These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Previous Topic Next Topic
Savira Terrant
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1101 - 2013-12-07 04:58:18 UTC  |  Edited by: Savira Terrant
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Savira Terrant wrote:
Btw. I do hope CCP realizes 2 loud fanboys who changed their mind 10 pages ago in this thread doesn't make for a good ship.

I think anyone who was serious about this ship gave up when the "all over the place" concept of the ship was deemed intentional.



Which is the exact thing we are trying to tell them to change. We want a battleship for exploration and nothing more. Thinking about the needs to support exploration the first thing to think about is how to get there. While I support CCP for not adding cloaking, it doesn't mean we don't need an alternative. And to be clear I just flat out say it: We do not need an RR bonus to support exploration frigs and cruisers. How the hell did that even happen? Obviously not while thinking about players needs.

.
Omnathious Deninard
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1102 - 2013-12-07 05:08:03 UTC
Savira Terrant wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Savira Terrant wrote:
Btw. I do hope CCP realizes 2 loud fanboys who changed their mind 10 pages ago in this thread doesn't make for a good ship.

I think anyone who was serious about this ship gave up when the "all over the place" concept of the ship was deemed intentional.



Which is the exact thing we are trying to tell them to change. We want a battleship for exploration and nothing more. Thinking about the needs to support exploration the first thing to think about is how to get there. While I support CCP for not adding cloaking, it doesn't mean we don't need an alternative. And to be clear I just flat out say it: We do not need an RR bonus to support exploration frigs and cruisers. How the hell did that even happen? Obviously not while thinking about players needs.

At this size, the main thing it will be doing is combat sites. I could support a scanning bonus still, but the hacking, RR bonuses need to go and full combat integration needs to be implemented.

Or on the complete other side of things, it needs to abandon its combat role and go full exploitation support role, with a fleet hanger, and ship maintenance hanger (probably make it so only covert ops capable ships can be stored in it)

Alvatore DiMarco wrote:
I continue to hope for some sort of unique cloak bonus.

I like your idea about -100% scan resolution penalty.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#1103 - 2013-12-07 05:10:50 UTC
Yeah, a battleship is always going to have to be designed with combat as a main role- anything that big needs to be able to adequately defend itself.

It can explore, but it also needs to be able to fight!

I like it the way it is now- we should just leave it as is, maybe give it +2 core strength or +15 virus strength Big smile

(and a strip club, obviously)

"A City made of Dreams is built in heaven"
Savira Terrant
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1104 - 2013-12-07 05:21:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Savira Terrant
Omnathious Deninard wrote:

At this size, the main thing it will be doing is combat sites. I could support a scanning bonus still, but the hacking, RR bonuses need to go and full combat integration needs to be implemented.

Or on the complete other side of things, it needs to abandon its combat role and go full exploitation support role, with a fleet hanger, and ship maintenance hanger (probably make it so only covert ops capable ships can be stored in it).


Well it was said that the scanning and hacking bonuses are free for this ship, so I couldn't care less.

I liked the idea of repping drone bonus instead of damage bonus to drones (20% per level, not these crazy amounts of 500% I've also seen), because that way we are given choices and keeps the drone theme of SOE.

I don't agree with you on abandoning the combat role, because a battleship that cannot help finishing a combat site, will never be used as a support ship. In that case we would just continue using carriers to jump in true damage dealers.

Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:
Yeah, a battleship is always going to have to be designed with combat as a main role- anything that big needs to be able to adequately defend itself.

It can explore, but it also needs to be able to fight!

I like it the way it is now- we should just leave it as is, maybe give it +2 core strength or +15 virus strength Big smile

(and a strip club, obviously)


While I am afraid to kick of just another myriad of posts by you and Thaddeus, I have to ask:

Do you understand that exploration means going into hostile space, blitz anything juicy as fast - and ideally undetected - as possible and get the hell out as quick as you can, all the while competing with a lot of other people to find the next site first?

In a WH it also means not trying to finsih sites with drones as your main (or any) damage. Because Sleepers just **** drones. But since I do not believe that only the mass (or any bonus actually) is convincing enough for a wormhole operation to use this ship I would actually just leave WH use out of this.

This ship was (supposedly) not made for missions, beltratting, doing anoms in a nice and cozy homesystem in 0.0 or any other save environment a usecase can be found after it was made to support exploration.

Supporting exploration. This was not our idea, but CCP's.
I really hope CCP Rise will ask around the office to find game designers who actually do exploration for a living and also ask them what it means to do it.

.
sabastyian
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#1105 - 2013-12-07 05:48:54 UTC
I'm curious as to why you didnt feel the need to make it similar to a black ops ( minus the jump portal, but has its own jump drive ) as this ship with the remote rep bonuses ( tweaked some for capacitor transfers as a RR bs is atrocious for capacitor ) it would be perfect for small scale black ops fleets. There is currently no viable covert ops cloaking ( or black ops ) logistics ship in eve. A remote repair legion is pretty costly ( i know the nestor costs more ) for a mediocre job considering the 1.3-1.4b+ price tag. Remote repair tengu's have some some action but due to the price and short range, they aren't completely viable. This ship has the potential to be the first Black Ops fleet logistic boat ( that actually has enough range to rep someone on the other side of the cyno ) but you are diverting away, claiming a 2b+ ship should be an exploration boat ( to follow suit ) but not a black ops ship (because it would be over powered.)
Savira Terrant
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1106 - 2013-12-07 06:18:31 UTC
sabastyian wrote:
I'm curious as to why you didnt feel the need to make it similar to a black ops ( minus the jump portal, but has its own jump drive ) as this ship with the remote rep bonuses ( tweaked some for capacitor transfers as a RR bs is atrocious for capacitor ) it would be perfect for small scale black ops fleets. There is currently no viable covert ops cloaking ( or black ops ) logistics ship in eve. A remote repair legion is pretty costly ( i know the nestor costs more ) for a mediocre job considering the 1.3-1.4b+ price tag. Remote repair tengu's have some some action but due to the price and short range, they aren't completely viable. This ship has the potential to be the first Black Ops fleet logistic boat ( that actually has enough range to rep someone on the other side of the cyno ) but you are diverting away, claiming a 2b+ ship should be an exploration boat ( to follow suit ) but not a black ops ship (because it would be over powered.)


Mh, I think this depends of where you see Black Ops. Long deployment behind enemy lines is cool and all, but I think the reality is quite different.
Ganking targets, while trying to be 100% sure of a kill and being out of there before the enemy cavalry arrives is how Black Ops are used. And by itself hard enough to counter. Targets who really have their wits together may get a point before the BO fleet jumps out again and have the buddies there in time, but this is hard enough already. Adding a true Logistic ship to the mix makes even that more improbable.
This in part is also why my concept for the Nestor a few pages back, while including a jump drive for covert cynos (no cloak bonuses), only had a repdrone bonus, which does not rep instantly and is destructable.

.
Quinn Corvez
Perkone
Caldari State
#1107 - 2013-12-07 09:10:45 UTC
Armour reps don't rep instantly either but is see what you're saying.
Zvaarian the Red
Evil Leprechaun Brigade
#1108 - 2013-12-07 09:58:00 UTC
Am I the only person who thinks spider tanking Nestors could end up being completely broken as a fleet doctrine?
Roy Alleyne
Dark Knowledge.
#1109 - 2013-12-07 10:20:53 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Am I the only person who thinks spider tanking Nestors could end up being completely broken as a fleet doctrine?


You can easily counter spider tanking BS formations with bombers, even the added range of the Nestor isn't enough to spread them to far apart.
Savira Terrant
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1110 - 2013-12-07 10:58:48 UTC
Roy Alleyne wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Am I the only person who thinks spider tanking Nestors could end up being completely broken as a fleet doctrine?


You can easily counter spider tanking BS formations with bombers, even the added range of the Nestor isn't enough to spread them to far apart.


What about lowsec? Just curious...

.
Sniper Smith
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#1111 - 2013-12-07 11:30:51 UTC
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Am I the only person who thinks spider tanking Nestors could end up being completely broken as a fleet doctrine?

Yes.. yes you are..

The hulls will be 2+bil a piece, before fit.

Domi's and Ishtar's can be a doctrine cause they are cheap and easy to replace.. these are neither.
Roy Alleyne
Dark Knowledge.
#1112 - 2013-12-07 11:37:50 UTC
Savira Terrant wrote:
Roy Alleyne wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Am I the only person who thinks spider tanking Nestors could end up being completely broken as a fleet doctrine?


You can easily counter spider tanking BS formations with bombers, even the added range of the Nestor isn't enough to spread them to far apart.


What about lowsec? Just curious...


Low sec would be bit more difficult and less flashy but still do-able. You use ECM to disrupt as many ships as possible while spreading your dps over as many ships as you can while still ensuring to break their tank, thus overwhelming what reppers are left operational.

Neuting would also be very helpful as RR is cap hungry with the Nestor being particularly vulnerable
Jason Atavuli
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#1113 - 2013-12-07 11:42:38 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi

I am very relieved to finally show you...

...version today so I'll edit later with it.

Hope this is exciting! Let me know
o/

STEALTH EDIT by Manifest brings high res concept art: http://bit.ly/1izOFm4



New toys, hell yeah. And 50something pages of posts later folks sure seem excited about something LOL

TBH I would have preferred losing 1 of the 2 bonus to the flashlights in lieu of a +7.5% drone tracking bonus ala Dommie but so be it. Oh and it looks great too, don't change a thing.

BTW if I donate another PLEX for the Phillipines can I get a mil SOE LP instead of 6 shirts? 
.
Komodo Askold
Strategic Exploration and Development Corp
Silent Company
#1114 - 2013-12-07 11:58:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Komodo Askold
Ah! Ah! So beautiful ship! Big smile

I was going after the Stratios, but I think I'm going to save LP's for a Nestor!

After the initial glee...

I don't find a virus bonus that useful on a BS... Now that everything excepting Ghost Sites require can grabbing, a BS would be very subpar against a frig or a cruiser... unless the Nestor gets a can grabbing/analyzer range, allowing it to better grab the stuff even though it's a big, slow BS. That said, perhaps its intended role is not K-space data/relic sites, but rather WH-space ones and Ghost Sites, where it better shine.

That remote rep bonus has another inmediate use: repair your own drones! I can imagine a sentry fit keeping its drones in space while repping them at will...

And, what about that shuttle bay it has? Are we getting that shuttle as a separate ship? It looks pretty cute!
Emma Yobibit
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1115 - 2013-12-07 13:58:55 UTC
Savira Terrant wrote:
Roy Alleyne wrote:
Zvaarian the Red wrote:
Am I the only person who thinks spider tanking Nestors could end up being completely broken as a fleet doctrine?


You can easily counter spider tanking BS formations with bombers, even the added range of the Nestor isn't enough to spread them to far apart.


What about lowsec? Just curious...


What about it? ships less then 20 km apart, just take a neuting ship on grid.... easy counter. they are right beside all the other combat ships.
Emma Yobibit
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#1116 - 2013-12-07 14:00:56 UTC
ok anything else then a useless cap bonus, this bonus only gives me 20 km range being pointless, why do you think T1 RR frigates aren't used that much, because 30km is to damn close.
Rajius
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1117 - 2013-12-07 14:25:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Rajius
I have posted on these forums very rarely, and I have not read this entire thread, so I apologize if this has come up already and been roundly dismissed.

Now I dislike the asymmetry of the ship bonuses. The first two have the same bonuses, setting them up as a progressively larger version of each other. Larger drones, more slots. Except The Nestor. We chickened out and didn't introduce a cloaking battleship. because it had turrets and drones, But in that we hit on another brilliant solution with the idea of a remote shield rep bonus. What I'm proposing is is to correct his, with the three ships bonuses all being tweaked to match. Now remove the laser bonus on all three ships - if these are the Sister's they should Focus on healing. The devs, and I suppose the player base has decided on armour reps, but we could change it to remote shield reps conceivably at this stage.

