These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

8 new Battleships and 4 new tech II battlecruisers for the Winter Expansion.

Author
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#1 - 2013-08-09 23:34:06 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
When CCP did the Battleship rebalance and thier decision to leave the Scorpion as a "disruption" ship caused the Caldari to only have one attack and only one combat Battleship. This also meant that Gal/ammar/mInmatar were left out of any distruption Battleship.

My Proposal is to introduce one new combat BS for Caldari and then 3 new "disruption" BS for Gal/Ammar/Minmatar

I came up with some rough concepts for these 4 new ships and they go as foward:

Disclamer i left out most of their stats the only ship i showed for drone bay was the gal one I instead focused on concepts slot layout and ship bonuses.

Minmatar
(needs a name)

The concept here is to make a big old school bellicose. The Idea is to make a good platform for the Ewar for each race give it good ehp and ok damage projection.

10% bonus to Target Painter Effectiveness and stasis webberfier optimal range per level
5% bonus to Torpedo and Cruise Missile damage Per level

7 High Slots 6 Turret 2 Missile

6 Mid Slots

6 Low slots

Gal
(needs a name)

The concept here is to make a drone ship but not a dps beast but one that can take advantage of ewar/utility drones. This ship by design is supposed to be the heavy Tackle.

10% bonus to Sensor Damper effectiveness and Warp Scram/Disrupter Range per level
15% bonus to Electronic Warefare and Utility Drones effectiveness Per level

125 mb 375m3 drone bay

6 high slots 6 Turrets

6 mid slots

6 low slots

Amarr
(needs a name)

This one is interesting mainly because the geddon has the second ewar(i know nuets/nos is not "really" ewar but go with me here) So why not make this ship a single ewar type and to compensate for lack or secondary give it a good damage bonus.

7.5% bonus to Tracking disrupter effectivness per level
7.5% bonus to Large Energy Turret rate of fire per level

6 high slots 6 Turrets

5 mid slots

8 low slots

Caldari:
(needs a name)

Ok now for the combat BS. (update i am going to try a missile combat version instead i figured big old sckoool drake)

10% to Kinetic Missile damage per level
4% to Shield Resistances Per level

7 high slots 7 Turrets

7 mid slots

5 low slots


Ok now the remaining 4 battleships.

This is more a loose concept but i am thinking logistics ships large RR and ET plus for gal and mini new assist bonuses. Role bonus to Logistic drone effectiveness

Caldari:

150% bonus to shield and Energy Transfer per level

Amarr:

150% bonus to Remote Armor Repair System and Energy Transfer per level

Gal:
150% bonus to Remote Armor Repair System Per level
20% bonus to Projected Eccm Range Per level

Minmatar:
150% bonus to shield per level
10% bonus to Remote sensor Booster range per level


ok then finally we have tech II ABC's Basically i would like to see the oversized weapons system upgraded and turned into a monster. yes i am proposing a heavy Bomber.

Think Stealth bomber now think of a ABC version designed to be a capital killer in a small package.
They would get a cloak bonus to speed like Blops.
They would use Citadel Torpedoes (with respective bonuses to racial damage type and enough bonus to actually make them useful)
Then they would also get a bonus to a new mod called the heavy bomb The bombs would be useful only against targets that have a sig over 1000m it would be hard wired into the mechanics but would do great splash damage to capital ships.
Also they can jump threw a covert ops jump brige

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Robbie Robot
Exiled Kings
Pain And Compliance
#2 - 2013-08-09 23:45:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Robbie Robot
For the logistic BS, instead of amount, how about cycle time reduction. They also need range, to the tune of +300% with max skills, something shorter range than all other logistic ships. With that huge bonus to amount, it would be very tempting to fit lots of medium RR. One of the issues with armor rr is that the heal happens at then end of cycle, which is another reason medium remote reps get picked, it has a shorter cycle.
Katia Echerie
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#3 - 2013-08-09 23:51:43 UTC
Sure, I like the idea of giving Caldari another combat battleship and the other races a disruption battleship. But lets stop there. There is absolutely no need for a battleship logi. Logi cruisers already fit large reps. If you want logistics for your battleships use carriers, thats what they are meant for.

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#4 - 2013-08-09 23:56:39 UTC
Katia Echerie wrote:
Sure, I like the idea of giving Caldari another combat battleship and the other races a disruption battleship. But lets stop there. There is absolutely no need for a battleship logi. Logi cruisers already fit large reps. If you want logistics for your battleships use carriers, thats what they are meant for.



i am still hopping tech II logi crusiers get overhauled to use medium reps like thier tech I brothers but remain as effective just not out as far. then that would leave room for a battleship version.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Rune Scorpio
Torgue
#5 - 2013-08-10 03:35:24 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Katia Echerie wrote:
Sure, I like the idea of giving Caldari another combat battleship and the other races a disruption battleship. But lets stop there. There is absolutely no need for a battleship logi. Logi cruisers already fit large reps. If you want logistics for your battleships use carriers, thats what they are meant for.



i am still hopping tech II logi crusiers get overhauled to use medium reps like thier tech I brothers but remain as effective just not out as far. then that would leave room for a battleship version.


Or screw bs logistics and bring out t2 frigate logistics that use medium reps or use cov ops cloaks. BS logistics would suck. Bad. Big ol sig and slow means they cant get to range unless they start there. Unless they offer capital level rr noone will use them.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#6 - 2013-08-10 03:45:07 UTC
Rune Scorpio wrote:
MeBiatch wrote:
Katia Echerie wrote:
Sure, I like the idea of giving Caldari another combat battleship and the other races a disruption battleship. But lets stop there. There is absolutely no need for a battleship logi. Logi cruisers already fit large reps. If you want logistics for your battleships use carriers, thats what they are meant for.



i am still hopping tech II logi crusiers get overhauled to use medium reps like thier tech I brothers but remain as effective just not out as far. then that would leave room for a battleship version.


Or screw bs logistics and bring out t2 frigate logistics that use medium reps or use cov ops cloaks. BS logistics would suck. Bad. Big ol sig and slow means they cant get to range unless they start there. Unless they offer capital level rr noone will use them.


you know i was thinking about capital reps on the ship... but that can wait for a tech II version.

yes i would love tech II logi frigs that use medium reps much like tech II Crusiers use Large reps and so too should tech II bs Logi ships.

though did you notice the bonus on minmatar and gal. projected eccm remote sensor boosters. those at that range are epic

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Job Valador
Professional Amateurs
#7 - 2013-08-10 07:17:18 UTC
The caldari attack bs didn't really get my attention but the amarrian ewar bs looks like it would be bloody brilliant. I would call it the "cardinal"

As for BS logi ships I have always thought something like that would be cool. get range bonuses.

"The stone exhibited a profound lack of movement."

Gawain Edmond
Khanid Bureau of Industry
#8 - 2013-08-10 07:20:27 UTC
the thing with logi bs is you're goin to want dronebays of 125 for large logi drones and.... wait rr bs fleets with bonused reps and all with sentries bring them on!!!!
Naomi Knight
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2013-08-10 07:41:03 UTC
When CCP did the Battleship rebalance and thier decision to leave the Scorpion as a "disruption" ship caused the Caldari to only have one completly usless battleship.

the scorpions is the most useless bs atm by far
do you realy want more of this kind?

Gabriel Karade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#10 - 2013-08-10 08:34:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Gabriel Karade
There is no need for 'disruption' battleships - the role is amply covered by T1 EW Frigates/Cruisers and their T2 counterparts. Likewise for the logistics role. Battleships are, and should remain as it states on the tin - ships of the line.

I'm somewhat disappointed they didn't use 'tiericide' to remove the Scorpion 'oddity', originally it being a Railgun platform....

Yes it could work as a niche thing, but only if ECM we're to be re-done (BS sized high-slot ECM modules being added for example?), not really in it's current state.

War Machine: http://www.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=386293

Marcus Harikari
#11 - 2013-08-10 10:35:11 UTC
your caldari ship is pretty much the rokh
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#12 - 2013-08-10 12:48:14 UTC
would it be bad for the minmatar/gallente to get bonuses to their secondary ewar, scrams and webs? nothing insanely huge like the T2 rcon bonuses. somewhere along the lines of 10% for scrams and 20% for webs?
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#13 - 2013-08-10 14:00:56 UTC
Marcus Harikari wrote:
your caldari ship is pretty much the rokh


What would you suggest? I made it to be a rokh and hype had a baby...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#14 - 2013-08-10 14:05:46 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
When CCP did the Battleship rebalance and thier decision to leave the Scorpion as a "disruption" ship caused the Caldari to only have one completly usless battleship.

the scorpions is the most useless bs atm by far
do you realy want more of this kind?



Did you look at the other three ships? Gal have like the ultimate utlity tackle. Minmatar have a great long range tp/webber autocannon and the amarr is just pure sex.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Alberik
Eusebius Corporation
#15 - 2013-08-10 14:30:04 UTC
for what reason should the counterparts of the scorpion get weapon bonuses? if you want real counterparts you have to remove weapons slots, not more than 4 of a kind, no bonuses on weapons.
for gallente this could mean only 3 of a kind as it has such a large drone bay.

i dont think we need such ships
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#16 - 2013-08-10 14:34:31 UTC
Alberik wrote:
for what reason should the counterparts of the scorpion get weapon bonuses? if you want real counterparts you have to remove weapons slots, not more than 4 of a kind, no bonuses on weapons.
for gallente this could mean only 3 of a kind as it has such a large drone bay.

i dont think we need such ships


The gal one has no weapon bonus. And if you look at other min and amarr ewar ships they are s mixed damage dealer ewar ships. Like the bellicose or arbitrator.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Zakeus Djinn
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#17 - 2013-08-10 21:24:55 UTC
I like the general idea, but I don't like some of your designs. Secondary EWAR bonuses (web and scram range) should stay on T2 hulls, that's part of what makes them so specialized. Additionally for target painter and sensor dampener bonuses, not only should they not be combined like that with the secondary EWAR bonuses, but tech 1 hulls only get 7.5% bonuses to those, and even tech 2 hulls only get 7.5% bonuses to sensor dampeners, so your t1 gallente battleship is a better sensor dampener than dedicated t2 EWAR hulls.

I would drop the web and scram bonuses, and drop the primary EWAR bonuses to 7.5%. I would also swap the minmatar bs to missiles and give a missile bonus because of the good synergy with missiles and target painters.

The gallente EWAR drone bonus is really awesome but I garantee people would dump ECM drones on it and with that large bonus you would end up with a really effective gallente ECM boat. Not cool, especially since it still has its own slots for say (bonused) sensor damps. I would change the drone bonus to bonus sensor dampening drones instead of all EWAR drones (I would keep the utility drone bonus though).

The amarr battleship looks awesome and reasonably balanced, the EWAR bonus is of the appropriate size, and while the rate of fire bonus is quite large it also speeds up cap consumption considerably.

The caldari combat battleship overlaps far too heavily with the rokh. Since the raven is an attack battleship, the caldari have no missile combat battleship, why not make it a missile ship? Slower but more durable than the raven, without the raven's range bonus.

I think Support battleships are a cool idea. Slow but much more durable logistics with large reps, probably about equal repair with a t2 logistics cruiser, but trading speed and signature for much more durability and possibly a slight increase in repair.

Your battlecruiser idea is completely unoriginal and has very little to do with everything else in the OP. I suggest you remove it.
Voxinian
#18 - 2013-08-10 21:54:00 UTC
I find the current Scorpion not really useful. It has for example only the same ECM strength bonus as a Blackbird cruiser that you can buy for 5 mil, while if you take the Rook (which is cheaper then the Scorpion) you get a 30% ECM strength bonus per level. So as a pure ECM boat you are better of in a Rook + that a Rook is of course faster, agile etc then a slow ass Scorpion with horrible locking times.

