Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Riddick Valer
|
Posted - 2007.05.16 23:28:00 -
[1]
T2 BS don't need to be a bigger gank or bigger tank, but something different. Here's a possible idea. It is a new ship class and a new set of weapons for each major gun type
Example Weapon Chain Rails Similiar idea to Assault launchers. Allows the firing of smaller class weapons at a higher rof. These guns have the same requirement as large guns, but fire small ammo at very high ROF. Each gun is like 5 small weapons tied together into a chain setup.
Escort Ship Requires Racial BS V Abilities: +5% tracking per BS level +5% damage with Chain weapons. Improved locking time
This would create an escort class that flies with the fleet and murders smaller ships (a weakness of BS), but does almost nothing against larger ships (because of lower dps). It fills a role for larger fleets, as destroyers can't take the damage from enemy fleets.
|
Chainsaw Plankton
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 07:55:00 -
[2]
8 highslots * 5 small guns = 40 small guns, or about 8-10 frigs. i do think that is effective against a battleship :p
although it would be nice to stick one or two on a raven, have the torps/cruise for the bses, and a set or 2 of frig guns for the other frigs and cruisers :D ohhh fof rocket spam that would be fun :D
although i would suggest this for say capital ships who sticks 3 giant guns on a ship and then leaves it open to small targets? and of course they would be limited on how many can be fit.
|
Minigin
Ganja Labs Hydra Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 11:17:00 -
[3]
just introduce a mod... but make it really high requirements. so for example 5 small guns in 1 turret slot but takes loads of PG Your signature <----- My awsome Sig
Real men PVP on the Forums. |
Riddick Valer
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 17:26:00 -
[4]
The chain guns don't have to have the same damage per shot as the regular small guns. For example, a Chain 150 Railgun would have 5x the ROF of a regular 150 rail, but only do 80% of the damage per shot. Overall, it would do 4x the damage of a small gun. These numbers can be tweaked as needed. Modify so that each could put out less overall dps then a T1 BS, just that its damage is better against smaller targets.
The idea is to create a quick-locking bigger version of the destroyer. Whereas destroyers are anti-frigate, this class would be a BS designed for anti-frig and anti-cruiser.
|
Yamichi Wiggin
Caldari Rising Knights SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 20:00:00 -
[5]
ok so a smaller weapon with higher ROF, better tracking, and lower damage? Rails: 425mm rail -> dual 250mm rail Projectile: Artillery -> Autocannons Lasers: Beam -> pulse
I kinda dig the idea of something along these lines but I don't see where it will fit. On the one hand, Frigs have destroyers. Cruisers have Battlecruisers. Battleships don't have an answer. I like the concept of an anti-cruiser/bc picket ship. But the weapons aren't the answer. Give it the ability to fit 8 weapons. Don't give it enough PG to fit all 8 of them as large weapons. Then amp its tracking speed per level like you said.
really though- it sounds like your idea is for a new class of weapon, not a new idea for the new ship. i dunno man. has potential but it doesn't sit right for me. not sure why. ------ Pain is weakness leaving the body.
There is no love in fear |
Riddick Valer
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 20:49:00 -
[6]
The new class and weapon would have to go together. Limiting the PG to prevent loading all 8 slots with large turrets wouldn't work. People would just pick an existing BS and put on mediums and get the same effect.
However, a new weapon alongside this ship, with a bonus to ROF or tracking would help fill the role. This ship could have limited PG to prevent people putting on large turrets, alongside improved locking time.
|
Yamichi Wiggin
Caldari Rising Knights SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 21:20:00 -
[7]
I'm still not sure I see a niche for this. I mean, if I need to protect a BS from frigs and cruisers, I'd use a BC and drones. having read some old dev blogs, that's exactly the role the BC was designed to fill. So what role does this one fill? ------ Pain is weakness leaving the body.
There is no love in fear |
Typhado3
Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium FREGE Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.17 22:27:00 -
[8]
I believe the niche for this ship would be similar to bc just bettter.
I like the idea of a bs to do this though I think same damage and 3 x rof of a small weopon would be good enough.
another idea I've had for a while is same ship purpose but instead of a bs use the tier 2 bc. bonuses like this:
bc skill 10% reduction in weopon radius for medium guns (for caldari/gallente u may have a turret ship or give the bonuses to missiles and drones) 7.5/15% bonus to tracking per level (not sure how big this should be)
adv bc skill varies between races, stuff like damage, range, maybe more tracking.
also give the ship high sig resolution so it can lock frigs fast. boost the number of high slots and the hard points so it can fit more turrets as well.
