EVE Search - Non-bomber T2 Destroyer Discussion

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Non-bomber T2 Destroyer Discussion

» 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)
Nomistrav Plague Riders 0	Posted - 2012.02.23 14:47:00 - [1] - Quote Yes. It's another one; but I'd like to bring a previous proposal back into the spotlight as an alternative example. The premise was destroyer that would actively engage Interceptors; and personally that sounds like a lot more useful of a ship than a Heavy Bomber which would be used to potentially engage large targets (which is why we have Stealth Bombers to begin with). There's a lot of debate about whether or not a Heavy Bomber would render the Stealth Bomber obsolete and with the way things look, it would. It may lack the capability to cloak but inevitably it's role is already present. It's an unnecessary ship that fields more firepower than it's counter-part, in essence: The Noctis of the Marauders. When looking at modern naval warfare as an example; an Escort Destroyer serves the role of safe-guarding larger ships from Frigates and Corvettes. It's a powerhouse, a vanguard, a sentinel, everything it needs to be in order to keep the operations of the fleet in motion without being pestered by lesser threats. In the case of Eve Online you can have a large fleet in motion and it will have Interceptors (at times) to play the tackle role where Interdictors/Heavy Interdictors fail to keep the battle in the fleet's favor. An excellent example of an Interceptor's job is to hold Tech-Three's with their unique Interdiction Nullifier. With this in mind the Escort Destroyer should favor a set of specialized features: Resistances similar to that of Assault Ships/Heavy Assault Ships. Increased HP Values, rather than reduced values such as the Interdictor; putting the T1 Destroyer as the middle-ground. Increased weapon specializations based on race. It seems rather pointless to attach rocket and missile bonuses to the Heretic when it's T1 counter-part focuses entirely on lasers. Guns should have higher tracking and longer ranges for engaging distant, fast-moving targets. Balancing. The Flycatcher has a 3% missile effectiveness bonus against fast-moving targets; making it unique in the Interdictor class (just as an example) Keeping the optimal range bonus of the destroyers was previously proposed for this ship type; and it's a sound idea. Feel free to discuss, suggest ideas, etc. Let's try to get the attention of CCP on this by giving an ideal proposal without much work on their end.
Velicitia Open Designs 654	Posted - 2012.02.23 15:10:00 - [2] - Quote This could work out pretty well, I think. Make them stupidly slow for their size (I'm thinking BC speeds here) so they can't step on too many toes (frigs are already a bit touchy), but then get range (or tracking or targeting res or some combination of these) bonuses in order to allow them to fulfill the "keep the big guns 'safe' from inties/SBs" role.
MIrple BSC LEGION Tactical Narcotics Team 3	Posted - 2012.02.23 15:20:00 - [3] - Quote The Speed reduction could be because of the heavy tank they field. I agree they should be slow so they are not used in ways unintended like nano hi tracking gangs. Let them warp fast say 6 AU have a quick align time but a slow base speed say 100 m/s. I am all for new T2 Destroyers in any fashion.
mxzf Shovel Bros 738	Posted - 2012.02.23 15:21:00 - [4] - Quote Why is this needed? What hole in Eve are you proposing this fill? How would it fill it? And how is it the best solution possible to the 'problem' that exists in the game without this ship? Adding in new ships just because it would be cool or because people want new hulls is never a good idea, hulls should have an important role to fill before they even hit the drawing board.
Velicitia Open Designs 655	Posted - 2012.02.23 16:00:00 - [5] - Quote mxzf wrote: Why is this needed? What hole in Eve are you proposing this fill? How would it fill it? And how is it the best solution possible to the 'problem' that exists in the game without this ship? Adding in new ships just because it would be cool or because people want new hulls is never a good idea, hulls should have an important role to fill before they even hit the drawing board. Pretty much, it seems that the role is "really slow, decently tanked dessie that makes 'ceptor and SB pilots think twice about a run". The ship would fill this with tracking or range or scan res (etc) bonuses so that it can catch 'ceptors/SBs In some sense, it's about as "needed" as the Noctis was. Using a dessie for this isn't impossible (or impractical), but a more specialised/tanked ship would help out, since in a mixed subcap fleet, a dessie would pop before being able to do anything... Currently, the only real counters to Interceptors are neuts (that I know of, I'm hardly ~elite~ at pvp)... and they can pretty easily fit a long point and be out of range of a neut. I suppose that "just use an interceptor" could also work, but that usually seems to be a bad way of going about things (see: supers).
Danika Princip Freelance Economics Astrological resources Tactical Narcotics Team 235	Posted - 2012.02.23 17:30:00 - [6] - Quote This is now a 'what t2 destroyers do you think could be amusing' thread. How about a smartbomb destroyer? High resist to it's racial damagetype, enough highs to inconvenience missiles and drones, and capable of screening a fleet from an opposing fleet. Could be amusing to sic a swarm of these things on, say, an Ihub crawling with fighter bombers.
Velicitia Open Designs 659	Posted - 2012.02.23 17:38:00 - [7] - Quote and here I was hoping to illicit a decent conversation from mxzf
Monty Kvaran Criminal Intentions En Garde 25	Posted - 2012.02.23 18:00:00 - [8] - Quote Counter to an interceptor is any recon, or a large faction e-neut, or another interceptor, or a dramiel, or a cynabal, or an Assault Frigate. (Plenty more counters if the ceptor is planning to dps and not just tackle) Interceptors don't need more counters.
mxzf Shovel Bros 738	Posted - 2012.02.23 18:10:00 - [9] - Quote Velicitia wrote: "really slow, decently tanked dessie that makes 'ceptor and SB pilots think twice about a run" Why not simply use a Caracal or something like that? It sounds like this proposed ship is simply duplicating a role that existing ships can already fill. And the Noctis vs Destroyer example is a somewhat poor one. The Noctis was a non-combat ship that was added to fill a role that wasn't truely filled; destroyers were shoehorned into that role at the time because they were fairly weak in combat and cheap to turn into a salvager. Before the Noctis, there really wasn't a dedicated salvaging ship, there was just something that was jury-rigged to fill the role.
Velicitia Open Designs 661	Posted - 2012.02.23 18:14:00 - [10] - Quote mxzf wrote: Velicitia wrote: "really slow, decently tanked dessie that makes 'ceptor and SB pilots think twice about a run" Why not simply use a Caracal or something like that? It sounds like this proposed ship is simply duplicating a role that existing ships can already fill. And the Noctis vs Destroyer example is a somewhat poor one. The Noctis was a non-combat ship that was added to fill a role that wasn't truely filled; destroyers were shoehorned into that role at the time because they were fairly weak in combat and cheap to turn into a salvager. Before the Noctis, there really wasn't a dedicated salvaging ship, there was just something that was jury-rigged to fill the role. so, we should remove Minmatar then? I see what you're saying though insofar as "cruiser with small guns/missiles"... though they still have trouble with locking frigs, no? Seriously, unless it comes equipped with mining lasers or a 900k m3 cargohold ... i'm not well versed in it.
mxzf Shovel Bros 738	Posted - 2012.02.23 18:26:00 - [11] - Quote Velicitia wrote: though they still have trouble with locking frigs, no? Not really. Any ship can lock any other ship, the only thing that changes is the locking time. A Caracal can lock an Interceptor with a MWD (even with Interceptors 5) in 5 seconds, more like 4 with a SeBo fit. Destroyers take about half as long to lock (due to higher scan res), but that doesn't make much of a difference in actual combat situations, since both ships require the Inty pilot to stick around for long enough to get a Scram+web on it due to their low speed. There's also the fact that designing a ship to engage a specific class of ship, especially one that is so much faster and better at evading, will simply guarantee that no one engages it. In the current game, an Interceptor pilot can say "Ooh, hopefully that Caracal is HML or HAM fit and it'll be an easy kill, it's worth a try", with the proposed ship the Interceptor pilot will know "I'd better not go anywhere near that ship, because I'll DIAF for sure".
Velicitia Open Designs 661	Posted - 2012.02.23 18:36:00 - [12] - Quote mxzf wrote: Any ship can lock any other ship Yeah ... I'm more used to the "locking (wait) ... still locking... (wait some more) ... boom, in a pod" mining barge style of things . Or I'm in a frigate trying to be ~elite~ at tackling (and subsequently, DIAF). On the same token though, in T1 land you have that anyway... Frigs will nearly always DIAF to dessies Dessies will nearly always DIAF to cruisers/BC Cruisers will nearly always DIAF to BC BC will nearly always DIAF to BS BS will nearly always DIAF to (groups of) Frigs T2 doesn't really have a progression like that ... or at least one that isn't apparent to me Frigs -> Assault Frigs, Interceptors, Bombers, Cov Ops Dessies -> Dictors Cruisers -> HIC, HAC, Recons Battlecruisers -> Command Ships BS -> Marauders
Nomistrav Plague Riders 0	Posted - 2012.02.24 05:23:00 - [13] - Quote Why is this needed? It is needed because as previously stated, Interceptor's have no real counter besides drones; and in a heavy fleet-battle (exceeding the double-digits) drones are impractical. You want something that doesn't depend on autonomous X's flying toward a target they're more than likely not even going to be able to catch. Unless, you know, they implement Warp Scrambler Drones, which I'm completely 100% **ing opposed to. What hole in Eve are you proposing this fill? The hole to fill is a variety of things. As stated above, something to make those fast tacklers have to work a little harder to fulfill their job rather than having free range once they're under the Fleet's optimal range. It fills an issue of variety; the Rock/Paper/Scissors manner that fleet battles always become, but in this case it's HAC/Drake/Battleship (logistics aside); with your capital fleets being thrown in there for the 's and giggles as we all know. It would also give Faction Warfare a new taste as ships up to Battlecruisers are usually the flavor of FW. How would it fill it? How we would fill this is by designing a T2 Destroyer based on what we already know and what we know that we need. Something to fulfill a role that no other ship has, based on technology that is already available (to comment on you're "new hull" thing it's not a new hull at all; just a different skin if anything) with little to no work on the development end. Just assigning numbers and a bit of touch-and-go from the art department. The most work CCP would have to do is balancing them all out with everything that's already available. And how is it the best solution possible to the 'problem' that exists in the game without this ship? I don't understand this question. How about a smartbomb destroyer? No. My experience with Smartbombs were only used in two instances: Once to ignite a carebear mining fleet in high-sec when I thought my security status was getting too high, and a few times when I was part of the Initiative/AAA war and the Drake-storm was getting stupid so we used Smartbombs to kill the missiles before they could hit us. In that instance, smartbombs cause damage to friendly ships which is -bad- and to top it off even further a Destroyer would simply not be able to catch up to an Interceptor; and would never be able to engage a (smart) stealth-bomber within range of said smartbombs. This would just turn into a one-time use thing which, as you said, would be used for Fighter-Bombers and it would be rather ineffective at that as any legitimate capital pilot would know it's exact purpose just by looking at the ship name and sick something on it in a heartbeat. And the Noctis vs Destroyer example is a somewhat poor one. The allegory was Noctis vs Marauders as some of the player-base was a little peeved that the Noctis took away one of the Marauder's traits of actively tractoring/salvaging from a distance. In conclusion, this ship would also fill a role that -will be needed- in the future as anyone paying attention the CSM Reports may have noticed that EWAR Frigates may very well be able to use their EWAR against Capital Ships; which is the theoretical proposed method of both bringing them back into fleet fights and bringing the Capital Fest down a bit. I can't confirm the validity of this, or confirm that it will be put into play, just that if it were this ship would probably be a welcomed asset on the field in that case. Yes. Any ship can counter an Interceptor in the right conditions, but good Interceptor pilots are known for their tenacity and integrity against these ships and there is not a specialized role in taking them down. An Assault Frigate is designed to be hardier than it's T1 counter-part, a Heavy Assault Ship is the same way. A Command Ship is most definitely hardier than it's T1 comparison, but the Interdictor is by all rights weaker than a Destroyer. It serves a purpose in -gang- warfare, but it's completely overshadowed by Heavy Interdictors which are brick tanked. Both of which serve a purpose, keeping the enemy in the field as to prolong the engagement on -your terms-. An Interceptor can just burn out of their bubble and take off if ** gets thick; blindly defending them with "any ship can counter them" may hold, but it has to be in the right conditions.
Bubanni SniggWaffe EVE Corporation 123566322353 90	Posted - 2012.02.24 07:29:00 - [14] - Quote an anti-interceptor concept is nice... there plenty of other ships that can do that... but they would lack what im proposeing now... High tracking, very low dps (frigate level) very long range... 30km+ even with (should be like 20ish km for shortest as in blasters) Idea is that it wont be able to instapop the interceptors, but simply be able to hit it with ease while it's within range. i'm thinking something like 50-100 dps max, as even that would be able to kill intercepters (specially if you have more than 2 of these), but the gimped dps, and lack of other abilities would make it a choice of bringing this over something more useful like a rapier that could just simply stop the interceptor from running or even dareing coming close.
Nomistrav Plague Riders 0	Posted - 2012.02.24 07:32:00 - [15] - Quote Bubanni wrote: an anti-interceptor concept is nice... there plenty of other ships that can do that... but they would lack what im proposeing now... High tracking, very low dps (frigate level) very long range... 30km+ even with (should be like 20ish km for shortest as in blasters) Idea is that it wont be able to instapop the interceptors, but simply be able to hit it with ease while it's within range. i'm thinking something like 50-100 dps max, as even that would be able to kill intercepters (specially if you have more than 2 of these), but the gimped dps, and lack of other abilities would make it a choice of bringing this over something more useful like a rapier that could just simply stop the interceptor from running or even dareing coming close. Wouldn't even be able to hold it's own once it drops beneath 30km, in-fact, what you just described is a Destroyer.
Bubanni SniggWaffe EVE Corporation 123566322353 94	Posted - 2012.02.24 09:59:00 - [16] - Quote Nomistrav wrote: Bubanni wrote: an anti-interceptor concept is nice... there plenty of other ships that can do that... but they would lack what im proposeing now... High tracking, very low dps (frigate level) very long range... 30km+ even with (should be like 20ish km for shortest as in blasters) Idea is that it wont be able to instapop the interceptors, but simply be able to hit it with ease while it's within range. i'm thinking something like 50-100 dps max, as even that would be able to kill intercepters (specially if you have more than 2 of these), but the gimped dps, and lack of other abilities would make it a choice of bringing this over something more useful like a rapier that could just simply stop the interceptor from running or even dareing coming close. Wouldn't even be able to hold it's own once it drops beneath 30km, in-fact, what you just described is a Destroyer. Oh indeed, yes I did, just one with more range, less dps and much more tracking... it's not suppose to hold it's own, it would be designed only for fleets as support to stop interceptors
Thutmose I Tiger Knights Epsilon Shimmy Alliance 0	Posted - 2012.02.24 10:58:00 - [17] - Quote Bubanni wrote: an anti-interceptor concept is nice... there plenty of other ships that can do that... but they would lack what im proposeing now... High tracking, very low dps (frigate level) very long range... 30km+ even with (should be like 20ish km for shortest as in blasters) Idea is that it wont be able to instapop the interceptors, but simply be able to hit it with ease while it's within range. i'm thinking something like 50-100 dps max, as even that would be able to kill intercepters (specially if you have more than 2 of these), but the gimped dps, and lack of other abilities would make it a choice of bringing this over something more useful like a rapier that could just simply stop the interceptor from running or even dareing coming close. Can't a SML flycatcher already do everything required here? 60km range, 50-100dps, low lock time.
Spugg Galdon Mak Mining Corp 106	Posted - 2012.02.24 11:27:00 - [18] - Quote There is a side note to this proposal though. This T2 dessie would be able to fly "fighter cover" for cap ships. Popping all the fighter bombers/fighters really fast and being a general PITA to SC's. It's role is already kind of filled by the current T1 dessies but they are a little lame at it.
Nomistrav Plague Riders 0	Posted - 2012.02.24 12:33:00 - [19] - Quote Bubanni wrote: Nomistrav wrote: Bubanni wrote: an anti-interceptor concept is nice... there plenty of other ships that can do that... but they would lack what im proposeing now... High tracking, very low dps (frigate level) very long range... 30km+ even with (should be like 20ish km for shortest as in blasters) Idea is that it wont be able to instapop the interceptors, but simply be able to hit it with ease while it's within range. i'm thinking something like 50-100 dps max, as even that would be able to kill intercepters (specially if you have more than 2 of these), but the gimped dps, and lack of other abilities would make it a choice of bringing this over something more useful like a rapier that could just simply stop the interceptor from running or even dareing coming close. Wouldn't even be able to hold it's own once it drops beneath 30km, in-fact, what you just described is a Destroyer. Oh indeed, yes I did, just one with more range, less dps and much more tracking... it's not suppose to hold it's own, it would be designed only for fleets as support to stop interceptors I dunno about it having more range; Destroyers already have a +50 role bonus to optimal range which puts hybrid Railguns at a base range of 22km and a maximum of 38km round-abouts with all skills at level five. 30km, as your proposal, would limit the T1 variant. Further more, using 150mm Railguns with Spike ammunition, the gun range well exceeds it's maximum targeting range at a 48km optimal with an 8km falloff. Maximum DPS would be set anywhere from 75-120 depending on the user and that's a regular Catalyst. Your proposal seems to nerf the T2 variant far beyond what the T1 is already capable of; this thread is to buff it not... well... destroy it, no pun intended.. I like the idea of the ship being a fighter/fighter-bomber counter. Have a squad of them and I'd imagine they could wreck the drones enough to be a nuisance that would wind up getting Primaried, granting the fleet a bit more time to turn the tide in their favor. Nice proposal there. Point is: Destroyers are not even good Glass Cannons, they're Paper-thin in all honesty. It's nigh impossible to tank them so you have to focus on DPS tanking and they're not even all that great at it. A T1 Rifter could eat them alive as is. We need to make proposals to revive this ship class and warrant CCP's attention.
Meditril T.R.I.A.D 24	Posted - 2012.02.24 18:33:00 - [20] - Quote The destroyer you are talking about is already existing and it is called Flycatcher. It shoots easily up to 50 km and it has a bonus which eases killing fast, low signature targets. What else do you need?
Nova Fox Novafox Shipyards 3283	Posted - 2012.02.24 19:52:00 - [21] - Quote Nerf the fly catcher, buff light interdictors in other ways, give the new tier of destroyers to take the role the flycatcher doesnt desevre. Say hello to new flycatcher's cousin without the bonus involving sphere launching. Create a modify buff a reaver system that turns the table around, for frigates to fit to counter the new destroyer but they lose thier original good functions. Pointing to one ship or dozens of not normally manufactured ships is not a good reason not to have a competing class. Nova Fox Shipyards Inventory
Nomistrav Plague Riders 2	Posted - 2012.02.25 02:55:00 - [22] - Quote The destroyer you are talking about is already existing and it is called Flycatcher. It shoots easily up to 50 km and it has a bonus which eases killing fast, low signature targets. What else do you need? I had mentioned this earlier as the Flycatcher is unique in it's class by being more efficient against targets that are fast moving. No other interdictor has this bonus, and their focus is on weapons not associated to their race (rockets/missiles). Yes, it already exists. No, it is not balanced in a game almost entirely about balance. -All- interdictors should have the same, or similar bonuses applied to their respective ships.
Meditril T.R.I.A.D 24	Posted - 2012.02.25 06:10:00 - [23] - Quote I tend to disagree. First, the Flycatcher is perfectly Inline with Caldari Missile doctreen. Second, different bonuses and capabilities between different races add spice to this game.

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.