These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

What I think the Winter Expansion Should Include: Ships/Deployables/Ammo/Sov

Author
El'Niaga
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2011-09-10 05:47:58 UTC  |  Edited by: El'Niaga
Some ship ideas;

Tech 1 Tier 3 Battlecruiser for each race (Level 3 in Battlecruiser)

Tech 1 Tier 4 Battleship for each race (make the Amarr, Minmatar, and Gallente ones EW Battleships for appropriate type EW) (Level 4 in Racial Battleship)

Heavy Battlecruiser (Take model of Tech 1 Tier 2 Battlecruiser, reskin, these can mount 1-2 capital weapons, have 4 instead of 8 high slots, bonus to fitting capital weapons and capital weapon damage, new t2 class) (Level 1 in Heavy Battlecruiser, new t2 ship skill)

Heavy Stealth Bomber (Destroyer scale bomber, main difference is it can fit another bomb launcher making 2 launchers possible per bomber, probably another t2 class requiring level 5 in covert ops) (Level 1 in Heavy Stealth Bomber, new t2 ship skill)

Minelayer (tech 2 tier 3 transport, modified blockade runner, specialized hold to carry minefields (see below) (Level 3 in transport)

Minesweeper (tech 1 tier 3 destroyer, can fit a mod that removes minefields by reducing minefield duration) (Level 3 in Destroyer)

EW Dreadnought (tech 1 tier 2 Dreadnought, fits capital EW mods by race that can affect Supercarriers and Titans) (Level 2 in Racial Dreadnought)

Drone Interdictor (tech 2 tier 2 Interdictor, bubble deals damage to drones/fighters/fighter bombers, does not stop warp) (Level 2 in Interdictor)

Heavy Drone Interdictor (tech 2 tier 2 Heavy Interdictor, again bubble damages drones/fighters/fighter bombers) (Level 3 in Heavy Interdictor)

Subspace Interdictor (tech 2 tier 3 Interdictor, bubble acts as a web effect, subspace bubble and warp bubbles cannot coexist in same space, whichever is launched first takes precedence) (Level 3 in Interdictor)

Heavy Subspace Interdictor (tech 2 tier 3 Heavy Interdictor, as the Subspace Interdictor just heavier module) (Level 3 in Heavy Interdictor)


Some ammo ideas:

Decloaker Bomb (30km radius, any cloaked ship within its area of effect has its cloaking device turned off. Note the pilot can just turn it back on if he's active after the module cooldown time.)

Some Deployable Ideas:

Decloaker Field (Like the bomb above it works like mobile warp disruptors except it decloaks the enemy ship in the bubble rather than stopping warp.)

Subspace Disruption Field (Like Warp Disrupt Bubble except has web effect, the subspace and warp bubbles cannot exist in the same area of space....no overlapping, have to be anchored at least 5km from the edge of each others fields.)

Minefield (Works like a Warp Disrupt bubble except instead of stopping warp deals damage to all in its bubble (t2 ones have fof recognition attacking only enemies in the field), there is a time limit after anchoring that the field will work......minimum I'd suggest is 8 hours, the minesweeper above reduces duration by half an hour per cycle of its minesweeper, with a cycle time probably of around 30 seconds to a minute)

Some New Sovereignty Ideas:

Outpost Guns (These are anchorable outside the Outpost in a system, 1 per sovereignty level held, obviously each race has its own type, you must anchor the same racial type as the Outpost is. Does require an additional level 2 sovereignty plug in for ihub)

Gate Guns (No more than 2 gate guns per gate, guns installed must match gate type, again another sovereignty plug in probably a level 4 sov plug in for the ihub)

Ice Accumulater (works like the ore upgrades. It is a level 2 or 3 industry plug in for the ihub, belt will match gate types in system....for example if its a gallente gate then you'll get blue ice, etc; a higher level plug in might get a belt with special ice types but obviously would require a higher industry level)

Patrol Base ( It creates another destroyable base at a planet other than where the outpost is. This is a patrol base where NPC controlled ships help patrol your gates (and only gates). There is a catch though, you have to supply the NPC patrolmen with ships, if they lose their ships they need new ships. They also can't fit all those fancy gizmos you have, so basically its just t1 fitted t1 ships cruiser and lower for Patrol Base 1 (level 3 sov updgrade), battlecruiser and lower for Patrol Base II (level 4 sov upgrade), and battleship and lower for Patrol Base III (level 5 sov upgrade). The patrol base is vulnerable to attack and roughly has the same hitpoints etc as a small tower pos. If it is destroyed you have to replace it and any ships that were in it before the patrols resume. A patrol base can only support 10 ships at a time. If patrol base is attacked all patrol ships will move to defend the patrol base to the best of their ability, however you better help them or they'll die fast. Note enemy raids will no doubt take what you fit your patrol with after they die :).

General Changes to 0.0:

Any system with fewer than 6 static belts is brought up to 6 belts.
The required amount to both get and maintain industry index is made one quarter what it is today to entice more miners to 0.0.
The amount of minisites from sov upgrades is doubled. (excluding wormholes which aren't minisites just saying that for clarity).
Any constellation that does not have 1 ice belt is given an ice belt in a random system (if constellation has system with less than 6 static belts as above put the ice belt in it to help get it to 6)

EDIT 1: Edited in what level of which skill they would be to try to make it more clear.
Acac Sunflyier
The Dysfunctionals
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2011-09-10 06:26:07 UTC
I do think there should be more ships added to game. I'd like to see more t2 BC Roles. I even forsee a use for the t3 bc. However, a t4 Battleship, are you nuts? What qould the prerecs be? Also, you do realzie that after a t3 ship explodes, the pilot looses SP right? What happens when a t4 explodes? I see t4 being unfeasible for the time.
El'Niaga
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#3 - 2011-09-10 06:33:10 UTC  |  Edited by: El'Niaga
Not tech 4, tier 4 (like Level 4 in MInmatar Battleship). Hmm wonder how I could make that more plain.

tier is level in base skill :), tech is the technology level. I didn't suggest any t3 ships above or modules though the long promised t3 frigates and battleships would be nice, I'd love though to see a t3 ship that combined industrial/transport/mining barge/exhumer features.

For example they need to drop the new roles.

There are no counterparts to the Scorpion, why exactly hasn't the Amarr built a turret disrupting Battleship, the Gallente a remote sensor dampening battleship, and the Minmatar a target painting battleship?

So basically (Theoritical names)

Blizzard: Target Painting Battleship (Level 4 Minmatar Battleship)
Iconoclasm: Tracking Disruptor Battleship (Level 4 Amarr Battleship)
Selene: Remote Sensor Damping Battleship (Level 4 Gallente Battleship......note this is not for Selene in PL, it fits the naming pattern of Gallente ships, and is the only child of Hyperion so far that doesn't have a ship named for them).

They would serve as long range EW platforms much like the current Scorpion does for the Caldari.

You'd need a level 4 Caldari Battleship too. I'd probably make another hybrid battleship for them. Instead of the optimal range bonus a damange bonus and instead of shield resist bonus I'd give it a falloff bonus for large hybrids of course. Call it the Ghost.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2011-09-10 07:19:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Well because there's no real point to an Amarr TD BS, either it would have not enough mids to be worthwhile or it would be the Amarr Shield BS. You could give it an energy neuting/nosing bonus, but that would obsolete the Blood Raider's one worthwhile ship, the Bhaalgorn.

And TPs on a battleship just suck.
Acac Sunflyier
The Dysfunctionals
Goonswarm Federation
#5 - 2011-09-10 07:37:52 UTC
I'd like to see more unique hulls for pirate ships, such as caldari and gallente ship hull skins. They need a complete redo. Why is it if you're a gallente primary, and fly things like a vindicator or a vigilant, you end up flying a different color hull of a megathron and throax respectivly? Especially when there is a machariel and a nightmare which combine empire skills but get a totally unique look. Please fix this ccp. It's lame!
El'Niaga
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2011-09-10 08:30:23 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Well because there's no real point to an Amarr TD BS, either it would have not enough mids to be worthwhile or it would be the Amarr Shield BS. You could give it an energy neuting/nosing bonus, but that would obsolete the Blood Raider's one worthwhile ship, the Bhaalgorn.

And TPs on a battleship just suck.


Why do you think TD would have no point?

You do realize that you can effective cut the range in half of most battleships. While perhaps sniping fleets aren't as common as they once were they are still used. Take for example normal engagement range of around 50-70km which is typical for the DRF Abaddon fleets. A tracking disrupting ship say that even just fit 4 such mods could effectively cut the range on 2-4 battleships enough to eliminate their DPS at that range. Probably just need 4 mids (maybe 5 so can have MWD/AB). That's only 1 more than the Abaddon if its 5. Sure I guess you could put a shield tank on it but Gallente, Caldari and Minmatar already have multiple ships that can be tanked either way and it would not be the best ship if you did so since you wouldn't be playing to its strengths.

You give it bonuses like

Iconoclasm

Amarr Battleship Skill Bonus:
15% bonus to Tracking Disruptor strength per level
20% bonus to Tracking Disruptor optimal and falloff range per level

Also a TPing battleship would not suck if you're fighting smaller ships.

Sample bonuses of Blizzard:

Blizzard

Minmatar Battleship Skill Bonus:
15% bonus to Target Painter strength per level
20% bonus to Target Painter optimal and falloff range per level

If your in a cruiser you might be in serious trouble you come across one of these. Sure against other battleships not as useful, but against smaller ships extremely useful as battlefield support.
El'Niaga
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2011-09-10 08:31:31 UTC
Acac Sunflyier wrote:
I'd like to see more unique hulls for pirate ships, such as caldari and gallente ship hull skins. They need a complete redo. Why is it if you're a gallente primary, and fly things like a vindicator or a vigilant, you end up flying a different color hull of a megathron and throax respectivly? Especially when there is a machariel and a nightmare which combine empire skills but get a totally unique look. Please fix this ccp. It's lame!


Oh I'd love to see more combo ships and more unique hulls myself.

I'd like to see what the Ammatar built combing Amarr and Minmatar elements.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#8 - 2011-09-10 09:24:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
El'Niaga wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Well because there's no real point to an Amarr TD BS, either it would have not enough mids to be worthwhile or it would be the Amarr Shield BS. You could give it an energy neuting/nosing bonus, but that would obsolete the Blood Raider's one worthwhile ship, the Bhaalgorn.

And TPs on a battleship just suck.


Why do you think TD would have no point?

You do realize that you can effective cut the range in half of most battleships. While perhaps sniping fleets aren't as common as they once were they are still used. Take for example normal engagement range of around 50-70km which is typical for the DRF Abaddon fleets. A tracking disrupting ship say that even just fit 4 such mods could effectively cut the range on 2-4 battleships enough to eliminate their DPS at that range. Probably just need 4 mids (maybe 5 so can have MWD/AB). That's only 1 more than the Abaddon if its 5. Sure I guess you could put a shield tank on it but Gallente, Caldari and Minmatar already have multiple ships that can be tanked either way and it would not be the best ship if you did so since you wouldn't be playing to its strengths.

1) 25k is not much range to cover, especially against slow, armor tanked battleships with no cap or damage bonuses. Now I suppose the TD fleet could try and kite the enemy BS fleet, but if you're going to be using your MWD and your non-cap bonused lasers, you're also going to be needing a cap booster in your mids as well just to keep your ship moving, which means you'll need at least 5-6 mids unless you want your ewar BS to have only 1-2 mods devoted to TD. And 5-6 mids can make a decent shield tank instead. In any case, TDs don't really effect titans or fighter bombers so I'm not sure how it would give an edge over the DRF.
2) TDs are useless against a drake blob. FCs aren't going to adopt a fleet doctrine that can't handle a drake blob.
3) Shield over TDs are more reliable in more situations (see #2)
4) Shield over TDs allow Amarr-only pilots to join fleets that are using shield logistics (and numbers are everything, really)
5) Shield over TDs free up the Amarr-style heaping helping of low slots to fit with tracking enhancers and heat sinks instead of tank.
El'Niaga
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#9 - 2011-09-10 09:33:39 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
El'Niaga wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Well because there's no real point to an Amarr TD BS, either it would have not enough mids to be worthwhile or it would be the Amarr Shield BS. You could give it an energy neuting/nosing bonus, but that would obsolete the Blood Raider's one worthwhile ship, the Bhaalgorn.

And TPs on a battleship just suck.


Why do you think TD would have no point?

You do realize that you can effective cut the range in half of most battleships. While perhaps sniping fleets aren't as common as they once were they are still used. Take for example normal engagement range of around 50-70km which is typical for the DRF Abaddon fleets. A tracking disrupting ship say that even just fit 4 such mods could effectively cut the range on 2-4 battleships enough to eliminate their DPS at that range. Probably just need 4 mids (maybe 5 so can have MWD/AB). That's only 1 more than the Abaddon if its 5. Sure I guess you could put a shield tank on it but Gallente, Caldari and Minmatar already have multiple ships that can be tanked either way and it would not be the best ship if you did so since you wouldn't be playing to its strengths.

1) 25k is not much range to cover, especially against slow, armor tanked battleships with no cap or damage bonuses.
In any case, TDs don't really effect titans or fighter bombers so I'm not sure how it would give an edge over the DRF.
2) TDs are useless against a drake blob. FCs aren't going to adopt a fleet doctrine that can't handle a drake blob.
3) Shield over TDs are more reliable in more situations (see #2)
4) Shield over TDs allow Amarr-only pilots to join fleets that are using shield logistics (and numbers are everything, really)
5) Shield over TDs free up the Amarr-style heaping helping of low slots to fit with tracking enhancers and heat sinks instead of tank.


It can make a difference. They wouldn't have a very strong shield tank if that's a concern give it a low shield hp to start with. You've never had the option of a long range TD so you can't say what some would do. Most fleets fail because they fail to balance their fleets. I'll give some props to Goons as they typically have a main battle line, sufficient logistics, sufficient EW and then enough small tackle to be highly effective, its a much better fleet composition than most alliances field.

Drakes true can't be tracking disrupted, but you make your EW force versatile. If they are facing drakes use Scorpions and jam them or use the Selene above to Remote Sensor Damp them. The Blizzard could easily raise their sig radius to that of a dreadnought. So you'd leave the Iconoclasm behind when facing them using the other 3. EW is the most underused portion of the game. The Selene for example would also help close those gaps allowing the Gallente ships to get within close range....where you don't want to be if they are carrying blasters.
Pere Madeleine
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2011-09-10 09:48:20 UTC
Don't think anybody's pointed this out yet, but what's the point in a ship with 2 bomb launchers? You could still only have a maximum of 6 bombs on the same target at once before they start blowing each other up before they can explode. All it would achieve would be to halve the number of players needed to perform a bombing run, but in that case you might as well take the bomb launcher off the stealth bomber, because they'd be totally obsolete for that purpose.
El'Niaga
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#11 - 2011-09-10 09:54:49 UTC
Pere Madeleine wrote:
Don't think anybody's pointed this out yet, but what's the point in a ship with 2 bomb launchers? You could still only have a maximum of 6 bombs on the same target at once before they start blowing each other up before they can explode. All it would achieve would be to halve the number of players needed to perform a bombing run, but in that case you might as well take the bomb launcher off the stealth bomber, because they'd be totally obsolete for that purpose.


It was just an idea. Bombers are probably used more without their bomb launchers than with.

Still I suppose its a valid point, it would give you the option of carrying two different types at the same time ready to launch, though obviously you couldn't release both at the same time (unless it was like 2 voids or void/lockbreaker etc)

I suppose in lieu of a second bomb launcher you could have the heavy stealth bomber have a special hold with cargo space to only hold bombs. Maybe enough space to carry 6 bombs in it.
Ineka
Doomheim
#12 - 2011-09-10 11:03:34 UTC
While I like some ideas about Tp TD and Damps it's plain useless since those can't totaly neutralise your opponent has CM does.

TP's need their bonus increased over 100% (imho) to start being really interesting

TD should be able to neutralise completely any turret range either with distance script or tracking script and even then once aligned you can shoot stuff, no point on using this one while neut is far more efficient

Damps: again reduces a 70+ targeting ship to 15km, it's not bad but not completely neutralised

ECM = neutralised target = better choice over all even if those above can help, ECM in the same situation will always be superior

I would like to see new ships but rather see balance stuff than new ships already broken before they get in the market
Gellenter Pl
Doomheim
#13 - 2011-09-12 23:14:50 UTC
a new ships models should be a good idea. There are some ships in a game, witch are considered to be ugly
El'Niaga
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#14 - 2011-09-14 07:07:51 UTC
Ineka wrote:
While I like some ideas about Tp TD and Damps it's plain useless since those can't totaly neutralise your opponent has CM does.

TP's need their bonus increased over 100% (imho) to start being really interesting

TD should be able to neutralise completely any turret range either with distance script or tracking script and even then once aligned you can shoot stuff, no point on using this one while neut is far more efficient

Damps: again reduces a 70+ targeting ship to 15km, it's not bad but not completely neutralised

ECM = neutralised target = better choice over all even if those above can help, ECM in the same situation will always be superior

I would like to see new ships but rather see balance stuff than new ships already broken before they get in the market


There is not balance, there never is. Its a constant argument and you can never achieve it unless everyone has the same skills and in the same ship with the same mods in this case using the exact same computer specs and exact same internet connection speed.

Some folks don't pay as close attention in battle, thus in some cases TDs that lower optimal range are more useful than CM. Someone loses his lock he warps off, TD doesn't cause target loss but does effectively remove the ship from battle.

A more mixed EW balance such as some Scorps, some Iconoclasms, etc also makes it harder to fit to counter your EW. Sure one guy might have an ECCM and the CM guy fail, but not likely he has something to counter all 3 types (TD, RSD, and CM).
Emperor Salazar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#15 - 2011-09-14 13:08:13 UTC
Yeah none of that is going to happen.

In a game like Eve where balance is so volatile, adding that many new ship types would basically destroy any semblance of existing balance. No one can predict all of the possible repercussions of those additions. Just look at the huge changes we saw in warfare with the changes made to supercarriers (formerly motherships) in Dominion.

Some of the ship ideas are cool, they're just not feasible in one fell swoop.