These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
12Next page
 

Pirate Faction Battlecruisers

Author
Sieonigh
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2012-12-09 12:14:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Sieonigh
With the ever pending Battlecruiser skill becoming more and more likely to becoming racial, the viability of this idea seems more likely.

So with further ado get your rotten veg and pitchforks ready cause here comes the Dread Guristas Battle cruiser.

Anaconda ( for the purposes of this discussion sudo ship name)

Special Ability: 50% bonus to Assault, Heavy and Light Missile velocity
Role bonus: 99% reduction in the CPU need of Warfare Link modules. (yes the pirates have a fleet booster)

Caldari Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 5% shield resistance per level
Gallente Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to drone hit points and damage per skill level

Slot layout: 6 H, 7 M, 5 L, 0 turrets, 4 launchers
Fittings: 710 PWG, 440 CPU, 350 CAL
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 6510 / 5915 / 5250
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 2400 / 700 s / 3.43
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 120 / 0.6 / 14010000 / 11.65 s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 400
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 65km / 215 / 7
Sensor strength: 26 Gravimetric
Signature radius: 292

i worked out the values though interpolation, looking at what gila and rattlesnake characteristics comparing them to T1 and T2 variants of the ships as well as looking at what it means to be a battle cruiser.

i worked the values using the EVE HQ ship editor, using the Ferox as the base hull for this made getting the warfare link link bonus already on it. as for the non existent racial BC skills i made them the cruiser race in the editor to make the bonuses work.

to have sufficient progression from the gila to the anaconda i added 1 slot to all (L / M / H) and added 1 more launcher hard point but keeping it med weapons for class consistency.

here is a screen shot of a general fitting (no point, derp)
http://i1132.photobucket.com/albums/m578/sieonigh/DGferox.jpg

here is a screen shot of the EVE HQ data to be put in for the ship editor if you so wish to look it up for your self
http://i1132.photobucket.com/albums/m578/sieonigh/anacondaspecs.jpg

So tell me what you guys think and if you would like to have it in game. i will try to do the other pirate factions if i get positive feed back.

if you are having a hard time applying the bonuses they do have to be set up in a specific way. best advise i can give is look at a preexisting ship with same bonus and look how that is done
AstraPardus
Earthside Mixlabs
#2 - 2012-12-09 14:22:36 UTC
I would say this looks totally reasonable, also...faction dessies, please and thank you. Both would be excellent, especially if they got new models. :3
Every time I post is Pardy time! :3
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#3 - 2012-12-09 14:38:38 UTC
it looks too tanky tbh this is why CCP are nervous of doing faction bc's i think at best they would give it similar tank to the current drake.
Also droneboats usually have one less slot than the rest.
I also think they will remove the missile velocity bonus on them as the shield resist makes them a brawler so a missile damage bonus perhaps more likely.
The sensor strength and sig radius is too high as-well i would look at the tier3' s for a similar ratio and then add a little on top of that.
It also looks very slow which it wouldn't be for sure but maybe a little heavier on mass as-well.
I would be intrigued to see what the angel bc would look like and the serpentis bc that would be plain nasty.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Sieonigh
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2012-12-09 15:06:50 UTC
Harvey James wrote:
it looks too tanky tbh this is why CCP are nervous of doing faction bc's i think at best they would give it similar tank to the current drake.
Also droneboats usually have one less slot than the rest.
I also think they will remove the missile velocity bonus on them as the shield resist makes them a brawler so a missile damage bonus perhaps more likely.
The sensor strength and sig radius is too high as-well i would look at the tier3' s for a similar ratio and then add a little on top of that.
It also looks very slow which it wouldn't be for sure but maybe a little heavier on mass as-well.
I would be intrigued to see what the angel bc would look like and the serpentis bc that would be plain nasty.



bare in mind DG are inherently tanky so don't think is too far from op, i was concerned the 7th mid slot made it too much towards the rattle snake but left it in for initial draft.

as for the sensor strength its fine for DG thier ships have high amounts comparatively.
the sig i feel is to compensate for the lol tank that DG have.

im currently working on the Blood one, but yeah i think ill nerf the anaconda tank wise drop one of the mids.
Hakan MacTrew
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#5 - 2012-12-09 18:16:26 UTC
Looks reasonable to me as a DG Battlecruiser. Gila already out tanks a Drake, so tank looks in line. Ferox model ftw, whoever did the Drake model needs to die, painfully, for the good of humanity!

