These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rhea] The Confessor

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#101 - 2014-11-28 05:43:43 UTC
FT Diomedes wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
And what about bubble nullification?


No, not a good suggestion. We already enough safe ways to travel.

Covert ops cloak is also a bad idea. It would come with too many nerfs to the useful aspects of the ship. A destroyer, in Eve, should destroy things.



My thoughts exactly. Ship looks to be in a good role position where it is, without being able to just covert cloak warp all over the place or be immune to bubbles.
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#102 - 2014-11-28 05:54:24 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Lord these don't need a dronebay. Ifntheybwere to do a dronebay in these, I would make it solely a ewar dronebay, and make it race specific.

Amarr, energy neutralizing drones (small)
Gallente, sensor dampening drones (small)
Caldari, Target painting drones (small)
Minmatar, web drones (small, lol do they exist? And they would need to be fixed)

Left the Ecm drones out because those would be pretty ridiculous to fight against. Yea target painting isn't a caldari feature, but they would benefit the most from the signature bloom of their target. Give the hull a bonus to them.

Might as well make those ewar drones do something (besides the ecm ones).

Stay wise, 10 bandwidth 30 dronebay size. Have to decide between using 2 smalls or 1 medium.

If you wanted a dronebay, it would be something like that, just no Dps drones.



SW 300s, 600s, and 900s do exist, yes.
However:
Stasis webification and Energy neutralizing drones are not ewar, they are combat utility drones. You will notice with a little fact checking, that energy neutralization is not electronic warfare in Eve.

The four types of ewar drones are:

Amarr, tracking disruption Acolyte TD-300
Minmatar, target painting Warrior TP-300
Gallente, sensor dampening Hobgoblin SD-300
Caldari, ecm Hornet EC-300

Honestly, if you're okay with bonused sensor damp drones, but not ecm, that's a little hippocritical, not to mention counter-intuitive to the bonuses e-war frigates and cruisers get for each race. It just doesnt seem right at all, having a ship solely bonused to a type of drone that is made by another race (warriors)

That's all a bit irrelevant though when we consider these are tactical destroyers, not E-war dessies, so I think it's safe to say we wont have to worry about such a silly drone bonus.
Semidurr
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#103 - 2014-11-28 07:08:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Semidurr
NO to cov-ops cloak on t3 desies.
It would be broken in FW area where they will be mostly used.

There is enough combat ships that have cov-ops capability.
Use them.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#104 - 2014-11-28 07:52:50 UTC
Semidurr wrote:
NO to cov-ops cloak on t3 desies.
It would be broken in FW area where they will be mostly used.

There is enough combat ships that have cov-ops capability.
Use them.

The t3 cruisers are the only combat with covert cloak the rest even bombers are support ships

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Semidurr
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#105 - 2014-11-28 08:01:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Semidurr
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
The t3 cruisers are the only combat with covert cloak the rest even bombers are support ships




Stratios for example has great capabilities when it comes to combat and i got no idea why are you calling bombers "support ships" when they are more than capable of wiping out entire fleets.
Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#106 - 2014-11-28 08:16:03 UTC
The lack of tracking may relegate it to sniping, but the alternative means its too strong.
basically i anticipate the defensive sub being used little on this particular d3. Other d3's on the other hand will likely behave differently.

no thanks to Covert cloak pls.
wouldnt mind a small % bonus to mwd sig penalty when using the propulsion mode though.

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
Barton Breau
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#107 - 2014-11-28 08:16:25 UTC
Dunno, from afar it looks like a slower coercer + 12.5% damage - tracking, arent we a bit close to home for a "new and flashy" ship?
Gnadolin
Space Pioneers
#108 - 2014-11-28 09:23:26 UTC
Stop comparing them with T3 Cruisers, as those are horribly of balance.

I would rather like to see Strategic cruisers nerfed to the point where those dessis are compared to their T1 counterparts then the other way round.

CCP already admitted that the Strategic Cruisers where a mistake and are far more powerful then initially intendend, just be patient for the "Tiericide" to move on and arrive on them.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#109 - 2014-11-28 09:54:05 UTC
Warde Guildencrantz wrote:
Can we have at least 1 different mode per race? Don't want every race to have sharpshooter+defence+propulsion and be identical cept for tank and weapons



Probably will.. I cannot see sniper mode on all 4. Because range bonus fails for blasters and AC. And peopel will not buy this to replace the trasher as pod killing alpha :P

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#110 - 2014-11-28 09:56:45 UTC
Seriously.. people complainign this thing to be weak are NUTS.

This thing is marvelous for small scale pvp!! I probably will fly one for weeks non stop after they are released.

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#111 - 2014-11-28 10:11:34 UTC
Having tested these on SISI quite a bit ive found that it is definately suited to small gang warfare, as a solo boat it does lack in some key areas. but can work as a solo kiter.

CCP have set the stats on this just right. my only issue is that it's a little too easy to skill for this. the tactical destroyer skill is a x5 multiplier. and you only need this skill in order to use the ship perfectly.

I would like to see the time between switches increases to 20 seconds at base and a skill introduced that reduces it by 10% per level. I would have this skill as a x4 multiplier and require Weapon Upgrades 5 before training.
Ab'del Abu
Atlantis Ascendant
#112 - 2014-11-28 10:19:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Ab'del Abu
Aebe Amraen wrote:
40m is absurdly cheap for this ship, cheaper than dictor hulls. Please consider doubling or tripling the price.


this

Also: Obviously those new t3 destroyers should have full t2 resists (BEFORE defensive mode). Change defensive mode to a bonus for active reps/more buffer.
TrouserDeagle
Beyond Divinity Inc
Shadow Cartel
#113 - 2014-11-28 10:59:56 UTC
lol @ all the 'it's T3, why isn't it overpowered?'
Kesthely
Mestana
#114 - 2014-11-28 11:03:58 UTC
Daichi Yamato wrote:
The lack of tracking may relegate it to sniping, but the alternative means its too strong.
basically i anticipate the defensive sub being used little on this particular d3. Other d3's on the other hand will likely behave differently.

no thanks to Covert cloak pls.
wouldnt mind a small % bonus to mwd sig penalty when using the propulsion mode though.


Are you kidding me? i'm actually affraid the defensive mode will be to overpowered, it looks like you can put an oversized afterburner on, and with links and implants you'll have a less then 20 sig radius destroyer, capable of doing 180 ish dps @ 10 km while orbiting at roughly 1800 m/s with the option to go switch to go in long range mode and aurora and reach 60 km (although you gain a lot of sig) or beef up your speed to 2.5km/s With the combination of insane resists, (base T2, 33% defensive + modules & Link) you'll be at over 80% accross the board with probably at least 2 in the 90's and that for a price of roughly 50-60 m fitted.
And this is all BEFORE you overheat
Armin Arraeb
Doomheim
#115 - 2014-11-28 11:10:44 UTC
Hi All

First of all thx to CCP for the very nice looking and interesting Confessor.

I only have one issue to report:
If you put on all Turrets, there are still 4 empty Turret Hardpoints on the Model. Isn't it possible to just display (only graphical, on the Model) one Turret as three (instead of two, as normal), as you did that on the Hawk for example? I know it is not that important, but I like it when Ships look fully equipped and not half empty...
AnimeHeretic
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#116 - 2014-11-28 12:50:57 UTC
A couple of things that stand out to me. It's base scan resolution is very low for a ship of its class(compare the confessors 350 to the coercers 525). I know the base stats need to be lowish to compensate for the massive mode bonuses. But this seems extremely low and I think it should be bumped up a bit.

The lack of a tracking bonus, even a small one (25%) on the sniper mode. It would really help nail fast kiters.

The last thing is the unimpressive dps. Barely more than a coercer. I think and extra turret would be good.

Last last thing. The Armor resistance bonus to the defensive mode seems to high. I would drop to 25. Combined with the lowered sig this is very powerful.
Nors Phlebas Sabelhpsron
The Red Circle Inc.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#117 - 2014-11-28 12:50:59 UTC
Valid Point wrote:
Please make the minmatar t3 destroyer vertical


P
l
e
a
s
e

d
o

t
h
i
s
!

Ship looks interesting. Looking forward to playing with it on Sisi tonight
Arline Kley
PIE Inc.
Khimi Harar
#118 - 2014-11-28 12:55:25 UTC
Not vertical.


a 45 degree angle. Its only a destroyer after alll. poor thing can't hold its own weight yet.

"For it was said they had become like those peculiar demons, which dwell in matter but in whom no light may be found." - Father Grigori, Ravens 3:57
Zmikund
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#119 - 2014-11-28 13:29:06 UTC
St'oto wrote:
You know I was thinking these things could be pretty awesome with the new "sleeper weapons." Whatever they are called now.. Polarized? Maybe have the mode change cancel out the 0% resistance or "scale it down." Would give that new weapon class an actual use! Sleeper weapons on a T3 - DO IT!

Seriously though, have the polarized weapons put a reduction to T3 destroyer resistances in defense mode but not completely negate resistances like all other ships. I think that's a solid compromise.

Zmikund wrote:
Tried it on sisi and found out its not what you would expect from T3 class ship ...
Here is list of things i would like to see changed a little ...

1) Ship has too low PWG and CPU considering its slot layout, at least one of theese should get little boost ....
2) Ship is too slow, mostly thanks to its heavyness ... im not asking to boost hull speed, but maybe adding 100% bonus to speed mode instead 66% would be nice because with MWD my ship was flying around 1200m/s, adding +66% from speed mode you get to 2k which is pretty much same speed as average cruiser ... flysing same speed as cruiser in destroyer in speed mode doesnt seem enough for me ...

TL:DR:
Confessor is too slow and has too low CPU/PWG ...


Edit Question:
How will their mode change work? will i get full new bonuses right after clicking on new mode? or will i get it over time as the mode animation progress? or will i get them in the end of change process?


There's no way you could know any of this considering the mode change doesn't apply bonuses yet. Plus you can easily fit a full rack of pulse II, Nos II, mwd, web, scram, 1ancil armor rep, 1 HS II, 1 DCU II, and 2 NANO II without any problems. Plus all rigs. (didn't try damage rigs tho.) So fitting is fine to be honest. All your other points are canceled out till they fix the mode changes.


Cant I? you know there is this mighty thing out there called math ... you have actual speed and since speed mode adds 66% unpenalized speed bonus you just have to multiply your actual speed by 1.66 and you get speed in speed mode ... try it when you get back to elementary school, its not that hard ...

... anyway ... when i read those cry-for-cloak posts i can alredy see new cry topics after release how horribly OP it is ... please dont do anything stupid and dont overbonus it ... it doesnt need more bonuses than it alredy has + it would have more dps with cloak than covops T3 has ...
Vulfen
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#120 - 2014-11-28 14:01:45 UTC
Valid Point wrote:
Please make the minmatar t3 destroyer vertical

CCP this must be done