These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Electronic Suppression Destroyers

Author
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1 - 2014-02-01 18:15:54 UTC
First off, a disclaimer: This suggestion does not feature numbers and hard stats, that part is CCP's job - at least for the first draft.

This is a suggestion for a new range of T2 destroyers to act as an electronic warfare counterpart to the current Interdictor range. Instead of the AoE warp disruption probes dropped by Interdictors, Electronic Suppression Destroyers (or ESDs) would utilise a new sphere launcher, loaded with a range of probes which instead of the warp disruption/drag effect, applied electronic warfare and similar penalties to all craft within its area of effect. ESDs would be fairly light on offensive firepower and buffer, and would be reliant on speed, support and their own e-war projection to survive. Like Warp Disruption probes, those craft normally immune to electronic warfare effects would be susceptible to electronic warfare probes. Effectively, these ships would be to Interdictors what Electronic Attack Frigates are to Interceptors (and by that I hopefully don't mean "still underpowered and unused")

The ESD range would use the recently added destroyers as their base hull for invention and ship model purposes, and what offensive capabilities they have would take their T1 hull as a starting point - the Minmatar ESD would be missile based, the Gallente ESD would largely rely on drones over mounted weaponry, etc.

Some suggested examples of possible E-War probe effects: target painter bubbles, sensor dampening bubbles, tracking disruption bubbles, capacitor neutralisation bubbles, remote repair module degradation bubbles, heat damage acceleration bubbles. I'm sure anyone suitably inclined can think of more.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2014-02-01 18:17:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Scatim Helicon
Talking points:

- You may have noticed I missed out any mention of ECM bubbles. This is deliberate, partially because of the foaming at the mouth that ECM causes whenever it is bought up but mostly because it would overlap with the existing ECM Burst and Remote ECM Burst modules. Whether you think ECM is overpowered or not in it's current form, we don't really need more of it in the game at this point.

- I'm also in two minds about stasis web bubbles - they could be useful, but if anything, it may be better to add these as options for the existing Interdictors which would let them further specialise in their Propulsion Jamming role.

- This may also prove an opportune moment for the Flycatcher to switch to using the Corax model for its base hull, since both are missile-based, and for the new Caldari ESD to be a hybrid platform based on the Cormorant. I'm not massively fussed about this, but I know some people care about consistency across tech levels, and CCP recently took the same measures on Command Ships so it would fit their current design principles.

- ESDs gaining immunity to their own bubbles: Discuss?

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#3 - 2014-02-01 18:20:24 UTC
interesting so being within the bubble would have a chaff like effect and would damp(lock or range) or ECM..or web or sig radius? sounds interesting..

if the ECM one works on capships too it could make t2 destroyers the "anti-blob" mechanic null has needed forever

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]

Lucine Delacourt
The Covenant of Blood
#4 - 2014-02-01 18:30:48 UTC
I like the idea of a second t2 Destro but can't help but assume we would see a ridiculous amount of web/warp bubble 2x Sabre camps on every pipe. The other EWAR bubbles are intriguing though.
Psianh Auvyander
Noir.
#5 - 2014-02-01 20:51:57 UTC
I feel like this effect would force fights to disengage more frequently than they do currently. Warp bubbles are intended to do the opposite - keep one side from fleeing. I feel like these would encourage it.

The idea itself is interesting, but I wonder if there's a way to implement it without discouraging someone from staying on the field with one active. I don't feel that warp bubbles should be a requirement for using these - that is to say, I don't think that the only method of keeping someone on the field with an ECM bubble should be a warp bubble.

I'd definitely be interested in seeing where this thought process will lead.

My Blog

@wsethbrown

Ariete
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2014-02-01 21:14:40 UTC
Nice idea having AOE dampening and disruption. Would be overpowered if combined with targeted EWar so they should be significant stacking penalties on them.
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
G0N3 F1SS10N
#7 - 2014-02-01 23:19:53 UTC
There is potential here.... hmmm....

Definitely would give an excuse to turn the new destroyer hulls into a new TII model.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.

Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#8 - 2014-02-02 00:04:38 UTC
1 draw back is limited area of influance second is dictor bubbles are static and dont move iirc.. so you can just move outside of them.

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]

Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#9 - 2014-02-02 00:39:34 UTC
Seranova Farreach wrote:
if the ECM one works on capships too it could make t2 destroyers the "anti-blob" mechanic null has needed forever

Check the second post - I left ECM bubbles out deliberately!

I'm always sceptical about any claims of an 'anti-blob mechanic' so I would certainly hesitate to claim it for a suggestion of my own, but a range of AoE ewar could act as a deterrent for static and/or densely packed blobs.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#10 - 2014-02-02 02:28:41 UTC
as broad concepts go, I like the idea

both of them ..

so yes, add web bubble to existing t2 destroyers
and yes, to new t2 destroyers with other e-war based bubble effects

Nuet Bubbles I think would be quite good.
Scatim Helicon
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#11 - 2014-02-04 18:56:21 UTC
Lucine Delacourt wrote:
I like the idea of a second t2 Destro but can't help but assume we would see a ridiculous amount of web/warp bubble 2x Sabre camps on every pipe. The other EWAR bubbles are intriguing though.

I was thinking that the AoE suppression effect would be less potent than a targeted module - while I said I wasn't going to go into specific numbers, a web bubble effect with a penalty of something in the 20-25% range (and a 'no stacking' clause so that multiple bubbles of the same type don't have any further effects) probably wouldn't be terribly overpowered. I agree it's certainly something to keep in mind with the idea though.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.

Zachev Trace
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#12 - 2014-02-05 01:20:32 UTC
I really like this idea. +1 from me.

A few well placed disruption bubbles could change the tide of a battle, just like Interdictors do now.


Off topic:

I also really like the idea of a Command Destroyer that is able to provide limited boosts for small gangs on the field. I believe it caters to small gangs well as they are no longer slowed down by larger boosting ships, making them much more mobile while not harming the current boosting ships as they provide much stronger boosts.

There have been posts on this already, just felt like adding it in to my post here :).


All in all, I feel the need for more T2 destroyers.