But regarding the OP, I am all for more (and more specialized) battleships in the game both T1 and T2 versions. I will leave it up to the number crackers to come up with balanced ships for all factions.
Voxinian
#19 - 2013-08-10 22:11:13 UTC
Naomi Knight wrote:
When CCP did the Battleship rebalance and thier decision to leave the Scorpion as a "disruption" ship caused the Caldari to only have one completly usless battleship.

the scorpions is the most useless bs atm by far
do you realy want more of this kind?



The Navy issue is an other story though, I personally like that one.
But yeah, the T1 scorpion is just to mediocre to be useful, It needs more ECM strength and bigger bonus to burst ECM and maybe a little bonus to shield.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#20 - 2013-08-10 22:13:44 UTC
Zakeus Djinn wrote:
I like the general idea, but I don't like some of your designs. Secondary EWAR bonuses (web and scram range) should stay on T2 hulls, that's part of what makes them so specialized. Additionally for target painter and sensor dampener bonuses, not only should they not be combined like that with the secondary EWAR bonuses, but tech 1 hulls only get 7.5% bonuses to those, and even tech 2 hulls only get 7.5% bonuses to sensor dampeners, so your t1 gallente battleship is a better sensor dampener than dedicated t2 EWAR hulls.

I would drop the web and scram bonuses, and drop the primary EWAR bonuses to 7.5%. I would also swap the minmatar bs to missiles and give a missile bonus because of the good synergy with missiles and target painters.


First off let me thank you for you constructive feed back and i will be incorporating some of your suggestions into the designs.

While i do agree on the missile platform for the Minmatar ship and will change it (do you have a suggestion? damage bonus?)

I am still rather conflicted on dropping the (tech II bonus from the gal/minmatar ships) the main reason is that there are nuets on tech I Amarr ships. Yes i know technically nuets are not e-war but they were chosen as psudo e-war for amar tech II ships. see the curse as an example. So yeah it can easily be removed but i can go either way on this one.


Zakeus Djinn wrote:
The gallente EWAR drone bonus is really awesome but I garantee people would dump ECM drones on it and with that large bonus you would end up with a really effective gallente ECM boat. Not cool, especially since it still has its own slots for say (bonused) sensor damps. I would change the drone bonus to bonus sensor dampening drones instead of all EWAR drones (I would keep the utility drone bonus though).

The amarr battleship looks awesome and reasonably balanced, the EWAR bonus is of the appropriate size, and while the rate of fire bonus is quite large it also speeds up cap consumption considerably.


Yes i agree there is a problem with ecm drones. I have come up with a solution though. get rid of them. LOL. no but seriously get rid of omni ecm drones they are op like multi specs were back in the day. Replace them with racial ecm drones. So that way you have to pick which type of ecm you are going to counter like: ECM white Noise 300 would be good only against minmatar ships.

Though yes if CCP just keeps ECM drones as is then sure repalced with a sensor damp bonus for drones can be done.


Zakeus Djinn wrote:
The caldari combat battleship overlaps far too heavily with the rokh. Since the raven is an attack battleship, the caldari have no missile combat battleship, why not make it a missile ship? Slower but more durable than the raven, without the raven's range bonus.


ok so what keep the resist bonus and add a kinetic missile bonus? (make it a big version of the old nano drake?)

Zakeus Djinn wrote:
I think Support battleships are a cool idea. Slow but much more durable logistics with large reps, probably about equal repair with a t2 logistics cruiser, but trading speed and signature for much more durability and possibly a slight increase in repair.


yes thats the idea right there... glad you liked it

Zakeus Djinn wrote:
Your battlecruiser idea is completely unoriginal and has very little to do with everything else in the OP. I suggest you remove it.
I completely agree on its lack of orininality... but hey i have wanted these ships for ages... litterally since i would say 2008 and have been posting about addiing them since... so i figure any chance i can advocate new ships i want these in the list.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

12Next page