These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[December] Command Destroyers

First post First post
Author
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#341 - 2015-11-18 12:28:22 UTC
Lynxovat Fujiwara wrote:
If we take 2 command destroyers near each other and activate MJFG with interval of 1 sec, will second MJFG begin spoon up and then both will jump 2 times or second command destroyer will get error and it's MJFG cycle will stop, while it is in first destroyer's MJFG radius?

they both jump: first one is jumping himself and the second, then the second one is jumping the first and himself
Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#342 - 2015-11-18 12:59:12 UTC
Virion Stoneshard wrote:
For those of you worried about a counter - take in mind, for an enemy command destroyer to MJD your group away, it needs to be within 6km of the target. Which means it can easily be countered with a scram in your fleet.


This means some good piloting and timing needed then, approach target at a known speed and fire up the jumpat the correct range, second ship spools up it's mjfg to fire on landing before a scram lock hits. Like an mjfg bolas, one throws the other and vice versa, and with a scram you can lock down the logi you just jumped out with the pair and then hit it hard 100km away from the fleet it was with :D
Terranid Meester
Tactical Assault and Recon Unit
#343 - 2015-11-18 12:59:37 UTC
Tornii wrote:
Then I read they're going to be based on existing models. Meh.


Wow its almost as if they are based on existing tech 2 ships. My word!
Kithran
#344 - 2015-11-18 13:11:55 UTC
afkalt wrote:
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:


There is instant counterplay.

You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.


Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.


ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.


Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan.

With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds.

PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting.



So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these.

Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror.



But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!"


No what it comes down to is you being stupid - an incursion fleet is a public fleet, everyone is in a different corp, you cannot therefore scram each other without being blown up by concord so that tactic is out.

The only possible tactic which you could use would be to lock him, shoot him and kill him in the 4 seconds you have before his mjd sends all your logi out of range with bs sized weapons.

Oh and the 4 seconds is not a typo - don't forget that thanks to server ticks you can't react until the server tells your client he has started.

And its not just incursion fleets either - bumping miners is annoying but at least you have to commit one ship per miner you wish to bump, if you allowed this module to be used you now bump a dozen at once in a way they can't counter, or you enter someone's mission and send the rat they have to kill to complete the mission 100km away - repeatedly. etc. etc.

There are lots of ways to either annoy people or kill people in high sec using one of these which cannot be countered thanks to high sec mechanics therefore it is perfectly logical to use the same high sec mechanics to stop them being used. Its no different to bubbles not being allowed in highsec.


afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#345 - 2015-11-18 13:22:59 UTC  |  Edited by: afkalt
Kithran wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:


There is instant counterplay.

You can scram it, thus shutting off the module AND tackling the ship. Which is both flashy and surrounded by several thousand DPS. It'll have a bad time.


Again, if you can expect combat fleets to do this, you can JUST as easily expect incursion fleets to do this.


ed: And it should only go suspect, imo.


Problem is, in high sec, a gank attempt targets one ship. Yes with a large enough suicide fleet, you can kill an entire incursion fleet. But that is committing numbers and can be noticed on D-scan.

With these destroyers, they can kill a whole fleet in ~5 seconds. With one ship. Tell me how that is not overpowered. I don't care what your thoughts are on incursion runners, that is not the point here. One ship, in high sec, should not be able to effectively kill 10 others illegally in 5 seconds.

PvP fleets are fit to take down PvP ships. A PvE fleet is not designed nor intended to engage a PvP target, especially a destroyer sized target with battleship targeting.



So bring a SeBod HIC. It's not exactly hard to stop these.

Maybe, >gasp< you need to adapt your fittings. The horror.



But again, what this comes down to is "MAH ISK/HOUR!!!!!"


No what it comes down to is you being stupid - an incursion fleet is a public fleet, everyone is in a different corp, you cannot therefore scram each other without being blown up by concord so that tactic is out.

The only possible tactic which you could use would be to lock him, shoot him and kill him in the 4 seconds you have before his mjd sends all your logi out of range with bs sized weapons.

Oh and the 4 seconds is not a typo - don't forget that thanks to server ticks you can't react until the server tells your client he has started.

And its not just incursion fleets either - bumping miners is annoying but at least you have to commit one ship per miner you wish to bump, if you allowed this module to be used you now bump a dozen at once in a way they can't counter, or you enter someone's mission and send the rat they have to kill to complete the mission 100km away - repeatedly. etc. etc.

There are lots of ways to either annoy people or kill people in high sec using one of these which cannot be countered thanks to high sec mechanics therefore it is perfectly logical to use the same high sec mechanics to stop them being used. Its no different to bubbles not being allowed in highsec.




You know if you scram the DESTROYER the field shuts off right? That would be the point of a HIC, genius.

Oh wait....you didn't?!

CCP Rise wrote:

Yes, scram will shut off an active MJFG and will also keep any targets in range of one that fires from taking the jump.



Maybe try and avoid being a smartass calling other people "stupid" when you're not in full possession of the facts eh? It makes you look like a proper asshat.


Seeing as you don't have the first idea about the topic you're being a smartass about, I went ahead and ignored the rest of your drivel.
Obil Que
Star Explorers
Solis Tenebris
#346 - 2015-11-18 13:34:02 UTC
What, if any, effect do bubbles have on the landing zone?


  • If there is a drag/catch bubble at the landing location, will the ship be dragged or caught by it?
  • If there is a bubble essentially AT the landing location, will the group land on the edge or in the center of the bubble?
Ncc 1709
Fusion Enterprises Ltd
Pandemic Horde
#347 - 2015-11-18 14:14:52 UTC
Wow, the amount of people thinking orca and freighters / jf's can be affected by this... go read the first post... DOES NOT AFFECT CAPITALS...

orca and freighters are Capital ships...
gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#348 - 2015-11-18 14:22:18 UTC
afkalt wrote:



words.. words ...words... something something highsec


.


really guys, what part of the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec you guys don't understand?
this mod is banned from high sec, can you get the over it and move on?
Odracir Atosc
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#349 - 2015-11-18 14:26:03 UTC
Chessur wrote:
I ******* love the idea of these MJD units. So many great possibilities with these!

Thew only thing that i would be curious to know, is why does eve need more destroyers? What abour BCs ? BSs? Why did you choose another small hull?


Yeah . It means that your kiting days are over.
Colt Blackhawk
Doomheim
#350 - 2015-11-18 14:40:09 UTC
Maybe CCP should finally stop breaking the game even more by adding more and more and more new ships.
Tech3 dessies are fun but let us face it they broke balancing horrible.
Think these dessies with their abilities will make eve a mess.

Edit: YES WE HAVE ENOUGH SHIPS IN EVE!!!

[09:04:53] Ashira Twilight > Plant the f****** amarr flag and s*** on their smoking wrecks.

Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#351 - 2015-11-18 14:41:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Moac Tor
Just a suggestion here, but perhaps prevent use of these if they are within a certain range of a Stargate or a Station. The reason being that this could potentially kill a lot of PvP.
Braden Fanguard
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#352 - 2015-11-18 14:42:47 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec.


Honestly CCP Rise, I would allow its use in high sec. You've got quite the anti-freighter bumping thread going on here and these destroyers could make for a very interesting solution to that problem.
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#353 - 2015-11-18 14:53:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
Colt Blackhawk wrote:
Maybe CCP should finally stop breaking the game even more by adding more and more and more new ships.
Tech3 dessies are fun but let us face it they broke balancing horrible.
Think these dessies with their abilities will make eve a mess.

Edit: YES WE HAVE ENOUGH SHIPS IN EVE!!!


would love too see T3 cruisers get fixed along with D3's over constant new ships that aren't very useful too half the games players.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

gascanu
Bearing Srl.
#354 - 2015-11-18 14:59:39 UTC
Braden Fanguard wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec.


Honestly CCP Rise, I would allow its use in high sec. You've got quite the anti-freighter bumping thread going on here and these destroyers could make for a very interesting solution to that problem.


yea, cose fixing broken stuff by breaking more stuff is the way to go...
Sarah Flynt
Red Cross Mercenaries
Silent Infinity
#355 - 2015-11-18 15:16:33 UTC
Ncc 1709 wrote:
Wow, the amount of people thinking orca and freighters / jf's can be affected by this... go read the first post... DOES NOT AFFECT CAPITALS...

orca and freighters are Capital ships...

Well, freighters probably, although they don't need Capital Ships trained.

Orca is a different beast however: capital build process but uses large rigs and can't use capital modules (granted, that's a fitting limitation, not a class limitation). It also doesn't require Capital Ships trained. So what is it?

Sick of High-Sec gankers? Join the public channel Anti-ganking and the dedicated intel channel Gank-Intel !

Harry Forever
SpaceJunkys
#356 - 2015-11-18 15:20:44 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Here is a feedback thread for some awesome new ships, Command Destroyers!

So here's the basics. We are adding a new line of Tech II destroyers based on the Algos, Dragoon, Corax and Talwar along with a new type of module called the Micro Jump Field Generator, which the new Destroyers will have exclusive access to. I'm going to go through some basic questions here at the top and then give you all the details after.

First, why Command Destroyers? We have always wanted to do a line of smaller ships that could provide gang support, but we expected to wait until after a rework of the ganglink mechanics, but here we saw a perfect opportunity to bring you this awesome new module and combining the role with gang support seems ideal. We still want to rework links and think these will slot in perfectly to that rework when it happens, but in the mean time you guys get a few awesome new tools.

Second, how exactly does the Micro Jump Field Generator work? This module is exactly like a Micro Jump Drive except that when it fires, it pulls any ships nearby along with it for the jump. There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec, you can not pull invulnerable targets (ships that have just undocked or just jumped through a gate and are still cloaked), you can not move capitals, and you can not jump into starbase shields. You CAN however do a lot of really crazy thing such as pull bombs that are midair, pull dictor bubbles or chain multiple jumps in a row using several Command Destroyers. As for numbers, we have a base spool up time of 9 seconds, a reactivation delay of 160 seconds, a pull radius of 6km from the ship and a jump distance of 100km. The module requires 5 PG and 31 CPU to fit and requires the same skill as normal MJDs to use.

Now, for the ships themselves. We are aiming to have a set of destroyers that are both faster and more resilient than either their Tech I counterparts or Interdictors, but sacrifice offense. This should make the support role, whether with MJFG or links, easier to fill while leaving them vulnerable to abuse in combat. Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls.

Here are the bonuses:

MAGUS
Gallente Destroyer Per Level:
10% Bonus to Drone Damage
4% bonus to armor resists
Command Destroyer Per Level:
2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link

PONTIFEX
Amarr Destroyer per Level:
10% Bonus to Drone Damage
4% bonus to Armor Resistances
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link

STORK
Caldari Destroyer per Level:
10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
4% Bonus to Shield Resistances
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link


BIFROST

Minmatar Destroyer per Level:
10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
4% bonus to shield resists
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link


And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTES

As always, we look forward to your feedback. With these ships I'm especially interested in any opinions or insights on the powergrid and CPU numbers, as the ships will probably get used a few different ways and I'm not positive we've accounted for all of them.

If you have any questions or need clarifications please ask, and don't be surprised if there's a typo here and there that needs fixing :)

Thanks !


what when I sit in one of those new destroyers, scram a target, and then use the micro jump field generator, will the target jump with me? or will it stay where it is because it was scramed by me?
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#357 - 2015-11-18 15:26:15 UTC
gascanu wrote:
afkalt wrote:



words.. words ...words... something something highsec


.


really guys, what part of the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec you guys don't understand?
this mod is banned from high sec, can you get the over it and move on?



And some of us are challenging the reasons for that ban and suggesting it should be allowed.

These are both features & ideas as well as feedback thus are entirely appropriate. Very much like how people campaigned to remove MJDs from the ABCs which had it in the initial iteration.

You are, of course, at liberty to ignore the posts talking about them as you see fit.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#358 - 2015-11-18 15:39:54 UTC
Harry Forever wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:
Here is a feedback thread for some awesome new ships, Command Destroyers!

So here's the basics. We are adding a new line of Tech II destroyers based on the Algos, Dragoon, Corax and Talwar along with a new type of module called the Micro Jump Field Generator, which the new Destroyers will have exclusive access to. I'm going to go through some basic questions here at the top and then give you all the details after.

First, why Command Destroyers? We have always wanted to do a line of smaller ships that could provide gang support, but we expected to wait until after a rework of the ganglink mechanics, but here we saw a perfect opportunity to bring you this awesome new module and combining the role with gang support seems ideal. We still want to rework links and think these will slot in perfectly to that rework when it happens, but in the mean time you guys get a few awesome new tools.

Second, how exactly does the Micro Jump Field Generator work? This module is exactly like a Micro Jump Drive except that when it fires, it pulls any ships nearby along with it for the jump. There's a lot of specifics to consider here but the big restrictions you need to know are that you cannot use this module in high sec, you can not pull invulnerable targets (ships that have just undocked or just jumped through a gate and are still cloaked), you can not move capitals, and you can not jump into starbase shields. You CAN however do a lot of really crazy thing such as pull bombs that are midair, pull dictor bubbles or chain multiple jumps in a row using several Command Destroyers. As for numbers, we have a base spool up time of 9 seconds, a reactivation delay of 160 seconds, a pull radius of 6km from the ship and a jump distance of 100km. The module requires 5 PG and 31 CPU to fit and requires the same skill as normal MJDs to use.

Now, for the ships themselves. We are aiming to have a set of destroyers that are both faster and more resilient than either their Tech I counterparts or Interdictors, but sacrifice offense. This should make the support role, whether with MJFG or links, easier to fill while leaving them vulnerable to abuse in combat. Their weapon systems will be missile or drone based, like their base hulls.

Here are the bonuses:

MAGUS
Gallente Destroyer Per Level:
10% Bonus to Drone Damage
4% bonus to armor resists
Command Destroyer Per Level:
2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link

PONTIFEX
Amarr Destroyer per Level:
10% Bonus to Drone Damage
4% bonus to Armor Resistances
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link

STORK
Caldari Destroyer per Level:
10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
4% Bonus to Shield Resistances
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link


BIFROST

Minmatar Destroyer per Level:
10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
4% bonus to shield resists
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link


And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTES

As always, we look forward to your feedback. With these ships I'm especially interested in any opinions or insights on the powergrid and CPU numbers, as the ships will probably get used a few different ways and I'm not positive we've accounted for all of them.

If you have any questions or need clarifications please ask, and don't be surprised if there's a typo here and there that needs fixing :)

Thanks !


what when I sit in one of those new destroyers, scram a target, and then use the micro jump field generator, will the target jump with me? or will it stay where it is because it was scramed by me?


It will stay where it was located, you will jump.

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#359 - 2015-11-18 15:43:05 UTC
AFKALT brings up interesting points, there could be interesting gameplay to be had in highsec with this ship/module.

On the other hand, there is something else that the Dev failed to mention. There is a long-standing tradition of banning AOE weapons and equipment in highsec. That and that alone should be the reason it is not allowed to be used in highsec. Not incursions or whatnot, because nobody deserves special protection. But we've had this blanket law of "No AOE in HS" for as long as I've played.

Yes I know smartbombs are an odd exception, I don't know why.

If you want to have a discussion about that rule, then I'm sure it'll be an interesting conversation. But you cannot talk about this individual module because it falls under that rule and therefore will never be allowed, no matter how convincing your arguments (and they are convincing), as long as that rule holds. So your argument/discussion/debate is happening out of order. Your first order of business is to have that rule revisited. Until you do that, arguing for this module in highsec is moot.
oohthey ioh
Doomheim
#360 - 2015-11-18 15:47:44 UTC
Hehe players could chain bombs in the the grid, that would be fun.