These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page12
 

Navy Destroyers?

Author
WaterMarks
The Keywork
#21 - 2014-04-11 04:44:35 UTC
Im down make them use medium guns but less of them

-Fly Reckless-

Luwc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#22 - 2014-04-11 06:46:04 UTC
Just put a Navy or whatever infront of the Corax, Algos etc etc.

http://hugelolcdn.com/i/267520.gif

Hal Safon
Filthy Peasants
Intergalactic Space Hobos
#23 - 2014-04-11 18:40:08 UTC
It seems like the main worry is that Navy Destroyers would be overpowered?

I really don't think that would be the case if they are implemented correctly. Especially considering that the market will balance their price accordingly. Part of the reason T1 destroyers are so powerful is that they are very inexpensive, and thus can be thrown into any situation. You get a lot bang for your buck....

Also consider that unlike many frigates, destroyers, being slower and larger, are much more vulnerable to cruiser class and above ships.
Zarnak Wulf
Task Force 641
Empyrean Edict
#24 - 2014-04-12 03:28:37 UTC
The market as a balancing concept should be well down the list. I for one remember the two year 'Age of the Dramiel' and have no desire to revisit it.
Alaric Faelen
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2014-04-13 18:11:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Alaric Faelen
1) T2 Command Destroyers.
-- mimic the T2 battle cruiser role with smaller bonuses, giving fast moving frigate gangs a way to have a boosting role in fleet. T2 BC's tend to be about the slowest ships in a fleet, so using a destroyer to support fast frigates gives somewhat of a similar effect. Bonuses need to be smaller so the two sizes of ships don't compete-- BC's are too slow to be useful in small, fast fleets while the Command Destroyers' bonuses wouldn't benefit a fleet of larger hulls as much as the T2 BC.

2) Pirate Destroyers.
--Mimic the tier 3 BC class by using the next size UP in gun class, but have virtually zero tank. I would have probably done the same when introducing the tier 3 BC's- explaining that pirate tactics justify the 'all gank, no tank' mentality, rather than make them new Empire ships. Pirate variants are more interesting than Navy variants because of the combined racial traits.

3) Support variant.
--Bonused for remote modules in general, route remote module use to high slots. DDs are high slot ships, so I feel their utility to a fleet should come from there. For example- a dedicated ReSebo or projected ECCM ship that can support many ships. People say EWAR is over-powered, well here is a ship as a hard counter- but presents the FC with a choice of using one of his fleet members for such a niche role, or bring MOAR GUNZ. Losing that ship (as it would surely become a primary) would reduce the effectiveness of a fleet, but not utterly cripple it.
This would require getting creative with routing mids to high slots. Perhaps a 'splitter' module that takes a mid slot remote module, splits it's effects into two or three targets but at a somewhat reduced amount due to 'signal loss'. Then there could be a skill to reduce that signal loss and be more efficient.

If possible, I would like to see new ROLES introduced rather than just new DPS boats. Since both the DD and BC classes currently only have a single T2 variant, those are the classes I would like to see any new roles go to.
Frankly, Navy Variants of ships are just expensive versions of the same thing. Other than being a bit 'more', they offer nothing new or innovative. So 'Navy' or 'Pirate' variants are very low on my list, at least compared to entire new roles to fly.
Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
#26 - 2014-04-14 01:12:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Omega Sunset
Sure... why not. A CNC: Caldari Navy Corax. 4x Torps, Cov-ops cloak, no bomb bonus, no cyno.
...or 3x torps and a deck gun... er I mean large railgun/blaster.
dive! dive! dive!

—Ω—

Jallukola
#27 - 2014-04-14 05:25:10 UTC
I think this'd be great! Can't decide should Tier 1 or 2 destros get that variant however. It'd be natural though, that the "staple powerhouse" version usually is the one.

All posts and mails screencapped and time stamped, including out of EVE, you will not reverse on me.

Might come in handy!

Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
#28 - 2014-04-14 08:51:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Omega Sunset
Jallukola wrote:
I think this'd be great! Can't decide should Tier 1 or 2 destros get that variant however. It'd be natural though, that the "staple powerhouse" version usually is the one.

I'd guess T1 as a navy version, right? I mean they are mostly souped-up T1, not quite matching T2 variants. Such as Merlin vs. Hookbill vs. Hawk or Harpy. Hookbill falls in the middle.

That was the idea for no bomb bonus nor cyno, so it's not a true T2 mufti-role cov-op, yet an added weapon over a bomber seeing it's a slightly higher class. I like the bombers so I wouldn't want to antiquate them against another variant on the grid. Little easier to get into for newbies/lower SP, but still torps, cov-ops cloak and maybe large hybrid turret (I'd prefer the 3 launch 1 turret hardpoint in fairness against bombers) can take a bit of SP to train up well. Then just adjust the LP price up enough to make them a little less disposable, maybe 30% over a bomber at least in ISK comparison (bombers ~20M now). Yeah, would be a fun little boat Smile

Maybe stat increase would be around equal to the % difference between a Merlin and a Hoohbill, either in power plant or shield (Hookbill is a nice shield tank and is quick to warp). If it were a T2, I'd go with the same but give it an ECM bonus hehe, pretty evil, CCP would be heavily flamed.

—Ω—

Ginger Barbarella
#29 - 2014-04-15 23:02:48 UTC
Diesel47 wrote:
IMO navy BC need a be cheaper.... Never even seen them used.


I used a Navy Drake once... it was fun. :)

But then I went back to my SNI. P

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac

Previous page12