These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

high sec mini carriers.
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#1 - 2011-09-23 18:04:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
EDIT...
THIS DESIGN AS BEEN EDITTED QUITE A BIT THROUGHOUT THE LENGTH OF THIS FORUM. READ THIS AND SOME OTHER POSTS JUST FOR THE PROGRESSION OF THE IDEA. IF YOU DONT' CARE ABOUT THE PROGRESSION, THEN JUST SKIP TO PAGE 2

Battleship class hulls.

Can field up to 10 sentry/heavy drones.

Only one turret harpoint, meant for drawing aggro.

With all skills lvl 5, and dominix with 10 t2 heavy drones and no turrets, can do 950 dps.

which is less than a marauder. However, due to the fact that a carrier's dps can't be jammed out since drones aren't effected by jam.

The damage buff the ship has to drones would need to be reduced...

allow it to still have a 10% drone hit point buff, but reduce the drone damage buff to 5% from 10% knocking off 25% of the dps, thus giving it 712.5 dps with a full fleet of t2 heavy drones with all skills lvl 5, which is roughly the same damage a dominix has with 5 heavy drones and a rack of railguns.

These would not be immune to electronic warfare like supers are, and sentry,heavy,medium, and light drones go down much easier with smart bombs.

So these ships would combatible.

They would be considered t2 ships, and in order to field the 5 extra drones, you would have to fit drone control modules, and have the skill to fit a full 5. The ships would have the cpu and power reduction needed to fit a full 5 of these.

Would have 2 high slots left over, 1 for the one slot aggro turret and a drone link aug, or 2 drone link augs if preferred.

The CPU would be roughly enough to give them the same tank as their t1 counter parts with roughly enough to fit a small, mostly ineffective turret, that can pretty much only be used to draw aggro.

Some say this would be the ultimate afk missioner, but that is no different than the rattlesnake, dominix, ishtar, gila, and whatever other drone boats there are. The only difference is ALL your dps is in the drones, so losing drones is more detrimental than it would be for one of the ships I just listed, which are capable of also fitting turrets and launchers.

so to recap, they'll have the same tank as t1 bs's with the dps of most t1 bs's, just all focused into drones.

These ships could be based of the tier 3 battleship hulls, so hyperion, rohk, Abaddon, and maelstrom.

These ships would be somewhat skill intensive requiring drone and ships skills.

Possibly falling under the catagory of marauders, but them having the advantage of using pure drones for dps, means they would have less dps than current marauders.

Thoughts?
Feligast
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#2 - 2011-09-23 18:16:58 UTC
As long as, just like carriers, it is fitted with a jump drive, cannot use gates, and the hisec cyno rules don't change, I would be okay with this.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#3 - 2011-09-23 18:22:18 UTC
Feligast wrote:
As long as, just like carriers, it is fitted with a jump drive, cannot use gates, and the hisec cyno rules don't change, I would be okay with this.


No, no jump drives. These ships shouldn't be allowed to jump clear across space, limiting them to gate usage would actually be better for pvp than fitting jump drives.
These ships having to use gate means that they're even more gankable via gate camps, making it easier to secure systems form these than it is to secure systems from supers.

Also, there's no reason fo the cyno rule to change if these ships didn't have jump drives.

A jump drive on this ship would make them much more powerful in that they would be able to jump into your system and completely avoid your gate camp.

Super capital blobs cynoing in is bad enough, so i'm sure cynoing in a blob of these would be just as bad.

Limit them to gates so there's more ways to combat fleets of them.
shadowace00007
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#4 - 2011-09-23 18:38:43 UTC
Yay more serverlag. and makes the domis pointless. This is a bad idea bro. Mini carriers have been suggested a lot on the old forums. But this by far is one of the worst I have seen.

Born Amarrian Raised Minmatar.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#5 - 2011-09-23 18:46:28 UTC
shadowace00007 wrote:
Yay more serverlag. and makes the domis pointless. This is a bad idea bro. Mini carriers have been suggested a lot on the old forums. But this by far is one of the worst I have seen.


My bad, didn't factor server lag, however, it doesn't make domi's pointless.

That's like saying golems made ravens pointless.

It's a level of progression.

However, like you said, server lag might become an issue, but if CCP eventually finds a way to combat this, then maybe they can be implmented.
Goose99
#6 - 2011-09-23 18:48:31 UTC
shadowace00007 wrote:
Yay more serverlag. and makes the domis pointless. This is a bad idea bro. Mini carriers have been suggested a lot on the old forums. But this by far is one of the worst I have seen.


Domis were already pointless when they introduced bandwidth and nerfed it down to only 5 drones. You call that a drone carrier? What a joke, lol.Roll

We could have mini carrier, or better yet, revert droneboat nerf and remove bandwidth mechanics.
shadowace00007
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#7 - 2011-09-23 18:53:47 UTC
Goose99 wrote:
shadowace00007 wrote:
Yay more serverlag. and makes the domis pointless. This is a bad idea bro. Mini carriers have been suggested a lot on the old forums. But this by far is one of the worst I have seen.


Domis were already pointless when they introduced bandwidth and nerfed it down to only 5 drones. You call that a drone carrier? What a joke, lol.Roll

We could have mini carrier, or better yet, revert droneboat nerf and remove bandwidth mechanics.


a group of 3 to 5 domis can take on a fleet of 10 or more with the proper fit. and the drones will do a huge amount of damage they can put out 600 DPS from the drones alone. Let alone the nuets and the spider chain that they bring. to me that looks a hell of alot like a carrier fleet. Everyone helps each other and they let the drones do the dirty work. Sounds like a domi to me. Just a hell of alot slower.

Born Amarrian Raised Minmatar.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#8 - 2011-09-23 19:03:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
shadowace00007 wrote:
Goose99 wrote:
shadowace00007 wrote:
Yay more serverlag. and makes the domis pointless. This is a bad idea bro. Mini carriers have been suggested a lot on the old forums. But this by far is one of the worst I have seen.


Domis were already pointless when they introduced bandwidth and nerfed it down to only 5 drones. You call that a drone carrier? What a joke, lol.Roll

We could have mini carrier, or better yet, revert droneboat nerf and remove bandwidth mechanics.


a group of 3 to 5 domis can take on a fleet of 10 or more with the proper fit. and the drones will do a huge amount of damage they can put out 600 DPS from the drones alone. Let alone the nuets and the spider chain that they bring. to me that looks a hell of alot like a carrier fleet. Everyone helps each other and they let the drones do the dirty work. Sounds like a domi to me. Just a hell of alot slower.


Actually, with all skills level 5 and nothing on the domi but a rack of 5 t2 heavy ogres, the domi has 475 dps, and with sentries it would actually be less.(no fittings or turrets)

Also, as to your comment about 3to 5 domis taking out a fleet, a fleet of 3 to 5 ravens can take out a fleet of 10 domis if the ravens are properly fitted with smart bombs and such. So, your comment on that doesn't stand at all.

Any fleet of one ship type can take out a large mixed, or even solid fleet compesition if they're fitted right.

Again, my suggested ships would rely solely on drones for dps, so a smaller fleet fitted with smart bombs would actually be able to devistate a large fleet of these by smartbombing down all their dps.

Hell, these ships might even be less effective in pvp than domis, since domis still have pretty effective dps with turrets.

So these ships are actually easily combated if your fleet is properly fitted, just like any other ship in eve apart from supers.

edit...

I would actually say a fleet of 10 turret/launcher boats could actually be more devistating and harder to combat than a fleet of 10 mini carriers.
shadowace00007
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#9 - 2011-09-23 19:38:42 UTC
Well Im done. Cant talk to people who don't know anything about the game.

Born Amarrian Raised Minmatar.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#10 - 2011-09-23 19:53:48 UTC
shadowace00007 wrote:
Well Im done. Cant talk to people who don't know anything about the game.


Attaway to stress your point.

Instead of stating reasons why or why this wouldn't work, you decide to say that the people agreeing with the idea dont' know anything.

Perhaps, trollish??
Obsidiana
Atrament Inc.
#11 - 2011-09-23 19:59:01 UTC
First, CCP is not keen on upping drones in New Eden. Ships used to be able to use 10 drones. The Domi could use 15. The Moros could use 35. That all changed to reduce server loads. Asking for more drones is asking for more lag.

Second, Carriers use fighters. I could see mini carriers that used fewer fighters (one per level, none to start) with a stiff damage penalty, but that's it. Basically you could give a friend some warping heavy drones with bad tracking. That said, with current game mechanic you could Concord a friend.

