These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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 page123
 

Suggestion for Capital Ship Destroyer
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sonya Corvinus
Grant Village
#41 - 2016-12-19 21:30:26 UTC
A8ina wrote:
I've been around some big and small fleet fights, I can say the small fleet attacks in foreign territory is the most fun ,
Big fleet operations with Battle ships and Capital ships is to slow and many times you get stood up when the other fleet decides not to take you on . Αθηνα

If they get around 2000 to 3000 maX in DPS will not be that extreme , and this ship can be the poor man's Capital ship defense


You've been around a lot of fights given 56 kills in six years, and not having done anything for four years?

Interesting.
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#42 - 2016-12-19 23:55:55 UTC  |  Edited by: James Zimmer
I like the general concept, but I think a T2 attack battlecruiser with a third of the DPS of a dread would be more balanced in tems of cost, damage output and vulnerability (plus it just makes sense given what attack battlecruisers do right now).

Also, for those of you who say that capitals need a support fleet, I invite you to look at carriers. At not too significant numbers, they begin to alpha off any subcap in the game, from an interceptor to a well-tanked Rattlesnake. They need a counter that is not a dread-bomb or supers, and this could be the perfect counter. Sure, they would die quickly, but they could win the ISK war if there isn't a proper subcap fleet to counter them

Finally, dreads are in a bad place right now, but their need for a buff doesn't invalidate this concept.
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#43 - 2016-12-20 00:01:43 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
I like the general concept, but I think a T2 attack battlecruiser with a third of the DPS of a dread would be more balanced in tems of cost, damage output and vulnerability (plus it just makes sense given what attack battlecruisers do right now).

Also, for those of you who say that capitals need a support fleet, I invite you to look at carriers. At not too significant numbers, they begin to alpha off any subcap in the game, from an interceptor to a well-tanked Rattlesnake. They need a counter that is not a dread-bomb or supers, and this could be the perfect counter. Sure, they would die quickly, but they could win the ISK war if there isn't a proper subcap fleet to counter them


But your idea is exactly the same as the OPs idea in that it renders dreads completely worthless?
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#44 - 2016-12-20 00:06:36 UTC
Danika Princip wrote:
James Zimmer wrote:
I like the general concept, but I think a T2 attack battlecruiser with a third of the DPS of a dread would be more balanced in tems of cost, damage output and vulnerability (plus it just makes sense given what attack battlecruisers do right now).

Also, for those of you who say that capitals need a support fleet, I invite you to look at carriers. At not too significant numbers, they begin to alpha off any subcap in the game, from an interceptor to a well-tanked Rattlesnake. They need a counter that is not a dread-bomb or supers, and this could be the perfect counter. Sure, they would die quickly, but they could win the ISK war if there isn't a proper subcap fleet to counter them


But your idea is exactly the same as the OPs idea in that it renders dreads completely worthless?


In the era of fighters that can go 2000km, dreads are already borderline completely worthless. They need a serious buff, but that goes beyond the scope of this thread.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#45 - 2016-12-20 19:31:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
James Zimmer wrote:
Also, for those of you who say that capitals need a support fleet, I invite you to look at carriers. At not too significant numbers, they begin to alpha off any subcap in the game, from an interceptor to a well-tanked Rattlesnake.

The Rattlesnake they can kill easily. Carriers are particularly good at killing tough battleships. Even a single carrier can rip apart a well-tanked Rattlesnake. The only way the Rattler will be able to stand up to that DPS is either if it's biased toward a certain resist profile or if it's tank isn't sustainable. Give it about 2-3 minutes tops, the tank will break.

