These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Navy Destroyers and "Tier 2" Navy BCs
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#1 - 2016-10-12 17:22:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Silivar Karkun
some brainstorming into possible concepts related to the remaining slots for navy faction ships. please take note that i dont mention any stat changes, just the bonuses. you can figure the rest.

1. Navy Destroyers: they are mostly based around the Frigate counterparts with some changes

Amarr:

-Coercer Navy Issue -> oversized vampire punisher?, keeps tracking bonus of the T1 version, adds 4% armor resists per lvl, changes the optimal range bonus to 100% vamps and neuts transfer range ? (take from the dragoon, given to a coercer, less turret hardpoints to compensate?)

-Dragoon Navy Issue -> small drone Navy Augoror?, keeps drone speed bonus, energy vamp bonus changed to 15% bonus armor hitpoints per lvl, droneship bonus increased 5% (15% per lvl)

Caldari:

-Cormorant Navy Issue -> smaller ferox?, role bonus changed to optimal AND falloff, range bonus per lvl changed to 5% small hybrid turret bonus damage per lvl

-Corax Navy Issue -> a smaller drake?, role bonus changed to max velocity AND explosion velocity, explosion velocity bonus per lvl changed to 4% bonus shield resistances per lvl

Gallente:

-Catalyst Navy Issue -> smaller navy brutix?, role bonus changed to optimal AND falloff, falloff bonus per lvl changed to 5% rate of fire bonus per lvl

-Algos Navy Issue -> small navy dominix?, tracking bonus changed to damage, larger bandwidth for fielding a full flight of medium drones.

Minmatar:

-Talwar Fleet Issue -> microwarping fleet scythe?, microwarpdrive signature radius reduction replaces role bonus (75%), old microwarpdrive bonus changed to 10% bonus damage for rockets and light missiles per lvl, old rocket and light missile bonus changed to 10% rate of fire bonus for small projectile turrets (with turret hardpoints added).

-Thrasher Fleet Issue -> smaller fleet stabber?, optimal range bonus kept(i would preffer to change it into Falloff, but anyways), damage bonus per lvl changed to rate of fire per lvl, tracking bonus unchanged.


2. "Tier 2" Navy BCs:

-Prophecy Navy Issue -> "poor man's damnation with drones"?, armor resistance bonus changed to 10% bonus damage for heavy and heavy assault missiles, role bonus unchanged

-Ferox Navy Issue -> "brawling ferox", shield resistance bonus replaces damage bonus per lvl, role bonus changed to tracking and falloff, optimal bonus per lvl unchanged

- Myrmidon Navy Issue -> "larger algos", active tank bonus per lvl change to medium hybrid turret tracking per lvl, role bonus unchanged, gets enough bandwidth to field a ful flight of heavies or sentries.

-Cyclone Fleet Issue -> "smaller fleet typhoon", heavy missie and heavy assault missile rate of fire bonus increase to 7.5%, active tank bonus changed to medium projectile turret rate of fire. dronebay and bandwidth increased to allow up to a full flight of medium drones (or 4 heavy drones/sentries).


some of these sound either really stupid or overpowered...........or both, but it was the best i could think atm. thanks for watching. open to criticism.
Amarisen Gream
The.Kin.of.Jupiter
#2 - 2016-10-12 18:32:13 UTC
Though I like the ideas, I just can't get behind adding more ships when we still need to flesh out the ones we have.

There are (might need a little cleaning up)
6 classes of frigate
2(3) classes of destroyers
4 classes of cruisers
2 classes of BC
2(3) classes of BS

By classes I mean
Scout/Exploreation
Support
EWar
Combat
Assault
Tackle

CCP has worked tirelessly trying to get all these ships balanced out proper like, which doesn't seem to always work out as well.

What I would rather suggest vs adding new ships is we go back through the ships we have. Hash out the Classses and sub-classes. Then add/remove starting from the BS size and work down.
I would have 4 BS hulls per faction. 1 combat for each primary weapon class. A EWar hull. And a in your face brawler.

Then again I have been spewing out this same thought/feels towards the ships for years and it never seems to be heard so I could be totally wrong.

"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1

#NPCLivesMatter #Freetheboobs
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2016-10-12 18:58:31 UTC
I would more likely make them similar to the Oracle/Naga/Talos/Tornado line: somewhat less tank than the t1 destroyers, but 5 or 6 turret slots for medium guns.
No bpc, only LP upgrade on the gunboats. Also unique names with Imperial Navy/Caldari Navy/Federation Navy/Republic Fleet "prefixes".

