EVE Search - T2 Battleship concepts.

All Channels

Ships and Modules

T2 Battleship concepts.

» 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)
50freefly Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 17:42:00 - [31] I like the flagship idea a lot. Having them be just barely better than BS's for pvp will not mean that regular BS's will be obselete, because these t2 BS's will be well over a billion if today's t2 prices are anything to go by. Originally by: Eight Ace For reasons that have been lost in the mists of time all caldari ships are designed by two people. One does the left hand side and the other does the right. And they never meet.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 17:45:00 - [32] Originally by: 50freefly I like the flagship idea a lot. Having them be just barely better than BS's for pvp will not mean that regular BS's will be obselete, because these t2 BS's will be well over a billion if today's t2 prices are anything to go by. That is why T2 BS needs to have a specialised role. It should not replace T1 counterparts. For a start, I think T2 BS should have lower DPS than T1 BS and higher resistances like Command Ships. Add whatever bonus/role later. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
Stamm Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.29 17:59:00 - [33] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: 50freefly I like the flagship idea a lot. Having them be just barely better than BS's for pvp will not mean that regular BS's will be obselete, because these t2 BS's will be well over a billion if today's t2 prices are anything to go by. That is why T2 BS needs to have a specialised role. It should not replace T1 counterparts. For a start, I think T2 BS should have lower DPS than T1 BS and higher resistances like Command Ships. Add whatever bonus/role later. Well, I dunno. Why not give the solo empire players something a little better to aim for. Going back to what I suggested it would be a 25% (at max on what would be a 10 or 12 x skill) to resists or shield/armor boost/repair. Other than that they'd be the same as the T1 battleships, except they'd be able to jumpdrive, and they'd give a one of a kind logistics bonus. No extra slots required, no new modules required. Use the Tier 3 battleship hull and bonuses for it. The 25% would be all they got. Not an insignificant bonus, especially when you consider it won't be stacking penalised, but I still think command ships as they are would probably give them more of an advantage in missions or for ratting anyway. Essentially it would not in ANY way obsolete the T1 battleships, or make them look like a poor mans ship. Even faction battleships would still be worthwhile (assuming they are brought up to speed with Tier 3 BSs).
Fortior STK Scientific Ascendant Frontier	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:04:00 - [34] So far the best ideas I think are the Capital Killers and Large Logistics. Allowing them to fit capital sized weapons but leaving out the siege mode. A bonus for turret users should be to tracking so the ships can move with losing out on DPS, but leaving the guns with a static sig resolution penalty on the guns so they don't snipe ships smaller than capitals. Strong and mobile force vs capital ships but quite vulnerable vs everyone else pretty much. The Large Logistics should be the Logistics bigger brother on all levels. Leave the Command-role to the current Battlecruisers.
Pinky Denmark	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:21:00 - [35] Tech 2 BS could ruin EVE Tech 2 frigates - kill them in Tech 1 cruisers/BS's Tech 2 cruisers - kill them in Tech 1 BS's Tech 2 BS - If they become Super Heavy Assault Ships we'll have a balance issue.. I agree with them as being "Flagships" - using Tier 3 BS hulls seems fine... make them quite costly - should at least be 3-400 mill worth in construction cost make them an upgrade from command ships - require very good Leadership skills Give bonus to survival, logistics and leadership modules only - people should still want Tech 1 Battleships... make them do a better job than comand ships AND being able to stay with the fleets instead of hiding... Pinky
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:31:00 - [36] Originally by: Pinky Denmark Tech 2 BS could ruin EVE Tech 2 frigates - kill them in Tech 1 cruisers/BS's Tech 2 cruisers - kill them in Tech 1 BS's Tech 2 BS - If they become Super Heavy Assault Ships we'll have a balance issue.. I agree with them as being "Flagships" - using Tier 3 BS hulls seems fine... make them quite costly - should at least be 3-400 mill worth in construction cost make them an upgrade from command ships - require very good Leadership skills Give bonus to survival, logistics and leadership modules only - people should still want Tech 1 Battleships... make them do a better job than comand ships AND being able to stay with the fleets instead of hiding... Pinky T2 BS will not ruin EvE if ppl dont keep asking for more DPS. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
White Ronin	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:32:00 - [37] We need to flesh out the roles/designs for T1 BS before we bring T2 online. We are still missing E-war based BS type. Once that is done you can see which of the 'type' would best suit a boost to T2 without removing balance and playability. As it is now you have alot of fighters with now chief, cook, maid or any other role in the bs slot. Some shoot far. Some shoot near. Some are gimp. And some you fear. A clear defined role that is what we'll do But dont forget the solo player pays to play too.
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:35:00 - [38] Originally by: Stamm Originally by: Jenny Spitfire Originally by: 50freefly I like the flagship idea a lot. Having them be just barely better than BS's for pvp will not mean that regular BS's will be obselete, because these t2 BS's will be well over a billion if today's t2 prices are anything to go by. That is why T2 BS needs to have a specialised role. It should not replace T1 counterparts. For a start, I think T2 BS should have lower DPS than T1 BS and higher resistances like Command Ships. Add whatever bonus/role later. Well, I dunno. Why not give the solo empire players something a little better to aim for. Going back to what I suggested it would be a 25% (at max on what would be a 10 or 12 x skill) to resists or shield/armor boost/repair. Other than that they'd be the same as the T1 battleships, except they'd be able to jumpdrive, and they'd give a one of a kind logistics bonus. No extra slots required, no new modules required. Use the Tier 3 battleship hull and bonuses for it. The 25% would be all they got. Not an insignificant bonus, especially when you consider it won't be stacking penalised, but I still think command ships as they are would probably give them more of an advantage in missions or for ratting anyway. Essentially it would not in ANY way obsolete the T1 battleships, or make them look like a poor mans ship. Even faction battleships would still be worthwhile (assuming they are brought up to speed with Tier 3 BSs). Your idea isnt bad. I think it is better to pool ideas first then sort out its roles. Solo or gang use is a different issue. If we design something for solo use from scratch, the T2 BS will become a solopwnmobile. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
Kaylana Syi Minmatar	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:37:00 - [39] Originally by: Stamm Can't have HAC resists on them, anything done to BSs to bring them out as T2 battleships will be used by ratters and mission runners. The only way to give them massive resists would be to nerf their damage output way below a T1 battleship, and that's not an ideal position. Which is why my idea a few posts up works... umm.... did I say they would have turret points? No? Ok then. Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
Vicious Phoenix	Posted - 2006.07.29 18:45:00 - [40] How about the T2 BS are able to mount a "area" cloaking module, cloaking everyone in your gang within, say, 30km. Of course to not kill the balance of the game, the T2 BS should either have the same resists as T1 BS or else REALLY crappy DPS (think 3 guns) or perhaps even no guns.
Sarmaul 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.07.29 19:09:00 - [41] Interceptor/Interdictor Resistances Built-in Jump Drive with a fairly good range +1 slot TEAM MINMATAR FORUMS - In Rust We Trust -
Pesadel0	Posted - 2006.07.29 19:49:00 - [42] They could have mining bonus .The minmatar one could have a optimal to mining lasers 10% do range and HAC resistances.
Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.07.29 19:54:00 - [43] just an idea or 2.... EW specialized ship with bonuses/links to improve sensors of gang members and bonuses to range/strenght of various EW modules modules to try to discover cloaked ships in a certain range. no dmg/and very good tank cloaking ship. can extend a cloaking field on friendly ships in nearby area. bonuses to ships speed and to fit the aoe cloak device. good speed and tank, low dps
Denrace Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.29 20:55:00 - [44] Caldari T2 BS 4 High Slots 8 Mids 3 Lows 4 Turrets/4 Launchers BS Skill: 10% Bonus to Shield HP 5% Bonus to Shield Resistances T2 BS Skill: 5% Bonus to Gang Members Missile Launcher ROF 5% Bonus to Gang Members Kinetic Missile Damage ________________________________________
Idara Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.29 20:58:00 - [45] Made a post a week or so back, here's what I think... AFAIK the T2 BS's are going to be insanely tankable "Command" ships for fleets, at least that's what I believe was thought of and hinted at in the past. However, the problems I see coming from this are if the ships are just given very high resists, tweaked a bit in the turret/launcher slots and left alone is the same problem with the, arguably of course, lousy logistics ships. Logistics ships you can't use in any real large scale PvP fight, because they are based on cruiser hulls, they get popped almost instantly when called primary. I see this happening for the Wing Command Battleships as well, no matter the resists, the ship will buckle and explode quite fast under concentrated fire of a traditional "blob fleet". What I think would help avoid this problem, and what would allow the Wing Command ships to stay on the front lines and properly direct the fight, as the revamps and everything coming in Kali seem to indicate that there will be better tactical organization during fleet battles, is to allow the Wing Command ships to fit Siege Modules. Now before the "RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE" starts, the battleships should be devoid of any, any offensive ability, save for maybe drones. No turret points, no launcher slots. There should be 4-5 high slots (for example) that can be used for Gang Assist modules. Instead of the T2 Battlecruisers which, again, under concentrated firepower will ***, the T2 BS's should get proper bonuses to allow them to fit as many Gang Assist mods as thier highslot layout allows, and allow the Gang Assist mods to actually make a difference. The 2-5% per ship level for T2 BC's is pretty lame, the Wing Command ships should have bonuses that dramatically help thier attached fleets, making them actually worthwhile the obviously exorbitant prices that T2 BS's will draw. Now, back to the Siege Module. Since the BS's won't have turret slots, they cannot benefit from the 500% damage bonus from the normal Siege Mod, so maybe introduce a "Command Siege Module" or somesuch that fits only on the Wing Command ships, and gives them the same general idea that a Siege mod on a Dreadnought does. Insane tanking ability. Having a siege module, and having them give 50-100% rep cycle amount bonuses, and reducing the cycle time itself will make these T2 BS's actually be visible on the front lines, rather than a carrier hiding in a safespot, ready to warp away the moment the SS is busted. Make the Command Siege Mod take the same fuel as normal Siege Modules, so that they can't be run forever. Make it difficult to keep the ship as the command centre for a fleet for extended times, but it doesn't need to have the Siege mod on all the time, only when the XTREMEOMGWTFBLOB shows up and starts shooting it. Also, as an aside to the T2 BS's, it would be a very neat idea or feature to somehow introduce a "cap booster" cargo bay or something that allows the Wing Command ship to store enough cap boost charges to negate the effect of nos for a while, allowing it to function as the proper fleet command ship role that we believe T2 BS's will be fulfilling. Now of course all this stuff with T2 BS's could change, I just hope that whatever they are, they aren't going to be hiding in safespots away from the eyes of everyone. The restrictions on the smaller carriers really **ed me off, it would've been great to see a new hull type, a new ship class in empire space, functioning as a command ship in empire wars. Instead these beauties hide in safespots, hardly ever seen in combat itself.
000Hunter000 Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.29 21:13:00 - [46] well if it will be used as a fleet command ship then it may need some specialized thing like beeing able to function at it's role while cloaked but unable to move/use weapons so: 1. it will survive the initial encounter cuz it can't be called primary and blow up out of existance a few seconds later. and 2. it won't be an uber nasty BS cuz it's worthless for anything but fleetcommanding stuff while cloaked. just my 0.1 isk for what it's worth. Banner will be updated shortly
Ath Amon	Posted - 2006.07.29 21:34:00 - [47] Originally by: Idara ....(too long to quote :P).... i mostly agree with your vision but i think that the fleet commander you describe is probably more suite for a capitol ship also range can be used to minimize damage of support ships... if a ship can stay at let's say 100-150km behind the fleet and not losing in functionality it could be quite safe from damage and hopefully (with lag permission) force people to think at tactics and coutnertactis to take down/protect such ships. it could also be interesting if the fleet commander can be used as a "buoy" for warp, defining certain area of space near it as different warp point. something like that can be usefull even during fleet deployment with ship that have a predefined area they will reach... eg front line, support, left wing, artillery and so on... something like that can be used to introduce new kind of strategies and ship roles and to have a bit more dynamic fleet battles (again with lag's permission)
Eximius Josari Shadow Reavers	Posted - 2006.07.29 21:46:00 - [48] Heavy Logistics Ship Heavy Force Recon Ship Heavy Fleet Command Ship Victory is the weakness of the enemy.
Captin Biltmore Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.29 21:50:00 - [49] Sorry Jenny, put the breaks on. Tier 3 BS need to be sorted first since they are due for release in a few months and the devs have already asked for suggestions on balancing them. No use in getting ahead of ourselves. (btw, if they come out as fleet command ships, they should be EXCLUSIVELY fleet command...not this uber hac **** that tech 2 battlecruisers are) Assasin For Hire - Contact in game
Arkanor Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.29 21:51:00 - [50] Originally by: Jenny Spitfire May be 2 cap weapon? Remember, this is just concept design. Would be nice to see target painters, etc. support in fleets and FC lasting longer in battles. FCs should fly covops then if surviving is the #1. Originally by: Ghosthowl WoW = hardcore paladins smashin dat face. Originally by: HippoKing I just cried, you know that?
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.30 06:43:00 - [51] Originally by: Captin Biltmore Sorry Jenny, put the breaks on. Tier 3 BS need to be sorted first since they are due for release in a few months and the devs have already asked for suggestions on balancing them. No use in getting ahead of ourselves. (btw, if they come out as fleet command ships, they should be EXCLUSIVELY fleet command...not this uber hac ** that tech 2 battlecruisers are) Nah, it is OK. We are pipelining. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!**
Jenny Spitfire Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.30 06:44:00 - [52] Originally by: Arkanor Originally by: Jenny Spitfire May be 2 cap weapon? Remember, this is just concept design. Would be nice to see target painters, etc. support in fleets and FC lasting longer in battles. FCs should fly covops then if surviving is the #1. FC in cov ops is not an option. Not immersive. ---------------- RecruitMe@NOINT!
jukriamrr	Posted - 2006.07.30 08:54:00 - [53] I suspect the tech2 BS's will have something to do with the new seamless 3D view...

Pages: 1 [2] :: 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.