These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New tech 2 battleship idea, anti-capital
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ClusterFook
Doomheim
#1 - 2013-01-24 21:45:36 UTC
So we all know the only counter to supers is more supers, but what if we could change that?
I had an idea for new tech 2 battleship with a unique weapon system:

A weapon system that has damage based off of mass (similar to how explosion radius affects missile damage) and only affects ships/objects with jump drives. This weapon system would be useless against sub-caps and structures/pos. So it does not step on siege dreads toes. This weapon could only work in low/null sec.

The ship:
The ship(s) itself would have the smallest sig of battleships, while sporting a slightly stronger tank (t2 resist, less raw hp's). The agility/speed would be poor even by BS standards. So what we would have is a tanky, slow, anti-cap sub-cap that is vulnerable to sub-caps.

Skills:
Being tech two the skills required would add a descent barrier to entry, and a new weapon skills for the new weapon system would be added.

Conclusion:
I think this would be a great way to change up the null-sec scene. 3 things currently affect the big blue donut, Sov grind, Tech, Supers. This addresses the super problem in a fun way for all. Who doesn't like new ships?

Thoughts?
True Ace
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2013-01-24 22:17:58 UTC
Your idea would be great if you give them a more submarine feel. Since their only weapons only work on caps give them a cloak like stealth bombers. T2 bs already cost an arm and a leg so people cant complain about a cheaper ship killing their cap.
ClusterFook
Doomheim
#3 - 2013-01-24 22:36:57 UTC
True Ace wrote:
Your idea would be great if you give them a more submarine feel. Since their only weapons only work on caps give them a cloak like stealth bombers. T2 bs already cost an arm and a leg so people cant complain about a cheaper ship killing their cap.


Interesting idea worth thinking about. However not sure if it would be balanced. The main reason cloaks on SB's are not overpowered is that they are paper thin, even though 8 can take out entire sub cap fleets. But it could add a completely new tactic to the battlefield. Definitely worth thinking about.

so questions to ask
1. covert ops? add cloak?
2. how much DPS should this put out, against supers? carriers? dreads?
3. would this actually solve super cap supremacy?
4. As a new ship type though do you think its worth exploring? Something you could see CCP working on?
Agustice Arterius
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-01-24 23:22:51 UTC
What would these be called.

Heavy Destroyer Battleships?

I think the idea is neat though.
lanyaie
Nocturnal Romance
Cynosural Field Theory.
#5 - 2013-01-24 23:27:42 UTC
Suggestion has been brought up many times tbh

1. cloak on these things wouldn't be good for the reason that capitals in wh's wont see them coming and are quite vulnerable to them and it would be all it takes to take down a cap if they're set for that
2. DPS would be negotiable but it shouldn't be too high or too low around the range of 4k might be good but I don't think these ships should be able to kill a capital solo
3. No people willl adapt
4. CCP might but it's been considered before


I'm also against them having a small sig radius but high tank makes them too hard to counter when there's capitals vs them

Spaceprincess

People who put passwords on char bazaar Eveboards are the worst.
Gizznitt Malikite
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
#6 - 2013-01-24 23:44:42 UTC

Came expecting another craptastic, overpowered "look at this uberpwnmobile I want" thread...

Found someone actually trying to discuss their idea.... bravo!!

1.) I originally thought cloaks would make them too potent... but to be honest... I like the surprise effect they offer... I think using them in WH's, as lenyaie pointed out, is something to be desired, not feared... and it's the most convincing argument FOR Cloaking them... It would also allow them to be deployable by covert cynos... which would be rather interesting...

2.) 2-3k dps on capitals would be decent... these are less potent than dreads, but are far less vulnerable...

3.) I don't think this will necessarily alter the Supercap battlefield much... Not unless you deploy these in enormous numbers, and since T2 BS's run 500m-1b a piece, these probably wont be massively fielded... At the same time, they aren't vulnerable to titan DD, are more maneuverable than dreads, and dish out enough dps they might see use...


ClusterFook
Doomheim
#7 - 2013-01-25 01:52:35 UTC
Just trying to come up with a solution that is both fun, gives small groups a chance to at least compete with super on field, changes the status quo and does not nerf super/titans to the point of uselessness. The main goal here is to allow a sub cap fleet to engage another fleet that has sub caps + supers/caps on field and have a chance to win. Also to counter hellcamps by larger alliances that will simply drop supers on any real threat. These t2 BS's should not be able solo pwn cap ships but rather be a ship type that can effectively engage them and be a threat. As such i agree a cloak would make them OP especially in WH situations.

