These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Author
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1 - 2017-01-02 05:34:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
There's not enough posts asking for new ships/modules/stuff so I guess it's time for me to start making my (after)Christmas lists. I did this one before but I'm dredging it up again since we've had more time to enjoy the new navy EWAR frigates. Navy Cruisers - Navy Bellicose



For quick reference, here was the important stats on my Navy Bellicose design:

Bellicose Fleet Issue
Minmatar Cruiser bonuses (per skill level):
5% bonus to Heavy Assault and Heavy Missile explosion radius
10% bonus to Target Painter effectiveness
Misc Bonus:
-80% penalty to Target Painter optimal range and falloff
+25% Stasis Webifier range

Slot layout: 5 H, 5 M, 4 L, 0 Turrets, 5 Launchers
3 Rig Slots, 400 Calibration
Fittings: 675 PWG, 390 CPU
Defense (shields / armour / hull): 2100 / 2000 / 1900
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1500 / 480s / 3.125
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 235 / 0.51 / 11,550,000 / 3 / 8.2s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 15/15
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 37.5km / 375 / 6
Sensor strength: 15 Ladar
Signature radius: 120




I am adding a fresh design: the Navy Arbitrator

Arbitrator Navy Issue
Amarr Cruiser bonuses (per skill level):
10% bonus to Drone damage and hit points
8% bonus to Weapon Disruptor effectiveness
Misc Bonus:
-75% penalty to Weapon Disruptor optimal range and falloff
-60% penalty to Drone control range

Slot layout: 5 H, 4 M, 5 L, 3 Turrets, 3 Launchers
3 Rig Slots, 400 Calibration
Fittings: 625 PWG, 375 CPU
Defense (shields / armour / hull): 1600 / 2250 / 2300
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / average cap per second): 1700 / 544s / 3.125
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / warp speed / align time): 220 / 0.51 / 10,200,000 / 3 / 8.7s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50/150
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 45km / 290 / 6
Sensor strength: 16 Ladar
Signature radius: 130



The Navy Arbitrator fights at close range, excelling in its ability to disrupt its targets' tracking. This ship has the most powerful tracking disruption bonus of any ship in the game, but is forced to fight at close range in order to use it. It is a bit lacking in powergrid but can still fit a potent array of weapons to tear its targets apart while they are helpless to do anything about it. With a relatively high speed and low mass (compared to the regular Arbitrator), this ship can choose its battles and engage in solo combat in which it easily gains the upper hand. With a wide array of high slots but bonuses to drone damage, there is a lot of room for the pilot to choose between more weapons or other utility items in the high slots.

I did the math (as well as I could, as EFT hasn't updated for command bursts) and I came up with the max possible tracking disruption with the standard 7.5% per level bonus being -97.67% per module. This ship having 8% per level would increase that to a max of -99.45% per module. That's with navy tracking disruptor scripted, max skills, and with a max skilled command burst pilot in a command ship with T2 burst and mindlink implant. If it really goes that high, I think it's a bit too high already. I am trying to be careful not to over-increase the attribute but I wanted it stronger than tech 1 ships even though EAFs and recons have the same bonus as tech 1. It barely makes any difference with missile disruptors.



Summary of differences this ship has from standard Arbitrator:

Bonuses

  1. 3 turrets/launchers instead of 2
  2. stronger weapon disruptor bonus
  3. +1 high slot
  4. higher fitting capacity, +50 powergrid and CPU
  5. about 50% more hit points, but with extra structure and less shields
  6. a 25% bigger capacitor with marginally higher regen rate
  7. 20m/s higher velocity and reduced mass (same align)


Penalties

  1. short target painter range
  2. short drone control range
  3. reduced targeting range by a small amount
  4. -1 max locked target (from 7 to 6)

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."

Shu t'Me
#2 - 2017-01-02 05:56:51 UTC
Why?

What role does this do that current ewar ships can't already do?
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2017-01-02 06:02:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
It's a slightly better solopwnmobile. After making it, I realized that the weapon disruption bonuses need a tweak in order to make it work, so it's stuck with barely any bonus over the Arbitrator, making it not significantly stronger.



I'm going to make a different suggestion asking to fix tracking disruption, and I'll link it here.

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
#4 - 2017-01-02 07:17:05 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
It's a slightly better solopwnmobile. After making it, I realized that the weapon disruption bonuses need a tweak in order to make it work, so it's stuck with barely any bonus over the Arbitrator, making it not significantly stronger.



I'm going to make a different suggestion asking to fix tracking disruption, and I'll link it here.


So why would anyone fly a 100m navy cruiser when the Arbitrator is very capable already?

You can already fit a 1600mm plate, 2x eanms, damage control unit, weapon disruptor, battery, long point and 4x small neuts.

With just 200 more powergrid you have an inexpensive Pilgrim without the cloak.

Why don't that Caldari get a Blackbird Navy Issue with 50% ECM strength, 8 mid-slots or a Celestis Navy Issue with 6 mid-slots and 9% dampening bonus?

I tell you why, they would be very broken. And until that day the balance of some very broken command sleipni- errm ships is done, we shouldn't add more to the pile of pain.

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2017-01-02 16:53:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
elitatwo wrote:
So why would anyone fly a 100m navy cruiser when the Arbitrator is very capable already?

The point of the Navy frigates is stronger jams with short range. I am going with the same format here. But tracking disruption math needs to be fixed, then I can easily give the Navy version 10% per level without it becoming OP. Even with the current 8%, there are situations in which its marginal difference is huge.



elitatwo wrote:
Why don't that Caldari get a Blackbird Navy Issue with 50% ECM strength, 8 mid-slots or a Celestis Navy Issue with 6 mid-slots and 9% dampening bonus?

I tell you why, they would be very broken.

Because that's obviously too much for one ship. You're strawmanning my proposal by suggesting a bonus and a drawback is akin to a bonus and a bonus. I'm giving them a high slot, not a mid slot, and a range penalty to go with their jam strength bonus.

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."

Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues
Hookers N' Blow
#6 - 2017-01-03 19:16:08 UTC
Finish tiericide and other rebalances first why do we need moar ships.

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2017-01-04 02:35:25 UTC
Eye-Luv-Girls wDaddyIssues wrote:
Finish tiericide and other rebalances first why do we need moar ships.

Tiericide is basically finished. I don't think a lot of dev time is currently being spent on it.

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."

Lugh Crow-Slave
#8 - 2017-01-04 04:04:06 UTC
there is no niche that these fill that is not already filled by the t1 or t2 e-war cruisers or the navy e-war frigs


no need for redundant ships to take up more of ccps time to keep balanced