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
DrysonBennington
Eagle's Talon's
#4 - 2016-10-13 14:45:55 UTC  |  Edited by: DrysonBennington
What about a Destroyer that is geared towards cargo hauling? The Destroyer based cargo ship would have a high Ship Warp Speed of 4.75 to 5.0 AU / s depending on race, weapon slots and greatly increased cargo capacity.

I will use the Catalyst as an example.

Liberty Class Gallente Cargo Destroyer

Traits

Gallente Destroyer bonuses (per skill level):

4% bonus to armor resistance
5% bonus to Small Hybrid Turret damage
5% bonus to Cargo Bay capacity

Role Bonus:

10% bonus to Small Hybrid Turret optimal range
10% increase to Cargo Bay capacity


Description

Designed as a forward element combat cargo ship, the Liberty is able to get supplies to front line fleets as well as engaging in fleet combat.


High Slots - x5
Medium Slots -x2
Low Slots - x4

Small Rig Slots - x 3

Cargo Capacity - 750 m3

The stealth version would have bonuses for fitting a Covert Ops Cloak with a decrease in high slots by one slot, two small rig slots and three medium slots with a 650 m3 cargo bay capacity.
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2016-10-13 18:56:07 UTC
DrysonBennington wrote:
What about a Destroyer that is geared towards cargo hauling?

Why do you want to combine 2 ship roles that have literally nothing in common?
I wouldn't mind a stealth destroyer though.

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#6 - 2016-10-14 21:54:29 UTC
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
I would more likely make them similar to the Oracle/Naga/Talos/Tornado line: somewhat less tank than the t1 destroyers, but 5 or 6 turret slots for medium guns.
No bpc, only LP upgrade on the gunboats. Also unique names with Imperial Navy/Caldari Navy/Federation Navy/Republic Fleet "prefixes".


im not sure how much balancing has been done on Attack BCs, but i fear adding Attack DTs would be harming for Attack Cruisers.

let alone for HACs or AFs (i think)...

i was thinking on that when writing the OP. but in the end i thought on something less dramatic, and more closer to what we have already on regards of Navy Hulls.
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#7 - 2016-10-14 21:56:03 UTC
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
DrysonBennington wrote:
What about a Destroyer that is geared towards cargo hauling?

Why do you want to combine 2 ship roles that have literally nothing in common?
I wouldn't mind a stealth destroyer though.


stealth destroyers are fine, but that's more oriented to T2 hulls.

and yeah, disagree on making a "cargo" destroyer. industrials are cheap to learn.
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2016-10-14 23:07:04 UTC
Silivar Karkun wrote:
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
DrysonBennington wrote:
What about a Destroyer that is geared towards cargo hauling?

Why do you want to combine 2 ship roles that have literally nothing in common?
I wouldn't mind a stealth destroyer though.


stealth destroyers are fine, but that's more oriented to T2 hulls.

and yeah, disagree on making a "cargo" destroyer. industrials are cheap to learn.

I think SOE could have a stealth destroyer. Give it the cloak, the usual bonuses except for the analyzers and enough bandwidth for 5 medium drones.

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#9 - 2016-10-15 04:36:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Silivar Karkun
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
Silivar Karkun wrote:
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
DrysonBennington wrote:
What about a Destroyer that is geared towards cargo hauling?

Why do you want to combine 2 ship roles that have literally nothing in common?
I wouldn't mind a stealth destroyer though.


stealth destroyers are fine, but that's more oriented to T2 hulls.

and yeah, disagree on making a "cargo" destroyer. industrials are cheap to learn.

I think SOE could have a stealth destroyer. Give it the cloak, the usual bonuses except for the analyzers and enough bandwidth for 5 medium drones.


it could work. yeah, but it could also opaque the Astero since they would be on the same hull size.
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#10 - 2016-10-15 11:13:03 UTC
Silivar Karkun wrote:
Dior Ambraelle wrote:

I think SOE could have a stealth destroyer. Give it the cloak, the usual bonuses except for the analyzers and enough bandwidth for 5 medium drones.


it could work. yeah, but it could also opaque the Astero since they would be on the same hull size.

Same hull size, but not the same function: Astero has bonuses for virus strength, what the destroyer wouldn't have. Only combat sites would be easier with this destroyer, while the Astero remains as an exploration frigate (with the option to combat, there are better pirate frigates for that though). Also, there are combat site gates that only allow frigates to pass.

