These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

T2 Assault Destroyer
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Ganja Jane
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#1 - 2013-12-01 08:48:48 UTC
I noticed that there was a lack of a T2 counterpart to the recent additions of the racial destroyers.

Just packing an idea into my bowl, but I'm thinking this...
New T2 ships with new T2 skills, reuse of library assets(maybe a few extra pieces of geometry to the models), tweaked textures... The easy stuff. Game design and balance... not so easy stuff. So expanding upon the idea via public outreach is welcomed to improve the concept so that it may prove a healthy addition into the EVE Online universe if implemented and not come across as something that doesn't provide a dynamic necessity to fleet and solo operations.

Assault Destroyer - T2 Variants of the Corax, Algos, Talwar, and Dragoon.

-Requires new skill: Assault Destroyers [Skill for operation of the Assault Destroyers. Can not be trained on Trial Accounts.]

Role: A heavier version of the assault frigate, providing a larger damage profile than interdictors.

I will provide a Corax T2 Assault Version as a template.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Corax T2 -

Caldari Destroyer Skill bonus:
5% Bonus to Rocket and Light Missile kinetic damage per level
10% Bonus to light missile and rocket explosion velocity per level

Assault Destroyer Skill bonus:
5% Bonus to Rocket and Light Missile kinetic damage per level
5% Bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Explosion Radius

Role Bonus: 50% bonus to light missile and rocket max velocity

8 High Slots
5 Mid Slots
3 Low Slots

310 CPU

8 Launcher Hardpoints

2 Rig Slots
68 Powergrid
350 Cargo

Shield 900hp
0% Em
50% Explosive
55% Kinetic
60% Thermal
Shield Recharge 625

Armor 800hp
50% EM
10% Explosive
43.75% Kinetic
45% Thermal

Structure 800

Speed 260 m/s

Recharge Time 290s

Max Target Range 55k

7 Max targets

Sig Radius 69m

Scan Resolution 475mm

Warp Speed 5.0 AU / Second

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#2 - 2013-12-01 08:58:48 UTC
I love the Corax model, so a T2 version would be awesome in my eyes. I think Heavy Destroyer sounds better than Assault Destroyer though.

As far as your stats go I think you would want to define a different role than the standard Corax, and all I'm seeing is a Corax with way more DPS. Even the role bonus is exactly the same.
Ganja Jane
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#3 - 2013-12-01 09:05:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Ganja Jane
Pretty much, it's going along the same lines as a T1 variant of a ship and it's T2 DPS role. Like the Gallante Incursus and Enyo variant. The incursus has 3 Small Turret hard points and has a 5% dmg bonus per Gallante frigate skill level. The Enyo has 4 turrets and has double the damage bonus as the Incursus was given at 10% per Gallante Frigate skill level.

So yes, this is a Corax with more dps based on the same design structure of T1 ships and their T2 Assault Version.

As for the role bonus, can you think of something more fitting? Perhaps rate of fire?

As for what you want to call it, I couldn't care. It's just something I was basing it off from how CCP was naming their other ships based on their role.
Ganja Jane
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2013-12-01 09:16:17 UTC
Or the 50% reduction to MicroWarp Drive Signature Radius penalty as a role.
Scatim Helicon
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2013-12-01 09:17:03 UTC
T1 Destroyers are already pretty tightly defined as glass cannon anti-frigate platforms, so a T2 version in the same role with more slots and more damage is just going to outperform the base hull in a manner that CCP have deliberately moved away from recently.

The idea of a new range of T2 destroyers is fine, but like Interdictors, they need some specialisation which doesn't tread on the toes of the T1s too badly.

Every time you post a WiS thread, Hilmar strangles a kitten.
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#6 - 2013-12-01 09:39:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Arya Regnar
8/5/3 slots is absolutely no no with that kind of base damage...

Your version of destroyers is nearly on par with assault cruiser with tank and it tops its damage.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#7 - 2013-12-01 09:55:56 UTC
Yeah it's pretty much overpowered as is and also renders the standard Corax obsolete at what it does best. My suggestion would be a tankier, shorter ranged damage dealer with tanking bonuses replacing one damage application bonus and the kinetic damage bonus, with maybe a 50% AB bonus for the role bonus.

That would leave you with a tankier, faster, slightly higher DPS Corax, but with far less range.
Nalelmir Ahashion
Industrial Management and Engineering
Mouth Trumpet Cavalry
#8 - 2013-12-01 10:39:07 UTC
T2 destroyer with medium weapons like those T3 BC with large weapons.
Motoko Innocentius
Domus Dei
#9 - 2013-12-01 10:59:51 UTC
Nalelmir Ahashion wrote:
T2 destroyer with medium weapons like those T3 BC with large weapons.


Ovesized weaopns I too think are the only possibility to do with a new t2 destroyer if one would be made, medium sized dessys might offer a nice new doctrine also against medium and large sized opponents if made fast or tanky enough.
Tabris Katz
The Forgotten Children
#10 - 2013-12-01 12:51:02 UTC
I think a good name for t2 destroyers would be Hunter-Seeker, 'heavy' and 'assault' are over used as it. No idea what role it fulfill right now, so I'll get back to you on that.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#11 - 2013-12-01 13:02:14 UTC
Tabris Katz wrote:
I think a good name for t2 destroyers would be Hunter-Seeker, 'heavy' and 'assault' are over used as it. No idea what role it fulfill right now, so I'll get back to you on that.


