These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Eos Fleet Command Ship: Proposal for a Covert Command Ship
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Norris Packard
Horde Vanguard.
Pandemic Horde
#1 - 2011-12-26 05:17:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Norris Packard
The Eos Fleet Command Ship is plagued with many issues hindering its role as a Fleet Command Ship. It lacks the ability to stand on the fields of large scale combat like the Damnation or Vulture can with their ability to fit massive EHP tanks. So the Eos, like the Claymore, is geared towards smaller gangs as their Fleet Command Ship for more focused style of combat (Claymore being fast hit and run skirmish gangs). So the Eos, being better focused for small gang combat, has a great role with its very specialized Information Warfare Links as a Fleet Command Ship for Recon/Stealth Bomber gangs. The problem with the Eos being utilized in this role is that they can’t stay unseen with a cloaked gang nor can they utilize the jump bridges of Black Ops. These are things that the Eos should be able to do in order to make it a unique and viable Fleet Command Ship without making the Eos infringe on the other Command Ships’ territory.

There are currently three ship bonuses for cloaking ships in Eve:

1) Multiplies the cloaked velocity by 125% per level. (With no targeting delay)
2) -98.5% to -99.25% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level.
3) -96% to -100% reduction in Cloaking Device CPU use per level.

One of these three ship bonuses could be utilized to replace the existing “+15 m3 extra Drone Bay space” bonus and the Eos could then be given a drone bay with the base value of 150 m3 to 200 m3 with 50mbit bandwidth.

Main advantage of going with option #1 is the risk that covert cloaking a command ship would make it the most powerful covert cloakable ship in space and option #1 avoids that risk by making the ship unable to warp around cloaked.

Options #2 and #3 are both covert cloaking options and really are just differences in ship CPU usage (there is also the Bomber role bonus that could be used) and is really just an issue of balancing how many gang links can be used along with the cloak. 75 CPU cloak would make it much harder to get that 3rd gang link running without fitting modules.

7 turret slots: allow the Eos to have its 7 turret slots back, honestly with the options to be fitting cloaks and ganglinks they won’t be used often but as the other ships all have the ability to use all of their highs for weapons the Eos should be given that option too. It would only be doing the damage of a tier 1 Battlecruiser as long as the drone bandwidth is limited to 50mbits but with all their extra drone bay an Eos can carry a few different surprises up their sleeves.

Few final items for consideration: Resistance, should they be reduced to the same T2 resistance boost that the Force Recons have?; Slot Layout, should the Eos revert to the old 7H/5M/5L/2R slot layout? Tanking becomes less of a concern for the smaller cloaking gangs and the extra mid would be useful for synergy with other EWAR. Reversion might also address concerns over the ship being able to have an extra MagStab over a Brutix but I personally wouldn’t be concerned about it and like the current slot layout better, but still worth discussion; Should the Eos be able to fit a Covert Cyno?
Diomidis
Pod Liberation Authority
#2 - 2011-12-26 05:51:45 UTC
You are describing an ambush PvP booster...
Something between a BO and a T3 in cloaky/booster config. Both of which already exist that is.
I don't see why it should change in this way, or how this is fleet CS related, Gallente related or Eos related if you wish.

Moreover 2/3 of the bonuses you are describing are not exactly "cloak" related bonuses, but role bonuses for ships that are meant to be used with cloaks, aka SBs, BOs, Recons and T3 with covert configs.

For the Eos to be more powerful, there has to be some FOTM change towards jamming or dampening heavy gangs, so ppl will utilize it more, or a direct or indirect boost in damps etc that might lure people into realizing what information warfare bonuses could do.

Maybe a logistic ship nerf that would make them more weak against the Eos boosted ewar.

Till this day, the Eos will be a underutilized CS, the covert booster role will be done through Proteuses (w/e) and the BOs will be the best iteration of cloaky tankers / damage dealers supporting SB fleets. Boring? Maybe...

"War does not determine who is right - only who is left." -- Bertrand Russell

Liam Mirren
#3 - 2011-12-26 22:24:11 UTC
Change the Gallente gang links to something different, the current ones mostly useless. Perhaps something turret related like adding tracking, optimal range... stuff like that.

Excellence is not a skill, it's an attitude.
Cambarus
The Baros Syndicate
#4 - 2011-12-27 14:13:18 UTC
Diomidis wrote:
You are describing an ambush PvP booster...
Something between a BO and a T3 in cloaky/booster config. Both of which already exist that is.
I don't see why it should change in this way, or how this is fleet CS related, Gallente related or Eos related if you wish.

Moreover 2/3 of the bonuses you are describing are not exactly "cloak" related bonuses, but role bonuses for ships that are meant to be used with cloaks, aka SBs, BOs, Recons and T3 with covert configs.

For the Eos to be more powerful, there has to be some FOTM change towards jamming or dampening heavy gangs, so ppl will utilize it more, or a direct or indirect boost in damps etc that might lure people into realizing what information warfare bonuses could do.

Maybe a logistic ship nerf that would make them more weak against the Eos boosted ewar.

Till this day, the Eos will be a underutilized CS, the covert booster role will be done through Proteuses (w/e) and the BOs will be the best iteration of cloaky tankers / damage dealers supporting SB fleets. Boring? Maybe...

Have you ever actually looked at the command links on the eos? There's a reason why the damn thing is so useless, and it's not the viability of buffing ewar:
Sensor intregrity II gives 45% more sensor strength
A t2 ECCM gives 96% more sensor strength.
The resist mods for armor and shield give 32% , compared to their mods (EANM and invuln) which give 25% and 30% respectively. the strength of the sensor integrity bonus would have to more than DOUBLE just to bring it in line with the other races, not even looking into the fact that the viability of such a link is iffy to begin with.

Recon operation II gives 32% more range to ewar mods, Not terribly useful given the already absurd range of ewar, but at least it has a niche use. IMO this link should also add to point range, removing said bonus from the minmatar link where it never belonged to begin with.

Electronic superiority II: Most of the bonuses from this link are a pathetic 16% it should be immediately obvious why this is a useless link, when all the other links offer 32-45% bonuses.
Norris Packard
Horde Vanguard.
Pandemic Horde
#5 - 2011-12-27 18:02:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Norris Packard
Liam Mirren wrote:
Change the Gallente gang links to something different, the current ones mostly useless. Perhaps something turret related like adding tracking, optimal range... stuff like that.


I think they shy away from links that would boost dps or effective dps. That said this would be very Gallante in style.

Based on the titans bonus to gangs they could change the Gallente to the armor booster and make a new Amarr Capacitor Warfare Link systems that could do something like Capacitor size, Capacitor regen, Energy Emissions capacitor use reduction.

Capacitor would be more universal to gangs like Skirmish Gang Links are and could be one way to change the Eos by removing the infowar from it.

If they did that I would want to see all races get an Infowar Command Ship and maybe give them all a larger bonus to the info war links to a usable level and give them each their racial electronic warfare bonuses as well.
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#6 - 2011-12-28 02:34:52 UTC
The Eos and by implication the information warfare gang links bonuses, are geared towards neutralising the Falcon as an effective ship. Well, that's the theory.

As everyone says, 'the metagame' has moved on and left the Eos totally useless, except for a very, very small core of sensor dampener adepts who kick around EVE trying to convince people about the res damp script's usefulness...but FC's and Alliance heads concentrate on the FOTM alphafleet/welpcane/artybaddon because it works.

The Eos can't boost this, nor can it boost the countermeasure which is to bring your own fleet and may the best logi vs alpha win. Vultures and Damnations can at least add to the tankiness of the fleet.

Or there's the R&K inspired armour HAC/T3 gang with 5 Ironclad Guardians, exemplifying the whole problem in a different way; the Info Warfare gang links are essentially useless to these fits because an ECCM gives a decent enough bonus to sensor strength for the Guardian anyway, preserving the testudo of Guardians, and everything is peachy. Bring the Damnation to give ZOMG OP reps and tank and it doesn't matter if one of your five guardians gets jammed for one cycle by one Falcon anyway.

The Skirmish links, well, they work well with nanogangs, which are a different FOTM; again no benefit for Info Warfare links in a nanogang.

Falcons are good in small gang and smaller fleet situations, but the Info warfare bonuses aren't enough to give a gang enough protection against them. If you want to neutralise a Falcon you either bring 3 x RSD's (lachesis/Arazu) to squeeze his targeting range down to 10km, or everyone fits ECCM. or you just hope to tank the enemy gang long enough to drive the Falcon off the field anyway.

That's the state of play. And whenever I say Eos or any other Fleet Command Ship, you really better believe i mean "(unprobeable) boosting T3" because they get 5% bonus vs 3% bonus. Which is of course, complete crap and needs fixing.

Info warfare, as pointed out, is pretty weak. It is half as effective at level 5 CS with info warfare 5, as fiting a lone ECCM module. It adds to range, when it needs to add to strength. 15%(25%...to 32%) boost to strength for a RSD scripted either way is meaningless because your average fleet will engage at ranges and with ships (eg, Drake's 80km locking range) that one damp per ship can't eliminate (Drake goes to 45km).

For example, a Falcon can put one racial jam on a Drake and effectively permajam it at any range. For an Arazu to achieve EW immunity from the Drake it needs 2 to 3 range-scripted sensor damps. 2 with a boosting Eos. This means that you are made to bring damps and Info Warfare to a fight where your damping ships have to face off against more than one ship each. Which is pointless because you may as well just bring more DPS. (and in the end, people use Lachs and Razu's for their point range).

Finally, if you do bring an info warfare booster to a fight, you are better deploying Falcons, because you get to avoid having to use an ECCM, you get range and strength buffs to your ECM, which makes Falcons even more crazy. Gallente blaster boats get nothing, Gallente drone boats get nothing.

So, until damps get a significant buff (eg, no stacking nerf? higher base range penalty? more aggressive attacking of sensor res of the victim?) they will continue to be a niche weapon system, info warfare will remain unulitised (it, too, needs a buff) and the Eos will be useless priceisely because the Proteus with the Warfare Processor gives better results (if you are crzy enough to bother).

I mean...is it too crazy to ask for a Lachesis to be able to damp ANYTHING to 10.5km locking range when it gets a Info Warfare booster on its side? No, no it is not.

p.s. cap warfare gang links sound great in theory but I foresee people bitching about bhaalcanes and bhaalpests

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Noisrevbus
#7 - 2011-12-28 03:23:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
This thread is quite similar to many others you see in this forum. People are quite accurate when they try to narrow down and point out the problems, but once it's time to be constructive it starts getting otherwordly.

Yes, it's a shame that with the way ganglinks work, the Gallente ganglinks specificly work and the way trends are going at the moment the Proteus is the favourable ship providing the related links.

Yes, the way figures and stacking apply the Gallente links could probably use some tweaking to their numbers and the ship itself could also possibly use tweaks (as opposed to a grand scale overhaul producing a solo monster).

Many other things people complain about only have to do with trends, inexperience and good old fashioned risk-aversity, lemming skips and comfort. If you want to top off EW-prowess in a gang that rely on it or heavily invest in it, the Gallente links are not bad. They are good for the same reason a DC is good for topping off any tank, provided you invest enough in the tank to make it worthwhile. The ECCM-link should probably get a little prod in the equation to make it react better to stacking returns. Chalk up a point for Cambarus.

On a concept level though, there are cloaky gangs that could put a Proteus with some Gallente links to quite interesting use. The level most Black-op oriented groups still play at in this game is quite discouraging; and that CCP saw it fit to make Bombers easier to use (because they die so often with too many groups too daft to use them properly) is quite frightening. I mean, we can sit here all day and complain about Gallente links and then applaud when our designers let us gang-warp bombers on runs with impunity; but is that really an improvement to this game? They are not buffing new, they are buffing daft, they are buffing blob.

The same goes for the Eos. It's a quite simple 1+1. An Armor-oriented gang free up midslots for EW-use. Most people who have seen an AHAC gang has seen this on a basic level: that there is at least one midslot available for leisure use (PL mass-stacked ECM on Zealots to pull the bottom-draw chance-game on Carriers etc). Few groups have had the insight to take that aspect of the design and exploit it for use though. That's the same reason why people didn't use Gallente ships or saw any value in their links wether we speak a gang based around Recons or Drones. Clearly, Damps need a buff - it's not a community that's getting used to being spoon-fed and crutched.

With all that said, what does the Eos need?

Possibly a look at it's base stats, specificly mobility, maybe shifting a slot left or right and likely giving the ECCM link a touch-up. That's pretty much it. Not that it will be a crowdpleaser, but that's about what it "needs".

Not that it matters too much... ~Tornado~, ~Daft Bombers~ Blink.

As always, nerf blobs, nerf dumb - buff EVE.
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
Sending Thots And Players
#8 - 2011-12-28 04:13:29 UTC
Amidst your broad arm-waving you missed the thrust of my argument. The sensor integrity link is only half a replacement for actually fitting an ECCM; it will in effect give a non-ECCM'ed ship about a 20-25% buff vs Falcon, turning a 90% jam chance to a 75% jam chance.

So for your PL AHAC lolECM fit, what does an Info warfare link really do? Gives your ECM an insignificant bonus to jam chance, range, falloff, and your Zealots a boost to sensor strength. Whopee. Or if everyone fitted damps, or ECM bursts, same difference. Better to fit a Skiwmish link instead, reduce your sig 30%, and you feel even more comfortable rolling lolECM.

The role of a fleet boosing command ship is to boost a fleet. Today's environment is alphafleets, not ECM blob. I mean, yes, occasional groups in the small end of the field (5-15? gangs) will saturate with ECM; others will saturate with ECM drones (another gripefest).

Bitching because the new bomb interface makes bombers easier to use is just complaining that the new font is easier to read which makes zero's and O's easier to discriminate, thus dumbing it down.

What, specifically, is an info warfare linked Cloaky Proteus going to do to boost a BLOPs gang? Unless I miss my mark, hardly any BLOPs fleets roll for ECM superiority over raw DPS. Better to roll skirmish links and gain point range of 30% (and fit a lone damp on every one of your 20 bombers). You never fight outnumbered with any form of BLOPs gang, its suicide.

There's nothing you can do to the Eos hull - armour, mobility (which got a wee buff recently), hybrids, drone bay, fitting, resists - which will make it useful until you fix Info Warfare links (and swap 5% bonus with the T3's). What's the point of a killdozer Eos when no one wants its fleet bonus anyway? Youd just end up replicating an Astarte.

This is a discussion about modifying the links, to make the ship more desirable. I think the hull itself is fine. No need for mobility if your enemy is damped to hell and unable to hit you. Nor hitpoints, and DPS becomes abstracted.

~~ Localectomy Blog ~~
Noisrevbus
#9 - 2011-12-29 00:02:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Noisrevbus
Hello Trinkets friend,

Usually, i don't like entering into pyramid-like retorts pulled out of context, additionally you give me alot of problems here. See, i used the examples i did because they're fairly well known. They've been used by high-profile groups and there are movies released showcasing the ideal so it's easy to double-check and understand with a simple trip to Youtube. Yet you spend alot of energy simply trying to ridicule the examples, while not discussing the arguments. They are also pretty basic and straight-forward examples which naturally make me question wether you'd be able to understand a more complex and effect-driven example.

Another problem is that you look at elements in this game very exclusively. You don't seem to consider what a Link may do once you have modules, remote-module and implants already forming a stacked value. It may seem alien to you that there are people out there who ECCM their ships, feed them R-ECCM, use ECCM-implants and still don't cry wolf when a Falcon wins the lottery - because they also have tanks and ships capable of dealing with ECM offensively (you know, shoot the guy).

The same goes for links, why would you ever want a Skirmish link instead, when you can have both at once? You can seed bonuses three times in a fleet. There's no mutual exclusive choice. Legion alt, Loki alt, Proteus alt and CCP's MT-spokesperson will thank you for multiboxing. You are paying to win, or maybe playing to win.

Quote:
You never fight outnumbered with any form of BLOPs gang, its suicide.


Some groups have done it, some groups still do it. You are right about one thing though, most people would rather take the easy route out and fight 5:1 or sit in a station and complain in local chat when the scenery turns, but that was kind of the point already made. Most people would rather be gang-warped or fly more Drakes, that's pretty dumb. When CCP reinforce that behaviour they are dumbing down the game.

Speaking of Drakes, let's say you have 20 of them, each fitting 2 sensor damps. Would they welcome having their 40 sensor damps being slightly better? The same benefit your 20 bombers would yearn. No surely, the Eos need to have gang links that makes your weapons shoot extra tasty fruitcakes, regular won't do.

Most people said Drakes were bad, most people said (armor-) HACs were bad, most people said CVA was bad, then they flew Hellcats because PL are pretty cool. Most people said Tech III will never work in fleets, most people say Bombers are suicide, most people said nano was dead, most people said sniping was dead - Burn Eden disagreed and got nerfed; most people said Dreads were bad and most people said Gallente, their drones, their links, their ships, their hybrid weapons and their electronic support was bad. The Church used to say Gallente was pretty cool, and Genos still do. Most people say quite alot, yet quite often they are proven completely wrong given the test of time. When some people discover new ground, most people tend to follow.

Speaking of Church and Genos - here's C4mel and Hydra reloaded using 15 such damp Drakes to fight a 50-man odd ragtag alpha fleet. I can't vouch for the footage entertainment value though, 35mins, one fight, i gave up early.

Are you most people? Alpha-fleet.