EVE Search - Q Ship conversions for transport ships

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Q Ship conversions for transport 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)
Trii Seo Flaring Prophet 499	Posted - 2014.02.04 10:13:00 - [31] - Quote Q-Ship in 3 easy steps! Step 1: Get an industrial. Tayra/Bestower are actually good for this! Step 2: FIT! Grab a Cynosural Field Generator I, fit as much as tank as you can. Top up with a web and a point! Step 3: Get some friends with either a blops or a titan. All done! You have your genuine Q-Ship! Let's see the faces of those pirates when they get waaaay more than they bargained for ;) Is it Hotdrop O'Clock yet? Covert pilots unite! Safer working conditions, less accidental limb loss due to unfortunate Cyno accidents! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=258986
Corraidhin Farsaidh Hello-There 163	Posted - 2014.02.04 10:19:00 - [32] - Quote In Eve terms a sneaky Q-Ship (supported by combat vessels) could be one with web, scram, as many neuts as it has turrets and as much armour tank as it'll take...
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 5	Posted - 2014.02.16 01:39:00 - [33] - Quote I think we should use the available 'INVENTION' system and have the result show up on the overveiw as the ship it was originally, but ALWAYS 'de-convert' back to that original if it is ever put on the market for sell. Use the invention system for converting mining vessels, industrials, and freighters; but NOT command industrials or jump freighters The large cargo/ore holds of these ships could be converted to extra reactor (more energy) , stronger fittings (more slots fitting the faction's particular style), larger drone bays with more bandwidth (fighter bays for the freighters), and/or enhanced shields. They should NOT effect armor or structure, since the conversions are avoiding any physical changes which may alter the ship's appearance or movement (would be a 'dead give-away' to see a super-tanker using hydro-foils that is wasn't your normal hauler). Thus, it wouldn't be a completely battle-worthy vessel. With mining vessels, the high slots would still be capable of using mining lasers to fill the greatly-reduced ore holds (for the purpose of convincing would-be attackers the target is actually a mining vessel), but this would block the Q-ship from using that particular high slot for a weapon. Note Q-ships should NEVER be capable of taking on a dedicated warship of the same size without a surprise factor; but should be able to hold its own or seriously effect a smaller warship, especially when it surprises the opponent. For this purpose, I think the 'Rapid Fire' missile launcher/direct-firing weapon would be particularly fitting weapon for use on a Q-ship. Maybe each faction should include bonuses for their prefered style on the Q-ships converted fron their industrials and freighters
Arthur Aihaken Embers Children TOHA Conglomerate 2911	Posted - 2014.02.16 02:23:00 - [34] - Quote Don't forget Merchant Raiders. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_von_Luckner I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.02.21 03:54:00 - [35] - Quote I just thought of another aspect by which a raider/ganker could identify a q-ship... the pilot's history. If Q-ships were to be enacted (in any form), gankers would quickly learn to leave 'helpless' industrials and mining ships with experianced pilots alone. The ganker would see the 'target' ship on his overveiw. If he suspected the ship was a Q-ship, he could call up the pilot's history. Seeing a Venture or mining barge being pilotted by a character with 7 years and numerous wars in his file is likely to convince the ganker to leave that 'target' alone or get help. Neither action is likely to help the 'target' if it is an actual Q-ship. The time taken to check the pilot's history could be a great help to an actual miner or industrial... making the ganker's challenge that much greater. I suggest CCP enact a protocol which enables a player to hide his character's history, his name, and/or even his photo. How to activate this precaution should be included into the tutorials and the importance of the action stressed to new players.
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.02.22 01:12:00 - [36] - Quote as an alternative, CCP could enact a method of masking the pilot of a ship on the overveiw, the screen, the target display, or any other display of the ship. This would mean the pilot would show in 'local chat', but would not be attributed to any particular ship. Of course, this would be the choice of the pilot flying the ship, not the person trying to target it. I imagine seeing a seven year veteran character is in system (but hiding which ship he/she is flying) could make many a ganker hesitate to attack a mining barge whom they can't ID the pilot... if Q-ships were available.
