Ascension
28
|
Posted - 2013.12.05 06:54:00 -
[26] - Quote
Endovior wrote:Lyra Gerie wrote:I would LOVE a hunter killer dessy. Even more so if they were given advanced ship probing equipment that allowed them two things.
1. To be the only ship capable of scouting out cloaked ships via new probes (only locates the grid of the cloaker)
2. A new bubble launcher that pulses every dozen ticks or so and decloaks all ships in range. Bubble range 25km T1 30km T2 The bubble also boosters sig radius of everyone inside by an amount as a drawback. I don't support anti-cloaking systems... largely, because it's really difficult to balance an anti-"AFK Cloaking" fix that doesn't stomp on the legitimate use of cloaking. For instance, you wouldn't want your bubbled gatecamps to be able to perfectly spot and kill Blockade Runners, just because they've got a Hunter-Killer orbiting the gate AFK with his decloaker on; manual decloaking is a real skill requiring effort, and any fix shouldn't trivialize that... or make it too easy for a gatecamp to murder everyone that arrives.
Can be made so it can't be used near stargates.And if the cloaker is not afk he/she can just warp between grids and completely negate the probe scanning.
This way gate camps will not get the ability to decloak anything that comes through hence the manual decloaking will still be necessary for getting cloaking ships on gates.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |