These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

[Rubicon 1.1] Sisters of EVE Battleship

First post First post First post
Author
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#2001 - 2014-01-14 00:00:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Quinn Corvez
HiddenPorpoise wrote:
If you give it a cloak it literally is a covert-ops logi and covert-ops battleship at the same time, neither of those things has been done for a variety of reasons and doing them at the same time would be broken more than I can state.

Use the ship on the test server, then complain.


You clearly haven't read anything I said above so I'll spell it out for you...

1. Remove some or all gun slots
2. Give the ship a covert cloak

1+2= A battle ship that can cloak but does the same dps as stratios or a cloaky T3.

And FYI I have tried it on sisi and it's as pointless as I thought it was. Not saying it isn't a good ship as a dps and tank platform, I'm saying it is a pointless ship that ads nothing new to the game. EVE does not need this ship!

Ps. There are cloaky logistic ships in game already. There is no cloaky BS for the reasons I explained in one of my last posts. Read up.
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#2002 - 2014-01-14 00:14:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Quinn Corvez
Savira Terrant wrote:
Please guys. Why do you start asking for a covert cloak and the RR bonuses? Just drop RR already and make this ship usable to support exploration. And yes if that means it will end up as a 2 billion (or whatever) non plus ultra anom and DED runner (which does not nessesarily mean most DPS), so be it.


Because we already have combat ships designed for exploration, so why do we need another?

What we do not have is a viable cloaky logistics ship (unless you are an AT winner).

Wouldn't it be better to have something new than to have existing roles repeated in a new hull that is not fit for purpose?
ASadOldGit
Doomheim
#2003 - 2014-01-14 01:00:08 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to have something new than to have existing roles repeated in a new hull that is not fit for purpose?

I think part of the problem is that this ship hasn't had its role defined properly. Even if it's meant to be multi-role, it would still have 2-3 main roles defined - it can't have infinite roles.

Why did the Sisters invent this ship? Why was it introduced into the game? What were the devs thinking when they thought "We need a Sisters battleship!" Did they have a vision behind this ship?

With regards to the stated theme of "exploration" - what exactly is "exploration" in the context of this ship? Highsec exploration is quite different to wormhole or nullsec exploration, often requiring completely different ships, and certainly different fits and, as Quinn stated, these ships already exist.

This signature intentionally left blank for you to fill in at your leisure.

Fortorn Lonshanks
Adeptus Incursio
#2004 - 2014-01-14 01:05:35 UTC
HiddenPorpoise wrote:
If you give it a cloak it literally is a covert-ops logi and covert-ops battleship at the same time, neither of those things has been done for a variety of reasons and doing them at the same time would be broken more than I can state.

Use the ship on the test server, then complain.


I think that at the end of the day, the ship itself is not the essential issue here. In its current iteration it is a decent plaything, very adaptive.

What I think is lost is the price. It needs to be cut.... roughly in half.

That can be done in a few ways of course. Up the conversion rate for concord LP and primarily reduce the LP cost for ship/BPC.

That would bring it in line with other Pirate BSs. This thing properly fitted simply could not cover its own cost through its utility.

Personally, I think if you are going to do a logi battleship, it should be done like a triage carrier, not the mauraders.

I also think the rep idea is neat, but doesnt fall in line with the other two ships, namely it cant cloak and warp at same time. I am in the pro cloak side of this argument.

My biggest issue/fear is that you can have this ship potentially as a logi hub, spidering with several others. It will apply tremendous DPS through sentries (via drone bunny) while providing local reps to snipers/itself. It will be heavily tanked and largely immobile. Current logis rely on signature and speed to tank, this will not. It will be raw tank as well as DPS and logi. Wouldn't replace ships but could potentially create a much larger force projection onto battlefield for those with money. This is essentially buying power. Yes the pirate ships are powerful, but full of weakness in their own way. This Nestor has far fewer I think.

In only this will it "potentially" be worth the price however I think it is still too high even for the above mentioned specialized situation.
Iyacia Cyric'ai
Lai Dai Counterintelligence
#2005 - 2014-01-14 02:38:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Iyacia Cyric'ai
Fortorn Lonshanks wrote:
HiddenPorpoise wrote:
If you give it a cloak it literally is a covert-ops logi and covert-ops battleship at the same time, neither of those things has been done for a variety of reasons and doing them at the same time would be broken more than I can state.

Use the ship on the test server, then complain.


I think that at the end of the day, the ship itself is not the essential issue here. In its current iteration it is a decent plaything, very adaptive.

What I think is lost is the price. It needs to be cut.... roughly in half.

That can be done in a few ways of course. Up the conversion rate for concord LP and primarily reduce the LP cost for ship/BPC.

That would bring it in line with other Pirate BSs. This thing properly fitted simply could not cover its own cost through its utility.

Personally, I think if you are going to do a logi battleship, it should be done like a triage carrier, not the mauraders.

I also think the rep idea is neat, but doesnt fall in line with the other two ships, namely it cant cloak and warp at same time. I am in the pro cloak side of this argument.

My biggest issue/fear is that you can have this ship potentially as a logi hub, spidering with several others. It will apply tremendous DPS through sentries (via drone bunny) while providing local reps to snipers/itself. It will be heavily tanked and largely immobile. Current logis rely on signature and speed to tank, this will not. It will be raw tank as well as DPS and logi. Wouldn't replace ships but could potentially create a much larger force projection onto battlefield for those with money. This is essentially buying power. Yes the pirate ships are powerful, but full of weakness in their own way. This Nestor has far fewer I think.

In only this will it "potentially" be worth the price however I think it is still too high even for the above mentioned specialized situation.

Your fear is completely unfounded. It doesn't have the slot layout to tank tremendously AND do a lot of DPS. It doesn't even have the base cap to do that much repping. Pirate ships traditionally have distinct advantages over their faction/t1 counterparts. Vindicator has DPS/Web. Machariel has speed and damage projection. Bhaalgorn has neuts and webs. Nestor has... ??????

It's a 2 billion isk lossmail waiting to happen.

PvPers who want to do this kind of thing will continue to use the Dominix and real logistics like Guardians and Oneiros. PvE players will use T3 Cruisers for exploration or the Stratios... or Dominix and Guardians as well.

The only people who have a legit reason to buy this ship are collectors.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2006 - 2014-01-14 03:43:07 UTC
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
It's a 2 billion isk lossmail waiting to happen.

Make that $2.5-$3 billion ISK, because there's no way players are going to be running T1 modules on a $2-billion hull. So think of the $2-billion Nestor as the base model. $3-billion "nicely equipped"...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Roy Alleyne
Dark Knowledge.
#2007 - 2014-01-14 07:39:02 UTC
ASadOldGit wrote:
Quinn Corvez wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to have something new than to have existing roles repeated in a new hull that is not fit for purpose?

I think part of the problem is that this ship hasn't had its role defined properly. Even if it's meant to be multi-role, it would still have 2-3 main roles defined - it can't have infinite roles.

Why did the Sisters invent this ship? Why was it introduced into the game? What were the devs thinking when they thought "We need a Sisters battleship!" Did they have a vision behind this ship?

With regards to the stated theme of "exploration" - what exactly is "exploration" in the context of this ship? Highsec exploration is quite different to wormhole or nullsec exploration, often requiring completely different ships, and certainly different fits and, as Quinn stated, these ships already exist.

Having an undefined role and/or niche is the reason that this thread has 101 pages and will likely have many more before it's all over.

You do ask a pointed question though that I may have heavily hinted at but never come right out and answered since I started posting. The way I see 'exploration' in terms of the Nestor is a small fleet of no more than a dozen pilots traveling from wh to wh, running PVE sites and hunting isolated players. Most importantly this fleet would have the ability to stay in deep Wspace for weeks without ever seeing a station or deploying a POS.

Granted that is a dream that would take a some major pull to work out but in general we already have BSs for running PVE that perform better, RR ships that rep better, solo exploration ship's that perform far better, and the ship's roles arn't even complimentary to eachother, leaving no niche for a ship such as the Nestor. The ship could easily fill the role of fleet support ship that could keep up with more nimble ships and pull it's weight in a small fleet. The closest analogues to such a ship would be a carrier or an Orca but carriers are only mobile in Kspace and their cynos pull a lot of attention for a group trying to remain below the radar of whichever faction's backyard they are flying in while Orcas are slow, heavy, lightly armored, and stick out like a sore thumb, not to mention full of things explorers don't need like an ore bay or mining foreman links.

Tbh, I think I'd be satisfied if Rise and his team pull through with a cloaked velocity bonus but it never hurts to lay all your cards on the table for examination and discussion. For the above role to be possible any number of the role bonuses could go to make room, starting with the scanning bonus. Big smile
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#2008 - 2014-01-14 08:37:16 UTC
^ I like that senario. Maybe salvaging bonuses should should be added in place of the turret bonuses to make a nomadic Nestor fleet more viable... And a covert cloak of course Blink
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2009 - 2014-01-14 09:29:58 UTC
Quinn Corvez wrote:
HiddenPorpoise wrote:
If you give it a cloak it literally is a covert-ops logi and covert-ops battleship at the same time, neither of those things has been done for a variety of reasons and doing them at the same time would be broken more than I can state.

Use the ship on the test server, then complain.


You clearly haven't read anything I said above so I'll spell it out for you...

1. Remove some or all gun slots
2. Give the ship a covert cloak

1+2= A battle ship that can cloak but does the same dps as stratios or a cloaky T3.

And FYI I have tried it on sisi and it's as pointless as I thought it was. Not saying it isn't a good ship as a dps and tank platform, I'm saying it is a pointless ship that ads nothing new to the game. EVE does not need this ship!

Ps. There are cloaky logistic ships in game already. There is no cloaky BS for the reasons I explained in one of my last posts. Read up.



BATTLEship... means BATTLE.. emans no GUNs is wrong conceptually :P

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#2010 - 2014-01-14 09:30:58 UTC
Arthur Aihaken wrote:
Iyacia Cyric'ai wrote:
It's a 2 billion isk lossmail waiting to happen.

Make that $2.5-$3 billion ISK, because there's no way players are going to be running T1 modules on a $2-billion hull. So think of the $2-billion Nestor as the base model. $3-billion "nicely equipped"...



The best thing of the nestor.. is that MY alt will be able to run missions on its vargur more safely.. because suicide gankers will be hunting NESTORS instead :P

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#2011 - 2014-01-14 09:46:22 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:

BATTLEship... means BATTLE.. emans no GUNs is wrong conceptually :P


Brilliant argument... Also cruisers should just cruise through space, no need for guns and that other rubbish. Roll
ASadOldGit
Doomheim
#2012 - 2014-01-14 10:21:57 UTC
Roy Alleyne wrote:
The ship could easily fill the role of fleet support ship that could keep up with more nimble ships and pull it's weight in a small fleet. The closest analogues to such a ship would be a carrier or an Orca...

Is that an idea that would be preferable for some? To convert it completely away from being a battleship and turn it into a combat-mini-"orca"-support-ship, minus the ore bays and bonuses to survey range & mining links, minus gun/launcher slots, and give it tractor, salvage & RR bonuses, an SMA & small corp hangar, and drone defenses, perhaps with bonuses to repair drones only?
(I was thinking it would keep it's armour resistance bonuses, as I'm assuming it's meant to be out in the field with the rest of the gang, and that off-grid boosts will one day be nerfed.)

What about command links - should it have those, or is that encroaching too much on the domain of the command ships?
Clonebay? Too much like a Rorqual?

Probably too drastic a change at this late stage (depending on how close 1.1 is being released).

Btw, I was googling the release date for Rubicon 1.1, and it's already been released!!!

This signature intentionally left blank for you to fill in at your leisure.

Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#2013 - 2014-01-14 10:59:13 UTC
^ A mini carrier with salvaging bonuses and a covert cloak sounds good to me. I agree that there is no need for guns on this ship, especially if that is what is stopping CCP from giving it a cloak ability.
Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2014 - 2014-01-14 13:22:23 UTC
+1 on the Covert Ops Cloak/salvaging bonus idea.

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2015 - 2014-01-14 14:42:33 UTC
Roy Alleyne wrote:
The way I see 'exploration' in terms of the Nestor is a small fleet of no more than a dozen pilots traveling from wh to wh, running PVE sites and hunting isolated players. Most importantly this fleet would have the ability to stay in deep Wspace for weeks without ever seeing a station or deploying a POS.


This is very easy to achieve. It's called an Orca with a T3 fleet. You just have to avoid C1 wormholes.

I've seen it done.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Roy Alleyne
Dark Knowledge.
#2016 - 2014-01-14 15:52:52 UTC
ASadOldGit wrote:
Roy Alleyne wrote:
The ship could easily fill the role of fleet support ship that could keep up with more nimble ships and pull it's weight in a small fleet. The closest analogues to such a ship would be a carrier or an Orca...

Is that an idea that would be preferable for some? To convert it completely away from being a battleship and turn it into a combat-mini-"orca"-support-ship, minus the ore bays and bonuses to survey range & mining links, minus gun/launcher slots, and give it tractor, salvage & RR bonuses, an SMA & small corp hangar, and drone defenses, perhaps with bonuses to repair drones only?
(I was thinking it would keep it's armour resistance bonuses, as I'm assuming it's meant to be out in the field with the rest of the gang, and that off-grid boosts will one day be nerfed.)

What about command links - should it have those, or is that encroaching too much on the domain of the command ships?
Clonebay? Too much like a Rorqual?

Probably too drastic a change at this late stage (depending on how close 1.1 is being released).

Btw, I was googling the release date for Rubicon 1.1, and it's already been released!!!

I hadn't considered tractor/salvage bonuses because they would be yet another change though I suppose they would be on the table as well. I was mainly thinking of making room for the SMA and fleet hanger by stripping the role bonuses it wouldn't need such as the scanning and virus bonus as well as either the RR bonuses or the laser optimal depending on what it needs to be balanced. The skill bonuses I would like to stay and I do think command links would be stepping to far onto the BC side of the line for comfort with a clone bay off the table completely as only capital ships have them and it would detract from the temporary lodging and migratory nature of Anoikis.

Don't worry to much over the Nestor's release date. I think we would all prefer CCP to release a working ship late then a crappy ship now that they will have to fix later.

Mournful Conciousness wrote:
Roy Alleyne wrote:
The way I see 'exploration' in terms of the Nestor is a small fleet of no more than a dozen pilots traveling from wh to wh, running PVE sites and hunting isolated players. Most importantly this fleet would have the ability to stay in deep Wspace for weeks without ever seeing a station or deploying a POS.


This is very easy to achieve. It's called an Orca with a T3 fleet. You just have to avoid C1 wormholes.

I've seen it done.

I agree and I've even done it myself for a little while but having an Orca in the fleet requires a pilot to sit in a safe, cloaked the entire time and this is generally regulated to an alt because sitting there gets boring after the first couple seconds. A support Nestor would be able to participate in combat along side the rest of it's fleet and flown by a main if the fleet has any interest in keeping such an important ship alive. Plus, like I said above, Orcas are unwieldy when trying to move around quickly and they lack any semblance of grace or stealth. Granted, with larger bays an Orca supported fleet would be able to stay out longer than a Nestor supported one but the greater usability of the Nestor provided by a cloaked velocity bonus and weapons in addition to not wasting a pilot's talents by cloaking them somewhere and leaving them to rot would be preferable.

P.S. To say it again, there is no way the Nestor is getting a covops cloak so can we drop it please and focus on what we can improve. Rise has already said his team would look at a cloaked velocity bonus so that is the most important and relevant potential change with a SMA being less likely considering that it would require a greater effort to balance and more changes from what we already have.
Rek Seven
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#2017 - 2014-01-14 16:15:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Rek Seven
Roy Alleyne wrote:
there is no way the Nestor is getting a covops cloak so can we drop it please and focus on what we can improve?


No, i personally won't drop it because CCP are wrong... as obnoxiousness as that sounds.

If my girlfriend served up a plate of steaming turds for dinner and told me to put some ketchup on it to make it taste better, i would refuse that to. Blink

If it doesn't get a cloak, it needs a jump drive (no good for w-space tho) and if it doesn't get either, then the ships release should be put on hold until CCP decide what they are doing with black ops battleships.
Mournful Conciousness
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#2018 - 2014-01-14 16:23:57 UTC
If not the covops cloak (I guess we can work around that one with a normal cloak), then what would make it worth the inevitable cost?

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

Arthur Aihaken
CODE.d
#2019 - 2014-01-14 16:45:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Arthur Aihaken
Mournful Conciousness wrote:
If not the covops cloak (I guess we can work around that one with a normal cloak), then what would make it worth the inevitable cost?

I'm not entirely sure how you justify the cost, regardless. All the other Pirate battleships at least offer something unique, and at 1/4 to 1/3 the cost. I guess it's white...

I am currently away, traveling through time and will be returning last week.

PopeUrban
El Expedicion
Flames of Exile
#2020 - 2014-01-14 17:28:05 UTC
Simple idea:

What if we left its current middle of the road bonuses, and gave it its own module:

Remote Computation Subprocessor (high)

This module adds +10 to targeted ships virus strength.
This module reduces targeted ships probe scanning times by 50%

Tada. Exploration support ship with some teeth. Give it a nice hefty range bonus so that it's operational at around 100km to cover a whole site's worth of buddies from the middle, and you've got a sensible centerpiece of your exploration fleet.