EVE Search - Tier 2 Destroyers...?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Tier 2 Destroyers...?

» 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)
Zetaa Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.31 11:42:00 - [1] Any chance we'll see these puppies at some point? ----- All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved.
Kaylana Syi Minmatar	Posted - 2006.07.31 11:49:00 - [2] Why would we need such a beast? The current ones fit exactly what they are meant for... anti frig platforms with nearly same firepower of a cruiser with the same basic HP of a frig. Tier 1 cruisers are the next step up. Team Minmatar Carriers need Clone Vats
Zetaa Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.31 12:19:00 - [3] Originally by: Kaylana Syi Why would we need such a beast? The current ones fit exactly what they are meant for... anti frig platforms with nearly same firepower of a cruiser with the same basic HP of a frig. Tier 1 cruisers are the next step up. Anti-inties? :P Or just better destroyers? :) ----- All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved.
FawKa Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.31 12:32:00 - [4] They are known as Interdictors Linkywinky to interdictors http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=369662&page=1#10 Link to banner
Andreask14 Sensus Numinis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2006.07.31 12:38:00 - [5] Nah, there are no tier 2 destroyers atm, interdictors are tech 2. There is no need for tier 2 ones though. ________________________________________________ Just a quick reminder that "Local" and "Instas" will always be what they are.
FawKa Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.31 12:41:00 - [6] Originally by: Andreask14 Nah, there are no tier 2 destroyers atm, interdictors are tech 2. There is no need for tier 2 ones though. Lol, right - I got to read a bit more next time http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=369662&page=1#10 Link to banner
Erif Nosra Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.31 12:43:00 - [7] bring em on !
Kery Nysell Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.31 12:49:00 - [8] Can't see the need for them at the moment ... what role would they have ? The Tier 1 ones are already underused (or badly used ... mining Cormorant FTL), another Tier of T1 ships with no real use would only make them dust-gatherers in some ship collector's hangar ...
Nafri Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.31 12:57:00 - [9] whole destroyer concept is not really great it units the worst of 2 worlds frigate hp + cruiser speed and sig size with frigate firepower From Dusk till Dawn Sig removed, e-mail us if you'd like to know why. -ReverendM ([email protected])
Kunming Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.31 13:02:00 - [10] Originally by: Nafri whole destroyer concept is not really great it units the worst of 2 worlds frigate hp + cruiser speed and sig size with frigate firepower Sounds like Battlecruisers to me!.. Doesnt mean I dont agree though Tier 2 destoyers could be leaning towards support or tackling, would makes sense at least.

Zetaa Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.31 13:04:00 - [11] Originally by: Kunming Originally by: Nafri whole destroyer concept is not really great it units the worst of 2 worlds frigate hp + cruiser speed and sig size with frigate firepower Sounds like Battlecruisers to me!.. Doesnt mean I dont agree though Tier 2 destoyers could be leaning towards support or tackling, would makes sense at least. laughs Destroyers do seem to have a bit in common with Battlecruisers, eh? And that is another idea I had, tier 2 Destroyers might do better at support/tackling, with having a few more middle slots, at least one more anyways. ----- All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved.
Boonaki Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.31 13:17:00 - [12] I wouldn't mind seeing them change up destroyers a bit. Teir 1, Fast, short range (damage/tracking), less hit points, less powergrid Teir 2, Not as fast as teir 1, long range (damage/op range or fall off), more hp's, more power grid. Fear the Ibis of doom!
Zidrin Gizi	Posted - 2006.07.31 13:31:00 - [13] Originally by: Nafri ...frigate hp + cruiser speed and sig size with frigate firepower There is no frigate which have the alpha-damage of a T2 fitted Snipa-Thrasher. Best damage in game - compared to its size of course.
Benco97 Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.31 13:38:00 - [14] Oh i've got it! Give Destroyers the BC gang module bonus, tada, cheap gang support for small groups. Frankly I feel silly sitting in my BC at an op where it's size isn't needed. Snug Radio - Fart like a Pirate
Zetaa Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.31 13:47:00 - [15] Originally by: Benco97 Oh i've got it! Give Destroyers the BC gang module bonus, tada, cheap gang support for small groups. Frankly I feel silly sitting in my BC at an op where it's size isn't needed. Oooh, now you're cooking with butter! Definitely a cool idea. ----- All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved.
Kunming Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.31 13:55:00 - [16] Originally by: Benco97 Oh i've got it! Give Destroyers the BC gang module bonus, tada, cheap gang support for small groups. Frankly I feel silly sitting in my BC at an op where it's size isn't needed. TBH BC's should have been like BS-killers with weakness' vs cruisers. Something with BS weapons and dmg bonus but maybe a tracking penalty (to RP it up: The large turrets on the small hull have a rather limited movement ability etc..). HP slightly higher than a cruiser with cruiser sig radius but BS agility. Would nicely mix fleets, so we have multi-class instead of the current mono-class fleets.
Testy Mctest	Posted - 2006.07.31 13:57:00 - [17] Originally by: Kunming Originally by: Benco97 Oh i've got it! Give Destroyers the BC gang module bonus, tada, cheap gang support for small groups. Frankly I feel silly sitting in my BC at an op where it's size isn't needed. TBH BC's should have been like BS-killers with weakness' vs cruisers. Something with BS weapons and dmg bonus but maybe a tracking penalty (to RP it up: The large turrets on the small hull have a rather limited movement ability etc..). HP slightly higher than a cruiser with cruiser sig radius but BS agility. Would nicely mix fleets, so we have multi-class instead of the current mono-class fleets. Actually, I think BCs do what they're meant to do well - they're ships that are designed to be able to take out cruisers, whilst not being as big as a battleship. BCs can take on any cruiser and win - including HACs - and in most cases more than one at a time. Unfortunately, their sig radius is a little bit too high, and their agility and speed are a little bit too low. The concept is correct imo, though. Scrapheap Challenge Forums
Benco97 Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.31 14:42:00 - [18] The way I see it BCs are good as they are for what they do, i'm perfectly happy with them, my idea however would remove the need for a second teir of destroyer and make the ones we've got now actually useful, come on people, sign it for me ^^ Snug Radio - Fart like a Pirate
Hllaxiu Shiva Morsus Mihi	Posted - 2006.07.31 14:50:00 - [19] Edited by: Hllaxiu on 31/07/2006 14:49:47 Originally by: Benco97 Oh i've got it! Give Destroyers the BC gang module bonus, tada, cheap gang support for small groups. Frankly I feel silly sitting in my BC at an op where it's size isn't needed. Gang mods - 5 cap/s Base capacitor, max skills, t1 destroyers: 2.5 cap/s --- Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in rising up every time we fail. - Emerson
Benco97 Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.31 15:03:00 - [20] Originally by: Hllaxiu Base capacitor, max skills, t1 destroyers: 2.5 cap/s Hmm... that is one damn good point... giving the destroyer the ability to fit them AND giving them a reduction to cap use... that would be 4 bonuses? ok so yeah, maybe my idea is a little wonky then. Blah, someone help ;p Snug Radio - Fart like a Pirate

Novarei Ninth Column	Posted - 2006.07.31 15:37:00 - [21] and a tier 2 destroyer whould have what benefits over tier 1? more turret hardpoints? hmmmm no... More hp (but less speed)? no that wouldnt work for a frig killer... I'm at a loss. --------------------
Zetaa Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.31 15:37:00 - [22] I have to say I'm happt with the response so far... it's really tiring to read in so many threads people saying, "Fly this ship instead of that hunk of crap...". But I'm guessing Tier 2 destroyers aren't anywhere in the near future. Are there really no roles they could fill, other than being better than their Tier 1 cousins? So far gang support seems to be a decent idea.. give them baby-BC gang bonuses somehow. ----- All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved.
Lienzo Minmatar	Posted - 2006.07.31 16:20:00 - [23] Needs an alpha damage boost to keep up with inty hp. Currently you need 3 to instapop inties with excellent skill and luck, plus a 4th to serve as bait. We need to cut that down to 2 destroyers, plus bait. Or just massively cut inty hull hp. +500 is waaayyyy too much. Assault Missile Launcher Improvement
Draugz	Posted - 2006.07.31 17:14:00 - [24] The Catalyst i have found to be excellent for pvp, dont bother fitting repper. Just do nano/magstab, 200mm plate, magstab. If you got decent gunnery skills you can take down anything frig sized rather fast.
Tao Han Caldari	Posted - 2006.07.31 17:28:00 - [25] Considering the price of BC's vs their usability I definitly think they are good. Destroyers on the other hand...
R3dj4ck Ry4n	Posted - 2006.07.31 20:49:00 - [26] I love destroyers. A dedicated anti-frig platform allows the bigger ships to concentrate on the larger threats instead of wasting their ammo trying to swat bugs. T1 destroyers in general could use a survivablity upgrade however. Slightly smaller sig & more speed or a substantial hp increase. The Coercer & Catalyst could use better bonuses. Reduction in cap usage and 50% falloff really pale in comparison to 50% optimal & 5% extra damage that the Cormorant and Thrasher get. If it ever comes into being I'd like to see T2 destroyers retaining the T1 bonuses, getting some armor resists and some sort of special ability as described in previous T2 dessie threads (sonar ping cloaked ship detection, depth charge launcher, torp launcher, etc.).
