These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Vote: Black Ops Battleships and Covert Cloaking Device

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Amanda Chelian
#21 - 2013-06-09 20:27:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Amanda Chelian
Cage Man wrote:
I say no. I would rather see them have the ability to run their prop mods while the cloaks are on and then apply the velocity bonus. This will them make them unique enough to train for. Imagine sneaking up on a target cloaked at 4-km/s.
Lots of other ships can warp cloaked and tackle, you want something tough and sneaky in a black ops ship, well I do Twisted


While I don't dislike the idea, you're misclassifying it as sneaking. Inability to warp means you already have to know where your target will be in advance, so it's more like lying in wait than sneaking around.

From a purely gameplay perspective, if you're going to have someone else do the tackle anyway, there's no logical reason you need a Black Ops to come in to apply DPS; most non-covert ships will fill that role just fine (with a fitted improv cloak if you have to stay hidden until something's tackled). This makes the current Black Ops nothing more than a jump bridge, when it could (and should, in my opinion) have a clearly defined role, which includes flying together with other ships in the same category, such as recons, stealth bombers, etc.
Ireland VonVicious
Vicious Trading Company
#22 - 2013-06-09 21:11:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Ireland VonVicious
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
Amanda Chelian wrote:
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
it already has a 625% cloaked velocity modifier lol



Assume 100 m/s base.

Improved cloak penalty: -75% -> 25 m/s
Black ops V bonus: 625% -> 156 m/s

Wow, amazing bonus.P


you're underestimating this bonus

it allows you to warp away almost while still cloaked since you can get up to warp speed while cloaked.

plus you move faster than any other battleship class ship while cloaked.



If they re do the ship to allow for covert cloaking I'm sure they could re do the bonus at the same time.

So maybe the answer is yes it should but with a heavily reduced bonus.

I also get the feeling that a lot of people here don't know how to use a black ops properly.
Veshta Yoshida
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#23 - 2013-06-09 21:13:04 UTC
No. If they need more mobility then suggest letting them be able to use propulsion mods while cloaked, if its possible to zero cap recharge while cloaked to prevent uber-mobility (doubles as a righteous nerf to super shenanigans!).
Amanda Chelian wrote:
Liam Inkuras wrote:
No, because that would lead to the ship class becoming very overpowered. It would become a nigh uncatchable battleship with the ability to covertly cyno in reinforcements. If you want that ability, use a cloaky T3.


So a T3 is allowed to do it (with a bubble nullifier, no less!) but a slower, easier to lock, and less agile ship, isn't? I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing the "overpowered" here.

The T3's cannot jump or bridge others to invisible jammer immune cyno's .. they are not generic T1 BS you know Big smile
Tsukino Stareine
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#24 - 2013-06-09 21:35:56 UTC
Amanda Chelian wrote:
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
Amanda Chelian wrote:
Tsukino Stareine wrote:
it already has a 625% cloaked velocity modifier lol



Assume 100 m/s base.

Improved cloak penalty: -75% -> 25 m/s
Black ops V bonus: 625% -> 156 m/s

Wow, amazing bonus.P


you're underestimating this bonus

it allows you to warp away almost while still cloaked since you can get up to warp speed while cloaked.

plus you move faster than any other battleship class ship while cloaked.


I'm not underestimating it. I'm just not understanding how running away faster from cloaking makes Black Ops worth their SP investment and price tag in any way, especially since T3 already do the running-away aspect magnitudes better than black ops due to nullifiers.

As for moving faster, any battleship-sized vessel with an afterburner or MWD will still outrun it by far, and what's the point of crawling around cloaked in a black ops anyway, if it can't warp without giving itself away on d-scan?


They can also make covert jump bridges and have a T2 resist profile.

They can also fit a MWD or AB and you cant use those modules while cloaked so it still beats t1 battleships for that role.

Being able to move into position in decent time while being undetectable is extremely valuable plus you can also combine it with the MJD making some truly fearsome stealth plays.

Blops battleships may need a little love in another department (namely their combat abilities) but it's not this

Art of Explosions
Domer Pyle
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2013-06-09 22:59:42 UTC
BOs already get bonuses to the improved cloaking device, so, no. the only thing that a covert ops cloak would add is the ability to warp cloaked, which is nice, but not that important.

"Imagine if the bars to your prison were all you had ever known. Then one day, someone appears and unlocks the door. If they have the power to do this, then are they really the liberator? You never remembered who it was that closed you in." - Ior Labron
Infinity Ziona
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#26 - 2013-06-10 05:26:20 UTC
Domer Pyle wrote:
BOs already get bonuses to the improved cloaking device, so, no. the only thing that a covert ops cloak would add is the ability to warp cloaked, which is nice, but not that important.

confusing comment. I would say its by far the most important thing to fix to make this ship fit into its proper role and ship category.

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..... :)
Rain6635
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#27 - 2013-06-10 06:18:03 UTC
OP because in the case of the Widow, it also jams

Rainf1337 on Twitch
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#28 - 2013-06-10 06:30:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Omnathious Deninard
Rain6635 wrote:
OP because in the case of the Widow, it also jams

Falcon same strength plus range bonus.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Rain6635
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2013-06-10 06:34:39 UTC
did you just rebut me with a completely different ship class? please explain why the falcon's existence supports the widow getting a covops cloak

Rainf1337 on Twitch
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2013-06-10 06:51:10 UTC
Rain6635 wrote:
did you just rebut me with a completely different ship class? please explain why the falcon's existence supports the widow getting a covops cloak

Well I was wrong about the range, but yes. The ECM strength is the same so the whole the widow has ECM is a moot point for the covert ops cloak.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
vyshnegradsky
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#31 - 2013-06-10 06:53:22 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Rain6635 wrote:
did you just rebut me with a completely different ship class? please explain why the falcon's existence supports the widow getting a covops cloak

Well I was wrong about the range, but yes. The ECM strength is the same so the whole the widow has ECM is a moot point for the covert ops cloak.


