Player Features and Ideas Discussion

I'll concede to those points, but dare I ask - if we were to try and get an idea like a ship designed explicitly to fit one kind of oversized module or another in the theme of current ABCs but with more versatility and specialisation options, do you think there is a way to make the variations able to fulfil roles not currently in game?

Also BloPs have cloak and n+1 tank :p so the ****** stats is absolutely necessary for them

Saboteur

Can fit covert ops cloak
Cannot fit covert cyno
Cannot use covert cyno
Immune to dscan
No penalty to targeting npcs (scan resolution) after decloaking, no inability to cloak while targeted by NPCs.
Immune to interdiction probes and bubbles
Normal cloak penalties apply to player ships.
Can loot wrecks cloaked
(Access range changes from 2500m to 4500m)

For roaming around hostile territory stealing their sites, anoms, data/relic sites without the ability to cyno so people will be more likely to hunt you down.
People out running sites? Follow them around and steal loot, run your own sites to take away from the owners of the area. Troll miners.

It's like a cloaky camper but with more gameplay focus than just sitting there being a dbag waiting to hot drop someone. Encourages active gameplay in hostile territory and interrupting pve.
Drop your loot in your friendly blockade runner

(My excuse to ask for a covert cloak with no scan penalty on NPCs for my pve bcs)

Lol you have no ******* clue as to the mechanics you're talking about do you?

This has literally nothing to do with OP - please take your idea elsewhere and avoid derailing threads.

I agree with everyone else here that thinks your idea is terrible.

However in the spirit answer these questions.

T3C and T3D have been terrible for the game simply outclassing all of the other ships in their respective classes and in virtually every role they have been used in. Your idea essentially introduces T3 battle cruisers to the game (we already have T2 they are called command ships) given the poor balance history and OP nature of the other T3 ships is this really a good idea?

Over the last few years with ship re-balance passes the T3C remain the only ships that are largely unchanged, no doubt that is in large part due to the difficulty in balancing a ship with sub-systems that can be changed at will. Now you want to introduce this balance nightmare sub-system idea into yet another class of ships, is that really a good idea? Do we really need or even want this mess added to the game?

You state that you want these ships to be either high DPS with low tank or high tank with low DPS depending on the whims and needs at the moment and propose to allow the players to choose at will which it will be. How do you propose to make this happen.
If they can fit large guns in the high DPS mode, how do you prevent them from using those guns when fit for the high tank role?
Reverse is also true, if they can fit a high tank in that mode how do you propose to prevent them from using the large guns?

Currently we have the ABC which fulfill the glass canon role, we have the command ships which among other roles can be be brick tanked pretty effectively, and we have the standard T1 BC which fill the gaps between these two extremes rather nicely, why do we need more ships to fill these roles?

You speak about costs, the flexibility you want will likely come at a fairly high price (ISK) if they are are reasonably balanced will anyone even bother with them when the T1 options available can fill the same roles for significantly less cost?