Sarmaul 0utbreak	Posted - 2006.07.31 21:01:00 - [27] Give Amarr a gank Destroyer, Caldari a missile Destroyer (T1 Flycatcher), Gallente a drone Destroyer and Minmatar an AC Destroyer (T1 Sabre). Then add Interdictors based on the new/old destroyers (i.e. Minmatar would get a slow artillery Interdictor with an optimal range bonus, Caldari would get a rail Interdictor, Gallente would get a drone Interdictor and Amarr a gank Interdictor). Magic. TEAM MINMATAR FORUMS - In Rust We Trust -
source Amarr	Posted - 2006.07.31 21:11:00 - [28] Edited by: source on 31/07/2006 21:11:49 Quote: Give Amarr a gank Destroyer, Caldari a missile Destroyer (T1 Flycatcher), Gallente a drone Destroyer and Minmatar an AC Destroyer (T1 Sabre). Then add Interdictors based on the new/old destroyers (i.e. Minmatar would get a slow artillery Interdictor with an optimal range bonus, Caldari would get a rail Interdictor, Gallente would get a drone Interdictor and Amarr a gank Interdictor). As much as I would love to see that, it giving more versatility to the underused shipclass and all. they would be stepping on the toes of their race's AF's edit trying to think of something constructive, give me a minute
R3dj4ck Ry4n	Posted - 2006.07.31 21:29:00 - [29] Originally by: Sarmaul Give Amarr a gank Destroyer, Caldari a missile Destroyer (T1 Flycatcher), Gallente a drone Destroyer and Minmatar an AC Destroyer (T1 Sabre). Then add Interdictors based on the new/old destroyers (i.e. Minmatar would get a slow artillery Interdictor with an optimal range bonus, Caldari would get a rail Interdictor, Gallente would get a drone Interdictor and Amarr a gank Interdictor). I really like your line of thinking. Wanting to give each destroyer a boost and retain some racial flavor has merit. But I would hate to see the catalyst turned into yet another drone boat. And I shudder at the thought of the 8 missle launching cormorant. Out of curiosity what constitutes an amarr gank destroyer?
Webster Carr Gallente	Posted - 2006.07.31 23:16:00 - [30] Originally by: Sarmaul Give Amarr a gank Destroyer, Caldari a missile Destroyer (T1 Flycatcher), Gallente a drone Destroyer and Minmatar an AC Destroyer (T1 Sabre). Then add Interdictors based on the new/old destroyers (i.e. Minmatar would get a slow artillery Interdictor with an optimal range bonus, Caldari would get a rail Interdictor, Gallente would get a drone Interdictor and Amarr a gank Interdictor). Magic. I think that I would go even further with new specific roles for the tier 2 destroyers. Gallente. A pocket carrier (drone boat). Give it a 25m drone bay plus 5m per level and the usual +10% drone hp/damage. Drop a slot for the drone bay and give it a 4/4/4 slot layout with 4 turret hardpoints. Make the ship overall a bit bulkier with more armor and structure but lower speed, perhaps something that looks like a really small Nyx carrier. Caldari. A lot of people would say a pure 'guided missile destroyer'. I think a little outside the box would be better: Slot layout 5/6/2. 5 Launcher 2 Turret points. Bonuses: 5% bonus missile kinetic damage and -5% to ECM target jammersÆ capacitor need. - Still a good missile boat, but has more of a purpose in PVP too. Other stats would be lower speed and longer range and better targeting systems. Overall look would be blockier, wider rather than long. Minmatar. A tackler destroyer. Slot layout 6/4/3. 6 turrets slots. Bonuses: +5% projectile rate of fire and +5% speed bonus. (With base speed starting at 275 or so.) Other stats would include less armor and structure, lower signature, mass and inertia. (Hey it's a mini Stabber.) The extra mid slot would allow for more tackling ability, perhaps on multiple ships. The look would be long and sleek, perhaps something like a small version of the new Kali Minmatar battlecruiser. Amaar. Now for something completely different: Picture the usual rounded Amaar hull taken further to a slightly elliptical sphere with a cluster of engines at the rear and a protruding nose cone to the fore. Slot layout 6/3/4 4 Turret hardpoints Bonuses: -10% to smartbomb cap use and +10% to small EMP smartbomb range. Other stats would be a heftier capacitor and armor, similar speed, but a drastically reduced targeting range and number of targets. I wouldn't foresee an Interdictor version of any of these but I do think that they would make destroyers a bit more sought after for PVP and more æflavorfulÆ overall.



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.