Third, carriers do not get turrets, not even mini-ones. Oh, and no extra drone, gang assist, or triage modules. No tracking bonuses to drones either (or they would be preferable to the capitol carriers even with reduced damage).
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#12 - 2011-09-23 20:13:48 UTC
Obsidiana wrote:
First, CCP is not keen on upping drones in New Eden. Ships used to be able to use 10 drones. The Domi could use 15. The Moros could use 35. That all changed to reduce server loads. Asking for more drones is asking for more lag.

Second, Carriers use fighters. I could see mini carriers that used fewer fighters (one per level, none to start) with a stiff damage penalty, but that's it. Basically you could give a friend some warping heavy drones with bad tracking. That said, with current game mechanic you could Concord a friend.

Third, carriers do not get turrets, not even mini-ones. Oh, and no extra drone, gang assist, or triage modules. No tracking bonuses to drones either (or they would be preferable to the capitol carriers even with reduced damage).


I get that until CCP gets a better server that can allow for more drones, that these ships wouldn't be possible. However, if they ever did get better server load capability, it would be entirely possible.

Until the server load capabiility is buffed, I would throughly enjoy these ships being able to field 5 fighter drones, but not to fighter bombers, as you would probably agree.

I'm confused with the concording a friend part, so no comment.

The turret is there simply for aggroing npcs. That way these ships can be used for pve. Without that small turret the drones would receive too much aggro.

As far as tracking and such bonuses go, it really depends on what would be needed to give these ships sufficient enough dps without modules to be competitive with other bs's that don't have such modules for turrets/missiles.

With only 5 fighter drones out, these ships may need some possible extra drone modules, but I'll agree no to gang assist and triage as well.

The tracking bonus would only need to be implemented if these ships didn't have competitive dps without it. however, their dps would be much lower than an carrier, even with carriers not having tracking bonus. Would basically be the same as replacing a carrier's dps with a bunch of battleships. Would take a good amount.

The one thing I'll add is that these mini carriers will not have any bonuses towards drone control range. So they're limited by skill and the amount of drone link augs they fit.

If you go with the 5 fighter drones idea, then you should still require these ships to fit 1 drone control unit per fighter drone, but they don't boost the amount of smaller drones you can control. Instead the power from the drone control unit is formatted into extra band width to be able to field the fighter drone. Each drone control unit would be converted to give you enough band width for 1 more fighter.

This would give the ship the same high slot layout I suggested, that way they couldn't fit a mass of drone link augs.
Goose99
#13 - 2011-09-23 20:48:16 UTC
Yes, it's the server lag that induced CCP to nerf droneboats. The lag back then was far worse than today. That kind of lag is already gone, so the nerf should be reverted.Cool
Duchess Starbuckington
Doomheim
#14 - 2011-09-23 21:33:23 UTC
Well, the biggest problem I see is that basically you've given no good reason for this to exist.

What niché does it fill? Why exactly is it needed?
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#15 - 2011-09-23 21:42:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Joe Risalo
Duchess Starbuckington wrote:
Well, the biggest problem I see is that basically you've given no good reason for this to exist.

What niché does it fill? Why exactly is it needed?


Why is a dominix needed?
why is a rattlesnake needed?
Why is a gila needed?
Why is an ishtar needed?
Why are carriers needed?
Why are super carriers needed?
Why are titans needed?

Most of the ships in game were put there simply to add a flavor of life to eve.

To balance out those flavor of life ships, CCP had to implement ships like scorpions, widows, and whatever else.

This ship would simply be a flavor of life ship, and it probably wouldn't need the addition of another ship in order to balance it.

If you took out every ship in eve that wasn't really designed with a need, then you would remove almost every t1 ship in the game, carriers, super carriers, faction ships, pirate faction ships, and whatever else.

The only ships remaining would be t2 ships and other ships like dreads.

However, without the t1 ships giving the flavor of life composition, than every ship with a niche would serve no purpose and no longer be needed.

So again, it's not for a purpose, it's just to add flavor to the game.
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#16 - 2011-09-23 22:45:52 UTC
Joe Risalo wrote:
Duchess Starbuckington wrote:
Well, the biggest problem I see is that basically you've given no good reason for this to exist.

What niché does it fill? Why exactly is it needed?


Why is a dominix needed?
why is a rattlesnake needed?
Why is a gila needed?
Why is an ishtar needed?
Why are carriers needed?
Why are super carriers needed?
Why are titans needed?

Most of the ships in game were put there simply to add a flavor of life to eve.