I want to see faction BCs, bit I am.concerned about keeping them balanced. Faction BSs already dominate PvP, care must be taken so that the BC class ones don't become the new instant win toy.
Sieonigh
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#6 - 2012-12-09 19:43:29 UTC

ok the Blood Raider one is done. (man was this a grind)

let me introduce you to the Covenant (Prophecy hull for the time being or a unique one like ashimmu)

100% increase to Damage Modifier of Medium Beam Lasers and Medium Pulse Lasers
99% reduction in the CPU need of Warfare Link modules.

Minmatar Battlecruiser Skill Bonus:
20% increase to Optimal Range of Stasis Webs per level

Amarr Battlecruiser Skill Bonuses:
15% increase to Energy Transfer Amount of Energy Vampires per level
15% increase to Energy Neutralized of Energy Destabilizers per level

Slot layout: 7 H, 4 M, 6 L, 4 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 710 PWG, 440 CPU, 350 CAL
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 6230 / 7810 / 6695
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap per second): 4210 / 815 s / 5.57
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 160 / 0.774 / 13500000 / 14.49 s
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 50 / 50
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 53km / 228 / 8
Sensor strength: 23 Radar
Signature radius: 290

here is a screen shot of a general fitting
http://i1132.photobucket.com/albums/m578/sieonigh/covenantfit.jpg

here is a screen shot of the EVE HQ data to be put in for the ship editor if you so wish to look it up for your self
http://i1132.photobucket.com/albums/m578/sieonigh/covenantstats.jpg


noticed an error in the anaconda's agility stat and now has been corrected
Sieonigh
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#7 - 2012-12-09 19:47:28 UTC
Hakan MacTrew wrote:
Looks reasonable to me as a DG Battlecruiser. Gila already out tanks a Drake, so tank looks in line. Ferox model ftw, whoever did the Drake model needs to die, painfully, for the good of humanity!

I want to see faction BCs, bit I am.concerned about keeping them balanced. Faction BSs already dominate PvP, care must be taken so that the BC class ones don't become the new instant win toy.


i share your concern about the balancing, feels like playing with fire putting these together.
Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#8 - 2012-12-09 19:55:24 UTC
What difference would these have with the cruisers other than just being kinda bigger?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#9 - 2012-12-09 20:03:05 UTC
just use the cruiser bonuses and add the warfare link cpu 99% and then just a case of more slots more tank higher mass less speed.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#10 - 2012-12-09 20:10:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Harvey James wrote:
just use the cruiser bonuses and add the warfare link cpu 99% and then just a case of more slots more tank higher mass less speed.

Then whats the point? A slower cynabal with extra guns? A serpentis ship that doesnt have the DPS or tank of the vindi but without the speed of the vigilant? What would be the point of a gila if I have another inexpensive tankier ship that can send out 5 heavy bonused drones?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#11 - 2012-12-09 20:17:35 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Harvey James wrote:
just use the cruiser bonuses and add the warfare link cpu 99% and then just a case of more slots more tank higher mass less speed.

Then whats the point? A slower cynabal with extra guns? A serpentis ship that doesnt have the DPS or tank of the vindi but without the speed of the vigilant? What would be the point of a gila if I have another inexpensive tankier ship that can send out 5 heavy bonused drones?


same as asking why use a cruiser instead of a bc

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#12 - 2012-12-09 20:28:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Harvey James wrote:


same as asking why use a cruiser instead of a bc


The faction cruisers are not comparable to a cruiser, they are HACS, a scaled up hac is silly because it takes away the purpose of it being a hac which is its size. The tank and DPS capabilities of the cruisers compared to the battleships leaves very little space inbetween for another ship to serve that role without looking extremely similar and not being worth a new hull. A pirate faction battlecruiser couldn't just be a scaled up cruiser because it would be redundant, it would need a new role and possibly have tweaked bonuses compared to its cruiser brothers.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#13 - 2012-12-09 20:38:58 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Harvey James wrote:


same as asking why use a cruiser instead of a bc


The faction cruisers are not comparable to a cruiser, they are HACS, a scaled up hac is silly because it takes away the purpose of it being a hac which is its size. The tank and DPS capabilities of the cruisers compared to the battleships leaves very little space inbetween for another ship to serve that role without looking extremely similar and not being worth a new hull. A pirate faction battlecruiser couldn't just be a scaled up cruiser because it would be redundant, it would need a new role and possibly have tweaked bonuses compared to its cruiser brothers.


They aren't HACS in any way they are cruisers with a twist

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#14 - 2012-12-09 21:12:06 UTC
Harvey James wrote:


They aren't HACS in any way they are cruisers with a twist


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, The Gila is simply an ishtar with missles and shield resists, the cynabal is a vagabond but better, and the vigilant is a deimos with a web bonus.

Have you ever flown the pirate ships?

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#15 - 2012-12-09 21:25:35 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Harvey James wrote:


They aren't HACS in any way they are cruisers with a twist


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, The Gila is simply an ishtar with missles and shield resists, the cynabal is a vagabond but better, and the vigilant is a deimos with a web bonus.

Have you ever flown the pirate ships?


i have a cynabal i know where you're coming from but when they do re-balance HACS i suspect they will address the similarities a bit in particular a role bonus for HACS would help.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

tankus2
HeartVenom Inc.
#16 - 2012-12-09 21:38:35 UTC
I generally support this idea, but I also share a lot of other folk's concerns over it becoming sidelined by the cruisers (speed n all) and battleships (dps and tank). Care must be taken so that these vessels have more tank and spank than a cruiser while being faster than a battleship. Rewrite of the previous sentence for clarity: ...have less speed than a cruiser while having less tank and spank than a battleship.

Also, someone said something about faction destroyers? You mean a ship that can melt the face off of most cruisers but die in a heartbeat? As long as I can get a steady supply of their prints, sure!

Where the science gets done

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#17 - 2012-12-09 21:52:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Commander Ted
Harvey James wrote:

i have a cynabal i know where you're coming from but when they do re-balance HACS i suspect they will address the similarities a bit in particular a role bonus for HACS would help.


They are designed to be better than hacs in every way it is silly to think they are just "better cruisers" when they have almost nothing in common with the cruisers. Not to mention their has been 0 talk of a hac rebalance so far.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#18 - 2012-12-09 21:59:00 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Harvey James wrote:

i have a cynabal i know where you're coming from but when they do re-balance HACS i suspect they will address the similarities a bit in particular a role bonus for HACS would help.


They are designed to be better than hacs in every way it is silly to think they are just "better cruisers" when they have almost nothing in common with the cruisers. Not to mention their has been 0 talk of a hac rebalance so far.


They aren't designed to be better than HACS they are basically a navy cruiser with a twist this is what devs have said.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

Commander Ted
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#19 - 2012-12-09 22:29:05 UTC
Harvey James wrote:


They aren't designed to be better than HACS they are basically a navy cruiser with a twist this is what devs have said.


That is not how they fly. Navy faction ships are straight upgrades from t1. Pirate ships only have minor resemblances to two races flavors mixed together. Now MODULES on the other hand are straight upgrades.

As for pirate battlecruisers they would need to have different roles from the battleships and cruisers which currently mirror each other.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=174097 Separate all 4 empires in eve with lowsec.

Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#20 - 2012-12-10 00:16:07 UTC
Commander Ted wrote:
Harvey James wrote:


They aren't designed to be better than HACS they are basically a navy cruiser with a twist this is what devs have said.


That is not how they fly. Navy faction ships are straight upgrades from t1. Pirate ships only have minor resemblances to two races flavors mixed together. Now MODULES on the other hand are straight upgrades.

As for pirate battlecruisers they would need to have different roles from the battleships and cruisers which currently mirror each other.


sounds good in theory but in practice their e-war bonuses would infringe on e-war ships so there isn't much room for manouvre
and i think there is no reason to change them a different hull sporting the same bonuses is a role in itself.

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using

12Next page