These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
Previous page12
 

Introduce a battleship sized anti-capital bomber

Author
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#21 - 2015-08-19 09:41:24 UTC
Sigras wrote:
Nyalnara wrote:
Sigras wrote:
Zan Shiro wrote:
Okay...your homework assignment. How does this new bomb not wipe a sub cap like a rokh with 500 mn MWD II but hurts an archon. this...I'd like you to work out. The archon has a lower sig radius....run a fitting tool to see for yourself.

A gravity bomb that does damage based on how much mass your ship has. next question
So, because current bombs are a pain for shield fleets because of bloated signatures, what you really want now is nerfing armor fleets? Seriously, whatever you come up with to break capitals will be more efficient on subcaps, unless tracking/sig based, especially if aoe based.

the worst case scenario is a plated Megathron with its MWD running. This worst case scenario is ~15% the mass of a nidhoggur (the lightest carrier)... not nearly as bad as if you were to go with sig radius which is ~79% of a nidhoggur (also the smallest carrier)

Additionally I thought of another way these things could be cap ship only bombs. They can be targeted and destroyed, but they're small, like 40 m^2, and they're immune to bombs and drones. Dreads and Titans couldnt target these things in time, but sub caps could.


They would still probably travel too fast for most ships to track them.

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.

Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#22 - 2015-08-19 14:19:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Serendipity Lost
I think his idea has a symantics problem. Bombs = AOE and anyone that enjoyed the AOE DD days understands clearly why that sort of thing isn't going to happen.

Let me rework if for you.

How about a sub-cap that can fire a single cap killer massive citadel torpedo. No splash damage. You lock your target and fire. It travels slowly to the target and when it gets there, there is a big boomy sound and the the targeted cap ship gets kicked in the junk. Think of it as one of those bunker buster bombs of today - It's big, it's heavy and it penetrates into the cap ship and then detonates. Maybe give it a unique damage profile that splits it's damage equally between shield/armor/hull - that would sure add interest and aid in explosions.

Make it big and slow. Make it targetable by subcaps. Make it susceptible to firewalling. Heck make it webbable. Web them until they run out of go juice and float useless in space.

Make it so big that the ship firing it is specialized to fire that monster torp only. Make it so big that the ship needs a fitting service of somekind to reload.

I think these features would add a lot of interest to the end game fights. Sure you could bring a fleet of these things, but you have to weigh the fragility of the payload, the fragility of the ships themselves and the involved reload requirements agains the bigger plan. I see it as fairly easy to balance via, damage values, ehp of the torps themselves, speed of the torps, and reload times/requirements. Relaod requirements would include: services required, actual reload time and physical size of the payload (how many can fit in a hauler).

It's use could be to have a (fleet size to be determined by damage value) fleet of these ships come on to the field, strike a specific target and then leave the field for reload.

This might be the interesting piece to the end game puzzle that allows for more than 2 explosions / hour in these fights. Do you go for the support carriers and dreads to take out their knees? Do you mass up a little more and go for the heart and kill supers? "Dude they just blew up our fleet of reloading haulers" (that would mess up a well laid battle plan)

I think this would add interest to end game fights, add more explosions / time in end game fights and maybe break the laggy grind cycle to a small extent. It would be the invisible threat you have to plan for that might or might not be there. It would be a whole new facet to cap/super cap warfare.

EDIT: When I put cap killer citadel torpedo I don't mean a special battleship can head shot a carrier. I mean the torp is designed for use against capitals. Definitely NOT 1 torp to kill a carrier/dread. It should take several.
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#23 - 2015-08-19 14:52:03 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Maybe give it a unique damage profile that splits it's damage equally between shield/armor/hull - that would sure add interest and aid in explosions.


No. Because remote hull rep while fleet fight is not exactly the most efficient thing. Would make these things overpowered, as in "warp fleet at 0 from enemy titan, lock and blap", because get enough hits and there's no hull anymore, thus titan goes boom, and almost un-remote-able.

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.

Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#24 - 2015-08-19 15:21:50 UTC
Nyalnara wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Maybe give it a unique damage profile that splits it's damage equally between shield/armor/hull - that would sure add interest and aid in explosions.


No. Because remote hull rep while fleet fight is not exactly the most efficient thing. Would make these things overpowered, as in "warp fleet at 0 from enemy titan, lock and blap", because get enough hits and there's no hull anymore, thus titan goes boom, and almost un-remote-able.



Yeah, that's reasonable. How about just across shield/armor. Direct Hullwonking would deffo be OP. I was just trying to salvage the guys idea and wasn't depoying a well thought out plan.

As much as I'd like to see archon sentries and even ishtard sentries go poof on a massive scale I think it's reasonable to just outright say NO to any AOE schemes. Anyone that has experienced them on the Eve scale knows those things are not meant for this game.
Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#25 - 2015-08-19 16:28:10 UTC
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Nyalnara wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Maybe give it a unique damage profile that splits it's damage equally between shield/armor/hull - that would sure add interest and aid in explosions.


No. Because remote hull rep while fleet fight is not exactly the most efficient thing. Would make these things overpowered, as in "warp fleet at 0 from enemy titan, lock and blap", because get enough hits and there's no hull anymore, thus titan goes boom, and almost un-remote-able.



Yeah, that's reasonable. How about just across shield/armor. Direct Hullwonking would deffo be OP. I was just trying to salvage the guys idea and wasn't depoying a well thought out plan.

As much as I'd like to see archon sentries and even ishtard sentries go poof on a massive scale I think it's reasonable to just outright say NO to any AOE schemes. Anyone that has experienced them on the Eve scale knows those things are not meant for this game.


Means bringing both armor and shield reps. Or logistics of both, at least. And Nidhoggurs are not exactly the tankier carriers, whether shield or armor.

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.

Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#26 - 2015-08-19 16:49:20 UTC
Lu Ziffer wrote:

Why the hell should a ship worth 100bil isk be killed by something that is worth 300mil?


Why not? Do you want fights or do you want people hidden away in their holes avoiding conflict forever so they can build ever bigger and more expensive ships?

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

Nyalnara
Marauder Initiative
#27 - 2015-08-19 16:56:24 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Lu Ziffer wrote:

Why the hell should a ship worth 100bil isk be killed by something that is worth 300mil?


Why not? Do you want fights or do you want people hidden away in their holes avoiding conflict forever so they can build ever bigger and more expensive ships?


Well, if my 100B ship can be killed by a 300M one, I'll definitely keep it well hidden, somewhere where the sun never shine...

French half-noob.

Non, je ne suis pas gentil.

Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#28 - 2015-08-19 17:08:46 UTC
Nyalnara wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
Lu Ziffer wrote:

Why the hell should a ship worth 100bil isk be killed by something that is worth 300mil?


Why not? Do you want fights or do you want people hidden away in their holes avoiding conflict forever so they can build ever bigger and more expensive ships?


Well, if my 100B ship can be killed by a 300M one, I'll definitely keep it well hidden, somewhere where the sun never shine...


Well, if all the 100B ships stayed well hidden where the sun never shines that would **** off like 200 guys and make like 100,000 guys happpy. I'm not seeing a problem with that on the bigger scale. Shocked
Jaz Antollare
SovNarKom.
Goonswarm Federation
#29 - 2015-08-19 17:10:55 UTC
I want my new battleship bomber! It could be an easy solution, - black ops with 4-6 bomb launchers! :D
Ben Ishikela
#30 - 2015-08-19 17:23:15 UTC
why is noone talking about the focused void bomb here?

Ideas are like Seeds. I'd chop fullgrown trees to start a fire.

Sigras
Conglomo
#31 - 2015-08-19 17:34:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Sigras
Nyalnara wrote:
Sigras wrote:
Additionally I thought of another way these things could be cap ship only bombs. They can be targeted and destroyed, but they're small, like 40 m^2, and they're immune to bombs and drones. Dreads and Titans couldnt target these things in time, but sub caps could.

They would still probably travel too fast for most ships to track them.

Do you understand how tracking works? If the bomb is coming at you it has 0 transversal.

Additionally, did I mention anything about range, distance traveled or speed of the projectile?
Nyalnara wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
Lu Ziffer wrote:

Why the hell should a ship worth 100bil isk be killed by something that is worth 300mil?

Why not? Do you want fights or do you want people hidden away in their holes avoiding conflict forever so they can build ever bigger and more expensive ships?

Well, if my 100B ship can be killed by a 300M one, I'll definitely keep it well hidden, somewhere where the sun never shine...

Nope, youre absolutely right in fact why even have combat in the game at all? why not just compare wallet sizes and have the person with less ISK self destruct because more ISK should always win right?
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#32 - 2015-08-19 17:38:49 UTC
Nyalnara wrote:
Sentamon wrote:
Lu Ziffer wrote:

Why the hell should a ship worth 100bil isk be killed by something that is worth 300mil?


Why not? Do you want fights or do you want people hidden away in their holes avoiding conflict forever so they can build ever bigger and more expensive ships?


Well, if my 100B ship can be killed by a 300M one, I'll definitely keep it well hidden, somewhere where the sun never shine...



Can you just back off on the drama here. No one (including the OP) is proposing that a BS should roll in and one shot and capital ship. Though your unreasonable fear and sky is gonna fall antics are somewhat funny and dare I say... just a little bit delicious, you're not really adding anything to the discussion other than "I'll take my ball and go home"

For you relatively small number of super pilots out there - the threat of <500 guys in supers quitting doesn't actually upset many folks outside of that number. How about you put away some unwarrented self importance and replace it with a little bit of 'eve should be fun'. Then end game lag fests could use some spice and more frequent explosions.

Juan Mileghere
The Corporate Raiders
Safety.
#33 - 2015-08-19 17:41:51 UTC
SFM Hobb3s wrote:
Yikes. Not like everyone knows that no matter what kind of fleet you bring in, once the cyno goes up and more archons start bridging in its time to just go home. Caps are not the problem. Remote repping is the problem, and is the problem for all things Eve. Take away, or at least SEVERELY nerf remote repping, and what you will get is reliance on your own local reps, and LOTS more ships dying on both sides. Both things I would like to see.

Or you know use a neut heavy doctrine... like neut domis and geddons... until supers come in...
Serendipity Lost
Repo Industries
#34 - 2015-08-19 17:56:07 UTC
Nyalnara wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Nyalnara wrote:
Serendipity Lost wrote:
Maybe give it a unique damage profile that splits it's damage equally between shield/armor/hull - that would sure add interest and aid in explosions.


No. Because remote hull rep while fleet fight is not exactly the most efficient thing. Would make these things overpowered, as in "warp fleet at 0 from enemy titan, lock and blap", because get enough hits and there's no hull anymore, thus titan goes boom, and almost un-remote-able.



Yeah, that's reasonable. How about just across shield/armor. Direct Hullwonking would deffo be OP. I was just trying to salvage the guys idea and wasn't depoying a well thought out plan.

As much as I'd like to see archon sentries and even ishtard sentries go poof on a massive scale I think it's reasonable to just outright say NO to any AOE schemes. Anyone that has experienced them on the Eve scale knows those things are not meant for this game.


Means bringing both armor and shield reps. Or logistics of both, at least. And Nidhoggurs are not exactly the tankier carriers, whether shield or armor.



I think if you only armor repped the primaried ship it would end up with no shields and just being armor repped which isn't that different from what happens now. It's the shield based capitals that would be at a disadvatage. I don't recall ever hearing an erebus pilot complaining about being shieldless. Anyway, it was just an idea, I'm not super attached to it.

I do like the One Shot Willy BS idea. It could provide for some interesting game play on a couple of levels.
Previous page12