To balance out those flavor of life ships, CCP had to implement ships like scorpions, widows, and whatever else.

This ship would simply be a flavor of life ship, and it probably wouldn't need the addition of another ship in order to balance it.

If you took out every ship in eve that wasn't really designed with a need, then you would remove almost every t1 ship in the game, carriers, super carriers, faction ships, pirate faction ships, and whatever else.

The only ships remaining would be t2 ships and other ships like dreads.

However, without the t1 ships giving the flavor of life composition, than every ship with a niche would serve no purpose and no longer be needed.

So again, it's not for a purpose, it's just to add flavor to the game.


You are so dumb its hurting me to read this post.

Aside from some of the tiered T1 ships, almost all ships in the game have a purpose. Your idea is added fluff the game doesn't need right now. There are more important things that need to be taken care of than adding a ship that overshadows existing ships.
Joe Risalo
State War Academy
Caldari State
#17 - 2011-09-24 00:37:08 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:


You are so dumb its hurting me to read this post.

Aside from some of the tiered T1 ships, almost all ships in the game have a purpose. Your idea is added fluff the game doesn't need right now. There are more important things that need to be taken care of than adding a ship that overshadows existing ships.


Would you do me a favor and either quit trolling, make suggestions, or gtfo
Goose99
#18 - 2011-09-24 01:23:05 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Joe Risalo wrote:
Duchess Starbuckington wrote:
Well, the biggest problem I see is that basically you've given no good reason for this to exist.

What niché does it fill? Why exactly is it needed?


Why is a dominix needed?
why is a rattlesnake needed?
Why is a gila needed?
Why is an ishtar needed?
Why are carriers needed?
Why are super carriers needed?
Why are titans needed?

Most of the ships in game were put there simply to add a flavor of life to eve.

To balance out those flavor of life ships, CCP had to implement ships like scorpions, widows, and whatever else.

This ship would simply be a flavor of life ship, and it probably wouldn't need the addition of another ship in order to balance it.

If you took out every ship in eve that wasn't really designed with a need, then you would remove almost every t1 ship in the game, carriers, super carriers, faction ships, pirate faction ships, and whatever else.

The only ships remaining would be t2 ships and other ships like dreads.

However, without the t1 ships giving the flavor of life composition, than every ship with a niche would serve no purpose and no longer be needed.

So again, it's not for a purpose, it's just to add flavor to the game.


You are so dumb its hurting me to read this post.

Aside from some of the tiered T1 ships, almost all ships in the game have a purpose. Your idea is added fluff the game doesn't need right now. There are more important things that need to be taken care of than adding a ship that overshadows existing ships.


Are we playing the same game? Eagle has a purpose? Diemost has a purpose? There are more pointless ships in t2 lines than in t1. And yes, a mini-carrier would have more purpose than them. Or we can just fix the Domi by unbreaking droneboats and remove bandwidth.Big smile
Emperor Salazar
Remote Soviet Industries
Insidious Empire
#19 - 2011-09-24 14:20:29 UTC
Goose99 wrote:


Are we playing the same game? Eagle has a purpose? Diemost has a purpose? There are more pointless ships in t2 lines than in t1. And yes, a mini-carrier would have more purpose than them. Or we can just fix the Domi by unbreaking droneboats and remove bandwidth.Big smile



You are mentioning ships that have purposes but are broken. Eagle has the potential to be a great sniper, if rails weren't crap. Deimos has the potential to be a great up in your face pew pew but again, things are kinda broken. They have a purpose, they just need fixing.

Nice try tho.

Just noticed its you again Goose. Damn you are one negative dude. Biomass your character.
Goose99
#20 - 2011-09-24 14:25:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Goose99
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Goose99 wrote:


Are we playing the same game? Eagle has a purpose? Diemost has a purpose? There are more pointless ships in t2 lines than in t1. And yes, a mini-carrier would have more purpose than them. Or we can just fix the Domi by unbreaking droneboats and remove bandwidth.Big smile



You are mentioning ships that have purposes but are broken. Eagle has the potential to be a great sniper, if rails weren't crap. Deimos has the potential to be a great up in your face pew pew but again, things are kinda broken. They have a purpose, they just need fixing.

Nice try tho.

Just noticed its you again Goose. Damn you are one negative dude. Biomass your character.


Domi also has a purpose that's broken - a mini carrier! Fix it.

Btw, LIKE ME, I must be liked by allCool
123Next page