These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

T3 Battleships
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Daoden
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2014-05-24 18:46:14 UTC
Before I begin yes I know this has been discussed before and there probably will never be a T3 battleship, but I wanted to put my own thoughts out there, so here's my idea

T3 Battleships should function similarly to T3 cruisers only have a few things changed.

Firstly rather then having the subsystems as they are, subsystems for T3 battleships would require calibration similar to rigs. Base calibration for the hull would be 1000 and subsystems would have between 50 and 500 calibration.

What would this do? Simple, if you wanted the best offensive capability you would choose to use the 500 calibration offensive system. This would have significant bonuses to weapon systems eg: 6 high slots, 6 turret, 7.5% damage per level, 5% ROF per level, bonus to optimal/falloff. Yes some of you will think this is OP but please keep reading.

In order to fit 6 turrets however you will need enough CPU and PG. So if you choose the cheap 50 calibration for engineering and electronics you wont be able to fit all 6 guns, a tank etc. so lets say you would need the 200 calibration minimum to fit the guns for both electronics and engineering, you now have 900/1000 calibration taken up leaving only 100 for Defense and propulsion, meaning you have the weakest tanking and movement and agility possible. So this would be a glass cannon set up. And since the electronics system is only the 200 kind your targeting range, scan res, and sensor strength are not going to be the greatest.

Like wise you could build a very tanky fit by using the higher defensive subsystem. This would give larger HP in general and bonuses to reps but sacrifice damage and even some fitting options.

Or you could get a versatile fit with 5, 200point subsystems.

There would be different types of subsystems for weapons as well, such as gallente getting drone bonuses, etc

So go ahead and post what you think (I expect the worst).
Raw Matters
KRAUTZ IN SPACE
Parallaxis Alliance
#2 - 2014-05-24 18:55:05 UTC
T3 Cruisers are currently well capable of destroying several other cruisers or even battleships. A Marauder is already a very dangerous opponent in PvP. A T3 battle-ship would completely destroy PvP balance as we know it.
epicurus ataraxia
Illusion of Solitude.
Illusion of Solitude
#3 - 2014-05-24 18:59:15 UTC  |  Edited by: epicurus ataraxia
Daoden wrote:
Before I begin yes I know this has been discussed before and there probably will never be a T3 battleship, but I wanted to put my own thoughts out there, so here's my idea

T3 Battleships should function similarly to T3 cruisers only have a few things changed.

Firstly rather then having the subsystems as they are, subsystems for T3 battleships would require calibration similar to rigs. Base calibration for the hull would be 1000 and subsystems would have between 50 and 500 calibration.

What would this do? Simple, if you wanted the best offensive capability you would choose to use the 500 calibration offensive system. This would have significant bonuses to weapon systems eg: 6 high slots, 6 turret, 7.5% damage per level, 5% ROF per level, bonus to optimal/falloff. Yes some of you will think this is OP but please keep reading.

In order to fit 6 turrets however you will need enough CPU and PG. So if you choose the cheap 50 calibration for engineering and electronics you wont be able to fit all 6 guns, a tank etc. so lets say you would need the 200 calibration minimum to fit the guns for both electronics and engineering, you now have 900/1000 calibration taken up leaving only 100 for Defense and propulsion, meaning you have the weakest tanking and movement and agility possible. So this would be a glass cannon set up. And since the electronics system is only the 200 kind your targeting range, scan res, and sensor strength are not going to be the greatest.

Like wise you could build a very tanky fit by using the higher defensive subsystem. This would give larger HP in general and bonuses to reps but sacrifice damage and even some fitting options.

Or you could get a versatile fit with 5, 200point subsystems.

There would be different types of subsystems for weapons as well, such as gallente getting drone bonuses, etc

So go ahead and post what you think (I expect the worst).




The T3 subsystems work quite well in principal with the various choices making for compromises in slot availability.
rigging these ships though does remove the main advantage of the T3 concept of allowing fitting swaps, as the rigs are not removable.

this concept on a battleship would also work well, and when the subsystems are rebalanced and improved, could carry over to a battleship line. Removable rigs would yield a big improvement in flexibility.

as for calibration based fittings, balancing on calibration could very easily lead to great complication and unintended consequences, you can only pick between options of subsystems currently, I believe that would be a great deal safer.

in summation, subsystems good (please update) rigs not.

There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#4 - 2014-05-25 02:03:23 UTC
+1 for T3 Flagships (battleships).

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-05-25 03:50:24 UTC
No.

Once or twice a year for the last few years CCP has taken actions to dialback T3 Cruisers, and some would argue they still aren't balanced. We don't need another 4 years of balancing T3 BS's.

Also, WH's have enough income as it is.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#6 - 2014-05-25 03:57:05 UTC
Sniper Smith wrote:
No.

Once or twice a year for the last few years CCP has taken actions to dialback T3 Cruisers, and some would argue they still aren't balanced. We don't need another 4 years of balancing T3 BS's.

Also, WH's have enough income as it is.

It's the only chance of getting a half-decent missile boat...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2014-05-25 04:41:32 UTC
Raw Matters wrote:
T3 Cruisers are currently well capable of destroying several other cruisers or even battleships. A Marauder is already a very dangerous opponent in PvP. A T3 battle-ship would completely destroy PvP balance as we know it.
T3s are overpowered because they are IMBA, not because they are T3.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Daoden
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2014-05-25 19:41:15 UTC
I think some people are misunderstanding me a little. The idea I proposed was not a T3 setup like cruisers.
there are no cov ops, remote rep option for these subsystems. it would be more like 2 different types of subsystems with various levels eg:

for minmatar
1 missile subsystem with calibrations between 50-500
1 projectile subsystem with calibration between 50-500

They do not become a jack of all trades sort of thing but rather allow you to choose what bonuses you would want. These would be very basic in their premise but powerful subsystems for all 5 categories.

The only one that would be slightly different is a EWAR equivalent electronics one which would fall inline with the current T3s to some degree.