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 393	Posted - 2014.02.22 02:19:00 - [37] - Quote Gentlement. I give you: [Procurer, Bait] Drone Damage Amplifier II Damage Control II Stasis Webifier II Stasis Webifier II Warp Scrambler II Adaptive Invulnerability Field II Strip Miner I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Medium Core Defense Field Extender I Hobgoblin II x5 60k EHP, 122 DPS, 2.8s lock time on a Taranis, dual web and 42.8 passive tank! All this can be yours for a mere 20 million ISK! Also, it can mine. -for deception purposes only, of course. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.02.22 03:36:00 - [38] - Quote I must ask (since I don't know so much about the Procurer), is that excellent example as one can fit a procurer now? I note the ship does very well as a tank (the procurer's main differance from the other miners), but it's ONLY offensive ability is the five drones. The main purpose of this discussion is to produce a Q-ship which has the ability to turn the tables on a frigate or destroyer raider or ganker, should the Q-ship get surprise. To do its duty, the Q-ship needs to be indistinquishable from the miner or industrial it is based on (which you fit does wonderfully), it needs to have a good tank (again, very well done by your fit), and it needs a strong 'first strike'. Five light drones (even type II Hobgoblins) does not fullfill that high 'Alpha'. Q-ships don't need good mobility or agility (and won't get such unless it's based on a quick miner or industrial), but they do need some hefty firepower as a first strike. They do not need to sustain that firepower, which is why the 'rapid-fire' weapons with long reloads are almost ready-made for the purpose.
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 394	Posted - 2014.02.22 04:07:00 - [39] - Quote I see what you're looking for, I was just providing the best currently existing option for it. The key is the dual webs, which should keep any most any frigate in range long enough for the drones to work. A small neut would be mega helpful in this by disabling the target's afterbruner, if you're willing to give up some of your camouflage. The sheer shock of a miner fighting will give you some time as well, as they probably won't notice they have a fight on their hands until they have significant damage already. There's room for variation in the fit, but the basic idea will be the same. A master of ambush combat it's not- but it makes a great lure for a gang and can ruin most solo frigates' day. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.02.23 00:38:00 - [40] - Quote Ines Tegator wrote: I see what you're looking for, I was just providing the best currently existing option for it. A master of ambush combat it's not- but it makes a great lure for a gang and can ruin most solo frigates' day. I admit I'm not very experianced, but most of the gankers I've seen are using destroyers, not frigates. I've seen catalysts, coercers, and thrashers, mostly, but I don't remember seeing any frigates. Your fit would probably do wonderful for immobilizing a ganker in a catalyst or coercer long enough for team mates to warp in and handle it; but that is not the point of our discussion. According to our discussion, a Q-ship needs to be able to handle the frigate or destroyer ganker ALONE after baiting him into range. When I say 'handle', I mean make the ganker hesitate to attack another industrial or miner. After all, we're talking about players with the mentality of finding and ganking targets that have no chance of fighting or escaping... not exactly a mature mentality, there.
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.02.23 00:50:00 - [41] - Quote I guess CCP doesn't care how many new players don't convert their 'trial accounts' to subscriptions. They probably don't even try track the conversion rate. I suspect being ganked by experianced players while trying to learn the game is a serious cut into those conversion rates. I personally know of 7 players who gave it up due to gankers. They were members of my college's gaming club and were testing EvE to see if it was worth playing. They allowed their trial accounts to expire and didn't bother to subscribe BECAUSE they couldn't play the game due to gankers. I just ran a search of dev posts to see if any of the devs ever mentioned q-ships. none have. that tells me our discussion here is worthless, because the devs aren't even interested .
JetStream Drenard EVE University Ivy League 27	Posted - 2014.02.23 01:33:00 - [42] - Quote TL; dr Awsome idea from the Honor Harrington series of books. +1
Ines Tegator Towels R Us 395	Posted - 2014.02.23 03:40:00 - [43] - Quote Aalysia Valkeiper wrote: I just ran a search of dev posts to see if any of the devs ever mentioned q-ships. none have. that tells me our discussion here is worthless, because the devs aren't even interested . Honestly, your post is the first time I've ever heard the term- at least by that name. I wouldn't be surprised if the idea has existed in the past under a different name. I'm having a hard time seeing where your idea fits into EVE. I like the concept rather a lot. But by destroyer ganking and concern with newbs, we're almost certainly dealing with highsec. Concord is already as Q as Q can get. If they gank, they will die. They know this, and choose to do it anyway. Striking them back is completely irrelevant because they have already accepted their doom. The procurer I posted is intended to bait roaming frigates in lowsec. In highsec, gankers tend to just ignore procurers because they have too much EHP to gank easily. You seem to be asking for two things; Ambush PVP and Highsec Gank Deterrent. Gank deterrent already exists- it's called the Procurer/Skiff or one of the new tanky industrials. Ambush PVP is a great idea, but I'm confused because it doesn't seem to be what you are after. - Mission Overhaul - Bridging the PVP / PVE Gap - -áIf the game stops teaching people to fear lowsec, maybe people will start going there?
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.02.24 01:55:00 - [44] - Quote Ines Tegator wrote: Aalysia Valkeiper wrote: I just ran a search of dev posts to see if any of the devs ever mentioned q-ships. none have. that tells me our discussion here is worthless, because the devs aren't even interested . Honestly, your post is the first time I've ever heard the term- at least by that name. I wouldn't be surprised if the idea has existed in the past under a different name. I'm having a hard time seeing where your idea fits into EVE. I like the concept rather a lot. But by destroyer ganking and concern with newbs, we're almost certainly dealing with highsec. Concord is already as Q as Q can get. If they gank, they will die. They know this, and choose to do it anyway. Striking them back is completely irrelevant because they have already accepted their doom. The procurer I posted is intended to bait roaming frigates in lowsec. In highsec, gankers tend to just ignore procurers because they have too much EHP to gank easily. You seem to be asking for two things; Ambush PVP and Highsec Gank Deterrent. Gank deterrent already exists- it's called the Procurer/Skiff or one of the new tanky industrials. Ambush PVP is a great idea, but I'm confused because it doesn't seem to be what you are after. Historically, the term has had many names. Among those names are covert galley (before the romans) and armed merchant. The actual term was given to ships taken to military shipyards and converted for military duty. They were crewed by miliary sailors for the expressed purpose of engaging and sinking enemy subs and raiders. Covert or auxilary cruisers were merchant haul converted in much the same manner to attack and raid enemy merchants and convoys.
Victoria Thorne Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 28	Posted - 2014.02.24 02:25:00 - [45] - Quote Ines Tegator wrote: Aalysia Valkeiper wrote: I just ran a search of dev posts to see if any of the devs ever mentioned q-ships. none have. that tells me our discussion here is worthless, because the devs aren't even interested . Honestly, your post is the first time I've ever heard the term- at least by that name. I wouldn't be surprised if the idea has existed in the past under a different name. I'm having a hard time seeing where your idea fits into EVE. I like the concept rather a lot. But by destroyer ganking and concern with newbs, we're almost certainly dealing with highsec. Concord is already as Q as Q can get. If they gank, they will die. They know this, and choose to do it anyway. Striking them back is completely irrelevant because they have already accepted their doom. I think the closest you could come in high-sec would be a ship capable of lying about its tank if scanned. Something that looks & scans like a Mackinaw, but tanks like a Skiff. (And mines like a Venture to keep the balance.) By itself, it would be worthless, but if you had a mining corp that deployed them on a regular basis, it would act as a deterrent. The idea being to throw an unexpected wrench in the "I need x # of cats to attack this target" equation. I haven't mined in a year or so though, so it doesn't matter much to me. Back when there were jet-cans, something like that would have been a fun little ship to have...
Nikk Narrel Moonlit Bonsai 3963	Posted - 2014.02.24 15:11:00 - [46] - Quote Victoria Thorne wrote: (And mines like a Venture to keep the balance.) You may be underestimating the Venture. Using Veldspar as an example Ore, I can only outmine the little frig with a Skiff by either: Dropping one of the low slot defensive items to fit a MLU2 & fitting at least 3 mining drone IIs (This in order to match an effective defensive fit on a venture that includes 2 mining drone IIs) OR Using 4 or more mining drone IIs (Same defensive Venture fit as before, EFT logs it as outputting 909 Veldspar per minute, as averaged out considering cycle timing) Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
Victoria Thorne Science and Trade Institute Caldari State 29	Posted - 2014.02.24 15:21:00 - [47] - Quote Good point. I've never used a Venture. You'd probably have to cut the mining yield further then. The point of a ship like that is not to mine, but to look like it's mining.
JetStream Drenard EVE University Ivy League 33	Posted - 2014.02.26 02:01:00 - [48] - Quote Victoria Thorne wrote: I think the closest you could come in high-sec would be a ship capable of lying about its tank if scanned. Something that looks & scans like a Mackinaw, but tanks like a Skiff. (And mines like a Venture to keep the balance.) By itself, it would be worthless, but if you had a mining corp that deployed them on a regular basis, it would act as a deterrent. The idea being to throw an unexpected wrench in the "I need x # of cats to attack this target" equation. I haven't mined in a year or so though, so it doesn't matter much to me. Back when there were jet-cans, something like that would have been a fun little ship to have... It would also have to have 'hidden' or invisible weapons or just looking at it would give away that it was an armed merchantman. In the Honor Harrington series the author had all weapons bays covered by sliding doors which looked like regular hull, so you would also need to deploy the weapons before use... And I cant remember if this was mentioned, but the cargo hold would have to be no bigger then a battleship hold or else it would just be an OP transport.
Hasikan Miallok Republic University Minmatar Republic 303	Posted - 2014.02.26 02:14:00 - [49] - Quote With 15 m3 drone bandwidth for Warriors and EWAR per boat and the ability to squeeze in a LSE small gangs of Nereus can actually be quite nasty, especially as people never think that 3 or 4 Nereus on a gate are part of the same gang (whereas 4 or more 'nados or catalysts is way suspicious).
Milton Middleson Rifterlings Point Blank Alliance 462	Posted - 2014.02.26 07:05:00 - [50] - Quote Komoran vs Sydney is a literally unique situation. I also feel obliged to point out that actual Q-ships were mostly miserable failures. Armed merchantmen overall have a better record, but they were generally commerce raiders, not disguised ASW ships. As others have said, you already have the ability to make Q-ship type industrials. If you want a more combat capable hauling ship, an Indiaman-type class of hulls probably makes more sense than a Q-ship.
Kenrailae Mind Games. Suddenly Spaceships. 242	Posted - 2014.02.26 11:42:00 - [51] - Quote Little late to the thread so sorry if I missed, But could this effect be achieved with effectively a bastion module for transports? 2-300% rep amount 75% cap usage reduction 1-200% damage increase High Fitting requirements(for the ship class intended for) Or something along those lines, fit only to Blockade runners and transports. Yes it'd be very visible at scan, but one wouldn't know if it were fit or not or active/online, etc. It'd never hold up to a combat ship. But it'd definitely surprise a few people too. The Law is a point of View
Nikk Narrel Moonlit Bonsai 3967	Posted - 2014.02.26 14:31:00 - [52] - Quote Then consider making a flat out different ship entirely. It only needs two aspects, in order to be mistaken for the intended soft target, the name and the appearance. These could be sold on market or contracts as Q or FAUX versions of the ship in question. It should cost twice as much as the closest comparable PvP oriented hull. But, on the overview, it would report it's identity as the soft target, and scan as the soft target. The hull would appear the same as the soft target. Noone has the right to a predictable kill, and while we are never guaranteed success, we all have the right to fool others. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
JetStream Drenard EVE University Ivy League 33	Posted - 2014.02.26 15:54:00 - [53] - Quote Another thought... even though it could not carry that much, it would make surprise possible, if the ship when scanned could 'show' a fake cargo. It would be so funny to look like your carrying a few billion out more, just to find out that you are deadly to most pirates.
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.02.27 05:20:00 - [54] - Quote JetStream Drenard wrote: Another thought... even though it could not carry that much, it would make surprise possible, if the ship when scanned could 'show' a fake cargo. It would be so funny to look like your carrying a few billion out more, just to find out that you are deadly to most pirates. like an updated version of the 'window' or 'chaff' used today to fool palse radars. we even have 'active' repeaters that make a target seem bigger or different to radar
Arthur Aihaken Perkone Caldari State 2954	Posted - 2014.02.27 06:10:00 - [55] - Quote Nikk Narrel wrote: These could be sold on market or contracts as Q or FAUX versions of the ship in question. Why not just offer these as retrofit options for existing hulls? I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Nikk Narrel Moonlit Bonsai 3974	Posted - 2014.02.27 14:50:00 - [56] - Quote Arthur Aihaken wrote: Nikk Narrel wrote: These could be sold on market or contracts as Q or FAUX versions of the ship in question. Why not just offer these as retrofit options for existing hulls? It could be done either way, in my opinion. It is the end result I feel needs the priority, in this case. That said, on the market, there would need to be some means of telling them apart. Even a MODIFIED stamp would do. (Possibly we could all assume the really expensive ones are the Q versions, but this leads to deliberate scams on the market.) (Market scamming doesn't need help, IMHO) Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
JetStream Drenard EVE University Ivy League 34	Posted - 2014.02.27 15:00:00 - [57] - Quote Aalysia Valkeiper wrote: JetStream Drenard wrote: Another thought... even though it could not carry that much, it would make surprise possible, if the ship when scanned could 'show' a fake cargo. It would be so funny to look like your carrying a few billion out more, just to find out that you are deadly to most pirates. like an updated version of the 'window' or 'chaff' used today to fool palse radars. we even have 'active' repeaters that make a target seem bigger or different to radar More like a item in cargo or a mod that can be programmed to display whatever cargo you want it to when cargo scanned. For instance you could program it to show 40b in officer mods or 5 billion in T2 hulls or whatever, only when cargo scanned. This is just to keep up the deception that it is a real freighter.
Corraidhin Farsaidh Hello-There 219	Posted - 2014.02.27 15:08:00 - [58] - Quote Q-ship conversions could be rigs that allow extra weapons mounts on existing hulls. They wouldn't show up on scans and would give improved firepower to the cargo ship but at the expense of cargo space being drastically cut due to the weapons systems taking the space.
Nikk Narrel Moonlit Bonsai 3974	Posted - 2014.02.27 15:32:00 - [59] - Quote Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Q-ship conversions could be rigs that allow extra weapons mounts on existing hulls. They wouldn't show up on scans and would give improved firepower to the cargo ship but at the expense of cargo space being drastically cut due to the weapons systems taking the space. I believe this is a core concept, given simplest explanation. I would even expand this, to allow a rig slot for each slot type being expanded, so that you could opt for incredible defensive ability instead of just shooting above expectations. That said, you are expanding rigs into the territory previously reserved for subsystems on T3's. I have no idea how difficult this would be to code, suggesting it might be more practical for "canned" versions rather than this. Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence So Local Chat vanished, now what?
Aalysia Valkeiper Imperial Shipment Amarr Empire 6	Posted - 2014.02.28 05:14:00 - [60] - Quote Nikk Narrel wrote: Corraidhin Farsaidh wrote: Q-ship conversions could be rigs that allow extra weapons mounts on existing hulls. They wouldn't show up on scans and would give improved firepower to the cargo ship but at the expense of cargo space being drastically cut due to the weapons systems taking the space. I believe this is a core concept, given simplest explanation. I would even expand this, to allow a rig slot for each slot type being expanded, so that you could opt for incredible defensive ability instead of just shooting above expectations. That said, you are expanding rigs into the territory previously reserved for subsystems on T3's. I have no idea how difficult this would be to code, suggesting it might be more practical for "canned" versions rather than this. Such as my idea to use the 'invention' system. The invention system would do 2 other things as well. 1> it would make the converted ship expensive enough so it wouldn't be desirable for 'suicide-ganking' 2> it would tend to ensure the pilots are more experianced than the pilots of the ships they are imitating. In any case, I think we need a system where ANYONE can hide who the pilot of their ship is.

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.