| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Beta Blue
   |
Posted - 2008.02.19 14:13:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Beta Blue on 19/02/2008 14:16:05
Destroyer Based
4 launchers only (4 Hi's only)
bonuses in velocity and resistance for destroyer lvl's
bonuses in RoF and damage in Torpedo Boat lvl's
similar skill requirements to Indictor to be able to use it.
Crazy idea ?
|
Eleana Tomelac
Gallente
Through the Looking Glass
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 14:24:00 -
[2]
That's kind of heavy bomber, but, there are several things that make it not survivable :
-Destroyer signature are fast to lock
-Torpedoe time to hit is too long, it will be locked before the torp hits and it can recloak
-Destroyer speed sucks, it needs a very big cloaked bonus
Appart from the survivability question, another type of bombers made only to hit very large ships would be welcome.
--
Pocket drone carriers (tm) enthousiast !
Assault Frigates MK II |
Schani Kratnorr
Internal Revenue Service
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 14:51:00 -
[3]
Basically this would be a larger stealth bomber without the cloaking device.
So far we have one class of ships that break the size constraints on weapons, and it is so highrly specialized that it is still not being widely used.
Having flown kestrels with cruise missiles and blackbirds with torpedos back in the day of missiles=win, I dont think the current game mechanics would benefit from going back to "oversizing".
The current trend is to force small weaoins on small ships, medium weapons on medium whips and so on. Larger weapons sizes cannot (generally) hit smaller ships, and smaller weapons dont hurt larger ships as much, this forces variety in fleet composition.
That is, until you reach the two dozen or so combatants. Once that happens, we start seeing group mentality take over, and we're back looking at the fifteen battleship, two interceptors blob again (scale up for caps).
So in short. I dont think breaking the size contrainst for ships helps the overall gameplay.
|
Conrad Rock
Caldari Provisions
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 17:41:00 -
[4]
is the point to have even cheaper empire suiciding ravens?
|
Saul Elsyn
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 17:45:00 -
[5]
lol... That's good.
While I can see the utility of a torpedo boat, this thing isn't a torpedo boat. Too slow, too big, and too heavily armed. It'd be like the S-boat of Torpedo boats. Prey.
Now an interceptor hull with 2 tubes might be an interesting setup.
|
Yamichi Wiggin
Caldari
Rising Knights
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 18:31:00 -
[6]
I'd rather see a cruiser-class ship with a single (maybe a second?) capital weapon. Something on par with battleship cost but able to deal noticeable damage to a capital ship. Allow non-caps to bring a fight to the capitals. Would also allow for an easier time of killing high-sec POSs.
Probably overpowered but who knows.
------
Pain is weakness leaving the body.
There is no love in fear |
Beta Blue
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 19:22:00 -
[7]
ok so still destroyer (Indictor) based but destroyer lvl bonus to velocity and signature.Say 10% velocity and -5% signature
But give the ship the same signature as a Assault Frigate to start with.
Torpedo boat skill per lvl - Say -10% Rof and 5% damage.
is that idea any better ?
and no cloak thats what Stealth Bombers are for, this is more a fleet or mission support ship
|
Lar Dredd
|
Posted - 2008.02.19 19:37:00 -
[8]
ooooh what range can I sit off a gate camp and snipe torps at them  now that would be cool
|
Random koala
|
Posted - 2008.02.20 17:39:00 -
[9]
I suggested this idea few weeks back, i like it, but i think a frigate size would be good, hit and run ship. But it would have limited capacity.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |