| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Anaalys Fluuterby
Caldari
   |
Posted - 2007.08.30 22:27:00 -
[91]
Though a recon-oriented battle ship sounds awesome I can't help wonder where the Exploration vessels are....
Or maybe this ship will get bonuses to Astrometrics?
 Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Since this thread continues to fight against the people who derail it into the macro miners witchhunt. I will move it to features and ideas discussion where ...
|
ShadowMonk
Caldari
Exiled.
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 23:12:00 -
[92]
Originally by: MITSUK0
This game seems to be growing a lot of fur latley... How long till they start adding *shudder* hugs?
Oh... That is an awesome weapon for Valentines Day or something...
[Notify] ShadowMonk has started Hugging you
|
RtoZ
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 23:20:00 -
[93]
Speaking as a long time mission runner, I think I can give ideas to what mission running battleships could be, without being gamebreaking:
1) Support ships. Bonus to tractor beams and cargo space per level, good tanks, only 3 of each weapon type high slots for 8 high slots vacant. Would be t2 skill requirements. Inability to fit Ewar, nos and neuts. High agility (to gtfo of hotspots).
2) Actual Mission runner: Very good tank. Bonus to damage and resists. Decent sized cargo hold and drone bay. 8 weapon slots, missile focused. Reference would be State Issue Raven. T2 skill requirements. PVP Caveats: EWar penalty. Sensor resolution penalty. Manuverability penalty. Inability to fit NOS or Neutralizer modules effectively. By penalty I mean very low stats on EWar, Sensors, remote energy systems and Agility and speed and no bonuses per level.
As for dividing mission runners and pvp'ers thats complete bs with the current game mechanics. Most people don't make actual money from pvp. Think about it for a minute: player ability tends to average out, so what happens is a few people break even, a lot of people lose and a small minority make a lot of isk. Most people support pvp with some other activity (corp ceo's, mission runners, industrialists, traders, miners, all of the above). The idea that you have a population of pvp'ers and a population of pve'rs is not the reality of things, allthough there is a small minority of both pure pve and pure pvp players. Out of these two the pure pvp tend to be pretty vocal, but that's not because they have a valid position, it's because they want more targets in low and no sec. For statistical purposes we can ignore the more extreme positions I think 
|
Tommy TenKreds
Animal Mercantile Executive
Animal.
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 23:35:00 -
[94]
Originally by: Flamewave
I'm thinking a missile-spamming Khanid Apoc will be one of the mission-runner ships...
That sounds more like the missile spamming, armor tanking BS that makes Caldari dream of finally trying pvp. 
|
MITSUK0
|
Posted - 2007.08.30 23:44:00 -
[95]
Originally by: ShadowMonk
Originally by: MITSUK0
This game seems to be growing a lot of fur latley... How long till they start adding *shudder* hugs?
Oh... That is an awesome weapon for Valentines Day or something...
[Notify] ShadowMonk has started Hugging you
[Notify] Self destruct has been activated.
|
Riddick Valer
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 00:09:00 -
[96]
What a mission ship should have:
Cargo room
A decent sustainable tank. Armor or shield.
Decent DPS, but doesn't have to be that high.
And, HARD to probe out.
Possible bonuses
-cap usage for armor reps or shield boosters.
-% chance to probe
+10% velocity to afterburner
+5% damage to drones/missiles/etc....
|
Lithalnas
Amarr
Hadean Drive Yards
Archaean Cooperative
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 00:19:00 -
[97]
an 6x torp Apoc with a cloaking bonus..
Geddon with jump portal generator
Abaddon with 1 gigabeam gun (station service adjuster) and a 250k lock range.
-------------
Hadean Drive Yards
|
Stakhanov
Katana's Edge
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 00:57:00 -
[98]
I can't wait for my T2 black ops mega. Stalk some targets , melt them with neutron blasters , loot their wrecks in front of the rescue gang , say "bye !" in local and cyno out. That would be totally cheap , but oh so enjoyable 
Originally by: Cipher7
If you manage to get baited, what's your skill, being a good victim?
|
Elysium73
Dark Cartel
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 02:45:00 -
[99]
wut?
|
6Bagheera9
Slacker Industries
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 03:27:00 -
[100]
/me Shakes head in disgust.
|
Rhaegor Stormborn
Pestilent Industries Amalgamated
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 03:36:00 -
[101]
Originally by: mallina
TBH the idea of a ship designed for running missions is completely against the founding principles of EVE and will do nothing but seperate the PvE/PvP players even more than they already are.
NPCs are a joke in general anyway, WAY too predictable and generally boring and easy. When are they gonna get some intelligence?
They need to make the AI more like human players. Increase the danger and excitement of PvP. Greater risk with greater rewards so that PvP is less of a boring grind and more of something you can do in short bursts for fun as well as income if you are successful.
Rhaegor Stormborn
Fleet Admiral - Pestilent Industries Amalgamated |
Imode
0utbreak
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 03:41:00 -
[102]
Please god, no more cloaking ships.
Also what in the world is this...
Originally by: "Noah Ward"
The other type of Tech 2 ship we haven't come up with a name yet, but it's going to be like a mission runner battleship. A huge number of our player base are not these big PvPers, they are mission runners for their empire, and you know doing their thing. While the ships will be really good at PvP, they will have things like bigger cargo bays for loot. They will have better locking times, better tracking, a lot of utility slots. Things that if you are a mission runner, what would be your ideal battle ship.
Really good at PVP.
Bigger cargo bays for loot.
Better lockign times.
Better tracking.
A lot of utility slots?
So you're making an uber mission battleship thats basically an I-Win button, but you're expecting people not to use it to pvp because you call it a mission battleship?
 
|
Digital Solaris
Latrocinium Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 05:12:00 -
[103]
I think we can expect battleship sized force and recon types with your typical flavour of each race. But what tier they will pick be everyones guess.
|
Arana Tellen
Gallente
The Blackguard Wolves
Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 05:20:00 -
[104]
Originally by: Kazuma Saruwatari
 here we go again...
All CCP needs to do is make one of each race's battleships more mission-friendly. Raven's done, Domi could use work, I dont even want to know for the Amarr and Mimmatar.
Black Ops Battleship?! Great, I forsee the covert ops frigate soon becoming extinct...
Yeah why use a simple frigate for scouting? Why not risk a 2 billion isk (at least?) ship 
---------------------------------
Core 2 Duo E4300 1.8ghz @ 3ghz, 2GB Gskill DDR2 5400 @ 667mhh 3-3-3-12, Abit fatality mATX F-I90HD @ 334mhz, 8800GTS 320mb
2x250GB 7200.10s Raid 0, Vista 64 Home. |
Arana Tellen
Gallente
The Blackguard Wolves
Knights Of the Southerncross
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 05:36:00 -
[105]
Originally by: Terex193
Skill req possible on the 2 new t2 bses? Black Ops and the Mish 1
BS V
Jump drive operation (black ops)
Recon ships V (black ops)
HAC V (mission runner BS)
---------------------------------
Core 2 Duo E4300 1.8ghz @ 3ghz, 2GB Gskill DDR2 5400 @ 667mhh 3-3-3-12, Abit fatality mATX F-I90HD @ 334mhz, 8800GTS 320mb
2x250GB 7200.10s Raid 0, Vista 64 Home. |
Bekador
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 05:45:00 -
[106]
Originally by: Arana Tellen
Originally by: Terex193
Skill req possible on the 2 new t2 bses? Black Ops and the Mish 1
BS V
Jump drive operation (black ops)
Recon ships V (black ops)
HAC V (mission runner BS)
Tech 2 ships donŠt require tech 2 ship skills as a prerequisite, so HAC or Recon is very unlikely.
|
Bendit
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 06:24:00 -
[107]
Edited by: Bendit on 31/08/2007 06:25:36
Since I have only flown caldari bs, I can guess the stats will be somewhat like this...
black ops:
Hull: Scorpion
Hig slots: 5
Medium slots: 8
Low slots: 3/4
Weapons will maybe be split like the force recon... Wich would suck. 2 launchers, 2 turrets... meh.
No weapon bonus. So it would hardly be any a solo pew pew ship.
Or maybe CCP will do something completely different \o/
Since no other race have a dedicated EW ship in the bs class.
On the recons they used the T1 bonues. If they have ew on the new ships it will be unbalanced or just simply wrong, since they will need to just "invent" some bonuses for the BS skill..
|
TerrorWOLF
PURE Legion
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 06:30:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Imode
Please god, no more cloaking ships.
Also what in the world is this...
Originally by: "Noah Ward"
The other type of Tech 2 ship we haven't come up with a name yet, but it's going to be like a mission runner battleship. A huge number of our player base are not these big PvPers, they are mission runners for their empire, and you know doing their thing. While the ships will be really good at PvP, they will have things like bigger cargo bays for loot. They will have better locking times, better tracking, a lot of utility slots. Things that if you are a mission runner, what would be your ideal battle ship.
Really good at PVP.
Bigger cargo bays for loot.
Better lockign times.
Better tracking.
A lot of utility slots?
So you're making an uber mission battleship thats basically an I-Win button, but you're expecting people not to use it to pvp because you call it a mission battleship?
Easy can only target NPCs
May Your Death Be Slow And Painful
|
Ishina Fel
Caldari
Synergy.
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 06:37:00 -
[109]
Originally by: Bekador
Tech 2 ships donŠt require tech 2 ship skills as a prerequisite, so HAC or Recon is very unlikely.
Oh? Then I must be mistaken in my belief that HACs require the AF skill on a quite high level 
|
Hiesi
The Ankou
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 06:38:00 -
[110]
if you have it only target npc's, how does that actually fit in with any story of Eve? So they designed a ship that can only target a pirate faction? but not pirates themselves? and not opposing factions? what?
|
Bendit
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 06:48:00 -
[111]
Target only NPC`s will never happen.
But what we can expect from them is maybe something like this?:
-Tier 2 hulls on all of them.
-Add 1 medium or lowslot to them.
-Take away one rig slot.
-Bigger cargobay.
-A small increase in sig resolution. (Not talking instalock here folks, so relax)
- Slight increase in resists. (No hac resists though)
- And since they mentioned better tracking I guess this means tracking for the turretships and explosion velocity/radius for the missiles.
Damagewise they will not give anything extra. They will have a slighly better tank, for what? 10x times the price, maybe more?
NO way it will be a solopwn mobile.
|
UGWidowmaker
Caldari
The Ankou
The Reckoning.
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 06:50:00 -
[112]
the jump portal thing sounds so damn nice.. it will be so funneh ...
OMFG
I am the widowmaker stay tuned.
|
Mastin Dragonfly
Absolutely No Return
The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 07:04:00 -
[113]
Edited by: Mastin Dragonfly on 31/08/2007 07:04:25
Speaking as a dedicated missionrunner I find the whole idea a bit absurd. Missions as they are can be done perfectly fine in the current battleships provided you actually have some SP under your belt. Only thing that a dedicated missionship could improve on is damage output and that is a big a boost for PvP as it is for PvE. And making some 'magical' rules to prevent it from targeting players or disable it to fit certain run-of-the-mill modules is completely unlike EVE.
|
Ranges
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 08:26:00 -
[114]
It seems that PVP vs PVE means;
On Tank
PVP = as many effective HP as possible
PVE = tanking as much DPS as possible
Therefore; make a low HP, middling resist PVE ship with serious repping bonusses to either repaired amount or cap used / cycle
On Gank
PVP = high spike damage or high DPS, damage type may be less relevant than pure DPS
PVE = Damage type specific DPS
Therefore; make a normal DPS, specific damage type PVE ship with (tadaaaaa!) enlarged magazines for the guns. (Sorry Amarr)
On EW
PVP = EW actually works pretty well here. And is important
PVE = the only EW i'd use on missions is a webifier or NOS. Rats dont warp. Rats dont get jammed.
Therefore; add a cycling time penalty to jammers, remote sensor dampeners etc. They're useless in PVE anyway
On Cargospace
PVP = well, one needs ammo. That's about it. :D
PVE = Cargohold can be useful for looting
Therefore; make it a serious cargohold. Some people loot, some people don't. But i doubt anybody would mind having a goodly sized cargohold. (below industrial size to avoid obsoleting those)
On Signature size
PVP = Low signature = life
PVE = If you intend to permatank the damage, why care that they lock you quickly, and never miss?
Therefore; Make a specialized PVE ship have a signature that is several times higher than that of a standar BS (150% of a BS sig?)
On Exploration modules
PVP = Huh!? Hacking module?
PVE = Exploration requires 2 of those things, and missions are nice with a salvager too.
Therefore; Why not add a range / cycle time bonus to the exploration modules for hacking / archaeology / salvaging? It's not like that would be disruptive to PVP...
I think that any of the above could be done without seriously disrupting the PVP experience, and still allowing most flavors of ships in mission running.
Greets,
-Ranges |
Darth Felin
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 08:27:00 -
[115]
Originally by: Imode
Really good at PVP.
Bigger cargo bays for loot.
Better lockign times.
Better tracking.
A lot of utility slots?
So you're making an uber mission battleship thats basically an I-Win button, but you're expecting people not to use it to pvp because you call it a mission battleship?
It is relativly easy to balance it out. Mission BS does not have to have uber dps. Just give it 7-8 highslots but only 5-6 turret/missile slots.
|
Jim McGregor
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 08:31:00 -
[116]
Originally by: Darth Felin
It is relativly easy to balance it out. Mission BS does not have to have uber dps. Just give it 7-8 highslots but only 5-6 turret/missile slots.
We already have that... like the Tempest for example. And as for it not having to have uber dps - why would anyone use it over a ship that HAS uber dps then, like the normal battleships? Because of the larger cargo bay? 
---
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
You're not supposed to feel like you're logging in to a happy, happy, fluffy, fluffy lala land filled with fun and adventures, thats what hello kitty online is for.
|
Azrael Maxim
Flexible Demeanour
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 08:34:00 -
[117]
I cant see the use of mission specific battleships, I would rather like to see command ship bs instead.
Black ops bs sound cool.
|
mallina
Caldari
Sybrite Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 08:46:00 -
[118]
---
Missionrunning BS (Farmathron):
+25% boost to NPC Bounty, Agent Reward and LP Gain per level
25% reduction in chance of being probed per level, with 0% chance at level 5
Special Bonus
+2 Warp Core strength
Balanced Resistances
Unable to mount Warp Scramblers, Microwarpdrives, ECM or Damps.
---
This is what we'll end up with if this goes too far 
|
Sazkyen
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 08:51:00 -
[119]
Yes, Master!!!!
|
Bellum Eternus
Gallente
Blood Corsair's
The Red Skull
|
Posted - 2007.08.31 09:19:00 -
[120]
Originally by: Jim McGregor
Originally by: Darth Felin
It is relativly easy to balance it out. Mission BS does not have to have uber dps. Just give it 7-8 highslots but only 5-6 turret/missile slots.
We already have that... like the Tempest for example. And as for it not having to have uber dps - why would anyone use it over a ship that HAS uber dps then, like the normal battleships? Because of the larger cargo bay?
More cargo = more 800 charges.
[Video]Blood Corsairs - Day One |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |