EVE Search - Second T2 Destroyer

All Channels

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Second T2 Destroyer

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.08.27 10:15:00 - [1] I'd like to see are real T2 destroyer for each race. The tech 1 versions are ok for what they do, but lets face it, they are tech 1. The T2 interdictor is a good ship for the job it does, but it's NOT a destroyer. I'd like to see a T2 version that really is a gunboat. We get 2 types of T2 interceptor based on the same hull. We get 2 types of covert ops based on different hulls (cov ops / stealth bomber). Why not 2 types of T2 destroyer based on the same hull? Interdictor and Gunship.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.08.30 02:16:00 - [2] Destroyers are to frigates what battle cruisers are to cruisers. Medium guns wouldn't really fit the idea. Done right a T2 destroyer should be able to take on T1 cruisers.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.09.01 14:02:00 - [3] Originally by: Ezekiel Amann Excellent Idea. Thanks, glad you agree.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.09.07 02:23:00 - [4] THIS is what a t2 destroyer should be.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.09.08 11:32:00 - [5] Originally by: Taniel these would definitely be able to take a t1 cruiser because you can already do that w/ a assault frig if you have good enough skills and choose your fights wisely I suppose a T2 destroyer should at least have a chance to take on a T1 cruiser. That's not really what I'm looking for though.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.09.14 17:40:00 - [6] I'd like a T2 verion of the T1 destoryers please. Why does everyone try to pervert the ship class?
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.09.15 17:41:00 - [7] Originally by: Typhado3 t2 does not mean better it means it specialises in something. what would this destroyer specialise in that makes it different from the t1 version. How about it specializes not dying in a matter of seconds? I don't think the destroyers in game are underpowered, but they definately aren't T2. Even with maxed skills, they have a hard time keeping up. How about some extra hp, cpu, and powergrid? An extra mid or low slot. Some resistances. Maybe a skill based reduction in ROF penalty. I'd like a T2 COMBAT version. We have Assualt Ships, Heavy Assault Ships (no such thing as a HAC), and Command Ships. While I'm not in favor of creating a BS with these types of resists, why is the the only T2 destroyer not a destroyer? Taken directly from the in game description: "Interdictors are destroyer-sized vessels built to fill a single important tactical niche..." I can recall when frigates feared destroyers. Not so much anymore with all the T2 versions out there.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.10.08 13:10:00 - [8] I'd still like a real T2 destroyer please.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.10.16 05:55:00 - [9] Originally by: Anubis Kerberos I'm gonna go ahead and say that they should make the T2 Destroyer the oft-asked for "Heavy Bomber." Torpedo's might be too much, but the ability to fit 2-4 bomb launchers would be pretty friggin' sweet.... Nope. Everyone and thier brother wants to use the destroyer hull as the catch all bastard ship for whatever idea they think needs to be added to eve. I say go pawn your garbage off on the cruisers. We still don't have a real T2 destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2008.12.31 09:01:00 - [10] I's still like an actually t2 Destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.05 15:57:00 - [11] I thank you for the bump, but I'm not looking for a "heavy bomber", an "anti stealth ship", or any other bastardized idea people keep tryin to force on the destroyer class. I'd like an honest t2 destroyer. IE a gunship with some hp and resists.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.07 23:46:00 - [12] Originally by: Alpha Wolfgang i definatly sign this... frigates are overpowered... theyre pesky, we need some real frigate killing destroyers. thats it. frigate killing. they specialize in killing frigates... did i mention they specialize in KILLING FRIGATES. ok, the next t2 destroyers should KILL FRIGATES ONLY, thats all, nothing fancy. live longer and kill frigs. doesnt sound like much to ask. See? This guy here know's what I'm talkin about.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.09 08:28:00 - [13] Originally by: Kenraz Silvinte Originally by: Torothanax Destroyers are to frigates what battle cruisers are to cruisers. Medium guns wouldn't really fit the idea. Done right a T2 destroyer should be able to take on T1 cruisers. Little FYI from a long time Dictor Pilot. A Flycatcher; Formerly known as the king of dictors, can throw enough DPS at 30 km to pop a cruiser in under 3 minutes. I've done it a number of times... I prefer the Sabre, but there's nothing wrong with the Flycatcher. I still want a real T2 destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.18 02:56:00 - [14] Still waitin for a real T2 destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.18 03:26:00 - [15] Edited by: Torothanax on 18/01/2009 03:33:34 I'm actually not looking for more damage, just better resists and/or more HP, maybe an extra slot or some power grid. The T1 versions just don't hold up in pvp long enough to be useful.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.21 07:57:00 - [16] Originally by: Shaka Quatuic Originally by: Torothanax Edited by: Torothanax on 18/01/2009 03:33:34 I'm actually not looking for more damage, just better resists and/or more HP, maybe an extra slot or some power grid. The T1 versions just don't hold up in pvp long enough to be useful. hey Toro!!! long time no see! I gotta agree here... we dont need an uber destroyer - we need one that can survive in PvP for more than 3 seconds. Hello Shaka, good to see ya. Glad to see you agree as well . And thanks to everyone for the feed back so far.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.23 04:54:00 - [17] Destroyers need love. Real destroyers that is.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.23 14:54:00 - [18] Originally by: Kessiaan I really can't see a role for a T2 combat destroyer - I can't see how any ship that tries to straddle being halfway between an AF and a HAC would ever work - it'd still have a huge sig radius for what it is, and it would still be underpowered compared to a cruiser (which can hit it for full damage). If you want a ship that can shred AFs and inties well-flown T1 destroyers can do that already. It's role would be what it's always been: Destroyers - Anti-frigate gunboats. The middle ground between a frigate and a cruiser. Since the speed changes, t2 frigates have become the ships of choice for small scale pvp. Nothin wrong with that but... T1 destroyers used to handily take out 'ceptors and AS's. While it's still possible, not so much the case anymore. Not to mention if a cruiser so much as looks at a destroyer, it's dead. So again I say destroyers need looking at, and I'd still like a t2 version with resists/hp/pg/slots to match.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.01.27 01:55:00 - [19] Bump for a better destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.02.08 13:00:00 - [20] We need a better destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.02.09 21:17:00 - [21] Did I mention I like destroyes?
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.02.25 02:46:00 - [22] Edited by: Torothanax on 25/02/2009 02:47:08 Originally by: libertarian cole Originally by: Torothanax Did I mention I like destroyers? There have been plenty of good ideas. What other bonuses could you give to a destroyer to help it kill frigates? The cat has: Destroyer Skill Bonus: 10% Bonus to Small Hybrid Turret tracking speed and 10% bonus to Small Hybrid Turret falloff per level Penalty: -25% rate of fire for all turrets Bonus: 50% bonus to optimal range for small hybrid turrets It is given both the range and DPS to be a pain in the ass to frigates. What else do you want? Some more hp would be cool. Maybe some resists. Another slot. Some PG/cpu. Ya know, the stuff other T2 ships get. As for bonuses, since most t2 ships have 3 or 4, maybe drop the -25% rate of fire. Or reduce it by 2-5% per lvl.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.02.26 06:26:00 - [23] Originally by: arbiter reformed give it a sig rad reduction bonus and the same 7 slot gun / cool too see caldari have 7 missiles. tank bonus and t2 resists and lots of speed (basicly bring back nano) A sig reduction bonuse might be cool. Destroyers are gun boats though. I'd like to see a T2 version stay true to the idea of the T1 destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.03.20 15:20:00 - [24] I'd still like a real T2 destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.03.29 06:54:00 - [25] Did I mention I'd like a real T2 destroyer? I really would.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.05.10 07:06:00 - [26] We need a t2 destroyer that can hold up on today's battle field. The t1 hulls fold too quickly in real combat.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.05.15 09:01:00 - [27] I'm likin some of the idea's I'm seein here. Others not so much, but I'm kind of a purist. Lets keep the ideas going.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.05.22 06:27:00 - [28] Edited by: Torothanax on 22/05/2009 06:29:51 Originally by: Bibbleibble If we take the destroyer from my thread, you will see that with a similar penalty to rof(damage is better otherwise there is a massive alpha strike) 8 missile slots will actually deal less damage than 8 turret slots on a destroyer. I really do advise anyone who is interested in improving destroyers now, has a look, as there are ideas there by both me and others that would really help with destroyers and their problems. As I see it, there should be a similar level of descision between flying a AF and a destroyer as there is between flying a HAC and a BC. You should have the option of trading speed, sig rad and resists for raw HP and DPS. Which is unfortunately not the case at the moment, as you have shown by the AF V destroyer situation. I'd appreciate it if you'd stop hi-jacking my thread. The topic is "True T2 destoryers". If it doesn't have a gun related role bonus, it isn't a destroyer. Go peddle your missile whatever it is somewhere else.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.05.24 06:33:00 - [29] Originally by: Galen Gallente I would like to see a T2 Destroyer that would be like the Skipray Blastboat from the old Star Wars d6 system by west end games. Slightly larger than an X-Wing or C. Corvette (Millennium Falcon) but packed 1 or 2 Capitol (Imperial Start Destroyer) scale weapons. Give it about 3 high slots only 1 or 2 of which are turrets. Give it a gigantic cap and power grid for the powerful weaponry. Now in Eve terms it would be a frigate/destroyer signature ship that was highly manuverable but could fit 1-2 Large (Weapon Type). Give it bonuses such that it can target Frigates and Destroyers as normal. So some bonus to scan resolution, tracking speed ect. ect.. I'm not sure a gun based stealth bomber is the way to go, but it's kinda interesting.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.06.30 06:03:00 - [30] I'd still like a real T2 destroyer.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.08.02 06:05:00 - [31] And look at the sig radius for the love [insert name here]. I know destroyers are supposed to be vunerable to cruiser, kinda like BC are vunerable to BS's. The difference is BC's can fit a tank. Destroyers can't.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.09.11 09:22:00 - [32] Lookin for some destroyer LOVE.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.09.12 22:52:00 - [33] Originally by: Hirana Yoshida There is no need to create a second T2 Destroyer There's not really a need for two assault ships or two interceptors per race either. But there are. Interdictors don't really count as destroyers either. It's a specialty class. Kinda like Heavy Interdictors aren't cruisers or Heavey Assault Ships. Originally by: Wrangler Al Originally by: Clansworth Originally by: Calypso Nadie also perhaps a 5% boost per lvl to defender missle rate of fire HA! She said defender missiles... that's just plain funny... Oh wait, were you serious? First they would actually need to make defender missiles work for players, and not just NPC's. This would only work if defender missiles were Fire and Forget and would target the first enemy drone or misile it found... (IDEA CCP?!?) Defenders would have to be activate the laucher and forget. Missles have been nerfed into the ground though, so not much need for defenders anymore. The subject is T2 destroyers btw.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.09.28 13:15:00 - [34] Originally by: Panem EtCircenses Well, this thread plus this one: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1179871 And this one: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1184113 Make 3 in generally the same direction; give us more destroyer love! Lets hope it gets added to the Common Ideas thread. Panem It used to be in the commonly proposed idea section. I don't why they dropped it. I've been trying to keep it active.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.09.28 13:55:00 - [35] T1 cruisers cost what, 5mil? Assault ships are running 28 mil right now. HASs are running 130 mil? I think cost is a pretty reason t1 cruisers won't go obsolete.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.10.14 21:43:00 - [36] I swear I saw someone post that destroyers need love!
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.12.05 19:48:00 - [37] So love for destroyers? Any day now you say?
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.12.10 13:10:00 - [38] If nothing else a sig reduction on the t1 destroyers. It's not like they can fit a proper tank. Maybe a 2-5% power grid increase.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.12.25 09:16:00 - [39] This thread was removed from the commonly proposed ideas list a while back. Does that mean you guys are actually looking at destroyers?
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.12.30 06:52:00 - [40] +1 for destroyer love.
Torothanax	Posted - 2009.12.31 05:49:00 - [41] I've always liked the idea of a mini command ship. I'd rather not see that as the focus of t2 destroyers though. I'd like to see a destroyer that can actually stay on the field of battle for more then a few seconds. I wouldn't mind a role bonus that allows the fitting of a "Command Processor" for free on all destroyers. Then players would have the option or fitting one command link (destroyer sized) at the cost of one mid and one highslot plus whatever cpu and powergrid req's the command link had. Or make it even simpler and let all destroyers fit a mini command link that has reduced capabilities compared to the normal ones. I like the idea of using a destroyer hull to hunt down cloaked ships as well, but I get tired of people trying to bastardize the entire ship class to do it. Retool the interdictor, or add a second interdictor with similar setup and probe/probe launcher bonuses. Destroyers aren't the only ship that should be able to hunt cloaked ships. It should be a module most ships can fit, such as a probe from an expanded probe launcher. For real life hunting of subs, navies use passive listening posts anchored to the ocean floor. They use frigates, destroyers, cruisers and other subs. They active ping the area of opperation (the grid in game) if they believe a sub is in the area. They use sonar dipping helicoptors (drones?). They drop disposable sonar bouys from aircraft (probes). They launch anti sub missiles (fof missiles?) and depth charges (smart bombs? Bombs?) from any of these platforms when they locate an enemy sub. Subs are hard to find if thier crew know what they are doing, but they are far from invisible or impossible to detect. While were at it, when do we get t2 recon probes? Probes that are cloaked themselves but can only be launched from t2 expanded (or some other specialized) launchers. The point is: destroyers as a class should be combat focused, not the "dump your specialization here" class. They shouldn't have a massive tank, but they should have some survivability on the battle field, especially T2 destoryes. Frigates are supposed to fear them, not laugh them off. I think a significantly smaller sig radius would go a long way for t1 destroyers, maybe a small speed increase as well. You'll recall they were indirectly nerfed (harshly) with the nano nerf. Or maybe increased pg/cpu plus a slot or two on a tier 2 version. Interdictors and the destroyers we have need some love. There should probably be a tier 2 version for each race. There should be a combat focus t2 hull as well. Command, salvage, cloak hunting, and whatever else version would be cool to, but I say that's icing on the cake, shouldn't be the main focus.
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.02.03 06:24:00 - [42] Yeah, but assault ships aren't designed for an anti frigate role, and the t1 destroyers barely stand up to most t1 frigates now a days.
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.03.11 15:32:00 - [43] Destroyer love please.
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.04.01 10:45:00 - [44] Ditto
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.04.09 06:59:00 - [45] Originally by: Xtover web bubble + dictor bubble = horrible idea. But to add: T1 destroyers need more PG, more tank- not a whole lot just a tiny bit. They should have a web and scram (about 100%) bonus (so pretty much a 20km warp scram to shut off intys MWD. They need at least 2 mids, the coercer can't catch crap with only one mid slot. 20 km web and scram won't happen. Pretty much guarantee that. I totally agree on the 2 mids minimum though. 1 mid is like WTF? Or give all ships one "tackle" only slot.
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.04.15 03:56:00 - [46] Who else loves destroyers?
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.04.19 08:28:00 - [47] Lookin' for destroyer love... (in all the wrong places?)
Torothanax	Posted - 2010.05.02 15:10:00 - [48] Keeping this thread unlocked.

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.