These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon] Sisters of EVE faction ships

First post First post First post
Author
Deviant X
Deviant Inc
#1461 - 2013-10-09 16:55:37 UTC
Assuming the current T1 and T2 frigs are for non-combat. They can handle all non-combat sites: T1 = high/low. T2 = all.

Would it be fair to assume that the SoE are combat related and fall into specific roles?

Frigate = high sec. Some low sec with good skills.
Cruiser = low-sec and some null-sec with good skills.
BS = Null-sec and WH space?

I mention the BS because of the place holder people found in the data base. That would make it a 'full line' of exploration ships. How do you balance exploration for each of the target areas? I am thinking some behind the scenes updates to exploration would be needed to smooth out the roles for all these ships.

Very cool looking ships. I am now debating going into Amarr hulls to fly one of these. non-combat exploration has never interested me. Combat exploration? That is a different animal.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1462 - 2013-10-09 16:55:45 UTC
Fa Xian wrote:
There are two versions of exploration. One is exploration hacking. The other is exploration combat.

Odyssey introduced and defined exploration hacking. Hacking is about avoiding combat and escaping PVP. You only care about opening cans, so virus strength and cohesion are all that matter - you'll never want something other than a T2 cov ops frigate.

But "can opener" exploration misses combat exploration. You cannot use a combat site you find with your hacking exploration ship. It has no weapons. These ships are clearly intended to let you do combat sites you find with exploration. That's why they have minimal can opening bonuses. They aren't can opening ships. They are combat site ships. That they have a bonus to virus strength at all is probably more to tip off players than actually empower can opening.

Will they beat T3 ships? No. T3s aren't intended to be comparable - a T3 is a specialized, "super" tool. It is end game content. It requires the highest investment in skills and isk. This is an entry point to doing combat sites without having to qualify for T3.

False premise 1 explorers only care about no risk hacking.
False premise 2 players that explore for data and relic sites do not wish to do combat sites in these new ships too.
False premise 3 the ships are only designed to do combat exploration sites. They are not meant to do data sites.
False premise 4 the virus strength bonus is only to tip players off that there was good stuff but it just blew up sorry....
Premise 5 that if you want to do relic and data sites you will only use a covert ops frigate, unfortunately, it seems that you are completely correct.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

MiMozO
Sacred Inquisition
#1463 - 2013-10-09 17:06:23 UTC  |  Edited by: MiMozO
Since Sisters are best at exploring, those ships MUST have the best exploring. And since Sisters do not like shooting people, those ships MUST NOT have primary combat capabilities. It was said that those ships are all about self-defense. Well give them the self-defense than. Give them ability to disable their pursuers in different ways, with electronics and speed.
Defender missiles could be used here with some interesting mechanics, like attacking and disabling ships which attacking Sisters ship. But, I guess good old style: "Let's add a ship, I don't know what for, but let's add it" is the most liked by CCP.
Onictus
Capital Fusion.
Pandemic Horde
#1464 - 2013-10-09 17:11:05 UTC
MiMozO wrote:
Since Sisters are best at exploring, those ships MUST have the best exploring. And since Sisters do not like shooting people, those ships MUST NOT have primary combat capabilities. It was said that those ships are all about self-defense. Well give them the self-defense than. Give them ability to disable their pursuers in different ways, with electronics and speed.
Defender missiles could be used here with some interesting mechanics, like attacking and disabling ships which attacking Sisters ship. But, I guess good old style: "Let's add a ship, I don't know what for, but let's add it" is the most liked by CCP.



If only the Sisters Epic arc wasn't called Bloodstained Stars....


...if we are getting all RP and **** now.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1465 - 2013-10-09 17:14:15 UTC
MiMozO wrote:
Since Sisters are best at exploring, those ships MUST have the best exploring. And since Sisters do not like shooting people, those ships MUST NOT have primary combat capabilities. It was said that those ships are all about self-defense. Well give them the self-defense than. Give them ability to disable their pursuers in different ways, with electronics and speed.
Defender missiles could be used here with some interesting mechanics, like attacking and disabling ships which attacking Sisters ship. But, I guess good old style: "Let's add a ship, I don't know what for, but let's add it" is the most liked by CCP.


