These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Tiericide - Blockade Runner and Deep Space Transport
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#61 - 2014-03-27 17:01:46 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:
Batelle wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Bubble immunity is a funny thing. The main reason they did it with inties is because they could control its abuse with cynos via a tiny cargohold, but now ships like the stiletto are incredibly good for relic hunting.


lol whut.

Cynoceptors are a thing and relic site hunting in ceptors is not.



Pretty much THIS.

Not sure where some of these narratives come about. At cyno 5 with a crow you need a single cargo rig to drop a cyno.

That's it. done deal. The only thing that stops that from being broken is that you can't drop a black ops cyno like that.


And cargo rigs don't affect your align time, require slots, affect warp speed. Losing a single rig slot and a touch of armor is a very small price to pay given these ceptors aren't intended for dogfighting. And you can even go the cargohold route and still not have your effectiveness really hampered.

And you can still both BRIDGE and JUMP a blops gang to a normal cyno, so its not like you need an idle titan or risk ANYTHING to use the ability to drop a gang on someone.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Bimmerman
Penumbra Heavy Industries
#62 - 2014-03-27 17:39:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Bimmerman
For DST's how about them getting a cargo hold of about 75-100k base but not allowing them to fit hull modifications (cargo expanders, inertia stabs, bulkheads, nanos) so it will allow them to fit tank or stabs and adjusting their slots accordingly. Skill bonuses could still increase cargo if you want but could also be geared towards survivability, maybe increase base HP stats to around the Procurer/Skiff level (maybe).


While I would personally love to move the unscannable bonus to DSTs, it would yield a lot of complaints from "pvpers" because while the BR is hard to catch is it pretty squishy and not to hard to pop without investing too much into the ganking ship. DSTs on the other hand can achieve some pretty hefty tanks and making the investment to gank them much larger and riskier because the contents are unknown. Then again I'm a dirty carebear and could be very wrong about that.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#63 - 2014-03-27 20:13:15 UTC
Bimmerman wrote:
For DST's how about them getting a cargo hold of about 75-100k base but not allowing them to fit hull modifications (cargo expanders, inertia stabs, bulkheads, nanos) so it will allow them to fit tank or stabs and adjusting their slots accordingly. Skill bonuses could still increase cargo if you want but could also be geared towards survivability, maybe increase base HP stats to around the Procurer/Skiff level (maybe).


Thats the summary of what I've been promoting...aside from adding bubble immunity to it. You would still be able to fit nanos and inertia stabilizers or warp core stabs. All that gimps your tank and so is an acceptable trade-off. So Yes to massive but static cargo capacity.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#64 - 2014-03-27 20:17:06 UTC
DSTs do not need to be unscannable and neither BRs nor DSTs need bubble immunity.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#65 - 2014-03-27 20:23:16 UTC
Batelle wrote:
DSTs do not need to be unscannable and neither BRs nor DSTs need bubble immunity.


cargo should be scannable but I disagree about the bubble immunity. We will likely never convince one another otherwise.
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#66 - 2014-03-27 20:50:22 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:
Batelle wrote:
DSTs do not need to be unscannable and neither BRs nor DSTs need bubble immunity.


cargo should be scannable but I disagree about the bubble immunity. We will likely never convince one another otherwise.


afraid I have to agree, but I do believe that DST's should NOT be able to drop a cyno - if only by adding the following field to the cyno attributes:
Cannot be fitted to: Transport Ships, Interceptors

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#67 - 2014-03-28 13:48:39 UTC
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
Justin Cody wrote:
Batelle wrote:
DSTs do not need to be unscannable and neither BRs nor DSTs need bubble immunity.


cargo should be scannable but I disagree about the bubble immunity. We will likely never convince one another otherwise.


afraid I have to agree, but I do believe that DST's should NOT be able to drop a cyno - if only by adding the following field to the cyno attributes:
Cannot be fitted to: Transport Ships, Interceptors


Well they can't warp cloaked and they only have 1 high slot and are very slow. T3's can warp cloaked, drop a covert cyno have more tank and be immune to bubbles ~and~ have over all more slots for utility.

not sure why this is a sticking point for you.
Batelle
Federal Navy Academy
#68 - 2014-03-28 13:52:35 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:
Batelle wrote:
DSTs do not need to be unscannable and neither BRs nor DSTs need bubble immunity.


cargo should be scannable but I disagree about the bubble immunity. We will likely never convince one another otherwise.


If you die in a bubble with a BR then you very much deserve it. And the person that kills you very much deserves the kill. BRs are already very good and very useful and its very hard to die in them.


With a DST, you shouldn't ever be anywhere near a bubble in the first place.

"**CCP is changing policy, and has asked that we discontinue the bonus credit program after November 7th. So until then, enjoy a super-bonus of 1B Blink Credit for each 60-day GTC you buy!"**

Never forget.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#69 - 2014-03-28 13:55:32 UTC
Batelle wrote:
Justin Cody wrote:
Batelle wrote:
DSTs do not need to be unscannable and neither BRs nor DSTs need bubble immunity.


cargo should be scannable but I disagree about the bubble immunity. We will likely never convince one another otherwise.


If you die in a bubble with a BR then you very much deserve it. And the person that kills you very much deserves the kill. BRs are already very good and very useful and its very hard to die in them.


With a DST, you shouldn't ever be anywhere near a bubble in the first place.


Yeah about that. *kevinspaceylexluthorwrong.jpg*
Xe'Cara'eos
A Big Enough Lever
#70 - 2014-03-30 03:18:54 UTC
Justin Cody wrote:
Xe'Cara'eos wrote:
Justin Cody wrote:
Batelle wrote:
DSTs do not need to be unscannable and neither BRs nor DSTs need bubble immunity.


cargo should be scannable but I disagree about the bubble immunity. We will likely never convince one another otherwise.


afraid I have to agree, but I do believe that DST's should NOT be able to drop a cyno - if only by adding the following field to the cyno attributes:
Cannot be fitted to: Transport Ships, Interceptors


Well they can't warp cloaked and they only have 1 high slot and are very slow. T3's can warp cloaked, drop a covert cyno have more tank and be immune to bubbles ~and~ have over all more slots for utility.

not sure why this is a sticking point for you.


same here, but it is..... maybe something about role functionality... T3's are generalists, recons get a bonus (force recon!), other ships can kinda do part of it....

For posting an idea into F&I: come up with idea, try and think how people could abuse this, try to fix your idea - loop the process until you can't see how it could be abused, then post to the forums to let us figure out how to abuse it..... If your idea can be abused, it [u]WILL[/u] be.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#71 - 2014-03-31 13:05:19 UTC
The DST still can't drop a black ops cyno. So jammed systems are still jammed. And if you can't get away from a DST you're bad and deserve to die. Seriously guy. Learn 2 warp
WouldYouEver HaveSexWith aGoat
Doomheim
#72 - 2014-04-01 03:28:40 UTC
Keep in mind the DST vessels can be tanked to nearly 150k EHP with good skills and the right implants.

Considering the nature of bumping ships in EVE I don't believe adding EHP to the DST vessels will help much.

Either give it bubble immunity
or
Make it a slower aligning blockade runner (benefits being more cargo and tank)
nahjustwarpin
SUPER DUPER SPACE TRUCKS
#73 - 2014-04-01 05:53:52 UTC
increase ship speed while cloaked per skill level like in black ops, but still unable to warp cloaked.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#74 - 2014-04-01 06:12:53 UTC
Alistair Cononach wrote:
Deep Space Transport = Battleship-like-tank Massive Hold Hauler.

Give the DST's a Battleship-like Armor/Shield pool, with appropriate low/mid slot layout.

Give two or three high-slots, and enough grid to fit weapons (unbonused) or Neuts.


It would be nice if a DST could reasonably expect "burn to the gate" to be a tactic for surviving small gate camps. I wouldn't go so far as to give it weapon hard points, but being able to fit a healthy buffer and heavy active tank with a few neuts would make life more interesting.

The blockade runners don't need the active rep bonus: if they get caught, they're dead anyway. I'd swap the repper bonus and immunity to cargo scanning for a second high slot on the ones that don't have 2 already, while the prowler would be a beastly covert courier ship if it got a skill-based bonus to agility.

Day 0 Advice for New Players
Gypsio III
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#75 - 2014-04-01 10:25:58 UTC
Blockade runner scan immunity was an utterly stupid bonus. They already had scan immunity, it was called the cloak. All the inherent scan immunity has meant is that you can't safely AP in highsec with an empty cargohold.

Dunno about DSTs really. If BRs are the solo transport, then DSTs should be the gang one. Bubble immunity, maybe. You could give them more tank/resists so logi repping them is easier, but they can already have awesome tanks - it's just that people choose to fit cargoholds instead. Maybe increase the base cargo and tank but remove lowslots to force them into being tankier? Or does that just pointlessly remove a degree of flexibility? What?
Neutrino Sunset
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#76 - 2014-04-01 13:53:49 UTC
I think there are some really good points there.

Switching the unscannable cargo from Blockade Runner to DST is a great idea, as is giving Blockade Runners another highslot to fit a covert cyno.

Replacing warp core strength on DST with bubble immunity is pretty good too. I wouldn't like to see bubble immunity being overly widely used as a bonus, but T3 cruisers can have a CovOps cloak _and_ bubble immunity. Bubble immunity alone for the DST wouldn't imo be OP but it might just be compelling enough to start to see the DST being used in null.

Off Topic: I think bubble immunity for inties was a terrible idea, and I think that the overuse of homogenous inty gangs through nullsec has now pretty much proved that it was a terrible idea, so it should be rolled back.
Justin Cody
War Firm
#77 - 2014-04-01 14:47:01 UTC
Neutrino Sunset wrote:
I think there are some really good points there.

Switching the unscannable cargo from Blockade Runner to DST is a great idea, as is giving Blockade Runners another highslot to fit a covert cyno.

Replacing warp core strength on DST with bubble immunity is pretty good too. I wouldn't like to see bubble immunity being overly widely used as a bonus, but T3 cruisers can have a CovOps cloak _and_ bubble immunity. Bubble immunity alone for the DST wouldn't imo be OP but it might just be compelling enough to start to see the DST being used in null.

Off Topic: I think bubble immunity for inties was a terrible idea, and I think that the overuse of homogenous inty gangs through nullsec has now pretty much proved that it was a terrible idea, so it should be rolled back.


bubble immunity for inties was the only counter to *drone-lands* and having every pipe entrance bubbled for 100KM in every direction. Inties don't do all that much dps. Your real problem is simply running into wolf-packs and thats old news. Inty wolf packs used to roam null sec all the time before bubbles became so common place.

individually they are quite vulnerable and anything seems OP when you get ganked by it.
Pashino
Venice Academy
#78 - 2014-04-05 16:09:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Pashino
For DST's, they should decouple the cargo hold from the low and rig slots, and make it a bit bigger than current - maybe close to what an orca can carry (orcas should be manging mining fleets, not haulers, but get used as such due to their cargo capacity). Leave the rigs and slots free to configure for defense - either tanking or warp stabs etc. And bubble immunity is a must.
Pashino
Venice Academy
#79 - 2014-05-03 10:51:30 UTC
I see that, from announcement at Evefest, this topic will get a Dev blog in the near future.

One extra wrinkle that could be added to making DST a desired ship and remove the remaining fly-in-the-ointment to them working as slow, tanky transports - have those that have initiated jumping to warp (and are not pointed) become unbumpable, much as some structures like stargates are now. They still will take forever to get to warp and can be blasted with enough firepower before they actually warp, but gate camps won't be able to rely on cheap tricks like bumping to hold them down while applying damage. Just as skilled BR pilots require specific setups and skilled attackers to catch, DST's will require a camp set to deliver a lot of damage in a short time to take down a DST. As long as the DST's are designed to withstand the current typical gate camp, and have a sufficiently large cargo capacity, they will again become a desired ship to buy and put into use.
1c3crysta1
Silent Majority.
Aspartame.
#80 - 2014-05-03 13:48:21 UTC
I think that DSTs should have a fighting chance against one or a few gankers, but die horribly to a larger gang. As for a fighting chance against few, running away should be an achievable option. One suggestion has been enabling the use for MJDs by the same way that large guns are avaliable for T3 BCs, that's a good idea.
Another option is to enable the getaway by applying the new AB bonus, a web-strength bonus, or both in tandem. To be able to get away by immolizing the enemy and getting out of his/hers point range is powerful against a single tackler, but useless if there are more of them around. If this was applied, the active rep bonus might even have a roll (even if a buffer would work just as well).

Other than that, I agree that DSTs should be more about a decent but more static cargo, since they more than any other hauler is based around tank and Cargohold Expanders being exclusively low slots favors shield tanks horribly.