The tristan should get a 400m^3 drone bay because the dominix has one.

This one's a bit over the edge guys.

Locked for breaking... well, pretty much all the rules.

  • CCP Falcon
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2013-06-10 07:03:34 UTC
vyshnegradsky wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Rain6635 wrote:
did you just rebut me with a completely different ship class? please explain why the falcon's existence supports the widow getting a covops cloak

Well I was wrong about the range, but yes. The ECM strength is the same so the whole the widow has ECM is a moot point for the covert ops cloak.


The tristan should get a 400m^3 drone bay because the dominix has one.

When the Tristan can field a full flight of heavy drones come back with that comment.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
vyshnegradsky
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#33 - 2013-06-10 07:17:05 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
vyshnegradsky wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Rain6635 wrote:
did you just rebut me with a completely different ship class? please explain why the falcon's existence supports the widow getting a covops cloak

Well I was wrong about the range, but yes. The ECM strength is the same so the whole the widow has ECM is a moot point for the covert ops cloak.


The tristan should get a 400m^3 drone bay because the dominix has one.

When the Tristan can field a full flight of heavy drones come back with that comment.


The tristan should be able to field a full flight of heavy drones because the dominix can

This one's a bit over the edge guys.

Locked for breaking... well, pretty much all the rules.

  • CCP Falcon
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#34 - 2013-06-10 07:31:18 UTC
vyshnegradsky wrote:

The tristan should be able to field a full flight of heavy drones because the dominix can

The Widow and Falcon have had the same ECM strength bonus for a long time. They were both designed with that same bonus. The only difference of there E-War capabilities is the covert ops cloaking device.

But the Widow has more EHP than the Falcon: And the Scorpion has more EHP (even before the odyssey BS balancing) than the Widow.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
vyshnegradsky
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#35 - 2013-06-10 07:56:13 UTC
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
vyshnegradsky wrote:

The tristan should be able to field a full flight of heavy drones because the dominix can

The Widow and Falcon have had the same ECM strength bonus for a long time. They were both designed with that same bonus. The only difference of there E-War capabilities is the covert ops cloaking device.

But the Widow has more EHP than the Falcon: And the Scorpion has more EHP (even before the odyssey BS balancing) than the Widow.


But why does it need a covert cloaking device? It doesn't need any more GTFO ability. It can MJD, slow boat with little/no speed penalty, use a jump drive. Having one just isn't necessary.

This one's a bit over the edge guys.

Locked for breaking... well, pretty much all the rules.

  • CCP Falcon
Rain6635
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#36 - 2013-06-10 08:22:06 UTC
convoluted point is convoluted

Rainf1337 on Twitch
Rual Storge
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#37 - 2013-06-10 11:21:17 UTC
Liam Inkuras wrote:
No, because that would lead to the ship class becoming very overpowered. It would become a nigh uncatchable battleship with the ability to covertly cyno in reinforcements. If you want that ability, use a cloaky T3.



All you need is 1 dictor with a good decloaking skills..... Blockaderunners are epicly easy to catch... let alone 1b isk costing battleships
Rain6635
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#38 - 2013-06-10 11:55:58 UTC
Omnathious, what you describe is a falcon battleship. what the widow currently lacks is the ability to move between bookmarks while cloaked. if you think falcons have a little too much patrolling ability, giving the same abilities to a battleship means it can patrol a little too hard.

especially now, when cruises are buffed and the widow has a bonus to firing rate and velocity. compared to the falcon it has 1 additional low, 1 additional mid, 3 additional highs... that's pretty good for a covops hotdrop fleet. can you imagine? that gang would have more jamming than a reggae festival.

a covops cloak would also turn the widow in to a battleship-class stealth bomber. with no targeting delay after decloaking... something like a covops cloak on a widow is that one extra thing that is seen on uber special edition ships.

if you want to use the Widow like the murder boat you describe, covert cyno just off-grid from your target, with a buzzard or falcon, and bring in the Widow. you can cover multiple systems this way, with covops cynos and a widow. again, if you insist on using a widow like a falcon.

wait, I forget: why do you want your widow to have a covops cloak? like, run me through the scenario...?

Rainf1337 on Twitch
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus
#39 - 2013-06-10 12:31:56 UTC
Amanda Chelian wrote:
They make for very lousy black ops due to not having the ability to warp while cloaked, and that's made obvious by how unpopular they are. I still don't understand why CCP decided that a ship type designed specifically for stealth doesn't get the same tools as other ship types in the same category.


You know using blackops successfully involves jumping to the target and not warping to it right? They could have no cloak bonus whatsoever and still be as good.
Amanda Chelian
#40 - 2013-06-10 13:22:23 UTC
Caius Sivaris wrote:
Amanda Chelian wrote:
They make for very lousy black ops due to not having the ability to warp while cloaked, and that's made obvious by how unpopular they are. I still don't understand why CCP decided that a ship type designed specifically for stealth doesn't get the same tools as other ship types in the same category.


You know using blackops successfully involves jumping to the target and not warping to it right? They could have no cloak bonus whatsoever and still be as good.


Really, now? What ever happened to roaming PvP gangs? Or are we just playing Hot-Drops Online now?

I'm not dismissing the usefulness of a Black Ops having a jump drive, but if the only merit of this ship type involves being cyno'd straight into battle, why wouldn't everyone just use a carrier for it instead? The difference in price isn't really that large, and a carrier can project a lot more DPS on target, tank like a champ, and even provide logistic support for the rest of the gang.