There's some good core ideas in this, self defence does not need to be passive though, It would suit the Sisters philosophy to give a bloody nose to anyone that dared interfere with their primary role of exploration NOTE PRIMARY ROLE.
Pve is also a nice addition and hidden combat sites has the possibility to add to it, particularly if part of the result of a successful clearance opened up more than isk or loot. Possibly lore or an exploration themed escalation. Or a special data or relic site, assuming it is not prevented from doing that role.I agree more emphasis on self defence and less on PvP would be good, but the loudest on the forum would absolutely explode at you for daring to suggest such a thing.......

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Sen Starfire
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1466 - 2013-10-09 17:14:27 UTC
After having seen all the comments concerning exploration, I reiterate my previous point; what if, instead of having weapon bonuses, there was a mechanic in place like the Zephyr, so that Sleepers ignore the ship unless it engages them? That would be most useful in Wormhole exploration, which is currently the realm of either T3 cruisers or fleets. Maybe even, considering their humanitarian nature, a bonus to remote armor repair? Just a couple thoughts.
Fa Xian
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1467 - 2013-10-09 17:16:23 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

False premise 1 explorers only care about no risk hacking.
False premise 2 players that explore for data and relic sites do not wish to do combat sites in these new ships too.
False premise 3 the ships are only designed to do combat exploration sites. They are not meant to do data sites.
False premise 4 the virus strength bonus is only to tip players off that there was good stuff but it just blew up sorry....
Premise 5 that if you want to do relic and data sites you will only use a covert ops frigate, unfortunately, it seems that you are completely correct.


I can see that an atmosphere of highly confrontational, argumentative shouting that is the nature of this forum easily gets in the way of being clear.

I am observing that currently in the game CCP does not provide a solid, middle tier option for combat based exploration. These ships appear to me to be intended for that role. That is why they do not step on the hacking based exploration specialty by having a high bonus to virus strength or cohesion. If they have the same +10 my Helios has, why would I use the Helios? This isn't about players but rather CCP filling out all the play styles with options and variants without invalidating previous work.

1) Of course players want exploration combat ships, not just hacking. Thus, these ships to give them what they want.
2) Of course players want to do all kinds of sites. CCP does not appear to want you to have 1 ship that does all of exploration. That's not dissimilar to, say, mining. You have mining ships and hauling ships, not one ship that does both.
3) These ships aren't only for exploration combat. They specialize in that. It would invalidate the significance of other ships if they did all jobs better. They aren't better than a tricked out T3 at beating combat sites as is either.
4) What is an "exploration" ship? You could just put exploration modules (scanner, hacker) on a Battleship and go. CCP signals to the players a ship is an "exploration" ship by putting hacking game bonuses on it.
5) Yes... if you want to do hacking as your primary focus, you'll only need the things I mentioned to excel.

The real complaints here should be about wormhole data and relic sites and gas sites - which have both rats and hacking. That's the bit that you'll still need a T3 for, the highest end of exploration.
Fa Xian
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1468 - 2013-10-09 17:17:57 UTC
MiMozO wrote:
Is it me, or something is wrong here?


I agree. I was personally expecting a T2 faction cruiser for exploration combat. It seems like this is just a midstep to T3... and I don't want to train Amarr and lasers.
Fa Xian
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1469 - 2013-10-09 17:19:48 UTC
Deviant X wrote:
Assuming the current T1 and T2 frigs are for non-combat.


It's not much of an assumption. They can't punch their way out of a wet paper bag. They're frigs for goodness sake.

Quote:
Would it be fair to assume that the SoE are combat related and fall into specific roles?


That would be my guess too.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1470 - 2013-10-09 17:21:53 UTC
Sen Starfire wrote:
After having seen all the comments concerning exploration, I reiterate my previous point; what if, instead of having weapon bonuses, there was a mechanic in place like the Zephyr, so that Sleepers ignore the ship unless it engages them? That would be most useful in Wormhole exploration, which is currently the realm of either T3 cruisers or fleets. Maybe even, considering their humanitarian nature, a bonus to remote armor repair? Just a couple thoughts.

Sleeper idea is nice, but a middle ground making them hate drones less so drones have some utility and are not thrown at them like chaff

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1471 - 2013-10-09 17:24:42 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Fa Xian wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:

False premise 1 explorers only care about no risk hacking.
False premise 2 players that explore for data and relic sites do not wish to do combat sites in these new ships too.
False premise 3 the ships are only designed to do combat exploration sites. They are not meant to do data sites.
False premise 4 the virus strength bonus is only to tip players off that there was good stuff but it just blew up sorry....
Premise 5 that if you want to do relic and data sites you will only use a covert ops frigate, unfortunately, it seems that you are completely correct.


I can see that an atmosphere of highly confrontational, argumentative shouting that is the nature of this forum easily gets in the way of being clear.

I am observing that currently in the game CCP does not provide a solid, middle tier option for combat based exploration. These ships appear to me to be intended for that role. That is why they do not step on the hacking based exploration specialty by having a high bonus to virus strength or cohesion. If they have the same +10 my Helios has, why would I use the Helios? This isn't about players but rather CCP filling out all the play styles with options and variants without invalidating previous work.

1) Of course players want exploration combat ships, not just hacking. Thus, these ships to give them what they want.
2) Of course players want to do all kinds of sites. CCP does not appear to want you to have 1 ship that does all of exploration. That's not dissimilar to, say, mining. You have mining ships and hauling ships, not one ship that does both.
3) These ships aren't only for exploration combat. They specialize in that. It would invalidate the significance of other ships if they did all jobs better. They aren't better than a tricked out T3 at beating combat sites as is either.
4) What is an "exploration" ship? You could just put exploration modules (scanner, hacker) on a Battleship and go. CCP signals to the players a ship is an "exploration" ship by putting hacking game bonuses on it.
5) Yes... if you want to do hacking as your primary focus, you'll only need the things I mentioned to excel.

The real complaints here should be about wormhole data and relic sites and gas sites - which have both rats and hacking. That's the bit that you'll still need a T3 for, the highest end of exploration.

No really, the issue is that people assume CCP have assigned a fixed role and just posting it to the forum for a slugfest. They have asked for constructive ideas, not for people to assume that what they believe is what CCP Have decided.After 75 pages and over 1500 posts of struggling peoples patience is a little frazzled

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Fa Xian
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1472 - 2013-10-09 17:27:03 UTC
MiMozO wrote:
Since Sisters are best at exploring, those ships MUST have the best exploring. And since Sisters do not like shooting people, those ships MUST NOT have primary combat capabilities. It was said that those ships are all about self-defense. Well give them the self-defense than. Give them ability to disable their pursuers in different ways, with electronics and speed.
Defender missiles could be used here with some interesting mechanics, like attacking and disabling ships which attacking Sisters ship. But, I guess good old style: "Let's add a ship, I don't know what for, but let's add it" is the most liked by CCP.


Oh, I think they know exactly what it's for... it's just not in line with anything in the lore. Look, they struggled to define a Gallente/Amarr hybrid from a lore perspective. This is all a mechanical choice to empower a play style on CCP's part - it's not a lore thing, it's a game play thing.

SoE gives endless missions to kill pirates and villains. They are "good guys", but not against violence. These are White Hat ships - as opposed to Black Hat bad guy pirate ships (that's an analogy to Western films)...

I would have liked to see things like built in warp stabilizers and/or ewar abilities, personally. They don't need to excel at hacking; I'd prefer the tougher fighting version we have here. But I'd like to see them allow lone explorers to evade or escape PVP while in combat sites in low or null... as it is, you're just going to get your expensive faction ship blown up.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1473 - 2013-10-09 17:30:40 UTC
Fa Xian wrote:
MiMozO wrote:
Since Sisters are best at exploring, those ships MUST have the best exploring. And since Sisters do not like shooting people, those ships MUST NOT have primary combat capabilities. It was said that those ships are all about self-defense. Well give them the self-defense than. Give them ability to disable their pursuers in different ways, with electronics and speed.
Defender missiles could be used here with some interesting mechanics, like attacking and disabling ships which attacking Sisters ship. But, I guess good old style: "Let's add a ship, I don't know what for, but let's add it" is the most liked by CCP.


Oh, I think they know exactly what it's for... it's just not in line with anything in the lore. Look, they struggled to define a Gallente/Amarr hybrid from a lore perspective. This is all a mechanical choice to empower a play style on CCP's part - it's not a lore thing, it's a game play thing.

SoE gives endless missions to kill pirates and villains. They are "good guys", but not against violence. These are White Hat ships - as opposed to Black Hat bad guy pirate ships (that's an analogy to Western films)...

I would have liked to see things like built in warp stabilizers and/or ewar abilities, personally. They don't need to excel at hacking; I'd prefer the tougher fighting version we have here. But I'd like to see them allow lone explorers to evade or escape PVP while in combat sites in low or null... as it is, you're just going to get your expensive faction ship blown up.

What you say here is very sensible, understandably I don't agree with you on the hacking side as i see it as an equally important part. But you make some very good points.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Fa Xian
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1474 - 2013-10-09 17:33:58 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
No really, the issue is that people assume CCP have assigned a fixed role and just posting it to the forum for a slugfest. They have asked for constructive ideas, not for people to assume that what they believe is what CCP Have decided.After 75 pages and over 1500 posts of struggling peoples patience is a little frazzled


So why not suggest they double the shields, armor, and hull? Do you think CCP will listen to that?

It's silly to just ask for something without understanding what is going on in the first place. CCP is not going to give +10 because it would invalidate the exploration role of all other existing exploration ships. You can keep asking and asking, but you won't get it because it's not on the table for negotiation.

You have a valid point; +10 is what defines a good exploration ship for hacking. Guess what? These aren't for hacking.
Fa Xian
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1475 - 2013-10-09 17:38:32 UTC
Fa Xian wrote:
You have a valid point; +10 is what defines a good exploration ship for hacking. Guess what? These aren't for hacking.


+5 base, with +1 virus strength per level of Cov Ops skill

That would be a reasonable compromise perhaps.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1476 - 2013-10-09 17:40:54 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Fa Xian wrote:
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
No really, the issue is that people assume CCP have assigned a fixed role and just posting it to the forum for a slugfest. They have asked for constructive ideas, not for people to assume that what they believe is what CCP Have decided.After 75 pages and over 1500 posts of struggling peoples patience is a little frazzled


So why not suggest they double the shields, armor, and hull? Do you think CCP will listen to that?

It's silly to just ask for something without understanding what is going on in the first place. CCP is not going to give +10 because it would invalidate the exploration role of all other existing exploration ships. You can keep asking and asking, but you won't get it because it's not on the table for negotiation.

You have a valid point; +10 is what defines a good exploration ship for hacking. Guess what? These aren't for hacking.

You are right in so many ways with this, but please, consider, CCP have never said these are not meant to be well rounded exploration ships, they have in fact said the opposite.
They have already said they will consider raising it.
If as you suggest the PvP bonus side was made less powerful, it was even offered by them as a possibility.Defence is a great idea, it does not automatically mean power to attack.
You may be new to this thread it is so very long it would take the patience of a saint to read it all but the only people who have said it is not possible are not employed by CCP they are posters on the forum.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#1477 - 2013-10-09 17:42:59 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Fa Xian wrote:
Fa Xian wrote:
You have a valid point; +10 is what defines a good exploration ship for hacking. Guess what? These aren't for hacking.


+5 base, with +1 virus strength per level of Cov Ops skill

That would be a reasonable compromise perhaps.

Tying the virus strength to the covert ops skill would be an excellent idea please see post 1382

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

Omnathious Deninard
Ministry of Silly Walks.
#1478 - 2013-10-09 17:43:30 UTC
Fa Xian wrote:
Fa Xian wrote:
You have a valid point; +10 is what defines a good exploration ship for hacking. Guess what? These aren't for hacking.


+5 base, with +1 virus strength per level of Cov Ops skill

That would be a reasonable compromise perhaps.

But they are not T2 ships and they should not be. +5 is fine for hacking.

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

Sen Starfire
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1479 - 2013-10-09 17:43:51 UTC
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
Sen Starfire wrote:
After having seen all the comments concerning exploration, I reiterate my previous point; what if, instead of having weapon bonuses, there was a mechanic in place like the Zephyr, so that Sleepers ignore the ship unless it engages them? That would be most useful in Wormhole exploration, which is currently the realm of either T3 cruisers or fleets. Maybe even, considering their humanitarian nature, a bonus to remote armor repair? Just a couple thoughts.

Sleeper idea is nice, but a middle ground making them hate drones less so drones have some utility and are not thrown at them like chaff


I agree; the point should be for these ships that they have a unique Sister-related mechanic, rather than just a different mix of standard mechanics. With the arguments going on concerning where they fit in the exploration world, better than frigs, worse than T3s and covops, though with different bonuses... That should not be the point. They should be unique, different than just a conglomeration of other race's specialties; or, at least, those features should not be the main aspect.
Wyndeigo
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1480 - 2013-10-09 17:45:46 UTC
The Astero, having only 2 high slots, should also have a drone damage bonus added along with the drone hp bonus.