Dps wise i was thinking 3-4k against carriers/dreads 4-6k on super/titans. 0 dps on anything else. Obviously up for debate here but i think this is a good start. I feel that will make them a real threat while not being OP against them considering their extremely niche role.

My thinking for a small BS sized sig is simply to help them against cap dps while still large enough and slow enough (i'm talking 85-95ms tops base speed) to allow almost full dps on them from sub caps. Also thinking of making these weapons extremely cap heavy so fits have to use cap mods to keep

As for their name. No idea... maybe siege battleships or something. Now lets go tell CCP to work on this! Cool
ClusterFook
Doomheim
#8 - 2013-01-25 02:04:03 UTC
Also what about instead of making these a tech two ship, they become either a 4th tier or the current 3rd tier?
Could make the weapon skill associated with it 8x to help keep them from proliferating to quickly.
Also the reduction in isk cost would be nice but what would a good isk range for a ship like this be? i was thinking at least 300 mil for the hull but a good range in my mind would be 300-500 base instead of 500-1 bil that a tech 2 ship would likely be. Perhaps the weapon system could be expensive as well with BP's only available from Concord/Pirate/FW loyalty stores.

So what ideas on what a ship like this should* run isk wise?
Luc Chastot
#9 - 2013-01-25 03:45:11 UTC
Damage based on mass is interesting, but I'd say it should be an alpha ship, instead of a dps one. Giving them strong tanks is not a good idea in my opinion, though; I'd rather them have to rely on logi support for tackling cap fleets and have good mobility for a BS.

Make it idiot-proof and someone will make a better idiot.

Allandri
Liandri Industrial
#10 - 2013-01-25 05:44:19 UTC
Why not just make a bomb that has the same damage effects?
Krell Kroenen
The Devil's Shadow
#11 - 2013-01-25 07:07:33 UTC
Gizznitt Malikite wrote:

3.) I don't think this will necessarily alter the Supercap battlefield much... Not unless you deploy these in enormous numbers, and since T2 BS's run 500m-1b a piece, these probably wont be massively fielded... At the same time, they aren't vulnerable to titan DD, are more maneuverable than dreads, and dish out enough dps they might see use...


I don't think we need another ship class out there making dreads even more redundent. But I agree, I don't think that such a class of ship would have much effect upon the big blob battles of null where the supercaps are to be found. But they would reshape wormholes and low sec and any other battle where there are only handful of caps taking part. For good or ill is the question.

I myself wouldn't expect any new class of ships till CCP is done blancing what we have. *Shrugs*
Serina Tsukaya
Dropbears Anonymous
Brave Collective
#12 - 2013-01-25 10:09:03 UTC
Why not just allow the current bombers we have to fit a single specialy designed Citadel torp launcher, can fit one torpedo, has an x minute reuse time. Gives a tactical decision: do you go for bombs for subcaps (or screw around with caps with void bombs), or do you use the torp module which can do a bit of damage in waves to caps. There's no point in talking about a new bc or bs bomber or anti cap ship, as they are already fully capable of killing a capital ship in sufficent numbers. Adding a battleship or a battle cruiser JUST for that role would be wasted development time on ships that could be used for something completely different.


Besides, who doesn't want to shoot "Photon torpedoes" at captial ships and smirk as they go poof.


ClusterFook
Doomheim
#13 - 2013-01-26 21:24:40 UTC
Serina Tsukaya wrote:
There's no point in talking about a new bc or bs bomber or anti cap ship, as they are already fully capable of killing a capital ship in sufficent numbers. Adding a battleship or a battle cruiser JUST for that role would be wasted development time on ships that could be used for something completely different.



Anything can kill anything with sufficient numbers. That is the point of this ship. This ships is not for tackle or any other point besides providing DPS to a capital. It must be High DPS, not high alpha. Would be kinda OP if you drop 5 of these and Alpha a carrier.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#14 - 2013-01-26 22:30:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
I dislike the idea that something "relatively" (ignoring super capital proliferation for a moment) expensive and exotic can be relatively easily killed by something thats not expensive and exotic (atleast not without a significant numbers advantage).

Given the way gamplay involving super/titans has evolved tho I'm all for something that evens the balance out a bit on the sub-capital side tho so that fleet (A) sub-capital fleet + supers isn't an instant win combination against fleet (B) of just sub-capitals but at the same time I don't think fleet (B) should be buffed so that it can own all over fleet (A)'s supers.