These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

Post your advanced battleship ideas here!

Author
Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#1 - 2013-04-01 08:39:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
Hey! I've seen a preponderance of threads concerning new battleship requests/designs here, so I thought I might post a thread and see if I could collect some of them into one place. So if you have a new Battleship idea or a proposal for a specific hull, post it here! Lets all share our creative work to see what people in EvE want out of Battleships!

I will start with a heavily revised version of a previous post I made about a State Faction Rokh:

Market Info

Hull Name: Hydra
Base Hull: Rokh
Price: 1,300,000,000 ISK

Description

Looking to upgrade their revered hybrid platform to face the unchecked menace of the Shadow Serpentis Vindicators, State R&D has put considerable effort in making a better Rokh. Fortunately, it's recent investment has paid off better than expected. Even though plans for the new model had been a closely guarded secret, Guristas pirate hackers managed to obtain a copy from a careless Caldari State administrator, and had immediately 0-dayed it all over the Caldari corporate net, immediately causing a joyous uproar amongst diehard fans of the Rokh platform.

Even more stable and solid than before, the recent improvements in turret mounting makes this ship able to hit out even farther than it's predecessor. Additionally, progressing miniaturization has increased the amount of space available for its internal bays, making room for more badly needed drone space. The sensor package has also been replaced by a more specialized model, giving a much quicker lock time and much greater sensor strength at the expense of targeting range. Most significant of the changes to the base hull is the new shield and capacitor generators, which is the best the Caldari State has to offer in this ship class.

However, these improvements are not without their drawbacks, as the new internal hardware has increased the mass of the hull considerably. It's a quite a bit heavier and unwieldier than it's predecessor, and requires a great deal more skill to pilot effectively. Much of the armor hardening hardware had to be scrapped to make room for the improved shield generators, but this is considered entirely irrelevant by the overwhelming majority of Caldari pilots. Despite these drawbacks, this new hull is sure to be a hit with it's striking arctic white and blue paint job, unique among Caldari designs.


Base Requirements

Advanced Spaceship Command 3
Caldari Battleship 5
Caldari Battleship Specialization 1*

Hull Bonuses

Skill bonus for Caldari Battleship: +10% hybrid optimal range and 5% hybrid falloff range.
Skill bonus for Caldari Battleship Specialization: +6% shield resists.

Structure

Structure HP: 8,000
Cargo Capacity: 625 m3
Drone Capacity: 75 m3
Drone Bandwidth: 50 Mbit/sec
Mass: 110,000,000 kg
Volume: 486,000 m3 (50,000 m3 packed)
Inertia Modifier: 0.175
Structure Resists: 0/0/0/0

Armor

Armor HP: 8,000
Armor Resists: 50/10/25/45

Shield

Shield HP: 10,000
Shield Recharge Time: 2,000s
Shield Resists: 0/50/40/20

Capacitor

Capacitor Capacity: 7,200 GJ
Capacitor Recharge Time: 1,250s

Targeting

Maximum Targeting Range: 48km
Maximum Locked Targets: 7
Scan Resolution: 90mm
Gravimetric Sensor Strength: 30 points
Signature Radius: 500m

Propulsion

Max Velocity: 80m/sec
Warp Speed: 2.50 AU/s

Fitting

Max CPU: 800
Max Powergrid: 15,000
Max Calibration: 300

Low Slots: 5
Medium Slots: 7
High Slots: 8

Launcher Hardpoints: 0
Turret Hardpoints: 8
Upgrade Hardpoints: 3
Rig Size: Large

Notes

*Caldari Battleship Specialization is not an actual skill in EvE, it just a placeholder for a skill that unlocks access to advanced Caldari State hulls. The design calls for the specialization skill to be rank 10. Per and Will based, under the Spaceship Command group.

Edit Log

Drone Bay has been reduced to 75m3.
Base speed has been reduced to 80m/s
Inertia Modifier has been increased to .175
Kin Resist has been reduced to 45
Therm resist has been increased to to 25
Caldari Battleship skill requirement has been increased to 5
Sensor Strength has been reduced to 30
Falloff Bonus has been reduced by half
Warp speed has been reduced to 2.5 AU/s
Base resists have been reset to the standard Rokh Resists.
Due to the hull resist nerf, the resist bonus has bee reduced to 4% and 2% respectively.
The scan resolution was set incorrectly, correct it to a 15 point improvement.
Combined the two shield resist bonuses into one, was causing confusion.
Moved all range bonuses to the same skill.
Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
Parasitic Legion.
#2 - 2013-04-01 08:58:30 UTC
Or post in the official thread for the battleship rebalance opinions.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#3 - 2013-04-01 09:01:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
That is more for rebalancing current battleship hulls, this thread is for ideas for new ships, as new tech 2 and pirate faction BS's wont be looked at for a while. Besides, I don't know if the CCP dev wants me clogging up his thread with statblocks.
Caleb Seremshur
Naked Oiled Bodybuilders
Parasitic Legion.
#4 - 2013-04-01 11:09:46 UTC
I would like to see some specialised battleships that can fit two racks of guns. Up to 16 guns in other words. Leaving them with similar fitting space to regular battleships means they can't reliably fit tanking modules or prop mods.

Also, they get no role bonuses, only non-damage racial bonuses. These new battleships will be like a ABCs to a dreadnought. Similar power but gimped fitting and on a smaller hull.
Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#5 - 2013-04-01 11:24:10 UTC
Well, why dont you gin up a statblock like mine and show us what a ship like that would look like?
mynnna
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#6 - 2013-04-01 11:45:43 UTC
I propose the "Grammar" class battleship. It seeks out and destroys spelling errors, syntax mistakes, and extraneous apostrophes.


Blink

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#7 - 2013-04-01 11:48:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
Yes, I know my composition is not the greatest. Though I can't consider a commentary on my grammar without an explication of at least one flaw in the text itself very serious.
mynnna
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2013-04-01 12:01:09 UTC
"Idea's"

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#9 - 2013-04-01 12:09:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
Ah, my second post. Thank you.

Any actual personal additions you want to contribute? I would love to peck apart one of your posts. Lol
mynnna
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#10 - 2013-04-01 12:12:17 UTC
And the thread title, actually. Blink

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal

Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#11 - 2013-04-01 12:14:55 UTC
0racle
Galactic Rangers
Already Replaced.
#12 - 2013-04-01 16:30:22 UTC
Caleb Seremshur wrote:
I would like to see some specialised battleships that can fit two racks of guns. Up to 16 guns in other words. Leaving them with similar fitting space to regular battleships means they can't reliably fit tanking modules or prop mods.

Also, they get no role bonuses, only non-damage racial bonuses. These new battleships will be like a ABCs to a dreadnought. Similar power but gimped fitting and on a smaller hull.


Not going to happen, man. Why do you think they're reducing the amounts of turrets on ships such as combat battlecruisers and faction cruisers and bringing their damage bonuse per level up? To reduce server load. 16 guns on a ship would bring that in the totally opposite direction and make the game inconsistent. 8->16 turrets? That's alot of empty slots on the other vessels.
Destoya
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#13 - 2013-04-01 17:48:22 UTC
I do hope you realize that this ship is amazingly OP in every way. I can hardly take the suggestion seriously to be quite frank with you.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#14 - 2013-04-01 19:32:35 UTC
A ship with 37.5% resist bonus maybe on top of T2 resist and about 50k range on blaster? Seems legit

The extra bonus on prop jamming its just silly
Grunnax Aurelius
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#15 - 2013-04-01 21:40:51 UTC
Did you seriously make a duplicate thread with a few differences, DUDE!!! If your idea gets flamed in the origina, dont repost the idea with a few minor inconsiderable changes its ******* sad, you need to realise that this perticular idea for a ship is TERRIBLE!!!

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=342042&find=unread

Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#16 - 2013-04-02 04:27:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
Alright, To Mare, you are correct, the prop jamming bonus is silly, and off flavor. I will probably remove it, as the bonus against jamming stands on its own as it is. In fact, it needs to be dropped a bit, as I am redoing the calculation for that and I think I did it wrong the first time around. As for flames, who pays attention to those? I look for constructive criticism, like To Mare's. Also, who writes something just to censor themselves? If you are going to say something to me, just say it. I'm not some sort of delicate flower.

Also To Mare, yes its up to about 50k, but the falloff is so brutal at that point your are hardly doing 35% of your original damage, if you hit. And the fact your limited to 60k lock range without sensor boosters helps offset this by a lot, giving a giant hole in its defenses against fast tacklers and aggressive cruisers, which is where a BS should be Rock-Paper-Scissors wise.
Destoya
Habitual Euthanasia
Pandemic Legion
#17 - 2013-04-02 06:01:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Destoya
Ok, in an effort to make you realize that you gave this wet dream of a creation batshit pretty insane stats, let's just take a "constructive" look at the tank for a moment. (I will ignore the web bonus for the purposes of this post)

Doing some easy math, with 2 LSE, a DC II, and Tengu bonuses you get 110k shield EHP before you add any invulns, with amazing resists from the double resist bonus and more HP than a navy scorpion

Adding in 2x invulns for 180k EHP, with a resist profile of 78/84/84/78 (before overheat of course), not to mention that you have another 3 midslots left for whatever you like. You could get far better tank by plugging those resist holes, especially with some cheap B/C type faction hardeners, but I'm quite frankly too lazy to do the maths.

I do appreciate the motivation to post your ideas, but what you've done here is basically build upon a ship's strengths to the point where there is little reason to fly anything else in the class by just adding everything that someone wished they could have when they consider a blaster rokh (another mid, another low, more range, more tank, more mobility, more cap, etc etc)

Why would you fly a rokh when you can take this which has far better tank, better damage projection, and more slots for EW? Assuming the amarr version is built along the same lines why would you ever fly an Abaddon? Cost is a reason for some, surely, but that will not stop PVP becoming inundated with these new battleships within 6 months, in much the same way T3 cruisers have largely marginalized their HAC/CS cousins in many arenas of warfare.

In addition, every other ship or ship class in EVE has some innate weakness. Having crappy targeting range on a ship class that is obstinately designed to fit Neutron Blasters loaded with Null is not an example of this, since you wont be able to hit anything over 70km (approximately the range with Sigamp) anyways. Introducing an entirely new hull type to EVE is also opportunity to introduce new roles and new accompanying weaknesses, not just to reinforce the role of an existing ship.
Van Mathias
Dead Space Continuum
#18 - 2013-04-02 06:21:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Van Mathias
You have valid points sir, but its kind of like asking "Why would anyone use meta 4 when there are tech 2 mods?". The answer is of course is tech 2 mods take time to train into, and are substantially more expensive ISK wise. In addition to this tech 2 mods come with a fitting drawback that can only be truly offset by more skill training. Of course anyone who could use this would not use a Rokh instead, just like anyone who uses a Cerberus has absolutely no use for a Caracal... except if he wants something really expendable that he can afford multiple spares of. Also, the current "teir 3" hulls have no progression path like their older counterparts. The Raven has the Navy Raven, the Scorp has a navy version AND a pirate faction version that are both strictly better, but far more costly. I would also like to point out that I think that I think all battleships are under tanked right now. I admit it is far more heavily tanked than usual but all BS need a substantial boost in that area, and add on the fact my example ship is supposed to be an exemplar of a battleship that favors tank and range over maxxed out DPS and maneuverability. It is much like how the Vindicator is an exemplary DPS platform that's reasonably quick with some pretty crazy secondary abilities, but is weak on the tank.

Also, cutting down on targeting range is a nerf, because lock time in a battleship takes forever, and one of the things that offsets this is the fact that you can start locking out from a substantially longer range.

Having 1 more mid doesnt really do much to increase its potential for EW, as ECM sucks without hull bonuses, and most other forms of EW are not that great.

Also, this proposal does not include another low, and is less agile than the base Rokh. On top of that, it has far less range, so you are giving up something by moving in it, I might increase the mass by another 5% to slow it down even more.

Right now I view what I have like an unfinished sculpture. I'm gonna carve away at its stats until I have a finished product that works and is appropriately balance for the new battleship power level after the hull rebalance, whatever that level of power may be.

I also consider recolored hulls and a new name to be a different version of the same ship, not really a separate ship in its own right. I guess I still view EvE thru the lens of old pen and paper RPG's.
Jacid
The Upside Down
Forfeiture
#19 - 2013-04-02 15:53:59 UTC
The only role i see off the top of my head that isn't already covered in battleships is the mini dread idea. Essentially a t2 version of the a BS that has the hull tank and resists of a BS but the tracking DPS and ewar immunity of a dread in siege. Would be a great anti pos ship for high sec and WH space and could lead to some interesting combinations in fleet warfare. The trick would be to make sure they weren't overpowered, perhaps a low ehp (60-70k ehp) to make alpha a counter , or removed its ability to get remote reps.

my 2 cents
Velicitia
XS Tech
#20 - 2013-04-02 16:07:57 UTC
Jacid wrote:
The only role i see off the top of my head that isn't already covered in battleships is the mini dread idea. Essentially a t2 version of the a BS that has the hull tank and resists of a BS but the tracking DPS and ewar immunity of a dread in siege. Would be a great anti pos ship for high sec and WH space and could lead to some interesting combinations in fleet warfare. The trick would be to make sure they weren't overpowered, perhaps a low ehp (60-70k ehp) to make alpha a counter , or removed its ability to get remote reps.

my 2 cents



2 turrets, only able to fire while in siege?

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

123Next page