These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

T2 Destroyer Heavy Bomber
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#1 - 2012-02-22 22:46:47 UTC  |  Edited by: MIrple
(Edited) 2/24/2012
Gallente Heavy Bomber

6 Hi Slots 4 Launcher Hard Points 2 Bomb Hard Points
3 Mids
4 Lows

Structure 782
Armor 950 Resists 50% EM 10% EXP 83% Kin 67% Therm
Shield 677 Resists 0% EM 50% EXP 85% KIN 60% Therm

Gallente Destroyer Skill Bonus:
10% bonus to torpedo explosion velocity and flight time per level
20% bonus to torpedo velocity per level

Heavy Bomber Skill Bonus:
10% bonus to bomb thermal damage per level
10% bonus to torpedo thermal damage per level

Role Bonus
-99.65% reduction in Siege Missile Launcher powergrid needs
Able to fit 2 bomb launchers

I have thought about this and I feel this is the best way To make it work. Skills required Destroyer lvl V and Bomb Launcher lvl 5. This will allow for the fitting of T2 Bomb launchers and these launchers will be able to fit the T2 anti capital bombs. These bombs have some basic guidance and are only able to launch vs capital ships much like the current DD. These Bombs do massive damage close to 200k at Heavy Bomber lvl 5. These ships are meant to in large swarms take out capitals in a single bombing run or soften up the supers for the capital fleet. It would take a fleet of 125 Heavy Bombers to take down a Super carrier. I think this would be a very interesting way to make supers die more frequently or at least make the alliance commit a sub cap fleet to protect the capital fleet.
Danel Tosh
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#2 - 2012-02-22 22:52:13 UTC
i like this idea alot better than the old one, but still keep in mind that this ship could render Stealth Bommbers obsolete so you may want to remove a bomb launcher or two so its not completely overpowered. +1
Vimsy Vortis
Shoulda Checked Local
Break-A-Wish Foundation
#3 - 2012-02-22 23:32:31 UTC
I think the lack of cloaking ability is meant to keep stealth bombers relevant.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#4 - 2012-02-22 23:40:55 UTC
I feel the addition of the 2nd bomb launcher is a fair trade off for not being able to cloak. This is a heavy bomber not a torp destroyer. I though about making it use the same ammo as the fighter bombers so midget torpedos but that would require a new skill plus making new ammo for the game. But on the other hand I think it might make supers more interesting as they would have to carry ammo for there bombers just like carriers have to carry ammo for there aircraft today.
Vrykolakasis
Sparrowhawks Corp
#5 - 2012-02-23 00:35:44 UTC
Disagreed. My thought is 4 launcher hardpoints set for torps, 0 bomb launcher hardpoints, no cloak, 6.00 AU/s warp, +75-100% torpedo damage, -150% torpedo cycle time, 2 mids (just enough for a point and a prop mod), 3 low.

However, teir 3 battlecruisers are already glass cannons with excellent damage potential. I'm unsure if this is necessary. I would like to see more destroyer hulls.
Danel Tosh
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#6 - 2012-02-23 00:40:49 UTC
well if it cant cloak then i can see those bomb launchers on it.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#7 - 2012-02-23 00:44:21 UTC
This is a ship designed to engage capital ships with that your saying this ship would be able to dish out extremely high DPS to any ship. If you feel the bomb launchers are to much What would you think of a New Kind of launcher that would only be able to fire on Capitals. Or make the Explosion radius so large that anything sup capital wouldn't be damaged by it all that much Kinda like my post about the midget torpedo Points on it so it does little better then SB damage with torps but with the other 2 hard points its a capital killer.
tankus2
HeartVenom Inc.
#8 - 2012-02-23 03:20:44 UTC
I would remove a mid or low (likely mid) and give it another high slot with another launcher hardpoint. if the iteron vs mega video teaches us, you can tank just about any ship with enough mids and lows, and robbing it of those mid/low slots will keep the ship as a spank vessel and not a tanky-dps thing.

Where the science gets done
leviticus ander
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2012-02-23 03:27:01 UTC
ya, what you could do if it's an anti capital weapon, make it have something like a 200% bonus to travel speed, but about a 400% explosion radius increase. this way it would still hit caps pretty hard and would hit supers for full damage. maybe 6 hardpoints, but absolutely no damage boost, otherwise something this small and relatively cheap wouldn't be able to compete with things like dreads and titans on a damage scale.
SGT FUNYOUN
Elysian Space Navy - 1st Fleet
#10 - 2012-02-23 06:06:05 UTC
I myself suggested this once. It was shot own six ways to Sunday. it would basically break the mechanics of the SB fleet.
Antal Marius
Allied Operations
Mechanicus Macabre Immortale
#11 - 2012-02-23 13:07:28 UTC
With the two bomb launchers and no amenities for a cov-ops cloak, I'm not too sure how it would really break the mechanics of an SB fleet. They two of them serve separate purposes, one is completely visible and the other is now
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#12 - 2012-02-23 14:55:07 UTC
+1

A new vision for the destroyer, aiming at a target not usually considered.

And with no cloaking, it really isn't competing with the SB just because they both have launchers, totally different approaches.

Upgrading Local to Eliminate All AFK Influence What if Local Chat changed, Hunting the Cloaked...
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#13 - 2012-02-23 16:24:29 UTC
I think there would have to be a role bonus or maybe a skill bonus implemented so that the bombs would really only do damage to a capital ship so explosion radius would have to be large or some other idea that i haven't thought about. I don't want this ship being an anti sup cap fleet I want this to be the Supers and Titans biggest fear on the field. Could also make a new bomb that shuts down capital propulsion for x/seconds to make them immobile. Just thought but with the way the game is going we need anti capital weapons to make Super Blobs pay.
Mary Annabelle
Moonlit Bonsai
#14 - 2012-02-23 18:28:43 UTC
Anti-Cap destroyer... That could be interesting to add to the mix.

If you make the increased blast sig a role bonus, maybe that would isolate the damage more towards the biggie supersized ships you mentioned.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#15 - 2012-02-23 18:52:50 UTC
I am very surprised that Mzxf has not commented on my idea as of yet.
Velicitia
XS Tech
#16 - 2012-02-23 19:06:04 UTC
he's too busy pointing out where I'm wrong in the "T2 better gunboat dessie" thread that's somewhere on the first page Smile

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia
shadowace00007
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2012-02-24 01:01:34 UTC
Bombs really dont hurt caps that much. so people would still blob. its not a bad idea but still, the idea of these keeping caps from blobing is not going to happen.

Born Amarrian Raised Minmatar.
Nomistrav
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#18 - 2012-02-24 05:34:30 UTC
Since I've noticed this thread and decided to browse through it for similarities; I've decided to make a mention of my current thoughts.

I don't want it to seem like I'm completely disregarding the plausibility, purpose, or proposed necessity of a Heavy Bomber, not at all; more so I would like to account for a T2 Gun-boat rather than adding to the Bomber conundrum.

HOWEVER

It would not be opposed to having T2 Destroyers specialized by their racial aptitudes. A Heavy Bomber seems a Caldari sort of thing, and I would imagine that by fielding bonuses based with this in mind it could still serve the same purpose under the Escort Destroyer proposition. In fact, you could even combine the two and have a dedicated gunboat that still has the capabilities of a Bomber.

For example; if you field it with superior turret damage bonuses to it's T1 counter-part, The Destroyer, but only field it with four guns, it leaves a degree of versatility to fill the other role. Give them five or six hi-slots so they can field their guns and whatever you have proposed as a method of helping to destroy capitals.

This shouldn't be taken into consideration without the expense of something in return, this ship should -not- be an end all to everything on the field be they small or large. It should sacrifice speed, or even tank, to perform dual duties. Consider it like an equal exchange, and collaborate/combine ideas as to lessen the work load of projected features.

"As long as space endures,

as long as sentient beings exist,

until then, may I too remain

and dispel the miseries of the world."

~ Vremaja Idama
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#19 - 2012-02-24 14:39:16 UTC
I don't want to make it a hybrid or dual role plat form. I want to make this have a specific role. As to the bombs not doing much damage to Capitals I would have to agree with you on that what about introducing a new type of bomb an Anti Capital Bomb it would take up the entire Bomb cargo space so 1 mounted per launcher. It would have the same operation as the DD of only being able to fire on capital ships. This would also make the SB more of a Capital weapon also as it could carry 1 also but not be as destructive as the heavy bomber would be to capitals. For this to work the Bombs would have to be 10 mi+ and do damage of 150k upwards. cargo Space would also have to be a factor I would think it should be large enough to carry 2 spare bombs and some room for Torps. These ships would need Carrier support or a can in space to reload from to make them effective in long deployments.
MIrple
Black Sheep Down
Tactical Narcotics Team
#20 - 2012-02-24 16:30:56 UTC
Made slight changes to the original Idea.
123Next page