'Heavy' and 'assault' are also over used in real life weapons and war vehicles because they are descriptive. Word variety simply for the sake of word variety is bad. A Hunter-Seeker sounds like a specialized anti-covert ops ship (which would be cool) rather than what's actually being discussed in this thread.
David Kir
Errantry Armaments
#12 - 2013-12-01 14:22:40 UTC  |  Edited by: David Kir
I think that T2 Destroyers should be Light Command Ships.

With OGB soon to be ditched we are going to need a mobile boost platform for frigate gangs.

Low boost bonus, interceptor warp speed, T" resists, no additional firepower.

We'll have to wait until CCP re-balances AFs, before we start introducing a ship that's meant to pray on them.
Don't know about you, but I don't want 500 DPS Catalyst/Thrashers all over lowsec.

Friends are like cows: if you eat them, they die.
Seranova Farreach
Biomass Negative
#13 - 2013-12-01 14:26:30 UTC
i would think to wait untill the t2 balancing cause isnt the Sabre already the most OP dictor atm? like 450ish dps and quite fast and tanky?

BUT! i would liek to see more t2 destroyers

[u]___________________ http://i.imgur.com/d9Ee2ik.jpg[/u]
Ganja Jane
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2013-12-01 22:38:19 UTC
These are all great points. A combat dedicated destroyer designed to provide T2 speed brawler damage. Balanced so that it delivers a damage profile that sinks in between assault frigate dps and heavy assault cruisers.

To establish a direct role for the ship is important. I liked the idea of light command ships. I also believed that there should be a T2 combat destroyer role.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#15 - 2013-12-01 23:13:05 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
David Kir wrote:
I think that T2 Destroyers should be Light Command Ships.

With OGB soon to be ditched we are going to need a mobile boost platform for frigate gangs.

Low boost bonus, interceptor warp speed, T" resists, no additional firepower.

We'll have to wait until CCP re-balances AFs, before we start introducing a ship that's meant to pray on them.
Don't know about you, but I don't want 500 DPS Catalyst/Thrashers all over lowsec.

You might interested in this:

"Light" Command Ships


As for this idea... I do not support it. The concept steps on too many toes (Assault Frigates and HACs) and, in their current proposed form, has the potential to obsolete Cruisers.


edit:
Ganja Jane wrote:
A combat dedicated destroyer designed to provide T2 speed brawler damage. Balanced so that it delivers a damage profile that sinks in between assault frigate dps and heavy assault cruisers.

You are aware that this is between 300 to 400 dps and 600 to 700 dps... right? If their cost is set generally around current Interdictor prices you're talking about cruiser style gank (and tank in your proposed form) in a far more mobile package for a mere 30 to 40 million. I would never fly a Tech 1 cruiser ever again if this becomes reality because these would be straight superior.

How did you Veterans start?
Xindi Kraid
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#16 - 2013-12-01 23:30:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Xindi Kraid
Currently all destroyers are classed as attack ships, so balance has their stats where they have good speed and great damage but not much tank to speak of. The T2 version out now is the interdictor which is similarly thin skinned. They are a huge threat to frigates, but the large sig but small tank means they aren't as dangerous to cruisers or anything larger than that.

I don't see much being gained by just upping the damage on a destroyer platform. What I would like to see are some destroyers that can possibly fit some tank. Something that can be just as dangerous to larger ships . Not only does this fit as many other T2s are dangerous to larger classes, but it also adds some new destroyer roles, minimizing overlap.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#17 - 2013-12-01 23:53:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
i think the assault line is basically adding a tanky bonus alongside an damage bonus a mwd role bonus/full T2 resists but with he tradeoff being less mobility.

in terms of slots well.. the current trend is the same amount of slots as T1 versions/navy versions at a stretch ..

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Mr Doctor
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2013-12-02 06:13:23 UTC
I kind of want to see more manual aiming in Eve, like bomb launching but with turrets. Say a Dessy that mounts a bonused BS sized weapon, but only one, Its range and tracking are decent but only hits in a small cone out from the nose of the ship (like a 10 degree d-scan) but with highest DPS in class. Only usable in low/null because it would make jitaganks crazy just like bombs are limited to nul. They would be a second wave ship after webs are applied, aligning and raining hot death... but with the major disadvantage of not being able to get transversal up so they become very vulnerable.

I guess the ability to fit two bomb launchers but not be cloaky could have the same effect, but that **** would be scary - launching off a void and a damage bomb together for example.

Hell what about a bastion module type deal that immobilises you and gives you direct turret control aiming with the mouse though you still have to compensate for turret tracking (ie, you cant twitch aim like youre in CoD, if you move too fast the turret has to catch up... or slow the mouse movement to that of the turret). Yes it would be a stupid idea but it would be novel for a while :p

I just want new things, new ways to play and fly and not just slight variations on old ways I guess.




Or how about a link bubble. Two types, size and duration are the same as dictor bubbles-

Linkerdictor
Launches a bubble that stops all link boosts for all ships caught in the bubble. Leveling the playfield for small frigate gangs that cant bring links with them

Linkefier
Launches a bubble that gives link bonuses to all inside it. Corax would give a combination of all caldari links at say.. half the power of current command ships but gives all 3 link boots. Each of the other dessys give the 3 links of their race when dropped. Does not stack with multiple bubbles though does with multiple races (ie 3 corax bubbles gives the same as 1 corax bubble to the ships inside, but a corax and talwar bubble give all caldari and matar bonuses to those inside. Linkerdictor bubble always wins, anywhere a linkerdictor buble intercects a linkefier bubble no bonuses are given in that section.
(obviously when I say Corax I mean whatever T2 Corax would be called)