EVE Search - Anti-Capital Battleship, anyone?

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Anti-Capital Battleship, anyone?

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:15:00 - [1] Greetings, fellow Defenders of the Forum! Lately, lots of people have been whining about both capital ships and the inability of removing POS guns/structures without using them. Well I have an idea that can help alleviate both issues! An anti-capital ship battleship. Such a battleship would only have a few slots (2-4 highs, 2-5 mediums, 2-5 lows) and only one turret/missile hardpoint, but would receive a fitting bonus to capital ship weapons so it could mount a single XL gun/launcher. It would be not-so-maneuverable, and it's limited slots would make tanking difficult. The idea is that these ships could be used in anti-capital gangs to provide additional firepower when combating capital ships and removing POS infrastructure after the tower itself has been removed. DISCUSS! I've got all my thermal hardeners on. ------------ ULTIMATE LAG SOLUTION IBTL! IBDS/DC! IBTC! 1st in a BoB post! And other such forum tom-foolery.
Drgnn CyberDyne Industries Te-Ka	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:17:00 - [2] No, we have enought ships in the game already tbh
DubanFP Caldari Four Rings D-L	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:18:00 - [3] Either they would get their asses handed to them in the same way stealth bombers suck, be as expensive as dreadnoughts anyways but worse "if they're T2", or replace dreadnoughts entirely. ______________________ DubanFP> I stopped capitalizing the g in goonswarm a little while back. I find they no longer deserved the little bit of extra effort required to press the shift key.
Vorketh Mordanil Amarr Brotherhood of Acquisitions	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:22:00 - [4] The only way I think that should work is if having the XL weapon active disabled all other high slot modules due to power consumption... that's the only way I can see to balance it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lowanaera Amarr Paladin Imperium Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:22:00 - [5] Abaddon 1x Dual Giga Pulse Laser I, 3x Megapulse II, 4x DHP II 4x whatever 7x Chelm's RCU 2x ACR II, 1x ACR I Does terrible DPS, but it's possible
lofty29 Infinitus Odium	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:23:00 - [6] What would be the point? A single capital turret out of Seige would do about 200 DPS --- Project Mayhem WTS : Faction Lewt
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:27:00 - [7] Originally by: lofty29 What would be the point? A single capital turret out of Seige would do about 200 DPS Hrm, point taken. ------------ ULTIMATE LAG SOLUTION IBTL! IBDS/DC! IBTC! 1st in a BoB post! And other such forum tom-foolery.
Gikanzin Minmatar High4Life Curse Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:27:00 - [8] Please for the love of all that is holy, no more skills!
Sli'co Scoser Gallente World Order The Imperial Order	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:30:00 - [9] I believe what you are looking for is a neut/nos battleship to suck the capacitor energy from enemy capital ships so they can no longer tank/gank. There's even rigs for energy emissions systems and pirate implants that help with the task.
zincol S.A.S Cruel Intentions	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:32:00 - [10] Edited by: zincol on 19/07/2007 15:32:11 Give Dreads more hi-slots/turret hardpoints. or increased damage,
prathe Minmatar Omega Enterprises Mostly Harmless	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:38:00 - [11] the anti capital bs is a possibility and has been discussed by ccp in the past but generally it has always fallen silent shortly thereafter
Dietes Marcellus	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:40:00 - [12] More Ships!!!
Tarminic Black Flame Industries	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:41:00 - [13] Originally by: Sli'co Scoser I believe what you are looking for is a neut/nos battleship to suck the capacitor energy from enemy capital ships so they can no longer tank/gank. There's even rigs for energy emissions systems and pirate implants that help with the task. Indeed, but does not solve the problem of removing those pesky POS guns after the tower is down and out. Originally by: zincol Edited by: zincol on 19/07/2007 15:32:11 Give Dreads more hi-slots/turret hardpoints. or increased damage, I don't think capitals need to be buffed, really. I'm curious though - would people like to see some kind of anti-capital battleship in the near future? And if so what would it do/how would it work? ------------ ULTIMATE LAG SOLUTION IBTL! IBDS/DC! IBTC! 1st in a BoB post! And other such forum tom-foolery.
Caios Caldari Unified Refining Federation Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:48:00 - [14] Interesting idea. Maybe doesn't have to be a battleship per se, maybe it could be an excuse to roll out T2 versions of the tier 3 battlecruisers, make them the larger cousin of stealth bombers with bomb deployment and oversized (i.e., capital) weapon fitting capabilities.
000Hunter000 Gallente Magners Marauders	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:49:00 - [15] yes please, buff my carrier! dreams of a carrier with turret/launcher hardpoints yes i know this will never happen but it would be damn kewl, even if they were just ordinary hardpoints and not capturret/launcher CCP, let us pay the online shop with Direct Debit!!! Magners is now recruiting, evemail me or Dagazbo ingame.
Ares Lightfeather Gallente	Posted - 2007.07.19 15:50:00 - [16] Edited by: Ares Lightfeather on 19/07/2007 15:51:02 How ? "Thinks about a movie with stars and wars, and a pipe that leads directly to the core of the ship". Serious idea : Create a new ship, the CCP-wing fighter, smaller than a frigate, that an undeterminate number of high slots, and has access to a special equipment : anti-capital class bomb launcher. This bomb has the following characteristics : it deals damage according to a formula that works like this : signature * signature / number to be determined with balance in mind, so the ship is useless against small ships, and so 50 or so of them pose a significant threat to capital ships. Their small size makes shooting them with anything but small drones and frigates a waste of time. The OP's idea, letting a specific class of BS equip a single XL cannon might work fine too... The problem isn't finding ideas to balance the system, but to be sure that the new idea(s) doesn't set things out of balance.
Pete Higgs	Posted - 2007.07.19 16:00:00 - [17] Really, the problem is that POS guns have too much structure HP. The way to fix this is change structure resist conveyed by the control tower to 99.9% and reduce POS gun structure HP by a factor of 100. Introducing a new ship just to fix what I would consider at best a poor design decision and at worst a bug seems unnecessary.
Chewan Mesa coracao ardente Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.07.19 16:12:00 - [18] Edited by: Chewan Mesa on 19/07/2007 16:12:05 Although I understand the wish for more, new and shiny ships from people, I never seem to get around to why you always want an Anti-Capital-Specced ship. There is no imbalance there that needs a counter. It is not like you need a 100man BS gang to kill a carrier, you dont even need BSs at all to render it useless, and some NOS/Neuts + an average gang can take it out np. I mean have you thought about how much DPS such a new BS would do? How many would there need to be to kill a carrier? The number of BS it now takes isnt anywhere high enough to justify something in the middle to make it faster. Concerning the POS-Structures, CCP should just make them all go pop once the tower is gone really...
Alora Venoda Caldari GalTech	Posted - 2007.07.19 16:47:00 - [19] Originally by: Chewan Mesa Concerning the POS-Structures, CCP should just make them all go pop once the tower is gone really... or they could just unanchor so you can scoop them up! or at least become easier to clear... like maybe having negative resists?? ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ Take away the risk and it would make flying around in space utterly pointless. Take away the flying around part and you make EVE into a space themed spreadsheet application.
Cornucopian Gallente Dutch Omega	Posted - 2007.07.19 17:16:00 - [20] Originally by: Dietes Marcellus More Ships!!! HEAR HEAR!!!!!! ----------------------------------------------- "Yes... I sleep with my myrmidon. It's nothing to be ashamed of!"
R3dSh1ft Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities	Posted - 2007.07.19 17:21:00 - [21] "Dreadnoughts have great DPS" - Myth "Carriers have great DPS" - Myth If you put 1 capital sized turret / launcher on a Battleship, you would be getting about 1/3 the DPS of a standard fit battleship. DKOD - an awesome synchronised killing machine
Silas Vitalia Khanid Provincial Vanguard Khanid Provincial Authority	Posted - 2007.07.19 17:37:00 - [22] Standard gangs of nos/neut battleships already have little difficulty incapacitating/destroying capital ships, certainly no need to assist them in that regard. I'm confused why people want easier ways to kill capitals. I had to save up/train for quite a while to afford my Dreadnought, and it's already a scary thought that a small pack of neut/nos BS's can put such a hurting on me, with little time in training or monetary investment. *Call me crazy, but I like the idea that a giant, expensive capital ship would be you know, difficult to kill.* -CEO -Khanid Provincial Vanguard
Pezzle Amarr Imperial Dreams Curatores Veritatis Alliance	Posted - 2007.07.19 17:55:00 - [23] While I am in favor of new ships we should not invent them to solve problems with current mechanics. A much better solution would be to have any module in disabled status after a POS is destroyed either be unanchorable/scoopable or you can detonate it (should the unanchor solution be to difficult). The keys here being a lack of tower present in any status and the module being in disabled status.
Papa Ina GoonFleet GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.07.19 18:00:00 - [24] We have anti capital battleships. They are called correctly fitted to fight capitals battleships.

Pages: [1] :: 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.