These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey 1.1] Command Ships

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#781 - 2013-08-04 23:11:45 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Doed wrote:
This is amog the worst ideas I've ever seen on these forums, sorry.

Its helpful to give your opinion, its more helpful to say why that is your opinion


There is Rolls, there is specilization, and then there is over specilization. This is eve where i can take a Exploration ship (heron) and pown in pvp with it. What we want is a ship that can do its intended roll well, but not be so locked into it that it can never escape. Oh and imune to ewar Is a terible idea, and needs to never be put on another ship besides the ones its already on.

What most people are arguing for is for each race to have at least one comand ship that can be fit "Alittle" over tanked so its a bad instant primary for the oposing fleet, at the cost of some dps potential, but not for it to not have any other options open to it liek your sugestion.
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#782 - 2013-08-04 23:43:36 UTC
I don't understand why the extremely specialized (T2 Command Ships) get worse bonuses in the area they were created for (Gang links) than the supposedly generalized T3 Cruisers?

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#783 - 2013-08-04 23:52:08 UTC
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
I don't understand why the extremely specialized (T2 Command Ships) get worse bonuses in the area they were created for (Gang links) than the supposedly generalized T3 Cruisers?


T3 cruisers are getting nerfed to 2% per level, but that bonus will apply to 3 kinds of links. When they're done the command ships will give stronger fleet boosts.
Niko Lorenzio
United Eve Directorate
#784 - 2013-08-04 23:58:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Niko Lorenzio
Another question if I may... why are there so many T2 ships which have the first skill bonuses that affect ship stats? I mean you need those skills to level 5 to be able to fly the bloody thing, so what is the point of adding say.. "4% bonus to all Armor Resistances" per Amarr Battlecruiser skill? Just incorporate it into the ship stats and give it another bonus, or swap it with a command ships skills bonus? There's dozens of ships with these kind of bonuses and it's annoying as hell. Basically it's a wasted bonus "slot".

The only time it would make sense is if you got podded without upgrading your clone and lost that specific skill, and then wonder if you should retrain Amarr BC5 for those extra bonuses.

The CSM XI Election are now open until March 25th, 2016. Consider Niko Lorenzio for CSM XI.

CSM matters, your voice matters, your vote matters!
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#785 - 2013-08-05 00:03:19 UTC
Ersahi Kir wrote:
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
I don't understand why the extremely specialized (T2 Command Ships) get worse bonuses in the area they were created for (Gang links) than the supposedly generalized T3 Cruisers?


T3 cruisers are getting nerfed to 2% per level, but that bonus will apply to 3 kinds of links. When they're done the command ships will give stronger fleet boosts.


This, CCP wanted T3s to be able to do more things at once but be worse at it, like a Swis army knife. They rep more than normal logi but dont have the range, They Can give more links but not as strong of links, They have Ewar subsystems but not as good as recons, and so on. But they went alittle to far and gave them all a HP + amount sub system and a gank sub system that could be paired with it, combined with a over the top fitting sub system, they where able to fit far mor tank and gank on one ship than i think was really intended.

They should have made certain sub systems not able to be paired on the same fit, like the tanky one with the ganky one, or the cloaky one with the interdiction nullifyed one. Force them in to slightly more generalized loadouts and less into the uber specialty ones.
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#786 - 2013-08-05 00:03:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Ersahi Kir
Niko Lorenzio wrote:
Another question if I may... why are there so many T2 ships which have the first skill bonuses that affect ship stats? I mean you need those skills to level 5 to be able to fly the bloody thing, so what is the point of adding say.. "4% bonus to all Armor Resistances" per Amarr Battlecruiser skill? Just incorporate it into the ship stats and give it another bonus, or swap it with a command ships skills bonus? There's dozens of ships with these kind of bonuses and it's annoying as hell. Basically it's a wasted bonus "slot".

The only time it would make sense is if you got podded without upgrading your clone and lost that specific skill, and then wonder if you should retrain Amarr BC5 for those extra bonuses.


For consistancy? Many ships have stats that don't translate into hull stats, but affect modules instead. Shield boost, gun mods, etc would still have to be listed. And people would whine if it wasn't explicitly stated, because they would think they were getting less ship bonuses.
FleetAdmiralHarper
State War Academy
Caldari State
#787 - 2013-08-05 00:07:03 UTC
Scuzzy Logic wrote:
FleetAdmiralHarper wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
i bought two just now. 1 to keep to look at, and the other to resell when the hull change happens and they go up like the Eos, albeit temporarily.

the only ship that could be more beautiful and closer to my heart would be a kaalakiota merlin. I already have the kaalakiota cormorant and love it very much :-3



i like the hookbill, they say its the ugly duckling of the caldari, but the IRONY of it being one of the few good looking ships, that actually looks like a ship, psychically hurts me XD


I know, right? Especially when you take a look at the Eagle... *barf*



yeah, why does the moa class ship look like a r3tar-o-sarus-rex?
Goldensaver
Maraque Enterprises
Just let it happen
#788 - 2013-08-05 00:52:12 UTC
Sigras wrote:
I'm Down wrote:
It would also be really cool if command ships were the primary link for communications within a fleet. In other words, if you were missing a squad command ship... your squad would have diminished broadcasting abilities for targets and repairs...

This way, attacking enemies command ships could actually cripple fleet communications.

This goes along with my idea of a specialized fleet command ship that would be ideal for fleet commanders to fly. Something with a massive tank and a bonus to targeting range / being unjammable / number of targets locked, so he can broadcast targets and keep tabs on people everywhere on grid. At the cost of all damage output. This ship would have no damage output and very few utility slots making it only attractive to fleet commanders.

It occurs to me that this ship might not be very fun to fly, but fleet commanders already have enough to do, so that doesnt really matter.

My Earlier Suggestion

Damnation:
Amarr Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Armor Resistances
+5 max locked targets per level
Command Ships skill bonuses:
10% bonus to all Armor hitpoints
3% bonus to effectiveness of Armored and Information Warfare Links per level

Role Bonus: Immune to Electronic Sensor Effects (E-war, Sensor Dampening, remote sensor boosting), Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules

Slot layout: 6 H (-1), 3 M (-1), 8 L (+2) , 0 turrets (-4), 0 Launchers (-5)
Fittings: 1200(-390) PWG, 500(+25) CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull) : 3500(+37) / 6000(+1395) / 4300(-24)
Base shield resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 0 / 20 / 70 / 87.5
Base armor resistances (EM/Therm/Kin/Exp): 50 / 35 / 62.5 / 80
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 3375 / 750s / 4.5
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 120 (-30) / 0.7(-0.004) / 11500000 (+1000000) / 18.18s(+5.0)
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 0 (-25) / 0 (-25)
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 150km (+100) / 210 / 7(+1)
Sensor strength: 22 Radar (+6)
Signature radius: 265
Cargo capacity: 645

The bonuses on the EOS would look similar:
EOS:
Gallente Battlecruiser skill bonuses:
4% bonus to all Armor Resistances
+5 max locked targets per level
Command Ships skill bonuses:
7.5% bonus to Repair Effects (both incoming and local)
3% bonus to effectiveness of Armored and Skirmish Warfare Links per level

Role Bonus: Immune to Electronic Sensor Effects (E-war, Sensor Dampening, remote sensor boosting), Can fit up to three Warfare Link modules

Thoughts?

You don't see whats wrong with a ship with almost Max locking range and is immune to EWar and can mount a painter and locks in a reasonable amount of time and has that good of electronics? Everybody just assign drones and leave it at that. You've made an unstoppable drone bunny.
Viribus
Lords of the Lockerroom
WE FORM YUG0SLAVIA
#789 - 2013-08-05 01:04:12 UTC
Cool changes. However as a certified elite pvper and one-time ATXI participant, I have ideas:

Amarr: The slot layout and tiny drone bay of the abso screams fleet dps ship, but with horrible mobility and no range bonus it kind of sucks at applying DPS. The damnation theoretically fills this role, but has the slot layout and drone bay of more of a brawling ship, and pretty bad DPS. It's great at its current role—an obligate link ship—but as DPS it can just be ignored because it doesn't do any damage compared to its massive tank. Ideally amarr would have one CS that's a good brawler and one that's a good mid-range fleet ship, but right now they have two that are mediocre at both. The abso should have an optimal bonus instead of a cap use bonus, and the damnation should get another damage bonus instead of the useless missile range bonus. Then you have a great fleet ship and a great brawling ship.

Caldari: It doesn't make sense that what is essentially the T2 drake has only 5 mids. As a HAM boat, it's an inferior Claymore because of its wonky slot layout and smaller drone bay, and as a HML boat it just sucks because HMLs got nerfed way too hard, and it's only going to suck more with the buffs to medium rails, arty, and beams. It needs HMLs to get un-nerfed and a 7/6/4 slot layout. No one is going to use the nighthawk in its current state.

Gallente: My problem with the Eos and Astarte is the same as my problem with the Myrm and the Brutix: they're basically the same ship, it's just that one is better than the other. If the Eos got a 5/5/6 layout and became a super Ishtar and the Astarte maybe got a tracking bonus or a mid moved down to a low they could be differentiated a bit and have their own strengths and weaknesses, instead of just being the same ship with the same tank and DPS.

Minmatar: as usual they get two decently powerful yet different ships that have good bonuses and slot layouts for their particular niches

watch me be a scurb and get owned
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#790 - 2013-08-05 02:15:36 UTC
Scuzzy Logic wrote:
FleetAdmiralHarper wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
i bought two just now. 1 to keep to look at, and the other to resell when the hull change happens and they go up like the Eos, albeit temporarily.

the only ship that could be more beautiful and closer to my heart would be a kaalakiota merlin. I already have the kaalakiota cormorant and love it very much :-3



i like the hookbill, they say its the ugly duckling of the caldari, but the IRONY of it being one of the few good looking ships, that actually looks like a ship, psychically hurts me XD


I know, right? Especially when you take a look at the Eagle... *barf*

That's why it has dual range bonuses. Don't want to get within viewing range
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#791 - 2013-08-05 02:23:49 UTC
my buddy in IT tells me it's a "thing" to break something on the network, in a way that he knows exactly how to fix and will make people complain & seek him out. fozzie.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#792 - 2013-08-05 03:54:44 UTC
I like most of the changes, though the nighthawk still seems like it needs to have a low slot changed to a mid to keep its tank in line with the other command ships
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#793 - 2013-08-05 04:14:10 UTC
Bullet Therapist wrote:
I like most of the changes, though the nighthawk still seems like it needs to have a low slot changed to a mid to keep its tank in line with the other command ships


I agree but then the claymore, Vulture and nighthawk would have the same slot layout, I wouldnt mind a 7-7-3 layout, it would kinda gimp its lows to make up for the crazy amount of mids.

5 lows on a missle ship is kinda waisted if its not fast enough to warent putting a nano on it
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#794 - 2013-08-05 04:17:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Rain6637
Heribeck Weathers wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:
I like most of the changes, though the nighthawk still seems like it needs to have a low slot changed to a mid to keep its tank in line with the other command ships


I agree but then the claymore, Vulture and nighthawk would have the same slot layout, I wouldnt mind a 7-7-3 layout, it would kinda gimp its lows to make up for the crazy amount of mids.

5 lows on a missle ship is kinda waisted if its not fast enough to warent putting a nano on it

what's wrong with the same layout if they have the same job and weapon system

I think fozzie wants us to think the nighthawk's resist bonus compensates for -1 mid, still not sure about the PG.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#795 - 2013-08-05 04:24:20 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Heribeck Weathers wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:
I like most of the changes, though the nighthawk still seems like it needs to have a low slot changed to a mid to keep its tank in line with the other command ships


I agree but then the claymore, Vulture and nighthawk would have the same slot layout, I wouldnt mind a 7-7-3 layout, it would kinda gimp its lows to make up for the crazy amount of mids.

5 lows on a missle ship is kinda waisted if its not fast enough to warent putting a nano on it

what's wrong with the same layout if they have the same job and weapon system

I think fozzie wants us to think the nighthawk's resist bonus compensates for -1 mid, still not sure about the PG.


I dunno, maybe it does, I just feel like the extra low is kind of wasted. Very few people are going to use anything like a nano in that low slot, and the extra BCU that you can fit there is at such a low effectiveness given the stacking penalties. Compared to another mid slot, which would take a lot of heat off of a player trying to fit tackle, tank, mobility etc I just don't think its all that useful.
Heribeck Weathers
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#796 - 2013-08-05 04:24:39 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Heribeck Weathers wrote:
Bullet Therapist wrote:
I like most of the changes, though the nighthawk still seems like it needs to have a low slot changed to a mid to keep its tank in line with the other command ships


I agree but then the claymore, Vulture and nighthawk would have the same slot layout, I wouldnt mind a 7-7-3 layout, it would kinda gimp its lows to make up for the crazy amount of mids.

5 lows on a missle ship is kinda waisted if its not fast enough to warent putting a nano on it

what's wrong with the same layout if they have the same job and weapon system

I think fozzie wants us to think the nighthawk's resist bonus compensates for -1 mid, still not sure about the PG.


In all honesty I think the night hawk was orininaly designed to be pasivly shield tanked and has more lows for more shield rechargers, but As times changed it became lost and confused. I personaly wouldnt want the same slot layout just because they would feel way to similar with only a resist bonus and active tank bonus setting them apart..... if Fozzie took away its damage aplication bonus on the claymore and gave it a doble tank bonus, then gave the Night hawk an active tank bonus it might feel like their rolls where more set apart.

Regaurdless 5 lows lends itself better to gun bloats so they can fit damage and trackign mods.
Battlingbean
Wings of the Dark Portal
#797 - 2013-08-05 04:46:24 UTC
Caldari ships live and die by their medium modules. A 7/7/3 Nighthawk would be an inverse Absolution with 7/3/7 so it shouldn't be overpowered. Now that I think of it 6/6/3 Cerberus could be a thing.
Kane Fenris
NWP
#798 - 2013-08-05 05:14:53 UTC
Battlingbean wrote:
Caldari ships live and die by their medium modules. A 7/7/3 Nighthawk would be an inverse Absolution with 7/3/7 so it shouldn't be overpowered. Now that I think of it 6/6/3 Cerberus could be a thing.



why would anybody want less than 4 lows on the ship????
Doed
Tyrfing Industries
#799 - 2013-08-05 05:16:42 UTC
Kane Fenris wrote:
Battlingbean wrote:
Caldari ships live and die by their medium modules. A 7/7/3 Nighthawk would be an inverse Absolution with 7/3/7 so it shouldn't be overpowered. Now that I think of it 6/6/3 Cerberus could be a thing.



why would anybody want less than 4 lows on the ship????


What this guy said, 3 lows on cruisers and up, esp hacs/CS is worse than having 3 mids in many cases.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#800 - 2013-08-05 06:01:03 UTC
I'm just saying 6 mids. not too interested in highs, I think it could do with just 1 utility

for shield gangs, however, I think I got it: you have two claymores, 1 vulture:

Claymore:
Evasive Maneuvers
Rapid Deployment
Shield Harmonizing (so that it gets the resist and maneuverability bonuses)

Claymore:
Interdiction Maneuvers
Active Shielding
Shield Efficiency

Vulture:
Info links

so your sig/speed/resists start at the top, and the squads still have the bonuses to reps/logi

needs 2x navy mindlinks, 1 info mindlink

pick your engagements

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)