These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Idea: Smartbomb Alternative - Passive highslot Point Defense System
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Wylde Kardde
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2015-03-19 17:34:18 UTC
New idea: PDS "point defense system", I intended this to only fit capital ships but a Battleship version could be ok too. IMO it should be a part of the game only seen in EvE's "endgame" null capital battles. Instead of fitting a cap draining smart bomb to fight off drones why not have a passive point defense system with an abundance of frigate to cruiser sized turrets spread discreetly around the hull. One module equipped would visually put all the guns on the ship hull and any additional PDS modules fitted would just increase damage and NOT cover the ship in 200 little turrets. I understand lag is a big issue but technology always improves, nobody would have expected the level of visual detail of turrets we have now back in 2008 so I think this could be done.

The range would stay the same as a smart bomb just different mechanics and some sort of good AI targeting since it's passive. It's main role is fighting drones and with CCP adding drone bays to everything these days it just seems like the right time to fight back (in game). It would have some stacking penalties but the main goal is to have a general buffer effect when being swarmed without losing focus on things.

In all I don't know much about capitals but I did read somewhere that CCP is trying to include new visual things on ships that change shape such as panels open closing on warp/ bastion module/ T3 destroyers.. So if any capital pilots can chime in and add to this would be appreciated. The video in my sig shows a PDS system mod for the game Homeworld 2, the blue ship 1/2 way into video is actually shooting incoming missiles and fighters.

The Origional Intention of Pirate BS's... pvp

Nightmare X-type Burn out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyajGLoe0Kc
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#2 - 2015-03-19 19:46:39 UTC
So you basically want a smartbomb that you can use in highsec without potential issue, and that doesn't take up as much cap as a smarty, and that can distinguish your drones from enemy drones and only shoot their drones?

Yeah no. -1
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2015-03-19 19:54:27 UTC
Yeah its a good idea. I've no idea why CCP thinks large ships shouldn't have an array of small gun turrets for small ship and missile defense....

"The primary armament of an Iowa-class battleship consisted of nine breech-loading 16 inch (406 mm)/50-caliber Mark 7 naval guns. The secondary battery was a dual-purpose weapon system; it was designed to defend the ship from either surface or airborne threats. The original secondary battery consisted of 10 Mark 28, Mod 2 twin gun mounts. Iowa-class battleships were all intended to carry a fearsome array of anti-aircraft guns to protect US aircraft carriers from Japanese fighters and dive bombers. This array included up to 20 quad 40 mm mounts and 49 single 20 mm mounts."

So 9 main guns, 10 medium sized guns, and 69 small anti-aircraft guns.

vs

Battleships in EvE ... 6 to 8 large guns.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#4 - 2015-03-19 19:57:42 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
~snip~


Because it is a very deliberate game design choice that larger ships have difficulty in clearing smaller faster ships.

Realism as always takes a very very very far back seat to game design.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#5 - 2015-03-19 20:20:10 UTC
Either use a smart bomb or get friends

-1

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Wylde Kardde
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2015-03-19 22:06:19 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
So you basically want a smartbomb that you can use in highsec without potential issue, and that doesn't take up as much cap as a smarty, and that can distinguish your drones from enemy drones and only shoot their drones?

Yeah no. -1


I definitely said capitals meaning 0.0 what're u smokin

The Origional Intention of Pirate BS's... pvp

Nightmare X-type Burn out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyajGLoe0Kc
Garnoo
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
#7 - 2015-03-19 22:07:32 UTC
but thats a step towards 'universal' ship that can counter/defend against almost everything and... i dont like itPirate

People are going to try to ruin your day. Get together with others, ruin their day back -  EvE
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#8 - 2015-03-19 22:12:27 UTC
Wylde Kardde wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
So you basically want a smartbomb that you can use in highsec without potential issue, and that doesn't take up as much cap as a smarty, and that can distinguish your drones from enemy drones and only shoot their drones?

Yeah no. -1


I definitely said capitals meaning 0.0 what're u smokin


Wylde Kardde wrote:
but a Battleship version could be ok too.


Psss... caps are in lowsec as well, and in the future, potentially highsec in a neutered form.

Still doesn't change the fact that capitals weakness of being unable to easily clear small tackle and drones is not something arrived at by accident, it is 100% a fully intended part of gameplay.

A couple years ago, CCP removed drones from the Dreadnaughts and Titans that had them, for the explicit reason of "We believe that these ships should require escorts of smaller ships to defend against subcaps."

Your idea is not going to happen.
Wylde Kardde
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2015-03-19 22:18:02 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Wylde Kardde wrote:
Anhenka wrote:
So you basically want a smartbomb that you can use in highsec without potential issue, and that doesn't take up as much cap as a smarty, and that can distinguish your drones from enemy drones and only shoot their drones?

Yeah no. -1


I definitely said capitals meaning 0.0 what're u smokin


Wylde Kardde wrote:
but a Battleship version could be ok too.


Psss... caps are in lowsec as well, and in the future, potentially highsec in a neutered form.

Still doesn't change the fact that capitals weakness of being unable to easily clear small tackle and drones is not something arrived at by accident, it is 100% a fully intended part of gameplay.

A couple years ago, CCP removed drones from the Dreadnaughts and Titans that had them, for the explicit reason of "We believe that these ships should require escorts of smaller ships to defend against subcaps."

Your idea is not going to happen.


Your probably right, I wasn't sure what people would think about it, just trying to put out some ideas out, thanks for the feedback though

The Origional Intention of Pirate BS's... pvp

Nightmare X-type Burn out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyajGLoe0Kc
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#10 - 2015-03-20 11:14:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Infinity Ziona
Anhenka wrote:
Infinity Ziona wrote:
~snip~


Because it is a very deliberate game design choice that larger ships have difficulty in clearing smaller faster ships.

Realism as always takes a very very very far back seat to game design.

Might be deliberate but its extremely stupid. Moreso that the reverse is not true, small ships don't have any difficulty clearing larger slower ships.

CCP Fozzie “We can see how much money people are making in nullsec and it is, a gigantic amount, a shit-ton… in null sec anomalies. “*

Kaalrus pwned..... :)
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2015-03-20 11:15:47 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
So you basically want a smartbomb that you can use in highsec without potential issue, and that doesn't take up as much cap as a smarty, and that can distinguish your drones from enemy drones and only shoot their drones?

Yeah no. -1



For much smaller dps and affecting only 1 target at a time does not sound as a reasonable tradeoff?

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Chance Ravinne
WiNGSPAN Delivery Services
WiNGSPAN Delivery Network
#12 - 2015-03-20 16:53:58 UTC
There's always the option of fitting a small weapon. It's stupid but the option is there!

You've just read another awesome post by Chance Ravinne, CEO of EVE's #1 torpedo delivery service. Watch our misadventures on my YouTube channel: WINGSPANTT
Iain Cariaba
#13 - 2015-03-20 17:16:22 UTC
Infinity Ziona wrote:
Yeah its a good idea. I've no idea why CCP thinks large ships shouldn't have an array of small gun turrets for small ship and missile defense....

"The primary armament of an Iowa-class battleship consisted of nine breech-loading 16 inch (406 mm)/50-caliber Mark 7 naval guns. The secondary battery was a dual-purpose weapon system; it was designed to defend the ship from either surface or airborne threats. The original secondary battery consisted of 10 Mark 28, Mod 2 twin gun mounts. Iowa-class battleships were all intended to carry a fearsome array of anti-aircraft guns to protect US aircraft carriers from Japanese fighters and dive bombers. This array included up to 20 quad 40 mm mounts and 49 single 20 mm mounts."

So 9 main guns, 10 medium sized guns, and 69 small anti-aircraft guns.

vs

Battleships in EvE ... 6 to 8 large guns.

Um, yeah. About that....
Wikipedia wrote:
In addition to the aircraft carried on board, the ships carry defensive equipment for use against missiles and hostile aircraft. These consist of either three or four NATO RIM-7 Sea Sparrow missile launchers designed for defense against aircraft and anti-ship missiles as well as either three or four 20 mm Phalanx CIWS missile defense cannon. USS Ronald Reagan has none of these, having been built with the RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missile system, two of which have also been installed on USS Nimitz and USS George Washington. These will be installed on the other ships as they return for Refueling Complex Overhaul (RCOH).[3][15] Since USS Theodore Roosevelt, the carriers have been constructed with 2.5 in (64 mm) Kevlar armor over vital spaces, and earlier ships have been retrofitted with it: Nimitz in 1983–1984, Eisenhower from 1985–1987 and Vinson in 1989.[2][22]

The other countermeasures the ships use are four Sippican SRBOC (super rapid bloom off-board chaff) six-barrel MK36 decoy launchers, which deploy infrared Flare (countermeasure) and chaff to disrupt the sensors of incoming missiles; an SSTDS torpedo defense system; and an AN/SLQ-25 Nixie torpedo countermeasures system. The carriers also use AN/SLQ-32(V) Radar jamming and deception systems to detect and disrupt hostile radar signals in addition to the electronic warfare capabilities of some of the aircraft on board.

Notice the Nimitz class carrier used by the US Navy also has lots of armaments besides its fighters. Even with that additional armament, it still travels as part of a battle group.