These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#1121 - 2013-08-08 20:20:44 UTC
Tobias Hareka wrote:
Soldarius wrote:
Its really sad when people are flying Damnations with skirmish links because nothing else will survive on field. Some boosts are better than no boosts and an empty wallet.


Vulture?


its still massively undertanked, lacks dps, lacks,mobility .. lacks any attention it was the only one in the second round to get no changes at all. .. besides perhaps the minnie ships but they are already great ships so...

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
J A Aloysiusz
Risk Breakers
SONS of BANE
#1122 - 2013-08-08 20:24:30 UTC
Mole Guy wrote:
Mole Guy wrote:
i just had a thought:
before i share it, i fly amarr cs mostly. but i can and do fly them all.

give a 10% per cs level to all incoming remote reps.
we can fit a descent tank if we are fleet boosting and any healing that comes to us will keep us alive.
the active tank would be good for solo battles or small gang warfare. im not saying get rid of it, but as a role for command ships, give them the ability to amplify incoming reps.

that way, in fleet setups, it would take advantage of incoming reps without having to have 400k EHP (which i think is a lot for a bc btw), it would still be able to self rep in solo or small gang situations AND maintain its tank or link setup as it likes.

fleet doctrines would mean several links AND maintaining tank
small gang would mean to use of a command ship without the need for logi.

maybe get rid of the active tank bonus all together and just have a bonus for incoming reps.
all ships maintain max dps (astarte level) with chosen weapon system. i know ccp is trying to make multi weapon choices and i REALLY am looking forward to smokin someone with my hamnation, or settling into using my absolution with killer resists now...

if you think about it, with the high resists they have, they need 1/2 the healing normal ships do to maintain their tank and with them gaining from incoming reps, we could keep them alive A LOT longer than you guys think.
this would give the damnation another bonus instead of the tank bonus. maybe another missile bonus or something.

with my incursion abso, good resist, links up and the armor implant, (1 1600 plate and good skillz), i had it at 110k EHP. this was gank fit for incursions. the ehp will be higher now because of links so i would expect 180k ehp or so or alot more with 2 1600 plates.

thats a descent buffer, not huge, but descent. now, if it gained 50% to reps at cs 5, thats a crap load of incoming reps.
as soon a the battle starts, logi lock a cs. 10 current logi healing equates to 15 post patch logi healing. this will keep them alive, allow them to fulfill their roles in fleet AND for those who like solo fighting, maintain their dps output.

just give bonuses to incoming reps and keep the tanks the same.
read this post. most skipped over it. i think this would fix everything. all we have to do is balance the ships for dps and let the incoming reps get bonuses.


I'm afraid I disagree. You'd have invulnerable spider damnation fleets running all up and down new eden.

Am I missing something here? The warfare link changes say static 15%, but the command ship changes say 3% per level. Obviously it amounts to the same, but the difference between static and level-based is significant for the "curve/cliff" aspect mentioned in the warfare link section.
Rain6638
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1123 - 2013-08-08 20:30:02 UTC
15% flat was changed to 3% per level on the 7th of Aug

[ 2013.06.21 09:52:05 ] (notify) For initiating combat your security status has been adjusted by -0.1337
Lloyd Roses
Artificial Memories
#1124 - 2013-08-08 20:37:59 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
Tobias Hareka wrote:
Soldarius wrote:
Its really sad when people are flying Damnations with skirmish links because nothing else will survive on field. Some boosts are better than no boosts and an empty wallet.


Vulture?


its still massively undertanked, lacks dps, lacks,mobility .. lacks any attention it was the only one in the second round to get no changes at all. .. besides perhaps the minnie ships but they are already great ships so...


Vulture is massively undertanked? No dps?

It can actually choose between sniping like an eagle or brawling like a Blaga, 500dps at 15km using Null. Using Void for ~700 @8km is still on par with a sleipnir.

I agree though that it is slow as hell, don't see a problem though.
Jureth22
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1125 - 2013-08-08 20:46:11 UTC
Sarmatiko wrote:
Quote:
The other threads are :
Command Ship model changes

NO FOZZIE PLS NO

Also glad that Marauders are safe, for now..


command ships are ugly,nighthawk looks sexy,but the rest are just meh.

also claymore bonuses are bad,fozzie needs to change either one of them to hm and ham damage instead of rof.otherwise it will fire very fast for very little damage,and thats always dissapoint.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1126 - 2013-08-08 20:50:35 UTC
Jureth22 wrote:
Sarmatiko wrote:
Quote:
The other threads are :
Command Ship model changes

NO FOZZIE PLS NO

Also glad that Marauders are safe, for now..


command ships are ugly,nighthawk looks sexy,but the rest are just meh.

also claymore bonuses are bad,fozzie needs to change either one of them to hm and ham damage instead of rof.otherwise it will fire very fast for very little damage,and thats always dissapoint.

Well, yes, but rof increases dps more than damage. So unless you plan on alpha heavies (such a thing exists?) then stick with rof. And besides he dual rof bonus those missiles fire almost every 2 seconds. Damage bonus would kill its dps by quite a bit.
Mole Guy
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1127 - 2013-08-08 21:12:52 UTC
J A Aloysiusz wrote:
Mole Guy wrote:
Mole Guy wrote:
i just had a thought:
before i share it, i fly amarr cs mostly. but i can and do fly them all.

give a 10% per cs level to all incoming remote reps.
we can fit a descent tank if we are fleet boosting and any healing that comes to us will keep us alive.
the active tank would be good for solo battles or small gang warfare. im not saying get rid of it, but as a role for command ships, give them the ability to amplify incoming reps.

that way, in fleet setups, it would take advantage of incoming reps without having to have 400k EHP (which i think is a lot for a bc btw), it would still be able to self rep in solo or small gang situations AND maintain its tank or link setup as it likes.

fleet doctrines would mean several links AND maintaining tank
small gang would mean to use of a command ship without the need for logi.

maybe get rid of the active tank bonus all together and just have a bonus for incoming reps.
all ships maintain max dps (astarte level) with chosen weapon system. i know ccp is trying to make multi weapon choices and i REALLY am looking forward to smokin someone with my hamnation, or settling into using my absolution with killer resists now...

if you think about it, with the high resists they have, they need 1/2 the healing normal ships do to maintain their tank and with them gaining from incoming reps, we could keep them alive A LOT longer than you guys think.
this would give the damnation another bonus instead of the tank bonus. maybe another missile bonus or something.

with my incursion abso, good resist, links up and the armor implant, (1 1600 plate and good skillz), i had it at 110k EHP. this was gank fit for incursions. the ehp will be higher now because of links so i would expect 180k ehp or so or alot more with 2 1600 plates.

thats a descent buffer, not huge, but descent. now, if it gained 50% to reps at cs 5, thats a crap load of incoming reps.
as soon a the battle starts, logi lock a cs. 10 current logi healing equates to 15 post patch logi healing. this will keep them alive, allow them to fulfill their roles in fleet AND for those who like solo fighting, maintain their dps output.

just give bonuses to incoming reps and keep the tanks the same.
read this post. most skipped over it. i think this would fix everything. all we have to do is balance the ships for dps and let the incoming reps get bonuses.


I'm afraid I disagree. You'd have invulnerable spider damnation fleets running all up and down new eden.

Am I missing something here? The warfare link changes say static 15%, but the command ship changes say 3% per level. Obviously it amounts to the same, but the difference between static and level-based is significant for the "curve/cliff" aspect mentioned in the warfare link section.

i initially wrote to get rid of the damnation tank bonus and give it a missile damage bonus so it can compete with other command ships.
it would have the tank of an abso or something.

if yer worries about spider tanking, jam them.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1128 - 2013-08-08 21:34:41 UTC
Jureth22 wrote:
Sarmatiko wrote:
Quote:
The other threads are :
Command Ship model changes

NO FOZZIE PLS NO

Also glad that Marauders are safe, for now..


command ships are ugly,nighthawk looks sexy,but the rest are just meh.

also claymore bonuses are bad,fozzie needs to change either one of them to hm and ham damage instead of rof.otherwise it will fire very fast for very little damage,and thats always dissapoint.


I'm going to generally agree with you here, however what I'm about to say should be applied to the nighthawk as well.

I'd very much like to see "unique" models for each of the command ships. No, I'm not talking about totally new ships designs, I'm talking about modest modifications to each of the commands that gives them some kind of specific feel. It could be something as small as the unique bridge the Kronos gets compared to the other mega models.
Ziranda Hakuli
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1129 - 2013-08-08 23:17:27 UTC
many pages. many suggestions makes the head hurt wondering why so many are talking with the brown hole.

remember
T1 bc. 17 slots
Faction. 18 slots
T2 bc. 17. Slots

Before the rebalance you had 1 Command Link and awesome DPS this was mostly used in PVP, Gate camps while the other with 3 links with a beefy tank in mind.

Now they both can support 3 links defeating the role of what one was intended and you children are being way too greedy.

As for fitting these beautiful ships and you cry your short on CPU or power, not enough DPS or Tank. have ya looked at your skills lately or are you being a complete idiot not know how to PROPERLY fit a ship. Way too much of one will kill it when you cannot find the balance you need.

Do not forget you may need implants to put these together. and lately well i been toying with them and been finding a decent balance with what has been mentioned but i feel that you all need to suck it up and check it all out on the test server when its ready to toy with.

Window VentureWas VeryWeary
Doomheim
#1130 - 2013-08-08 23:19:24 UTC
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
56 pages of suggestions suggests to me that the whole mechanic of command ships is b0rked from the ground up.

As I recall, Darth Vader always commanded his fleets from a supercapital. Perhaps we can kill 2 birds with one stone here:

Remove command bonuses from command ships entirely. Only Titans get the command bonus. Disallow off-grid boosting. When a command module is activated, make it light up on overview like a cyno does. Use it at your peril.

This has the following effects:

1. It finally forces titans to stay and fight, and ensures that they are on the field rather than gathering dust in deadspace.
2. No sides in a skirmish are at a disadvantage
3. No command bonuses in wormholes, ensuring evenly matched skirmish-style fights (gudfite!)
4. T2 battlecruisers can focus on tank and gank, which is pretty much the only way they'll get used on grid ever in the entire history of eve past, present and future.
5. no command bonuses in hisec, which makes duels and hisec wars fairer and more fun for both sides.
6. In order to alpha the command ship off the field, you'll need to bring a BIG fleet. So all that whinging about command ships not being useful in fleet warfare goes away.

Remember, listen to your Uncle Darth. The Dark SIde of the Force knows best.

/MC



This....this is making an insane amount of sense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN0q_M9UFFY
Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#1131 - 2013-08-08 23:21:41 UTC
The nighthawk still needs more midslots. The 5 mid and 5 lows isn't a fantastic setup for a shield tanking command ship.

The double optimal bonus for the vulture is a real hindrance IMO, it should swap an optimal for 10% shield hp per level.

Giving a hybrid tracking bonus for the EOS is a waste and should be replaced which something better.
Window VentureWas VeryWeary
Doomheim
#1132 - 2013-08-08 23:21:46 UTC
Grymwulf wrote:
Has anyone considered that perhaps CCP should set it up that each race has a viable skirmish and fleet command ship? Instead of making Minmatar/Gallente kings of small gangs and Amarr/Caldari kings of fleet boosting, give each race one command ship with a resist bonus and the other with the local rep bonus.

This allows those who prefer a specific race to choose a ship based on not just it's weapon types, but on whether they will be doing small gang or fleet ops.


At the very minimum, this ^, it is literally full ****** to lock a racial group into a specific style of fleet play, that's not dynamic at all, that's stagnant as ****.
Reatu Krentor
Void Spiders
#1133 - 2013-08-08 23:24:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Reatu Krentor
Fozzie,

Have you tried using a marauder style role bonus for the weapons? With this you wouldn't need to do strange things like having double 10% damage bonuses on the sleipnir or 7.5% rate of fire and damage on the nighthawk. If you have considered this, I wouldn't mind knowing what made you decide against it.
For a sleipnir, a 40% damage role bonus would make 5 turrets/launchers equivalent to 7. With such a role bonus you wouldn't have to change the sleipnir's bonuses for example. The 5 turrets on the new sleipnir would be effectively identical to the 7 of before.
The same could be done for Astarte, keep the double 25% damage skill bonus and add a 40% damage role bonus.
Nighthawk and Absolution could keep identical bonuses and dps with a 20% damage role bonus but maybe they could be snazzed up a bit and also receive a 40% role bonus as well.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1134 - 2013-08-08 23:24:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerick Ludhowe
Ziranda Hakuli wrote:


remember
T1 bc. 17 slots
Faction. 18 slots
T2 bc. 17. Slots



remember
rigs are slots too

Sooo....

t1 bc 20 slots
navy bc 21 slots
t2 bc 19 slots


Either way, comparing slot numbers is more or less irrelevant at this point as Commands have been "marauderified". For example, the Astarte now gets more dps out of 5 turrets than it did out of 7 in the past, this essentially is giving it 2 more slots...
Soon Shin
Scarlet Weather Rhapsody
#1135 - 2013-08-08 23:31:12 UTC
The previous post bring up a good point, T2 ships usually has more slots than its t1 counterparts.

Its a laughable joke that T1 and Navy ships have more slots than T2.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#1136 - 2013-08-08 23:36:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Jerick Ludhowe
Soon Shin wrote:
The previous post bring up a good point, T2 ships usually has more slots than its t1 counterparts.

Its a laughable joke that T1 and Navy ships have more slots than T2.


I was not trying to make a point by posting rig including slot numbers other than rigs should be considered when looking at total slots.

The real point i was trying to make is that the raw slot count is not a good way to compare ships, especially when certain ships have much larger dmg bonuses intended at making a smaller number of turrets do dmg similarly to a larger number of turrets with the overall goal of freeing up slots for other modules.

To use the Astarte again....

8-4-6 astarte with 7 turrets and TQ bonuses is worse than the currently proposed astarte (not even factoring in resistances changes ect). In this situation, a raw comparison of slot numbers is simply misleading.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1137 - 2013-08-08 23:55:23 UTC
Show gallente and minmatar command ships some fleet resist bonus love. Remind us why gallente command ships should be flown. Help the EOS for goodness sake!!!! What kind of bonuses are those anyway?

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1138 - 2013-08-09 00:27:18 UTC
What if the claymore and Eos got a Shield/Armor HP bonus instead of resist bonuses as other players suggested. So Caldari/Amarr get resist bonuses (might have to kill the damnations HP bonus) and the Gallente/Minmatar get HP bonus? the C/A ships would still be good at mitigating incoming damage thorugh resists, while G/M ships have a larger buffer. It would allow the G/M ships to be more usable in large fleets while still being able to utilize that bonus effectively on small scales that they seemed to be destined to fly in.
Rain6638
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1139 - 2013-08-09 00:31:54 UTC
Ziranda Hakuli wrote:
a bunch of name calling and no proof

post a fit

[ 2013.06.21 09:52:05 ] (notify) For initiating combat your security status has been adjusted by -0.1337
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1140 - 2013-08-09 00:46:08 UTC
Andy Landen wrote:
Help the EOS for goodness sake!!!! What kind of bonuses are those anyway?


To be fair the eos is much better than what's live right now. The live eos is just an abortion of bonuses.