These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Combat Engineering ships

First post
Author
Rowells
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#21 - 2014-05-14 04:24:17 UTC
Auduin Samson wrote:
I'm curious, does anyone see anything about this that wouldn't work? Lots of people have pitched in saying that it looks cool with a couple tweaks, but is there anyone that thinks this would be flat out bad? And if so why? Always good to hear both sides when brainstorming... prevents later surprises.

I actually think it might be because its its a new role that hasnt been filled before so implications are fuzzy aside from speculation. I like it though.
Komodo Askold
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#22 - 2014-05-14 10:34:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Komodo Askold
I'm bumping this a bit; I think it deserves more discussion and a look by the devs.

Auduin Samson wrote:
I'm curious, does anyone see anything about this that wouldn't work? Lots of people have pitched in saying that it looks cool with a couple tweaks, but is there anyone that thinks this would be flat out bad? And if so why? Always good to hear both sides when brainstorming... prevents later surprises.
Right now I can't come up with a disadvantage... It would be a brand new role. Having ships that can easily set up and destroy/remove deployables and POS would probably increase the usage of the former (which would fit very well with even more deployable types) and vastly make the removal of the latter easier, in terms of abandoned POS (which are a problem in W-space, but no so much in K-space).

About the proposed ideas, I find the deploy/anchor time quite fitting and desirable.

About what ships should they be, I'm thinking ORE could say something about this. Even though I like racial ships, ORE is an expert in all things industrial, and they're still making new ships (read this devblog, especially the part it talks about the Prospect is the first of a new line of ships, "Expedition Frigates"). Those ships being ORE would easy things up for balancing, and as posted before, it could be a nice role for the Primae (or yet another Noctis variant!). The thing is the combat role part, since ORE is more about defending itself when necessary... Perhaps drones?
Auduin Samson
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#23 - 2014-05-14 11:38:24 UTC
I was thinking Ore would be fitting as well and gave some serious thought in my original post. However, the one thing that turned me away is that these ships, or at least the field engineering ships, are at home on the battlefield. Ore ships are designed to take a beating, but not to actively seek out fights with fleets (Unless you're one of those crazy battle rorq pilots). It seemed like a better choice to me to suggest T2 variants of the current frigate logi ships, as they're the only frigs right now that don't have an upgraded version and it would continue the role of field support, albeit in a different way.

ORE is the undisputed king of industry, but these roles would be less about industry and more of what I would call "Aggressive Engineering," which could be a profession in it's own :P
Bohneik Itohn
10.K
#24 - 2014-05-14 15:27:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Bohneik Itohn
Can I restructure this a bit with some suggestions?


First I think it'd be a good idea to make these ships Battlecruisers. I will admit that this opinion is partially based upon the fact that BC's are the most thinly populated subcap hull type, but it also fits rather well, and I'll try to explain why.

The combat engineer as described is someone who is on the field for extended periods of time supporting fleets. They are also playing a primarily support role, and there is already a mechanic in game that complements extended activity in a single system and support role ships: Warfare links. Giving Combat Engineer ships a single Warfare Link slot with a bonus equal to a command ship would make them very handy to have in between the periods when they are doing their structure oriented tasks, meaning that this ship won't be something that you pull out to accomplish a certain task and then immediately put back in the hangar. It will have a purpose in the fleet, and not just as a swiss army knife to be pulled out of the pocket when the opportunity arises.

Making it a BC also solves a lot of other sticky questions at the same time. A support role frigate could easily be caught and melted in seconds by any interceptor while it is doing tasks where it wouldn't be desirable to keep backup on the grid because that would put your reinforcements at unnecessary risk. A BC hull would have plenty of time to call in backup or assess the situation and determine that he shouldn't call anyone, because it could likely lead to more losses with little strategic gain. You can give it enough DPS to make bashing enemy structures feasible, and you reduce the likelihood that these vessels just become a cheap tool for harassment, where combat engineer ships warp into one of your structures and start tearing it apart at a very accelerated rate and then immediately leave when you show up to defend because lol frigates warp fast and "they're not fit for PvP".

You also don't have to use the bag of infinite holding trick to give them a large, specialized cargo hold. The Gnosis has 900m3 of standard cargo space, it's not unreasonable to ask for 1500m3 of specialized cargo space or maybe a bit more with that precedent being set.

I just think a BC hull would fit the role more properly and would circumvent having to introduce a lot of possibly janky mechanics to allow the ship to serve it's purpose.

There has also been a lot of people asking for the ability to pull down abandoned POS's, and I think you could roll that ability into a combat engineer ship nicely.

Wait, CCP kills kittens now too?!  - Freyya

Are you a forum alt? Have you ever wondered why your experience on the forums is always so frustrating and unrewarding? This may help.

Auduin Samson
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#25 - 2014-05-14 16:23:26 UTC
Bohneik Itohn wrote:
(restructured suggestions)


I like this quite a bit. At the very least, make the heavy engineer a battlecruiser as you suggested. I like the idea of a fast and agile ship for engineering duties, but perhaps it could be toned down a bit to prevent becoming just an obnoxious way to quickly harass people. For example, there could be an engineering frig dedicated to quickly setting up deployables, but without the large hold and the demo charge option. This would still make it useful (and allow it to maintain combat effectiveness), especially for small gangs moving quickly. For example, one of these ships in a small strike force of assault frigates could carry a cyno jammer and a warp disruption field generator that could be quickly deployed to allow the fleet to evade enemies.

The heavy version, on the other hand, could have the large cargo hold necessary for extensive fortifications, demo charges, and (if it's ever implemented) the ability to hack and reclaim abandoned structures. It would be an effective engineering platform while maintaining utility and combat effectiveness. This would be in the invasion force to set up a forward position quickly, or in a WH colonization fleet to set up a POS and be able to defend itself.
Arla Sarain
#26 - 2014-05-14 17:25:03 UTC
Neat idea.

Specifically because it's not a combat role labeled as Combat Engineer with the typical MMO/FPS traits of a regular front-line brute.

Pretty interesting ship role.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#27 - 2014-05-14 17:39:14 UTC
I would find it interesting if the ship had a fleet operating mode, where it would enter a form of siege / bastion mode that gave it heavy ECM counters against being targeted directly.

I would specify that this would only work so long as two conditions were met:

1. Like a boosting effect, another ship must not just be on grid with it, but in locking range of an opponent's ship.
Any hostile attempt by a non fleet member to lock the vessel would transfer the lock to another ship in the fleet.
(This is why some other fleet ships MUST be in lock range to grant this benefit, they will be locked instead)

2. No offensive weaponry actively mounted. This boat is pure support only.

The ship could not leave grid if things went south, but as long as they had allies in range, they would be fairly safe from harm.

It's the smart bombs and similar non targeting weapons that can bypass this.
Auduin Samson
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#28 - 2014-05-15 10:20:32 UTC
I don't know, the idea of transferring locks to other ships in the fleet sounds like a recipe for disaster. If everyone is focusing that ship, reps would be on it. If all of those locks got set to other ships which may or may not be able to handle the aggro would make the logi's job a nightmare. Not to mention nobody would want to fly in a fleet when the obvious loot pinata will end up costing their ship because of it's derpy aggro management.
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#29 - 2014-05-15 11:33:16 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I would find it interesting if the ship had a fleet operating mode, where it would enter a form of siege / bastion mode that made it untargetable so it would be such an epic troll because it would just sit between thousands of ships going "f**k you all, yoloswag420"

FTFY.
Jur Tissant
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#30 - 2014-05-15 11:40:42 UTC
Only if we can introduce the Spy ship as well.
Ren Coursa
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#31 - 2014-05-15 11:43:15 UTC
Bob Maths wrote:
That's a pretty cool idea. What would the ships look like?


My take would be something like the Rorqual, it looks like a construction site.
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2014-05-15 13:23:11 UTC
Ren Coursa wrote:
[quote=Bob Maths]... it looks like a construction site.


You mean it should be a minmatar ship?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#33 - 2014-05-15 13:35:29 UTC
Liafcipe9000 wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:
I would find it interesting if the ship had a fleet operating mode, where it would enter a form of siege / bastion mode that made it untargetable so it would be such an epic troll because it would just sit between thousands of ships going "f**k you all, yoloswag420"

FTFY.

Hilarity ensues.

Ok, I get that you did not understand the point, much less the mechanism.
All you understood was that targeting would swap over to other ships, and assumed random chaos since the details were confusing.

NO.

The ship itself could ONLY be in this mode to transfer, if it was bastioned, meaning it could not simply leave when unexpected things happened.

The ONLY ships capable of being targeted by this effect would also need to be inside the targeting range of the attacking ship.
For those not grasping the meaning, that means the ships defending it would need to be almost on top of this ship.

Frigates with well know short range, as well as ships with short ranges for other reasons, could bypass this if the defending ships were not close enough.
That means simply being 20KM distant is going to be more than enough in many cases, to avoid the effect entirely.
Players adapt, and this mechanic would require clever play on both sides.

And by clever play, that means someone planning on the possibility of needing to counter this type of defense, just like we already plan around countering and needing points, and ECM counters.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#34 - 2014-05-15 13:42:39 UTC
Auduin Samson wrote:
I don't know, the idea of transferring locks to other ships in the fleet sounds like a recipe for disaster. If everyone is focusing that ship, reps would be on it. If all of those locks got set to other ships which may or may not be able to handle the aggro would make the logi's job a nightmare. Not to mention nobody would want to fly in a fleet when the obvious loot pinata will end up costing their ship because of it's derpy aggro management.

It would actually be fairly predictable, as only the ships closest to it by intent would likely be affected.

(Ships with long range attacking would adapt by trying to remove 'obstacles', and groups wanting to focus on the engineer boat would send in short range blaster boats to minimize this defense ability)

Long story short, the engineer ship is only truly vulnerable when it's fleet buddies are gone from range.
Your opponents can't cherry pick it from your group if you play smart.
(as opposed to previous where off grid boosting and support was such a wonderful idea)
Auduin Samson
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#35 - 2014-05-15 13:50:42 UTC
Still sounds like a way too powerful ability that is completely out of the ship's intended role... It would be effectively indistructable until the entire fleet is dead, require careful maneuvering of other pilots to prevent being insta-killed by a mechanism that they have no control over, and still be a nightmare for any FC. When trying to coordinate targets and maneuvers, the last thing the FC should have to worry about is if anyone gets too close to one of their own ships WHILE carrying out said maneuvers. Not bumping a bridge titan is one thing, but dancing around a loose cannon on their own team while in the middle of combat is quite another. Not to mention that accidentally transferring aggro to hapless team mates has nothing to do with an engineering role.
Auduin Samson
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#36 - 2014-05-15 13:51:47 UTC
...Also, what would be the point of a stationary "Doom my allies for my survival" mode when it's intended job is moving around the field clearing/deploying structures?
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#37 - 2014-05-15 14:00:14 UTC
Auduin Samson wrote:
Still sounds like a way too powerful ability that is completely out of the ship's intended role... It would be effectively indistructable until the entire fleet is dead, require careful maneuvering of other pilots to prevent being insta-killed by a mechanism that they have no control over, and still be a nightmare for any FC. When trying to coordinate targets and maneuvers, the last thing the FC should have to worry about is if anyone gets too close to one of their own ships WHILE carrying out said maneuvers. Not bumping a bridge titan is one thing, but dancing around a loose cannon on their own team while in the middle of combat is quite another. Not to mention that accidentally transferring aggro to hapless team mates has nothing to do with an engineering role.

Again, the ship would be locked down, and unable to approach others in their own fleet.

Fleet members would need to deliberately place themselves in proximity for the effect to occur, so the random nature is really not genuine.

Fleet members who CHOOSE to defend this ship, need to position themselves nearly on top of it.
It really is too easy to bypass otherwise, making it far less random for many concerns.

Heck, you could even require that the engineer boat designate a target, which needed to remain local to it, in order to use the flying shield effect.

The ultimate point is that your engineer boat should be able to avoid being popped as a priority target, or it's presence on grid is pointless.

Unboosted fleet wanted? Kill booster. Done.
If the actions in the background being performed have meaning, it will be a priority target, as removing it would hurt every ship in range that it had been helping.
Auduin Samson
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#38 - 2014-05-15 14:51:10 UTC
Again though, I don't see the point of making a ship whose sole purpose is moving around the battlefield completely immobile.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#39 - 2014-05-15 14:58:40 UTC
These demo charges. if their limiting factor is explosion velocity, can they be used to gank marauders in bastion mode? kind of like an anti-siege weapon. And triage carriers and sieged dreads for that matter.
No way to have them affect structures only? If DD's can only target caps, then it must be code-able to allow a mod to only target structures.
and give them the old torp explosion animation.

rapid POS setups and take downs with an indy, cool idea.
rapid deployable set-up and take down with a frig, cool idea

hacking deployables (and other things), more a scout, covert role. Covert frigs and astero or stratios can do that.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

Auduin Samson
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#40 - 2014-05-15 15:20:21 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
These demo charges. if their limiting factor is explosion velocity, can they be used to gank marauders in bastion mode? kind of like an anti-siege weapon. And triage carriers and sieged dreads for that matter.
No way to have them affect structures only? If DD's can only target caps, then it must be code-able to allow a mod to only target structures.


Didn't think about seige'd dreads and marauders. You're right, if there is a way to limit the demo charge's target to structures only, that would be ideal. While realistically a charge made to take down a structure should be just as effective against a parked ship, it would wreak havoc on game balance.