These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

I'd like to see tech 2 and tech 3 carriers, dreads, supers, and titans

First post
Author
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#1 - 2014-09-12 04:14:47 UTC
I'd like to see some new tech 2 ships carriers, dreads, supers, and titans. It would be even better if there were tech 3 variants too. It'd be nice to utilize the subsystem skills in a deeper and more meaningful way then they're currently being used.
Torneach Structor
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#2 - 2014-09-12 04:15:29 UTC
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#3 - 2014-09-12 04:16:12 UTC
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.
Torneach Structor
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4 - 2014-09-12 04:27:11 UTC
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#5 - 2014-09-12 04:30:36 UTC
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.


What tactical role do you want them to fill?
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#6 - 2014-09-12 04:43:08 UTC
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.



aww, come on. Who doesn't want PL dynamite fishing with bigger faster better rides. Only choosing them since they'd have the balls to run them I know for sure. Well run them not in pve only. Sure they got picked on for losing a space turd...pilot at least had the balls to run it and not just log in to stare at it lol.

But beyond that....not feeling this really. t2/t3 cap and mommy doctrines.....even with current t1 meta there is divide here between the blob and else.

But I could be persuaded....all op has to say is the new caps and higher for caldari are hybrid based. To have caldari's gun based end game not be a tier 3 bc. I like the rokh, just makes me a little sad to get fullest gun potential I turn to Naga lol.


Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#7 - 2014-09-12 04:46:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Orion Pax
Zan Shiro wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.



aww, come on. Who doesn't want PL dynamite fishing with bigger faster better rides. Only choosing them since they'd have the balls to run them I know for sure. Well run them not in pve only. Sure they got picked on for losing a space turd...pilot at least had the balls to run it and not just log in to stare at it lol.

But beyond that....not feeling this really. t2/t3 cap and mommy doctrines.....even with current t1 meta there is divide here between the blob and else.

But I could be persuaded....all op has to say is the new caps and higher for caldari are hybrid based. To have caldari's gun based end game not be a tier 3 bc. I like the rokh, just makes me a little sad to get fullest gun potential I turn to Naga lol.




I like people that can be persuaded and that sounds like an great idea. We can let CCP sort out the details.

Done! Blink

Also check out this video: http://youtu.be/bv7vPtXdWnk
Torneach Structor
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#8 - 2014-09-12 04:48:24 UTC
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.


What tactical role do you want them to fill?

You're the one making the suggestion. Burden's on you for suggesting it.
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#9 - 2014-09-12 04:51:03 UTC
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.


What tactical role do you want them to fill?

You're the one making the suggestion. Burden's on you for suggesting it.


I don't care as long as we get new big ships to blow up. CCP can handle the details. You can make suggestions in the direction you would like this idea to go.
Torneach Structor
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#10 - 2014-09-12 05:20:17 UTC
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:

More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.


What tactical role do you want them to fill?

You're the one making the suggestion. Burden's on you for suggesting it.


I don't care as long as we get new big ships to blow up. CCP can handle the details. You can make suggestions in the direction you would like this idea to go.

Into the ground, since as it stands, the proposal has no merit.
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#11 - 2014-09-12 05:25:07 UTC
Torneach Structor wrote:

Into the ground, since as it stands, the proposal has no merit.


Well, make it have some merit. It's an open idea. We're brainstorming here.
Asuka Solo
I N E X T R E M I S
Tactical Narcotics Team
#12 - 2014-09-12 05:32:56 UTC
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.


Its the only justification.

More capital things to blow up = more capital PvP = yayness.

On a more serious note:

T1 carriers of today need to become:

T1 Carriers of tomorrow:
- 1 logi wannabe variant. (existing carriers - kill the ability to use sentry drones and un-nerf fighters)

- 1 Drone boat variant (pure DPS, add new and better fighter drones that ccan actually gank sub caps and presto)

- 1 hybrid weapon (drones & turrets / missiles) variant for semi-solo anti cap / anti super fun.

T2 Carriers of tomorrow:
- 1 pure Logi carrier (reps like a boss - ala Guardians / Basies anybody?) - No point to have t2 sub cap logi's if t1 will do nicely with your "not a reason argument"... if sub capitals can have t2 versions that are just better than the t1 version for no other reason... then so can Capitals.

- 1 pure advanced fighter / drone Carrier (black ops / recon role - cloaky warpable / covert cyno (jump with no cyno?) carriers that allow players to see what their drones are seeing, allow more playability with fighter drones... maybe even give this carrier fighter bombers)

- 1 heavy carrier (semi super carrier with lots of hybrid weapon system DPS bonuses) - chews through large sub caps / capitals and supers like lightsabers through butter.

T1 Dreads of today need to become:

T1 Dreads of tomorrow:
- 1 Siege boat (already in place)

- 1 Battleboat (Battleship version of a Dread, complete with capital MWD / Afterburners & more turrets / missiles without siege, give this ship a new weapon system (flak turrets or something of the like) to break up large groups of sub caps - force them apart the way interdictors were supposed to with pure firepower. Make this weapon system an anti-kiting system that does more damage to smaller ships with med-high transversals / orbiting you at range etc)

- 1 E-war dread (for pure anti super e-war)

T2 Dreads of tomorrow:
- T2 siege boat: give this dread the turret / missile tracking of old dreads (allow blapping in siege) with moar DPS against stationary or very large ships. More tankyness.

- T2 Capital Interdictor (Locks down jumpdrives and cynos / bridging capabilities with an AoE module - like a HIC). This will be a pure anti super / anti capital / anti-support / anti logistics (moving) ship. Change up bubble mechanics to only prevent warp drives and not jump drives.Also split disruptor / scrambler module(s) ability to prevent jump drives from activating, forcing cap fleets to have these to tackle / lock down capitals / supers.

- t2 dread e-war boats with tanky hulls (only ships that can use e-war on supers). ECM, Neuting, damps, tracking nerfs etc.

I'd also like to see a super dread someday... for lolz.

Eve is about Capital ships, WiS, Boobs, PI and Isk!

ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#13 - 2014-09-12 05:38:48 UTC
Bad idea.

Tech 2 ships are traditionally "specialist" ships... and capitals in general are already hyper-specialized for a Tech 1 ship (similar to Attack Battlecruisers). You can't make carriers more of a logistics ship than they already are... you can't give them more damage dealing ability because then they would step on the toes of Supercarriers... you can't make a specialized Dreadnought... it is what it already is... and Titans represent the ultimate in capital warfare and fleet support.

Tech 3 ships are supposed to be "generalist" ships that are not as good as Tech 2 ships in any specific respect, but incorporate all the different aspects of Tech 2 ships into one... but never at the same time (NOTE: this is supposedly the vision the DEVs have for T3s).
If you make capital ships more versatile than they are (like they USED to be) then you open the doors for previously bad gameplay than only reinforced the powerbases of older, richer players.
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#14 - 2014-09-12 05:41:08 UTC
Asuka Solo wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
Orion Pax wrote:
Torneach Structor wrote:
What tactical role do you see these ships filling?


More things to blow up.

That's hardly justification for implementing the suggestion.


Its the only justification.

More capital things to blow up = more capital PvP = yayness.

On a more serious note:

T1 carriers of today need to become:

T1 Carriers of tomorrow:
- 1 logi wannabe variant. (existing carriers - kill the ability to use sentry drones and un-nerf fighters)

- 1 Drone boat variant (pure DPS, add new and better fighter drones that ccan actually gank sub caps and presto)

- 1 hybrid weapon (drones & turrets / missiles) variant for semi-solo anti cap / anti super fun.

T2 Carriers of tomorrow:
- 1 pure Logi carrier (reps like a boss - ala Guardians / Basies anybody?) - No point to have t2 sub cap logi's if t1 will do nicely with your "not a reason argument"... if sub capitals can have t2 versions that are just better than the t1 version for no other reason... then so can Capitals.

- 1 pure advanced fighter / drone Carrier (black ops / recon role - cloaky warpable / covert cyno (jump with no cyno?) carriers that allow players to see what their drones are seeing, allow more playability with fighter drones... maybe even give this carrier fighter bombers)

- 1 heavy carrier (semi super carrier with lots of hybrid weapon system DPS bonuses) - chews through large sub caps / capitals and supers like lightsabers through butter.

T1 Dreads of today need to become:

T1 Dreads of tomorrow:
- 1 Siege boat (already in place)

- 1 Battleboat (Battleship version of a Dread, complete with capital MWD / Afterburners & more turrets / missiles without siege, give this ship a new weapon system (flak turrets or something of the like) to break up large groups of sub caps - force them apart the way interdictors were supposed to with pure firepower. Make this weapon system an anti-kiting system that does more damage to smaller ships with med-high transversals / orbiting you at range etc)

- 1 E-war dread (for pure anti super e-war)

T2 Dreads of tomorrow:
- T2 siege boat: give this dread the turret / missile tracking of old dreads (allow blapping in siege) with moar DPS against stationary or very large ships. More tankyness.

- T2 Capital Interdictor (Locks down jumpdrives and cynos / bridging capabilities with an AoE module - like a HIC). This will be a pure anti super / anti capital / anti-support / anti logistics (moving) ship. Change up bubble mechanics to only prevent warp drives and not jump drives.Also split disruptor / scrambler module(s) ability to prevent jump drives from activating, forcing cap fleets to have these to tackle / lock down capitals / supers.

- t2 dread e-war boats with tanky hulls (only ships that can use e-war on supers). ECM, Neuting, damps, tracking nerfs etc.

I'd also like to see a super dread someday... for lolz.



Now we're talking.
Tabyll Altol
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2014-09-12 05:53:39 UTC
Pls start to post an Idea.

This is not you have 3 wishes for free.
The Idea i want more ships/things to blow up is not really an idea, it´s an statement.


Should be closed because of :



23. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#16 - 2014-09-12 05:59:40 UTC
I would not be opposed to T2 Dreads and Carriers.

I would be vehemently opposed to T2 Moms and Titans. I'm already vehemently opposed to T1 Moms and Titans.

Get rid of T1 Moms and Titans and you'll have a role for T2 Dreads and Carriers to fill. Not only that, but those roles can be somewhat properly balanced this time around, too.
Sigras
Conglomo
#17 - 2014-09-12 06:27:56 UTC
Ok, so here's the problem with suggesting "new ships" without any further thought.

The ships are going to have a role, all ships have a role, and if it's role overlaps with another ship's role, it's either going to be better, worse, or the same (obviously)

If it is better
Then the old ship is never used and you end up shooting at the exact same number of different kinds of ships.

If it is worse
The new ship is never used and you end up shooting at the exact same number of different kinds of ships.

if it is the same
Both ships are used and you end up fighting two ships with the exact same abilities, different names and different skins

Try putting some thought into posts before wasting CCP web server resources on them.
Orion Pax
Yoyodyne corporation
#18 - 2014-09-12 06:31:35 UTC
Tabyll Altol wrote:
Pls start to post an Idea.

This is not you have 3 wishes for free.
The Idea i want more ships/things to blow up is not really an idea, it´s an statement.


Should be closed because of :



23. Post constructively.

Negative feedback can be very useful to further improve EVE Online provided that it is presented in a civil and factual manner. All users are encouraged to honestly express their feelings regarding EVE Online and how it can be improved. Posts that are non-constructive, insulting or in breach of the rules will be deleted regardless of how valid the ideas behind them may be. Users are also reminded that posting with a lack of content also constitutes non-constructive posting.



I started Eve a long time ago. Near the beginning, perhaps it was 2005? I don't remember. The game has come a long way and it's a lot better than it used to be. However, it's also lost a sense of wonder. A sense where anything is possible and the end game is so far away, it's just a single star in the sky.

In the beginning people didn't know what they were doing. There was so much content that was there, but no one had yet touched any of it. It was all a vast ocean with distant mountains that seemed so far and amazing. Well, we've crossed the ocean and reached the mountains. We've arrived. Titans are everywhere. And guess what? Games slowly die out when people have tried everything.

So how can we prolong the inevitable? We create new distant mountains. We rekindle a sense of awe and wonder in this huge expanse we call space. We need a massive injection of new goals that seem impossible. Yet maybe, just maybe they are possible with time.

The suggestions I made are bigger goals which will prolong Eve's life span.

The truth is we need game changers. Perhaps something like an alien race which has organic ships which fight in totally different ways than the currently available ships. And then we could reverse engineer these ships and produce them ourselves. It would be a big change since we would have these different ships with different requirements and mods plus they would have to be balanced within the Eve universe. I'm not saying we should do this idea.

I'm encouraging brainstorming.

I've done my part. We need CCP to do theirs.
Sigras
Conglomo
#19 - 2014-09-12 06:48:54 UTC
you're right, we need new challenges, new mountains... but we need them to be thought out, well planned, not haphazard and ridiculous like "we need new ships with no plan and no idea what they should do"

If you want to start a discussion, try starting it by asking what kind of ships the community would like to see put into the game instead of throwing out suggestions of two very specific ships and then saying you have no idea what they should do.
Luwc
State War Academy
Caldari State
#20 - 2014-09-12 07:07:29 UTC
I'd like to see less obvious troll posts

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

12Next page