My Opinions are my own, not my corp's, not my friend's, and not my pet fedo's |
Gamesguy
Amarr E X O D U S Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 03:43:00 -
[9]
I vote we go the opposite way, battleships kill cruisers fine as it is, we dont need to make smaller ships even more oboselete.
With the alarming increase in the usage of capital ships in smaller skirmishes, the Royal Navy decided to commission a ship capable of lending heavy capital grade firepower to conventional fleets, yet remain more mobile than a dreadnought. The result is a monster. The Wolverine is specifically designed to combat capital class vessels while maintaining all the mobility of a ship of its class.
Carthum ships are the very embodiment of the Amarrian warfare philosophy. Possessing sturdy armor and advanced weapons systems, they provide a nice mix of offense and defense. On the other hand, their electronics and shield systems tend to be rather limited.
Battleship Skill Bonus: 50% bonus to XL energy weapon rate of fire and 5% bonus to all armor resistance per level.
Flagship Skill Bonus: 50% bonus to XL energy weapon damage and 10% bonus to XL energy weapon optimal range per level.
Role Bonus: 98% reduction in XL weapon power grid needs, 50% reduction in XL weapon capacitor usage.
Penalty: -92.5% tracking and -92.5% explosion velocity for all XL weapons.
Slots: 8/4/8, 4 turret slots, 2 rig slots. 24k grid, 600 cpu 25m3 drone bay.
10000 structure, 10000 armor(60/80/62.5/35), 8k shield(0/90/70/20), 2500 recharge.
Capacitor 8000, 1250 recharge. 100 km max targetting range, max locked targets 8, radar sensor str 30, scan resolution 60mm sig radius 470, max velocity 100m/sec.
With only 4 turret slots and 25m3 drone bay its pretty worthless against regular battleships, and it has the same penalties to its guns as siege mode, making it only useful for shooting at caps ships. It does quite a bit more damage than a dread, but its tank is much weaker.
|
Riddick Valer
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 13:58:00 -
[10]
That would be good, also.
I'd just like to see T2 BS specialized towards a certain role, such as anti-cruisers/drone or anti/dread. I don't want to see them as just a bigger HAC or Command ship. Thats what T3 will be for.
|
|
EadTaes
Minmatar Native Freshfood
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 16:51:00 -
[11]
I don't liek the Idea ofve t2 BSs. A T2 BS will just be over powered and would imbalance the game furter.
Also the idea ofve the weapon is cool but givignt hem super anty cruiser and anty frig is no good ance again. Will just remove the roles ofve BCs and Destroyers in combat amd make BSs the only ship worth flying for pvp.
Also we do have 1 anty-BS ship and they are stealt-bombers. althou i'll grant it to you currently they are not much use againts BSs in their current state.
CCP gave weapons tracking speeds and scan resolutions for a reason. And that is to force mixes ofve ships in fleets. IE if you send only BSs againts teh enemy they enemy will just used frigs and cruisers and rip all ofve your BSs to shreads becasue they wont be able to defend them selves. And that is part ofve the reason why a brand new 2 days old character can WTFPWND a 4 year old character. Wich is soemthign rare in most RPGS wich also make EVE a very well thought out game. In otehr MMORPG if your the new guy on the block your lvl 3 and some lvl 50 comes around you wont even be able to put a scrach on him. IN a way your can't realy be part of the communaty until you get much stronger. And here you can go out and get into the melle with a brand new character. So if BSs get abilaties to waste all the smaller ships without a second thou that initial concept ofve balance versus size and new people being capable ofve inflicting server damage to old people will be lost.
So as fun as this sounds one must think what impact will this have on the game play. to me it will make almost everythign else alredy existing obsolete and thus should not get put into.
|
Yamichi Wiggin
Caldari Rising Knights SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 19:45:00 -
[12]
I can second the idea of the T2 BS being an anti-capital platform. I can get behind that 100%
I'll have to agree though that making the T2 BS an anti-small ship platform will just imbalance the game further. ------ Pain is weakness leaving the body.
There is no love in fear |
Shadarle
|
Posted - 2007.05.18 20:50:00 -
[13]
I like the idea of making the T2 BS an anti-capital ship platform. I'd like to see new T2 BC's added as anti-battleship platforms then as well and perhaps some new T2 HAC's or AS's used as anti-cruiser/bc ships.
Though the Flagship could also be a large command ship. With better usage of warfare link mods.
Tanking Setups Compared
Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |