These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Is it me, or do we need more destroyer types?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Zevix
Theoretical Paradigms Initiative
Everyones Best Interest
#1 - 2015-08-04 19:22:33 UTC
Seems like for every other class there are has at least 3 to 5 yet each race only gets 2 destroyers? seems like there might be room for more indy or sov warfare type ships with entosis bonuses or a mini ice miner bonuses/holds (since ore and gas got the love from Ventures). I dont know, I am half asleep and thinking out loud here but it just seems like there is more versatile ship roles on the destroyer t1/t2 front that is just getting ignored.
Lu Ziffer
Balanced Unity
Goonswarm Federation
#2 - 2015-08-04 19:27:47 UTC
More destroyers T1 and T2 I like were this going
SFM Hobb3s
Perkone
Caldari State
#3 - 2015-08-04 19:43:58 UTC
We just got four real destroyers. That actually 'destroy' stuff. Twisted
Zevix
Theoretical Paradigms Initiative
Everyones Best Interest
#4 - 2015-08-04 19:53:26 UTC
I do "sort of" recognize t3 destroyers, but the skill threshold and role is still mostly combat related. If (merely as an example) we had a t1 ice mining destroyer with a big 5-8k ice hold (half a proc/skiff) from the ORE faction group like the Venture they provided for the frigate class...then have the t2 be an entosis cycle time bonus boat. Again, just spit-balling here but more t1's at least to round out the classes seems like a reasonable thing to inquire about.
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#5 - 2015-08-04 19:54:39 UTC
Destroyer-sized variants of Attack Battlecruisers with bonuses to cruiser-class weapons please.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#6 - 2015-08-04 20:05:40 UTC
desie sized command ships please.

for on-the-go fleet boosting

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Abby Silverwind
Demonic Retribution
Shadow Ultimatum
#7 - 2015-08-04 20:07:05 UTC
Nope I think that the ones we have are generally OP already

Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me;

Your rod and your staff, they comfort me.

Drunk Posting Best Posting
Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#8 - 2015-08-04 21:04:19 UTC
So because other ship classes has multiple classes, therefore Destroyers need it too?

How about no?
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2015-08-04 22:54:14 UTC
Celthric Kanerian wrote:
So because other ship classes has multiple classes, therefore Destroyers need it too?

How about no?

Howabout yes. Glaring discrepancy in the ship lineup is obvious. Spotting it isn't a reason to fix it?



Wanna know the real reason T3 destroyers are so awesome? It's because CCP took two high slots and moved em down. Why not do that with T1s? Release a lineup of combat destroyers which have stats similar to the attack variants, but 6 highs and 7 mids+lows. Suddenly it'll be possible to give them a decent fit and they'll still have a lot of power to back it up.

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."
Sabrez Haklar
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#10 - 2015-08-05 00:41:36 UTC
If it means i get a cloaky destoryer im in +1
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#11 - 2015-08-05 00:58:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Nyalnara
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Celthric Kanerian wrote:
So because other ship classes has multiple classes, therefore Destroyers need it too?

How about no?

Howabout yes. Glaring discrepancy in the ship lineup is obvious. Spotting it isn't a reason to fix it?



Wanna know the real reason T3 destroyers are so awesome? It's because CCP took two high slots and moved em down. Why not do that with T1s? Release a lineup of combat destroyers which have stats similar to the attack variants, but 6 highs and 7 mids+lows. Suddenly it'll be possible to give them a decent fit and they'll still have a lot of power to back it up.


Well, not sure, i should check in Isis, but as far as i remember, all T1 dessies have a 7mid+low layout... their main problem is about fitting, because low PWG or CPU value. Or, sometimes, both. And a full rack of weapons, on top of it. And low base stats. And...

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#12 - 2015-08-05 05:03:46 UTC
Nyalnara wrote:
Well, not sure, i should check in Isis, but as far as i remember, all T1 dessies have a 7mid+low layout... their main problem is about fitting, because low PWG or CPU value. Or, sometimes, both. And a full rack of weapons, on top of it. And low base stats. And...

The original lineup all have 5 mids+lows with 8 highs, for 13 total slots. The new tech 1s all have 6 mids+lows, and 7 high slots, except the drone ships have only 6 highs. Drone ships often have -1 slot. Tech 2 and 3 have 14 slots.

They lack CPU mostly because they don't need much with so few mids and lows. Their powergrid is tight with so many weapons, except on the Thrasher with autocannons it's got a ton left over. If you give them 6 highs and 7 mids+lows, then reduce powergrid and increase CPU to match, they fit very comfortably. As an example, I'll use the Catalyst as a base:


Combat Catalyst
6 high slots, 6 turret hardpoints
3 mid slots, 4 low slots
powergrid multiplied by 0.75 = 53 MW (66.25 after powergrid management 5)
CPU divided by 0.75 = 237 Tf (296.25 after CPU management 5)
With max skills and a full rack of T2 150mm rails, that costs 121.8 CPU and 54 powergrid, leaving 115.2 Tf CPU and 12.25 MW powergrid. The powergrid is a little thin at that point, but there's about 16.5 CPU average per remaining slot. It's tight but that's partly because you have 150mm rails fit. Even still, you can work with that. But if you fit a cheaper weapon system, you get a lot more to work with.

I might also support a buff to T1 destroyer powergrid and CPU. Their fits are way too tight I feel sometimes.

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."
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#13 - 2015-08-05 06:59:04 UTC  |  Edited by: elitatwo
Zevix wrote:
I do "sort of" recognize t3 destroyers, but the skill threshold and role is still mostly combat related. If (merely as an example) we had a t1 ice mining destroyer with a big 5-8k ice hold (half a proc/skiff) from the ORE faction group like the Venture they provided for the frigate class...


Funny you mention this because I was trying to fit my Prospect into my Bustard but she is too large to fit in the fleet hangar. I can however fit 4 ceptors or 3 frigates all fit with rigs and so on in the hold. The Prospect however seems to be more like destroyer size.

Just a few months back where w-space got the shattered holes I was proposing the same thing, a ship similar to the Prospect which can mine ice and is of course from ORE our beloved excavation experts.

And while we are at it, speaking of tech 1 and 2 destroyers, why does the dictor bubble launcher need 100 CPU when you only fit one to begin with?
Was that a double insurance that we only fit one ontop of the module restriction itself? (I only recently trained them because I negleted destroyers for the longest time and with the Hecate on the horizont and all the destroyer hype I thought, I might as well)


I won't be against a tech 2 lineup of the second tech 1 hulls we got in the destroyer class like a tech 2 Algos, Dragoon, Corax and there is more I don't recall lesser tech.

Thinking about this, the Corax needs some love, some speed love and the Flycatcher only has one low. Please give much love to the Flycatcher.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Daniela Doran
Doomheim
#14 - 2015-08-05 07:20:12 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Zevix wrote:
I do "sort of" recognize t3 destroyers, but the skill threshold and role is still mostly combat related. If (merely as an example) we had a t1 ice mining destroyer with a big 5-8k ice hold (half a proc/skiff) from the ORE faction group like the Venture they provided for the frigate class...


Funny you mention this because I was trying to fit my Prospect into my Bustard but she is too large to fit in the fleet hangar. I can however fit 4 ceptors or 3 frigates all fit with rigs and so on in the hold. The Prospect however seems to be more like destroyer size.

Just a few months back where w-space got the shattered holes I was proposing the same thing, a ship similar to the Prospect which can mine ice and is of course from ORE our beloved excavation experts.

And while we are at it, speaking of tech 1 and 2 destroyers, why does the dictor bubble launcher need 100 CPU when you only fit one to begin with?
Was that a double insurance that we only fit one ontop of the module restriction itself? (I only recently trained them because I negleted destroyers for the longest time and with the Hecate on the horizont and all the destroyer hype I thought, I might as well)


Just be honest and say, "because I'm running out of stuff to train for".
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#15 - 2015-08-05 07:59:34 UTC
Daniela Doran wrote:
Just be honest and say, "because I'm running out of stuff to train for".


What? According to EVEmon that might be the case in 2018 and my current que is set to run out next May. I still have plenty to train and many interests.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Valkin Mordirc
#16 - 2015-08-05 08:49:22 UTC
I would like more T1 ships in general.


But before that I would really like some sort of balance in the current ship line up as is. Like the Corax.


Pretty sure it's only in the game for the festive launchers.
#DeleteTheWeak