Now change the Sisters of Eve ships bonus

- Astero - Stratios - Nestor - Bonus change

Amarr Racial Ship Bonuses:
5% Armor resistances per level

Gallente Racial Ship Bonuses:
7.5% drone damage and 20% hitpoints per level

Role bonuses:
250% bonus to remote repair range (shield/armor, at this stage of the proposal)
Can fit Covert Ops Cloaks and Covert Cynosural Field Generators

40% // 45% // 50% increased strength for scan probes
+10 // +12 // +15 virus strength for relic and data analysers (Maybe this could be changed, I have never used this system)

These ships explore the regions of space, and scout out it's secrets. We already have black ops battleships, and the game has continued one. These new Sister's ship are focused instead on exploration. The laser bonus felt tacked on. By trying to break the mold with the new ship we ended up with an idea on how to change it. Again the data/relic rate could be changed, these sites made harder so that 'only' Sister's Ships could access them. If you want to promote an innovative task (mini games) into a game, then there should be a ship class dedicated to it.

Now it could still fit one hell of a tank - and field a full drone flight, but they couldn't hit as hard as a military vessel. Of course they could still come along Big smile and maybe they could even keep their drones alive in a Wormhole. I would also like to see faction Sister's of Eve Remote Repairer's. Or make them a Faction Ancillary Shield Boosters, and tweak the cargo-hold appropriately. Maybe add another high level agent with a story. If Eve online is going to explore another 'unknown region' we're going to have to be given the proper ship to do it in by the Sisters of Eve Bureau. I`m sure this isn`t a far departure from what we already have.

So, Community?
Onictus
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#1118 - 2013-12-07 14:58:31 UTC
Savira Terrant wrote:
Omnathious Deninard wrote:
Savira Terrant wrote:
Btw. I do hope CCP realizes 2 loud fanboys who changed their mind 10 pages ago in this thread doesn't make for a good ship.

I think anyone who was serious about this ship gave up when the "all over the place" concept of the ship was deemed intentional.



Which is the exact thing we are trying to tell them to change. We want a battleship for exploration and nothing more. Thinking about the needs to support exploration the first thing to think about is how to get there. While I support CCP for not adding cloaking, it doesn't mean we don't need an alternative. And to be clear I just flat out say it: We do not need an RR bonus to support exploration frigs and cruisers. How the hell did that even happen? Obviously not while thinking about players needs.



Speak for yourself.

I think the very idea of an "exploration battleship" is pants on head stupid, plain and simple. Much less a 2 billion isk pirate battleship.

I like the space-priest idea, it just needs a bit of work to before it becomes worthwhile.
Thaddeus Eggeras
Urkrathos Corp
#1119 - 2013-12-07 15:45:11 UTC
The Nestor is good as is. Shut it and let's get it on SiSi to get tested so it can be adjusted IF needed
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#1120 - 2013-12-07 15:47:04 UTC  |  Edited by: MeBiatch
i still support the escort carrier idea.

if you use WWII as an example. there were three kinds of carriers used. Fleet, light, and escort. for eve this could be supercarrier = fleet, regular carrier = light, and then we are left with an empty slot for the escourt.

for me the nestor should be the suport for the SOE ships and that means it could potentially fill the escort carrier idea. also the size compares too a nyx is 3.3 km long a thanny is 2.2 km long and the average bs is from 500m-1km long. Typically in wwii the escort carrier would be 1/3 the size of the fleet versions. so this also stands up to the comparison.

the role of an escort carrier is to provide air cover and logistics to an expeditionary force. So this fits perfectly with the exploration mantra of SOE.

first thing i would do is get rid of lazor bonus and hacking.

This is better suited for the ships its meant to support. We already have the RR for the logistics and drones for the air cover.

IN WWII escort carriers were primary used as waypoints for planes to land on and then go the the next destination. so that kinda fits in with the idea of covert ops bridging. so that leaves us with a ship that has great drone projection/ good RR and the ability to use jump drive and jump bridge technology.

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.