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#11 - 2016-10-18 16:28:19 UTC
Dior Ambraelle wrote:
Silivar Karkun wrote:
Dior Ambraelle wrote:

I think SOE could have a stealth destroyer. Give it the cloak, the usual bonuses except for the analyzers and enough bandwidth for 5 medium drones.


it could work. yeah, but it could also opaque the Astero since they would be on the same hull size.

Same hull size, but not the same function: Astero has bonuses for virus strength, what the destroyer wouldn't have. Only combat sites would be easier with this destroyer, while the Astero remains as an exploration frigate (with the option to combat, there are better pirate frigates for that though). Also, there are combat site gates that only allow frigates to pass.



i have my doubts. but it could work
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#12 - 2016-10-19 16:56:44 UTC
Before we add anything to a very unhealthy pool of ships that isn't balanced at all can we give the Corax a little speed love?

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Amarisen Gream
The.Kin.of.Jupiter
#13 - 2016-10-19 21:19:33 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Before we add anything to a very unhealthy pool of ships that isn't balanced at all can we give the Corax a little speed love?


Besides the Corax part, the ships really need a major pass through balance. Maybe their own expansion in which all the ships are redone with more moderan tech. Not the current fix that redo this patch work system. Though capitals seem healthy and industrials are starting to look good. So maybe we just need a sub capital ship balance pass, T1 through T3 and pirates. Would be a good time to retire some ship lines and add new.

"The Lord loosed upon them his fierce anger All of his fury and rage. He dispatched against them a band of Avenging Angels" - The Scriptures, Book II, Apocalypse 10:1

#NPCLivesMatter #Freetheboobs
13kr1d1
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#14 - 2016-10-19 21:30:01 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Before we add anything to a very unhealthy pool of ships that isn't balanced at all can we give the Corax a little speed love?



given that missiles don't have a problem hitting anywhere, and it has a 50% velocity bonus, I don't see why corax needs a speed boost. Maybe people just need to start using it. Nuking someone with 1500 volley is super fun. Its also guaranteed to do what you need volley attacks to do in this game; bleed through the tank into unbuffered untanked armor or hull.

Don't kid yourselves. Even the dirtiest pirates from the birth of EVE have been carebears. They use alts to bring them goods at cheap prices and safely, rather than live with consequences of their in game actions on their main, from concord to prices
Dior Ambraelle
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2016-10-19 22:36:09 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
Before we add anything to a very unhealthy pool of ships that isn't balanced at all can we give the Corax a little speed love?

Why not give the Corax at least 1 little drone, and enough room to carry 3 maybe? It obviously has a drone bay.

If you want an intelligent argument, please do, I'm up for it!

But if you want a trolling contest, I will win it by simply not participating.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#16 - 2016-10-20 03:57:13 UTC
13kr1d1 wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Before we add anything to a very unhealthy pool of ships that isn't balanced at all can we give the Corax a little speed love?



given that missiles don't have a problem hitting anywhere, and it has a 50% velocity bonus, I don't see why corax needs a speed boost. Maybe people just need to start using it. Nuking someone with 1500 volley is super fun. Its also guaranteed to do what you need volley attacks to do in this game; bleed through the tank into unbuffered untanked armor or hull.


How about this, the Corax has a mwd speed of 1232m/s.

Now let's take a look at the Fearox. Mwd speed is 1107m/s with a meta mwd.

And now as conclusion, what frigate is the Corax supposed to chase?


Amarisen, I do love the Corax, I just don't fly destroyers very much. However the Stork is a beast Smile

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#17 - 2016-10-20 04:00:52 UTC
Amarisen Gream wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
Before we add anything to a very unhealthy pool of ships that isn't balanced at all can we give the Corax a little speed love?


Besides the Corax part, the ships really need a major pass through balance. Maybe their own expansion in which all the ships are redone with more moderan tech. Not the current fix that redo this patch work system. Though capitals seem healthy and industrials are starting to look good. So maybe we just need a sub capital ship balance pass, T1 through T3 and pirates. Would be a good time to retire some ship lines and add new.


Not sure about that. Destroyers may need a little love but not much. Tech 1 cruisers are still okay-ish unless you run into volt-carebears that need 2x oneiros for each legion or proteus they bring..

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Lugh Crow-Slave
#18 - 2016-10-21 14:00:22 UTC
So just another reason not to us an af then? What niche would either of these two new ship types fill that is not all ready filled? Adding ships just to add ships is never a good thing

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble