These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Ships & Modules

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Need more covert ops
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Joseppi Luminari
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#1 - 2017-01-08 07:13:50 UTC
In today's eve, it's the universe of blobs and gate camps.. Covert ops allow you to circumvent some of that by being able to help dictate when fights happen.. Plus covert play is super fun! But we have so few options for ships for solo players. You pretty much get the astero and stratios, that's it. Everything else that can fit a covert ops cloak is gimped when it comes to combat, especially 1v1 combat but fills a specific niche. Only soe ships have a well rounded application.... T3s are way too costly to buy and to lose so those are pretty irrelevant to most players.
Easy additions that would be amazing and diversify covert play:
The Chremoas. Bring back the Chremoas for lp!!! Perfect little stealth fighter. Looks amazing, great stats for a variety of fits and purposes.
Add small weapon bonuses to stealth bombers. +small hybrid turret dmg or +rocket fire rate.
Chremoas Chremoas Chremoas. Did I say bring back the Chremoas?
Long term additions:
Talos, naga, tornado, oracle tech 2 additions with covert ops cloaks. Bonuses to exploration or combat.. These are easily some of the coolest looking ships in game but not very useful except for niche purposes, such a waste.. Especially useless for solo endeavors.
Chremoas for other races. Stealth fighters if you will. Chremoas can be minmitar's stealth fighter. 3 more opportunities to create fun exciting additions.

Bottom line, at the moment, we have very very few options for covert ships that fit in with solo gameplay. 2 to be exact. Everything else has a very specific purpose and limits it's use or is just plain worse. Hope that can change.
Jeremiah Saken
The Fall of Leviathan
#2 - 2017-01-08 09:49:56 UTC
I don't think we need more covert ships, and I'm writing this as regular covert ops user. The more we have this kind of hulls the more nonsense like d-scan immunity Rise will introduce.

Actually I would like to see racial exploration covert cruisers. Sisters ships are cross trained hulls.

"I am tormented with an everlasting itch for things remote. I love to sail forbidden seas..." - Herman Melville
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#3 - 2017-01-08 09:54:43 UTC
Chremoa is a alliance tournament reward ship and it's OP as hell as a result. All AT-rewards are designed to be way too powerful since CCP knows there's only going to be very limited amount of them EVER. No, you are not going to get it for LP.

Wormholer for life.
Do Little
Bluenose Trading
#4 - 2017-01-08 10:15:42 UTC
I decided to price check a Tengu to confirm your assumption: Hull sells for 135 million, Subsystems are a little over 30 million each - say 285-290 million for the ship. Stratios is selling for 225 million. That is not a big price difference, especially when you consider it includes interdiction nullification.

Skill requirements for the T3 cruisers are not unreasonable - you aren't going to skill into a T2 cruiser any faster.

I disagree with the assumption that T3s are irrelevant to most players. They are extremely flexible and useful ships that should be a goal for most players. The subsystem skill penalty is minor unless you plan on getting blown up a lot - it's a rank 1 skill, maximum 4 day train.

I suspect you're hoping for scanning/hacking bonuses on a force recon with no increase in price. If CCP wants to lower the barrier to entry I think it would be a lot easier to increase the drop rate for Nexus chips and push down the price of the Stratios. Not suggesting that would be a good idea.
Khan Wrenth
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2017-01-08 13:45:18 UTC
Do Little wrote:
I decided to price check a Tengu to confirm your assumption: Hull sells for 135 million, Subsystems are a little over 30 million each - say 285-290 million for the ship. Stratios is selling for 225 million. That is not a big price difference, especially when you consider it includes interdiction nullification.

Skill requirements for the T3 cruisers are not unreasonable - you aren't going to skill into a T2 cruiser any faster.

I disagree with the assumption that T3s are irrelevant to most players. They are extremely flexible and useful ships that should be a goal for most players. The subsystem skill penalty is minor unless you plan on getting blown up a lot - it's a rank 1 skill, maximum 4 day train.

I suspect you're hoping for scanning/hacking bonuses on a force recon with no increase in price. If CCP wants to lower the barrier to entry I think it would be a lot easier to increase the drop rate for Nexus chips and push down the price of the Stratios. Not suggesting that would be a good idea.

This thread brought up these subjects in an odd fashion, but I have wished that there were a racial cruiser option for exploration. For one, it's odd that you go from a tech 1 frigate, to a tech 2 frigate, to a tech 3 cruiser. Second and more importantly, T3 cruisers are supposed to be multipurpose cruisers that *shouldn't* be better than a dedicated T2 ship at a given role...but there is no exploration cruiser for them to be balanced against. Or maybe exploration should just be nixed from the T3 line when they get their balancing.

I do have the ability to train any T3 cruiser, but I elect not to at this time until they get hit with their tiericide. There's plenty of very fun ships to fly in EvE and I'd rather not spend time training into the T3C line until they get their pass. I've played the game of "train into something just before CCP announces a nerf/rebalance" way too often. I'm rounding out more general use skills in the meantime.

But all that said, and on the other hand, I'm not a dedicated explorer (obviously). If they felt like they really needed a tech 2 racial cruiser, I'm sure it would have been brought up more often before. I suppose they don't think it's necessary, so whatever.

Let's discuss overhauling the way we get intel in EvE.
Joseppi Luminari
Space Wolves ind.
Solyaris Chtonium
#6 - 2017-01-08 15:09:59 UTC
Do Little wrote:
I decided to price check a Tengu to confirm your assumption: Hull sells for 135 million, Subsystems are a little over 30 million each - say 285-290 million for the ship. Stratios is selling for 225 million. That is not a big price difference, especially when you consider it includes interdiction nullification.

Skill requirements for the T3 cruisers are not unreasonable - you aren't going to skill into a T2 cruiser any faster.

I disagree with the assumption that T3s are irrelevant to most players. They are extremely flexible and useful ships that should be a goal for most players. The subsystem skill penalty is minor unless you plan on getting blown up a lot - it's a rank 1 skill, maximum 4 day train.

I suspect you're hoping for scanning/hacking bonuses on a force recon with no increase in price. If CCP wants to lower the barrier to entry I think it would be a lot easier to increase the drop rate for Nexus chips and push down the price of the Stratios. Not suggesting that would be a good idea.


Dude, are you kidding? A t3 is more expensive and when you lose it, you lose a **** ton of lp. That's the biggest waste of time ever. It's totally irrelevant to anyone flying solo that can't afford to lose a 500m ship plus 600m for the skill injector after you lose it. You are going to get blown up a lot as a solo player. It's totally unreasonable.
And no, the recon ships don't need exploration bonuses, they need a more rounded layout. Right now, the statios is way better solo than any of them. They all fit a very specific niche function instead of being versatile general use combat ships. There's only two versatile covert ships, soe.

And the Chremoas could easily be toned down to be a balanced fighter.... People respond without thinking it seems like. The point was more diversity among covert ops ships would be a huge bonus to the game for solo players. The Chremoas is a perfect example and adjusting it's stats takes two seconds.
It's not like covert ops is new, there wouldn't be any more of a threat than there already is. No one said make unbalanced covert ops ships, just more of them. There's zero variety at the moment.
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
#7 - 2017-01-08 18:35:33 UTC
Joseppi Luminari wrote:
Dude, are you kidding? A t3 is more expensive and when you lose it, you lose a **** ton of lp. That's the biggest waste of time ever. It's totally irrelevant to anyone flying solo that can't afford to lose a 500m ship plus 600m for the skill injector after you lose it. You are going to get blown up a lot as a solo player. It's totally unreasonable.


Where are you getting the 500mil number? And why are you assuming that you *have* to use an injector to recover SP? And what does LP have to do with anything?

Joseppi Luminari wrote:
And no, the recon ships don't need exploration bonuses, they need a more rounded layout. Right now, the statios is way better solo than any of them. They all fit a very specific niche function instead of being versatile general use combat ships. There's only two versatile covert ships, soe.


So I think this is really what you're trying to get at. You want a few more combat-capable ships with covops cloaks. Ships that could be used solo, unlike bombers. And if that's all you're arguing for I guess I kind of agree. Mind, they'll have to be balanced in other ways.

Joseppi Luminari wrote:
And the Chremoas could easily be toned down to be a balanced fighter.... People respond without thinking it seems like. The point was more diversity among covert ops ships would be a huge bonus to the game for solo players. The Chremoas is a perfect example and adjusting it's stats takes two seconds.
It's not like covert ops is new, there wouldn't be any more of a threat than there already is. No one said make unbalanced covert ops ships, just more of them. There's zero variety at the moment.


Now we're back to crazy. By simply mentioning the Chremoas you're basically asking for unbalanced covert ops ships. If you think it could be toned down, suggest how it would look afterwards. Then post the whole thing over again in Features and Ideas.
Wander Prian
Nosferatu Security Foundation
#8 - 2017-01-09 10:27:08 UTC
CCP won't add a alliance tournament reward ship into public availability, nor will they make one weaker and give it to everyone. Those who have it deserved it by winning the alliance tournament. It's really overpowered ship (like all AT rewards are) but that's one of the reasons why people go to the AT in the first place. Having it, or any other AT -reward ship publicly available would break any kind of balance CCP has gotten so far.

Wormholer for life.
Lasisha Mishi
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#9 - 2017-01-09 14:59:53 UTC
bonus to rockets for stealth bombers would be nice

but outside of that....we don't need more cov ops ships
Salvos Rhoska
#10 - 2017-01-09 19:06:48 UTC
T3C fill the bracket you intend for, in spades.

Their cost is a result of a player market, and a non-issue as such.

T3Cs are horrifically OP as they are.

The last thing we need is more covert ops capable combat ships.

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
RavenPaine
RaVeN Alliance
#11 - 2017-01-09 20:12:05 UTC
So you're asking for an all around ship, better than all the other ships, with covert ability.

Seems ok to me.
SurrenderMonkey
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#12 - 2017-01-09 20:30:30 UTC
What the **** is this "bring back" the Chremoas idiocy?

It was never generally available. It's an alliance tournament reward ship, and its stats reflect that.

"Help, I'm bored with missions!"

http://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#13 - 2017-01-09 22:17:42 UTC
Joseppi Luminari wrote:
Bottom line, at the moment, we have very very few options for covert ships that fit in with solo gameplay. 2 to be exact. Everything else has a very specific purpose and limits it's use or is just plain worse. Hope that can change.

As a primarily solo player who relies heavily on cloaking ships, let me disagree with you wholeheartedly.

We already have CovOps capability for:

Glass Cannon DPS/AoE Damage (Stealth Bombers)
Combat Probing/Exploration (CovOps Frigates)
General Purpose Frigate Combat/Exploration (Astero)
Cyno/Ewar (Force Recons)
Jack-of-all-Trades Cruiser (T3 Cruisers)
General Purpose Cruiser Combat/Exploration (Stratios)
Hauling (Blockade Runners)
Mining (Expedition Frigates)

I have flown all of these solo to good effect. That's pretty much every basic form of gameplay in EvE, except for capital ships (which aren't really considered solo ships), available with a CovOps cloak, not to mention covert jump portals off of a BlOps (which also isn't solo play). Of course CovOps aren't generally as capable and/or durable as other, non-CovOps ships, but that's the price you pay for being able to move around with ease. What else do you want*?

Also, comparing AT prize ships to any other ship is an exercise in utter futility. They are in a league of their own on purpose and commonly available ships should not be anything like AT ships.

I'd also like to chime in and say that I agree with the notion brought up a few times in this thread that T1 racial exploration cruisers would be a welcome addition to the ship lineup. I could also see the Force Recon ships adopting the models of these new cruisers, and maybe some more of their roles. This would allow natural ship progressions:

T1 exploration frigates -> T1 exploration cruisers -> CovOPs frigates -> Force Recon Cruisers
T1 EWar frigates -> T1 EWar cruisers -> EA Frigates -> Combat Recon Cruisers

But I'd hardly call it a necessity and that should probably go in PFaID....



*I could see a case being made for CovOps cloaks on BlOps Battleships, but I haven't been convinced yet. If you're going to add a CovOps anywhere, it should probably go to them first.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs