EVE Search - An idea about filling the huge gap between BS and Capital Ships

All Channels

Ships and Modules

An idea about filling the huge gap between BS and Capital Ships

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Hatsim Black Lance	Posted - 2007.05.16 08:59:00 - [61] Juggernaut: Capital Class Destroyer. Recognizing The need of a Capital Destroyer platform The "CCP" Introduced The top of the line T2 Battleship(Capital Class Destroyer) to round out their Huge Gap beween the Supercapitals and Subcapitals. The Result: The Juggernaut. Built To wreak havoc on the Enemies Capital Fleet... Battleship skill bonus: 5% bonus to armor Hitpoints and Resistance per level. Capital Destroyer skill bonus: 5%bonus to Capital Turret & missile damage per level and 10% bonus to Capital turret & missile effectiveness vs Capitalships Unique Ability: Grapple. used to lockdown and follow an Supercapital trough the Cyno Required Skills: Battleship lvl5, Advance Spaceship Command lvl4, Spaceship command lvl5 Secondary skills: Capital destroyer skill lvl3. "imagine a dozen hornets pouring from the devil's mouth, Now imagine they have autocannons." /Hatsim
SonTzu The Dark Horses Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.17 06:26:00 - [62] Edited by: SonTzu on 17/05/2007 06:32:32 Edited by: SonTzu on 17/05/2007 06:28:01 Personally, the idea in itself is great, but with every new addition also brings more exploits, bugs, and more flame. If i remember correctly, the hitpoints of all ships were increased across the board to prepare a basis to implement subsystem/module targeting into this game. Since ships have become so massive, it's only sensible to be able to knock key systems to reduce a ship's effectiveness in battle. As suggested by Theo Ramone, smaller ships should play a key roles as counters for large naval vessels while at the same time fall prey to any class designed to hunt it down. Instead designing ships to carry OVERSIZED weapons, instead make the smaller guns work in favor of targeting random High, Med, or Low Modules along with a new set of core subsystem designated as powerplant(low), jump/warp drives(med), and fire-control(high) so large ships can be crippled. With this implementation, we can solve the nos issue, cyno-run-away issue, and the insane firepower of large fairing vessels while keeping newer eve players, smaller vessels, and promoting more tactical confusion for Fleet Commanders . To eliminate the small craft's insta-pwn button, BS and Capital modules should be assigned hitpoints relative to their size that is kept seperate from their hull, armor, and shields. Cruisers or smaller are granted the ability to strike against CAP core or modules at random and frigates or smaller against BS class equivalent. This makes perfect sense as smaller crafts are smaller and more agile giving them the ability to navigate close enough to do specifc damage with small guns where as larger guns lack the precision. Before the BS/CAP pilots flame, the core systems will be targeted AFTER all their respective modules are offlined. For example, inties and frigates will have to offline all the low slots on a raven inorder to get a chance to offline their powerplant crippling cap recharge, but since modules are offlined randomly, the time to burn out 5 lows might as be enough to render the ship useless (if you were called primary, you wouldn't last long to begin with), but in regards to CAP ships, the opposing force might be able to cripple you before your actual death which will be dealt shortly afterwards. In essence, smaller ships will have a chance to play more roles in Fleet OPs while BS and CAPs remain dominant since firepower is still vital. Also interestingly, Fleet Commanders will be granted a few new options instead of amassing BS and CAPs solely for fleet engagements. Also the term Juggernaut is defined as a large, overpowering force where as Dreadnaught refers to a battleship with high caliber weapon. Sounds like Juggernaut >>> Dreadnaught Out with the 'Art of War' and in with 'War for Dummies'.
Emo gnome	Posted - 2007.05.17 09:16:00 - [63] Edited by: Emo gnome on 17/05/2007 09:17:36 I very much like this idea but I like the name "Patrol Ship" Though I guess that name could just as easily be given to T2 Battleship
Rinaldo Titano Caldari Domus Fatalis FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.05.17 09:35:00 - [64] As i see the problm is not capitals, but supercapitals EW immunity. Is naturally that a force of 2 bil ships need to be very very outnumbered by BS's to take them down. Would be a shame if a 2bil ship, or a 20bil MS could be taked down by 3-4 BS's, and thats not just because the pricedifference, but because the skilldifference. So just let resolve somehow the EW immunity. We cant just take this immunity. is even thats shame that a 1 bil carrier can be dampened by 2-3 cruisers so, that woudl useless(maybe the dampeners should be rangedependent: by 10km they do 60% by 30km 30% etc. the numbers are not correct, just wrote some, they should be calculated before). But is unfair thet even a big couple of ships cant lock down an MS or Titan. So maybe it would b a way of combination of capital modules(like capital WCS, Capital tracking computer and capital sensor booster - but at least the capital WCS) and the capitals would get as default WCS points. Let say carriers get 1WCS/lvl, MS 3WCS/lvl and a titan 4wcs/lvl and that could be incrased by the capital wcs wich could give for example 6WCS/module. so and avarge MS with carrier skill 4 and 1 WCS modul would have the srenght of 18WCS, what means would need 10 scrambler modules to hold it down. So would not be unvulnerable, but would need a lot of ships to lock down. Pls dont blame me for this idee, as i sad is just an idee and maybe wrong, but if not wrong maybe is worth to make a calculation about the proper needed numbers. Tnx for your responses
Aladari Selhura	Posted - 2007.06.02 12:52:00 - [65] A quick thought , stopgap between battleships and capital ship, far more durable then standard battleship, more pricey ,but in any case again not 1 button anti cap hull design, and of course more skill intensive The folowing is and variation of caldari tier 3 Rokh Rokh Hull Developer Ishukone 9375 hp hull 8750 hp armor 10625 hp shield 7500 cap 975 cpu 18750 power 2875 shield recharge 1437 capacitor recharge 8 hi slots 7 med slots 4 low slots 8 turets Base shield res em 0% ,ex 60% ,kin 70% ,ther 80% Base armour res em 60% ,ex 10% ,kin 65.7% ,ther 89.15% Battleship skill bonus ; 10% to large hybrid optimal range , 5% to shield resistances, Armada command BS skill bonus ; 10% to large hybrid damage and 5% to efectivnes of all warfare links Role Bonus: 99% reduction in Warfare Link module CPU need. Can fit 4 links simultaniously req skills Caldari Battleship 5 CAldari Cruiser 4 Caldari frigate 4 Space ship command 5 Advanced space ship command 4 Armada command BS skill 1 Warfare link specialist 5 Leadership 5 Signature analysis 5 Long range targeting 5 Sharpshooter 5 Trajectory analisys 5 Electronics 5 Logistics 5 I suppose it needs a bit more "touchup",but it is just an basic layout
Garr McButtwoop	Posted - 2007.06.02 17:30:00 - [66] very much loving this idea /signed how about call it a battlestroyer
Jongo Fett Caldari Save Yourself Inc.	Posted - 2007.06.02 17:31:00 - [67] that was me ^^
adilaNNN Caldari Fracked Inc KnightRaven Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.13 02:22:00 - [68] OK geniuses, how much do you propose the cost of these so called cap ship destroyers be?
Arvald Caldari House of Tempers	Posted - 2007.08.13 05:20:00 - [69] Originally by: Sokratesz /me likes Need to find a cool name for the class though juggernaut, Mammoth, Corvette, super duper capital killer forum warrior in training [orange] Your signature is beyond the file size allowed on these forums. Emai
Xoduse Gallente Beasts of Burden YouWhat	Posted - 2007.08.13 05:25:00 - [70] i like it! /signed ---------------------------------
Insomnium Minmatar the united	Posted - 2007.08.13 06:14:00 - [71] Edited by: Insomnium on 13/08/2007 06:14:39 looks at dates OMG I'VE JUST SEMI-NECROED!!!! /me slaps self ------------------------------------ If you define cowardice as running away at the first sign of danger, screaming and tripping and begging for mercy, then yes, Mr. Brave man, I guess I'm a coward
Nathanial Victor Minmatar Native Freshfood	Posted - 2007.08.13 06:21:00 - [72] daddy likes
Rakivic	Posted - 2007.08.13 06:26:00 - [73] Look the way I see this whole thing is that it is the EW immunity of capital ships (as many people said). That causes the problem of this ôgapö so I have an idea. Take the immunity to EW of capital ships this will make them more venerable, and intrudes a special module for the Titan that makes it restraint to all EW, thus still keeping the Titan as the ôcream of the cropö so to speak when it comes to ships in EVEà well actually this would probably make it more so. Also introduce an new type of scrambler that can only fit on battle ships and up which can scramble a capital ship and prevent it from making a Cyno jump as well as giving it the ability to destroy/destabilize a Cyno field and thus having the capital ôappearö back to where it started from kind of like having it reverse the jump But this is just my .2 cense worth and no doubt there are flaws to it. It is just a rough over lay of my idea.
Kokoshu Caldari Militaris	Posted - 2007.08.13 08:37:00 - [74] So like you want a ship (BS) that can wtf BBQ **** a cap ship without you yourself flying a cap ship?? if you want summet to kill cap ships its there and its a dread, who says the link ( if there should be one ) between cap and BS should be summet to kill cap ships not me. I got very bored in my training for cap ships but thats the price i payed for training for it, i agree a ship inbetween would have been nice but how about you make it so for a carrier there is a BS logisitc ship and if you train for dread there is mini sige module for current BS. Obviously they would have to be balanced and there are just ransom ideas, but asking for summet to nail cap ships which is BS sized is bad ships kill ships below then traditionally Cruiser > frig Battle cruiser > cruiser BS > battle cruiser cap > BS not BS > Cap ships see ma point? otherwise i want a "patrol" frig to nail battle cruisers because i think the time sink from frigate to battleship is to long
Kokoshu Caldari Militaris	Posted - 2007.08.13 08:40:00 - [75] Originally by: Rakivic Look the way I see this whole thing is that it is the EW immunity of capital ships (as many people said). That causes the problem of this ôgapö so I have an idea. Take the immunity to EW of capital ships this will make them more venerable, and intrudes a special module for the Titan that makes it restraint to all EW, thus still keeping the Titan as the ôcream of the cropö so to speak when it comes to ships in EVEà well actually this would probably make it more so. Also introduce an new type of scrambler that can only fit on battle ships and up which can scramble a capital ship and prevent it from making a Cyno jump as well as giving it the ability to destroy/destabilize a Cyno field and thus having the capital ôappearö back to where it started from kind of like having it reverse the jump But this is just my .2 cense worth and no doubt there are flaws to it. It is just a rough over lay of my idea. 1) carriers and dreadnoughts are not EW immune 2) carriers and dreadnoughts cant cyno if scrammed 3) Titan and Motheship are EW immune
Karyuudo Tydraad Caldari Whiskey Pete's Drycleaning Services	Posted - 2007.08.13 09:21:00 - [76] The fundamental problem I see with your proposed class is that it doesn't really fix what you claim to be the issue. All it does it make this new class the mainstay of fleets, relegate Capital ships to a support/logistics role, defines BS as they new heavy tacklers due to the difference in mobility, signature radius and tracking, and makes anything smaller than a BS even more useless for anything but tackling. And, anything that isn't slapped with multiple webbers isn't going to have trouble getting out of your mini-interdictor sphere launcher, so it doesn't really punish people for sticking close together. And it might as well remove the interdictor class from the game in its entirety.
Gawain Hill	Posted - 2007.08.13 11:39:00 - [77] yea so i got bored of reading after the first page firstly what's wrong with new players not being able to take out capital ships? secondly if they can take out a capital ship then why would they bother earning money they'd just get together with a few mates loaded up on remote sensor boosters webs and target painters and ransom everyone in eve and be unstoppable till a cap fleet shows up to pop them all this ship would end up costing what 500mill a go? plus skill cost get 3 gankageddons with decently skilled pilots for that muchand you'll out damage them i don't want any cap ship killer and i dont' fly cap ships how to kill a cap ship the easy way warp in gang of 5 abaddons fitted with 5 heavy neuts and 3 large smart bombs (the smart bombs of for making fighters go away) add in a few cap boosters and a dozen ships to feed them cap cap ship can't more or tank and it loses it's drones next warp in a dozen or so battleships fitted for blowing it up win p.s. don't forget to use those bubble things p.p.s. this works better if the cap ship is on it's own if it has friends with it then you need to bring in more ships to blow them up too but bringing everything in at the same time works too just send in a dozen frigs and cruisers and bc's and anything else you have floating around to take out support p.p.p.s. if everyone has smart bombs then all drones go away :) p.p.p.p.s. i'm bored waiting for downtime to finish
FawKa Gallente Old Farts Imperial Republic Of the North	Posted - 2007.08.13 11:51:00 - [78] I hate it :P You kinda say the old BSs are getting worthless - so lets creater something with more firepower. You just kill the BSs 100% then, including balance to all other ships lower than a BS. Sure we are getting into capital ships online but keep on creating ships with more dps isnt the best way.
bundy bear	Posted - 2007.08.13 12:08:00 - [79] So what you want is a ship more like capitals but without the weaknesses of capitals? You dont like the fact that a regular fleet doesnt win a "super expensive" capital fleet? You dont like the fact that a corp that spends billions getting carriers for support platforms has an advantage of one that doesnt? Cap ships are balanced. Cap ships require alot more SP and isk investment and arent solo pwn mobiles. Just look at dreadnaughts. They have weak DPS unless they enter siege making them very vunerable.
adilaNNN Caldari Thundercats RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.26 00:39:00 - [80] Quote: So like you want a ship (BS) that can wtf BBQ **** a cap ship without you yourself flying a cap ship?? if you want summet to kill cap ships its there and its a dread, who says the link ( if there should be one ) between cap and BS should be summet to kill cap ships not me. I got very bored in my training for cap ships but thats the price i payed for training for it, i agree a ship inbetween would have been nice but how about you make it so for a carrier there is a BS logisitc ship and if you train for dread there is mini sige module for current BS. Obviously they would have to be balanced and there are just ransom ideas, but asking for summet to nail cap ships which is BS sized is bad ships kill ships below then traditionally Cruiser > frig Battle cruiser > cruiser BS > battle cruiser cap > BS not BS > Cap ships see ma point? otherwise i want a "patrol" frig to nail battle cruisers because i think the time sink from frigate to battleship is to long ok this post was kind of hard to understand but my interpretation is you think bs can destroy cap ships :S your lil diagram there displays what the usual outcome in a 1 v 1 battle of those different class of ships would be, in that case since when did a BS beat a cap ship? and if you consider it as small groups in each class then i'd agree that holds true all the way aswell, so since when did a BS ever take out a cap ship, unless your a complete tard to fly your ship solo, ofcourse if a moron did something like that then he'd most definately loose his cap ship, you morons need to play more sensibly instead of thinking your invulnerable in your expensive caps. i'm not very experienced at this game either but sometimes i just have to give a big sigh. how old are you guys?
ViolenTUK	Posted - 2007.08.26 01:43:00 - [81] I like the idea of more ships. For years we have had only three battleships to choose from. We should have a number of battleships introduced for each race. If tier 4 battleships were created this may plug the gap to a certain degree without going through the fuss of creating a new ship type. Tier 4 would require faction battleship level 5. This would be an extended training period for dedicated players that wouldnt take up the time that training for a dreadnought would take. Abilitys would need to be honed out but they would need to be notably more powerfull than a standard battleship but impractical for pvp. Lets say very slow for example. www.eve-players.com
Arthur Frayn	Posted - 2007.08.26 07:55:00 - [82] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/08/2007 08:02:12 Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/08/2007 08:01:37 Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/08/2007 07:57:01 Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/08/2007 07:55:32 I liked the previously mentioned idea of a tech 2 BS with capital turrets. My idea about that would be to limit a BS to 4-6 highslots, and only two turret or missile hardpoints. The rest of the highs could be loaded with any combo of mods(cloak, nos, etc). It could also have a penalty to turret tracking like destroyers, thus limiting its usefulness to fighting capitals. It would essentially be a flying gun, rather like the WWII experiments done by the Germans. They managed to fit battleship sized guns on cruiser hulls to great effect. Such a ship could be a heavy, T2-resisted gun platform that could be cheaper than a Dread, but not much use for anything else. There is of course the argument that it'd make an unbelievable gatecamping sniper, but it'd have very few defenses beyond its tank if a gang decided to take it down. It could be designed without a drone bay to emphasise its specialised role. And it could always be limited to losec and 0.0 so that it wouldn't cause possible havoc in empire space. A small task force of them could take on a dread or two, and a large enough fleet of them would make an awesome active defense for a POS, where players could actually get in non-dread ships to defend it. The closest thing I can liken such a ship to would be a mobile POS turret or missile battery. Is that a stupid idea, and why?
murder one Gallente Blood Corsair's The Red Skull	Posted - 2007.08.26 08:01:00 - [83] You guys really need to read my fleet ship concept. Link in sig. [07:13:55] doctorstupid2 > what do i train now? [07:14:05] Trista Rotnor > little boys to 2 Fleet Combat Ships
Arthur Frayn	Posted - 2007.08.26 08:09:00 - [84] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/08/2007 08:09:17 Originally by: murder one You guys really need to read my fleet ship concept. Link in sig. That idea would nerf battleships somewhat, and a ship of the line would be painfully expensive. I also don't like the idea of a midpoint ship using capital shield and armor reppers. The whole idea smacks of a dreadnaught designed for conventional anti-ship warefare when the battleship's entire purpose is precisely that. I'd rather see a ship designed solely for anti-dread warfare which would be utterly useless for anything else.
goodby4u Cutting Edge Incorporated RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.26 09:31:00 - [85] /signed. As for a name...Either heavy command ship or heavy destroyer...kinda like the heavy assault ship. __________________________________________ Yes it is great being amarr. I am minmatar,fly amarr,use gellente drones and am in caldari space.
Arthur Frayn	Posted - 2007.08.26 10:23:00 - [86] Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/08/2007 10:24:19 Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/08/2007 10:23:49 Originally by: goodby4u Edited by: goodby4u on 26/08/2007 09:39:15 /signed. The caldari one should be juggernaut like suggested. The amarr either blasphemer(like the bigger version of the heretic). The minmatar should go with the icelandic god group,such as odin or thor. And the gellente should basically be some random word with -or at the end. If there's a vote for names, I'd call the Caldari ship the Gryphon. Edit: Damn, it's taken by a p*ssant frigate.
murder one Gallente Blood Corsair's The Red Skull	Posted - 2007.08.26 11:09:00 - [87] Originally by: Arthur Frayn Edited by: Arthur Frayn on 26/08/2007 08:09:17 Originally by: murder one You guys really need to read my fleet ship concept. Link in sig. That idea would nerf battleships somewhat, and a ship of the line would be painfully expensive. I also don't like the idea of a midpoint ship using capital shield and armor reppers. The whole idea smacks of a dreadnaught designed for conventional anti-ship warefare when the battleship's entire purpose is precisely that. I'd rather see a ship designed solely for anti-dread warfare which would be utterly useless for anything else. They'd be great anti-cap ships, and without close range weapons available, wouldn't nerf BSs. They'd be designed like WW II Battleships: large and slow, but long ranged, high firepower ships, designed to have the fleet centered around them. They'd be good against cap ships because they could withstand some concentrated DPS long enough to stay engaged with a Dread or Carrier. [07:13:55] doctorstupid2 > what do i train now? [07:14:05] Trista Rotnor > little boys to 2 Fleet Combat Ships
welsh wizard Celestial Apocalypse Insurgency	Posted - 2007.08.26 11:28:00 - [88] Agree that there is a problem. The fleet sgould be built around a core battleship group with capital ships providing support (dreadnaughts being the exception as their role is detached). Unfortunately capital ships are able to operate with relative impunity to support while being able to kill them with relative ease. Ideally we should be defending our capital ships, not amasssing impenetrable blobs made up entirely of remote repping capitals at the expense of support. The hitpoint buff only made the gulf more apparent. Perhaps there wouldn't be such a problem if the server could handle massive amounts of support, it can't.
Beer	Posted - 2007.08.30 06:57:00 - [89] I suggest this........Take the cryo from the ops ship (since it counts as a cloak anyways) and make it a Battle Ship T4 Mod. Make the new T4 BS have long Range ONLY (being ineffective at close range). Since it would do greater damage add a new skill in called " Heat Control", basically your T4 BS would fire very slow do to guns over heating (effectiv. un-ftpwning it). As your skill in "heat control went up, your time between firing time would go down. Give it 3 rig slots, but those rig places would be used for small t2 guns giving it a chance to fire on smaller ships close range (this of coarse would even the ship out a bit, and give you more options in battle). This idea would still allow the ms and dreds to remain central units on the field, while giving then a stronger support ship; ment to bring only damage and carnage to other captital ships. For those worried about the lost of rigs, you could even make another skill called ........ "advanced battle tech.". This would give the BS bonuses to the armour or shields of said T4 BS. OUT COME.......... A ship thats a step above the normal BS in armour or shields (after training of new skill) Makes the cryo a tool we can use again, leaving the ops to do its normal job. A ship that can cause heavy long range damage (with skills to shorten the time between shots) Also gives the Player a chance to beable to defend themselves up close, although still keeping it mainly as a long range heavily armoured gunner. What you think?
twit brent Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.08.30 07:09:00 - [90] So what everyone wants is a new class of ship like capitals but without the glaring weaknesses capitals have? Keep dreaming.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 :: 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.