Interceptors, not a chance. With no support fleet, an interceptor could land on the field, perform complex reconnaissance maneuvers, and zip out of there while the carriers are still locking target. Let's say the carriers do manage to lock target, they're going to need to web and paint the interceptor just to get fighters to be able to hit it. Given that the interceptor has the supreme mobility advantage even if the carriers manage to hit it with high-end webs, it can simply move out of web range and there's nothing the carriers can do about it. They can paint it and shoot it but they're not likely to do much short of 3 painters on one interceptor, and that's if it isn't afterburner fit. I haven't tested it, but I've a hunch based on fighter attributes that if you don't paint the interceptor, the fighters' own movement will cause them to miss the target even if it's sitting still. So no.
edit: I'm looking into the carrier changes and I see that they may have a FAR greater ability to shoot down small ships than they did previously, but I am finding it difficult to decipher the mechanics. I really hope this isn't the case. Carriers should NOT be able to easily solo cruisers and below.

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."
James Zimmer
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#46 - 2016-12-21 01:22:14 UTC  |  Edited by: James Zimmer
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

edit: I'm looking into the carrier changes and I see that they may have a FAR greater ability to shoot down small ships than they did previously, but I am finding it difficult to decipher the mechanics. I really hope this isn't the case. Carriers should NOT be able to easily solo cruisers and below.


I can't make heads or tails of the stats either, but from what I've seen, carriers apply well to cruisers and above. They lose a lot of DPS when they're shooting frigates, but they're not even close to helpless. They have web fighters to deal with speed/sig tanks and fighters that go 8.5k/sec (all level 5, no drone speed modules) for people who try to rely on pure speed. Oh, and they have a module which allows them to lock almost as fast as a destroyer without even using sensor boosters. Did I mention they can engage from 2000km away?

Their main weaknesses are relatively low DPS and uninspiring tanks compared to dreads, but with 20-30 of them massed, I'm not aware of a subcap fleet in the game (outside of stealth bombers) that can stay on the field.
GROUND XERO
The Legion of Spoon
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
#47 - 2016-12-23 07:05:26 UTC  |  Edited by: GROUND XERO
Posted this somewhere else like 2 mounth ago :_) ... but for everything else that would kill supers you can count me in! Blink

Future ship ideas in EVE Technology and Research Center

I only need one ship: Fire ship (which has a long tradition when it comes to suicide on smaller ship on a real big ship!!!)

T3 bc sized ship (aka you gonna loose skillpoints :_))

- rolebonus: can use t2 cloack (aka warping cloacked)
- dmg: same like DD if you hit a capital ship by driving into it with at least 75% of speed!

slots:

High
-1x for the super mine

Meds
-5x

low
-5x

Name: Kamikaze

EPIC ship idea!!! would cure SUPER-CANCER Roll

NCPL (Necromonger of new Eden) will make EVE great again!
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
#48 - 2016-12-24 02:43:35 UTC
James Zimmer wrote:
...In the era of fighters that can go 2000km, dreads are already borderline completely worthless. They need a serious buff, but that goes beyond the scope of this thread.


What you mean was, "in an era were a pointed carrier with maybe a capital afterburner moves at 200m/s, a Dread will sit for 5 minutes and solo it - every time."

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#49 - 2016-12-24 06:55:20 UTC
elitatwo wrote:
What you mean was, "in an era were a pointed carrier with maybe a capital afterburner moves at 200m/s, a Dread will sit for 5 minutes and solo it - every time."

Sure dreads can beat carriers. But try and mobilize a dread fleet to attack a carrier fleet. If you even manage to lock them down, you're going to have a hell of a time getting them to stay locked down. They can pop bubbles and HICs like they were bubble wrap, then jump out.

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."
Danika Princip
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#50 - 2016-12-24 13:02:26 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
elitatwo wrote:
What you mean was, "in an era were a pointed carrier with maybe a capital afterburner moves at 200m/s, a Dread will sit for 5 minutes and solo it - every time."

Sure dreads can beat carriers. But try and mobilize a dread fleet to attack a carrier fleet. If you even manage to lock them down, you're going to have a hell of a time getting them to stay locked down. They can pop bubbles and HICs like they were bubble wrap, then jump out.


Paper can beat rock every time, it's totally overpowered.
Previous page123