| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
MIrple
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
16
   |
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:17:00 -
[31] - Quote
I am seeing a lot of confusion with the bomb launchers on this ship. Would a new Module make people less fearful of exploites of this ship. The Module would be called an Anti Capital Launcher. This would require a new skill of Anti Calital Launcher and would require Bomb launcher V for it. This would be able to hold a new Charge call a RPC or rocket propelled charge. This would have tracking capabilities but would not be able to lock onto anything sub capital. The charge would be invented from bomb BPC's so it is a T2 weapon. Basically Someone tinkered with a standard bomb made the explosive a shape charge to focus all the damage of the weapon into a small pinpoint area. I would think a max range on this bomb would be 20km and they travel at a speed of 750m/s so if there are frigates or destroyers in fleet they would be able to target and destroy these before they hit the capital ship. I think that each of these should do around 200~250k each. That would put 100 of these bombers at 50 million Damage per run. Please read this and let me know if this is a better approach then just having bomb launchers. Also please put any Ideas or changes you would make to this ship so we can refine and solidify this more. Thanks |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy
Caldari State
1
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 20:13:00 -
[32] - Quote
I like the anti cap bomber idea, put some fear into those titan pilots, however dessys are really really squishy. it jsut makes me wonder about a 20 km range weapon with supers having ~ 7km/7.5 sec smartbombs with the supercap volume diameter thats a pretty huge amount of space that it hits. it would be an interisting fight though
Oh and i still want my AEGIS Destroyers. scan for cloakys in the old school probe formats. active ping scans, (hmm... active ping shows cloaky types+name on scanner shows a AU range. also makes you warpable like a cyno, the scanner not the cloaky)
something anything would be fun. |
SPYDER245
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:25:00 -
[33] - Quote
First, let's make caps/supercaps almost unable to lock and destroy subcap targets. Then, make a cheap subcap ship that can destroy a capital/supercapital.
Why not remove the caps/supercaps altogether ?
If you want a good weapon against a supertank, spend a similar amount of isk and bring your own supercannon. Dont ask for a wooden arrow with a 500 megatones nuke head. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
17
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:28:00 -
[34] - Quote
Your logic about bring the same ship to kill the same ship is already been counted as dumb. Just because I propose a ship that would make people have to have support ships for there Capital fleets. I am sorry that your I win button is no longer valid. |
SPYDER245
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:35:00 -
[35] - Quote
MIrple wrote:Your logic about bring the same ship to kill the same ship is already been counted as dumb. Just because I propose a ship that would make people have to have support ships for there Capital fleets. I am sorry that your I win button is no longer valid.
Hmmmm... when ? I meant same amount of isk. If you want to take down a fleet, bring your own fleet - this was EVE's logic since the invention of T2s. Having a superbomb that can destroy entire fleets of supercaps and their escorts reduces any fight to something like whoever-fires-first-wins. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
17
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:40:00 -
[36] - Quote
MIrple wrote:I am seeing a lot of confusion with the bomb launchers on this ship. Would a new Module make people less fearful of exploites of this ship. The Module would be called an Anti Capital Launcher. This would require a new skill of Anti Calital Launcher and would require Bomb launcher V for it. This would be able to hold a new Charge call a RPC or rocket propelled charge. This would have tracking capabilities but would not be able to lock onto anything sub capital. The charge would be invented from bomb BPC's so it is a T2 weapon. Basically Someone tinkered with a standard bomb made the explosive a shape charge to focus all the damage of the weapon into a small pinpoint area. I would think a max range on this bomb would be 20km and they travel at a speed of 750m/s so if there are frigates or destroyers in fleet they would be able to target and destroy these before they hit the capital ship. I think that each of these should do around 200~250k each. That would put 100 of these bombers at 50 million Damage per run. Please read this and let me know if this is a better approach then just having bomb launchers. Also please put any Ideas or changes you would make to this ship so we can refine and solidify this more. Thanks
Please read this and explain how this ship would take down entire fleets of caps and subcaps |
SPYDER245
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 15:52:00 -
[37] - Quote
Please bring down your tone a notch - i am not trying to offend you so please return the favor; we are merely discussing an idea, please try and do it in a mature way.
Now, can anywhere in eve a single ship ( or 2 or 3 or 4 or 5 ) take down a ship 2 classes up their size ( obviously, assuming its pilot was experienced enough to know how to fit it properly ) ? I.e. 2-5 frigs taking down a BS or 2-5 cruisers a capital or 2-5 BS a supercap. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
17
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:12:00 -
[38] - Quote
Yes I have seen 3 to 4 frigs take out a BS, and also what you are saying is that Freighters shouldn't be kill able by anything other then BS's? What your saying is flawed in game dynamics. I also stated that the way the ship would work is you would need many of these to kill a Capital not the 3~4 you stated please read all of the forum post before responding with this is OP. I am not trying to attack you but I feel you read the top post and then immediately commented on this tread. |
SPYDER245
Black Wormholes of Apocrypha
TOGETHER WE STAND
0
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:44:00 -
[39] - Quote
MIrple wrote:Yes I have seen 3 to 4 frigs take out a BS, and also what you are saying is that Freighters shouldn't be kill able by anything other then BS's? What your saying is flawed in game dynamics. I also stated that the way the ship would work is you would need many of these to kill a Capital not the 3~4 you stated please read all of the forum post before responding with this is OP. I am not trying to attack you but I feel you read the top post and then immediately commented on this tread.
Freighters and industrial ships are non-pvp so they dont get into this discussion.
I admit i am guilty of not readin the entire thread, just the edited first post. Now i have read it all. I have the following comments :
You say one of these ships can fit 2 launchers and both can do 250k damage in one run, so 500k damage for a ship. One decently fitted archon has somewhere between 175k and 200k armor, and at least one tank type under 90%, so one of these bombers can take down one quarter of its armor in one run. 5 ships can destroy it without problems. Maybe with overheating, boosters and gang bonuses a capital could still be standing against 7-8 bombers which are a 50 times cheaper ship.
Also, you argued against using un-nerfed dreads against supers stating that you want "a cheaper ship". Please take in account that a dread is already almost 60-70 times cheaper than a titan.
|
MIrple
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
18
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 16:50:00 -
[40] - Quote
Thanks for the positive feedback on this would making the Explosion Radius larger so that Dreads and Carriers wouldn't receive full damage. But full damage would still apply to Supers and Titans. I understand what you are saying about dreads I am just trying to propose an idea that would make it suicidal for alliances to field fleets of capital without sub cap support. |
MIrple
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
20
|
Posted - 2012.03.19 20:15:00 -
[41] - Quote
Bump even if this never makes it into the game would like more talk about this for my own help on making a post flesh out so my next idea well thought out before i post it. |
Reaver Glitterstim
Resurrected Darkness
45
|
Posted - 2012.03.19 20:44:00 -
[42] - Quote
I think the current stealth bomber already is a destroyer. Lets consider the facts:
destroyer base velocity is around 255m/s, and stealth bomber base velocity is around 265m/s
they both cause a lot of damage but are relatively fragile
Now just increase its sig radius along with increasing its HP to match, and bam! it's a destroyer.
Whether it's making a heavy bomber, declaring the current bomber a destroyer, or something entirely different, I am in favor of implementing more tech 2 destroyers.
-á"The Mittani: Hated By Badposters
i'm strangely comfortable with it"
-Mittens |
MIrple
BSC LEGION
Tactical Narcotics Team
25
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 20:05:00 -
[43] - Quote
I just dont want to let it die. I am a paying sub so CCP do what I say cause thats the way it works right? Trolls welcome |
Rrama Ratamnim
Phoenix Evolved Part Duo
1
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 20:44:00 -
[44] - Quote
very slick idea |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc
Mordus Angels
240
|
Posted - 2012.04.25 20:59:00 -
[45] - Quote
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:I think the current stealth bomber already is a destroyer.
Eh? I missed seeing this when it was posted originally....
No, it's a frigate.
Each race has only one T1 and one T2 destroyer ATM.
I think adding more types of destroyers would increase small scale PvP, as they could become the big fish in that small pond. |
Morgan Dinn
The 20th Legion
Mildly Sober
0
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 10:20:00 -
[46] - Quote
Verry interesting idea and should be useful also but at the way it is presented it would be waay too overpowered.
Needs tweaking. But I'm giving a +1 still for this. New ships are always a cool thing. |
Mike Whiite
Progressive State
State Section 9
42
|
Posted - 2012.04.26 12:14:00 -
[47] - Quote
maybe it's more a thing, for a T2 Battlecruiser, maybe a T2 version of the tier 3 ships
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |