These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page123
 

Need a subcap for fighting Supercaps and caps: Nuclear Submarine

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#41 - 2014-04-23 11:01:07 UTC
Thellero Orlenard wrote:
How about they add subsystems to strategic cruisers to equip the launchers.? Increase their tankability but make the mass of the launcher enormous so that the warp time is massive.




Unprobable instantly landing **** YOU INSTADEAD TITAN T3


Please stop making horrible ideas
seany1212
M Y S T
#42 - 2014-04-23 12:16:30 UTC
Supers have had many very significant nerfs, doomsdays used to be AoE and you could lose waves of subcaps to a single titan, then they went focused and still had to wait the cooldown, then it was changed so they couldnt doomsday subcaps, then there were tracking nerfs and EHP reductions.

The issue that EvE is gaining is that as there are more and more long term players around contributing to greater super pilot numbers, and as there are lots more ways to make isk, those supers are easier to acquire than ever before. However this idea isnt the right way to go about it and will make supers pretty much useless overnight.

Your stealth bombers comparison just shows how ill-thought out your idea is, stealths can't hold more than approximately 4 bombs with very little room cargo-wise for anything else, bombs are not targeted weapons, they travel in the direction you're flying for 30km and then detonate, they are time delayed between bomb runs which is why it's generally a good idea to warp away once dropping one.

I do agree that there will need to be a fragile anti-super sub-capital ship but this is way overpowered and under-thought about. Roll
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#43 - 2014-04-23 12:16:33 UTC
Thellero Orlenard wrote:
How about they add subsystems to strategic cruisers to equip the launchers.? Increase their tankability but make the mass of the launcher enormous so that the warp time is massive.


Whats the point of making it hard to warp out if you already blew your load and a Titan is about to die to a cruiser hull?
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
#44 - 2014-04-25 10:57:17 UTC
This is a terrible idea. Most of the "ideas" in this thread are terrible.

If you want to kill a Titan, you bring your own capitals to do it, or you bring a lot of subcaps. If you don't have a lot of subcaps or your own capitals, then what makes you think you're entitled to kill a Titan?
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#45 - 2014-04-26 00:24:45 UTC
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them. As always I let some edge cases stay.
Please people, keep it on topic and above all civil!

The Rules:
4. Personal attacks are prohibited.

Commonly known as flaming, personal attacks are posts that are designed to personally berate or insult another forum user. Posts of this nature are not beneficial to the community spirit that CCP promote and as such they will not be tolerated.

5. Trolling is prohibited.

Trolling is a defined as a post that is deliberately designed for the purpose of angering and insulting other players in an attempt to incite retaliation or an emotional response. Posts of this nature are disruptive, often abusive and do not contribute to the sense of community that CCP promote.


This thread has also been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Meandering Milieu
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2014-04-26 04:00:30 UTC
Make it so it can only target caps. If you went with the "doomsday nuke mod" it shouldn't be able to be used against subcaps, for the same reason titans can no longer doomsday subcaps.
Shivanthar
#47 - 2014-04-26 11:15:30 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
Leave the nuke part out, citadel cruisers are good to hear.
In order to fight against super-caps, you need to be in dangerous places already. So, any frigate sized fleet would tear this citadel fleet apart, since citadel torpedoes will do NOTHING to them... Not counting other bomber wings against these cruiser wings. Risk is insta-death of the whole wing entirely. Reward is, if you can plan it right, it would bring havoc to the battlefield and shortens all those hours of fighting into *minutes*. Less server load, quicker deaths, everyone is happy.

If Eve has a logic of having oversized weapons on glass cannons to compete against their bigger brothers, which is indeed out there already, I don't understand people complain against it and calling it "illogical".

So, people is happy to see that a fenrir/providence/etc. goes down with a suicide Tornado fleet and calls it OK within the boundaries of *safe* high-sec, but very sad to see their *defensless* much higher EHP super-cap ship goes down in flames within -0.4 system because of a citadel-equipped-cruiser fleet? Ehm, but where is your defense fleet in this case?

Those, who were yelling to those industrial guys "get some defense if you carry anything important", where are you here? Super-cap itself is important, and if you get caught by a mystrious 10.000 fleet of citadel equipped cruisers, then I simply call it a bad intel, lame gameplay (solo navigation with super-cap?).

I support the OP (leaving doomsday/nuke part out ofc). Apologies if my English sucks.

Edit: Counter for this is to re-enable area of effect on doomsday weapons on titans, which will tear everything apart within radius.

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
M1k3y Koontz
House of Musashi
Stay Feral
#48 - 2014-04-26 11:57:26 UTC
Archimedes Eratosthenes wrote:
Val'Dore wrote:
Just be aware such offensive ability will pretty much make certain it is a paper tank. Which is not a bad thing.


I was thinking making it a Destroyer hull instead. Thin as a dictor, but even slower.


Then they would just be smartbombed since most supers have at least one smartbomb fit, you get 250 of them in a fleet and most of the pods in those fights are killed by smartbombs rather than tacklers.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#49 - 2014-04-26 15:15:04 UTC
There should be some sort of subcap that can utilize citadel torps much like the stealthbombers use standard torps. However the DD that the OP has requested should NOT be looked at.

To keep them on par with the stealthbomber flavor of bomb runs you could have a couple choices...

A. Add a new bomb that can only scrape the paint off subcaps due to the explosion velocity of it (So as not to step in on the current stealthbombers)
B. Give them the ability to fit 2x bomb launchers. This would either let people make back to back bomb runs, or to cut the number of bombers per wave in half.

I did read a couple of posts mentioning having turrets on these ships. This should be a flat out no because they would be much easier to abuse with blapping subcaps when you compare the ease of abuse to missiles.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Rayzilla Zaraki
Yin Jian Enterprises
#50 - 2014-04-26 16:56:48 UTC
I like the concept of a "Boomer" type of ship that is capable of being sneaky and delivering massive destruction. The OP also has a good start with making its tank paper thin. Painfully slow is also a good touch. I don't much care for the rest of the OP's execution of the concept, however.

For the warfare to be at all symmetrical CCP would then need to introduce a counterpart as in an "attack submarine" specifically designed to hunt the cloaked "Boomers". This would bring an interesting new gameplay to Eve for sure but is a slippery slope, nonetheless.

Make the "Boomers" based on the tier 3 battlecruisers and the attacks based on the destroyers introduced last year.

Perhaps allow both to target while cloaked, but must decloak to fire with a slow recloak time.

The "Boomer"'s main weapon would be more powerful than the citadel missiles, but nowhere near that of a doomsday. They could require a 60 second spool up time which slowly decloaks the ship. In game, the ship would fade in and out on the overview, each time staying faded in a little longer. A quick witted target might be able to lock the Boomer, thus decloaking it.

Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues.
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#51 - 2014-04-26 17:16:34 UTC
If there's a weapon that remotely decreases resists, you need a system that increases them remotely to balance it out.

"A City made of Dreams is built in heaven"
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#52 - 2014-04-26 18:18:16 UTC
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
If there's a weapon that remotely decreases resists, you need a system that increases them remotely to balance it out.


Already exists in game, called neuts and remote cap.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Barbara Nichole
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2014-04-26 18:28:12 UTC
this invariably gets suggested every year around this same time....

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#54 - 2014-04-26 18:35:17 UTC
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
If there's a weapon that remotely decreases resists, you need a system that increases them remotely to balance it out.


Already exists in game, called neuts and remote cap.

I said resists, not capacitor.

"A City made of Dreams is built in heaven"
Loraine Gess
Confedeferate Union of Tax Legalists
#55 - 2014-04-26 18:38:46 UTC
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:
I like the concept of a "Boomer" type of ship that is capable of being sneaky and delivering massive destruction. The OP also has a good start with making its tank paper thin. Painfully slow is also a good touch. I don't much care for the rest of the OP's execution of the concept, however.

For the warfare to be at all symmetrical CCP would then need to introduce a counterpart as in an "attack submarine" specifically designed to hunt the cloaked "Boomers". This would bring an interesting new gameplay to Eve for sure but is a slippery slope, nonetheless.

Make the "Boomers" based on the tier 3 battlecruisers and the attacks based on the destroyers introduced last year.

Perhaps allow both to target while cloaked, but must decloak to fire with a slow recloak time.

The "Boomer"'s main weapon would be more powerful than the citadel missiles, but nowhere near that of a doomsday. They could require a 60 second spool up time which slowly decloaks the ship. In game, the ship would fade in and out on the overview, each time staying faded in a little longer. A quick witted target might be able to lock the Boomer, thus decloaking it.




So all we have to do is completely rewrite the cloaking, grid mechanics, overview, and graphics systems to implement a needless complexity that brings nothing to the game?
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#56 - 2014-04-26 18:51:45 UTC
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
If there's a weapon that remotely decreases resists, you need a system that increases them remotely to balance it out.


Already exists in game, called neuts and remote cap.

I said resists, not capacitor.


No cap=no hardeners=reduced resists.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#57 - 2014-04-26 18:59:33 UTC
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
Hopelesshobo wrote:
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
If there's a weapon that remotely decreases resists, you need a system that increases them remotely to balance it out.


Already exists in game, called neuts and remote cap.

I said resists, not capacitor.


No cap=no hardeners=reduced resists.

I said increase, not decrease. His proposal is for a system that'll reduce resists remotely. There's no way to remotely increase them as balance.

"A City made of Dreams is built in heaven"
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#58 - 2014-04-27 06:43:50 UTC
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
Hopelesshobo wrote:


No cap=no hardeners=reduced resists.

I said increase, not decrease. His proposal is for a system that'll reduce resists remotely. There's no way to remotely increase them as balance.


Sorry, I didn't finish my equation...

No cap=no hardeners=reduced resists=request for cap=receive remote cap=turn hardeners on=higher resist

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.
Lephia DeGrande
Luxembourg Space Union
#59 - 2014-04-27 07:42:59 UTC
Maybe wrong thread but what i want is an equalent for a B-52 Bomber that would be cool.

Meet the Mario Kart 8 - Capsuleer Club Cup
shimiku
Zircron Industries
#60 - 2014-04-27 09:23:26 UTC  |  Edited by: shimiku
i found it here you go your subcap to fight supers best subcap EU
and now that you have your subcap that you wanted ofcause you need a capsule to go along with it and here you go you might need some drone skills
Previous page123