These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mhari Dson
Lazy Brothers Inc
#1681 - 2013-12-30 20:29:39 UTC
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Mhari Dson wrote:
4 lows on the astero worked out to provide a reasonably resilient frig.
5 lows on the strat provides an underperforming cruiser tank
6 lows on a battleship means it'll be a joke in a firefight any of the other faction BS's could handle.

With the pricetag of the ship bieng far beyond that of any other faction BS it's wow factor should be at least equal to the current iterations of the Vindicator or Machariel. Up the ante or watch it just be a hangar decoration.

As for this bieng an answer to logis getting to fly something other than a cruiser..... a guardian or oneiros will still outperform it with ease.


But astero and stratios did thier job as exploration ships so their lower pvp aplications was acceptable. Nestor will not. We have marauders, machs and vindis for high end PvE. With 6 low slots and T1 resists I dont see this ship flying C5 capital spawn. So really give it 7 low slot because it won't be exploring anything anyway...



Instead of a 6/6/6 layout it should have a 5/5/8, after all it's not a SOCT ship, it's turrets are decorative, and it's an armor tanker and designed using aspects off 2 armor tanking races.
Joker Dronemaster
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1682 - 2013-12-30 21:14:21 UTC
Mhari Dson wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Mhari Dson wrote:
4 lows on the astero worked out to provide a reasonably resilient frig.
5 lows on the strat provides an underperforming cruiser tank
6 lows on a battleship means it'll be a joke in a firefight any of the other faction BS's could handle.

With the pricetag of the ship bieng far beyond that of any other faction BS it's wow factor should be at least equal to the current iterations of the Vindicator or Machariel. Up the ante or watch it just be a hangar decoration.

As for this bieng an answer to logis getting to fly something other than a cruiser..... a guardian or oneiros will still outperform it with ease.


But astero and stratios did thier job as exploration ships so their lower pvp aplications was acceptable. Nestor will not. We have marauders, machs and vindis for high end PvE. With 6 low slots and T1 resists I dont see this ship flying C5 capital spawn. So really give it 7 low slot because it won't be exploring anything anyway...



Instead of a 6/6/6 layout it should have a 5/5/8, after all it's not a SOCT ship, it's turrets are decorative, and it's an armor tanker and designed using aspects off 2 armor tanking races.


Every time I try to theory craft a fitting for either the BS or cruiser I always find myself having one less low than i really need and one mid slot I don't really know what to do with.

I think the cruiser should be 5/4/6 and the Nestor should be 7/5/7. you need some highs for link augs and such.
Roy Alleyne
Dark Knowledge.
#1683 - 2013-12-30 21:52:00 UTC
Joker Dronemaster wrote:
Mhari Dson wrote:
Cassius Invictus wrote:
Mhari Dson wrote:
4 lows on the astero worked out to provide a reasonably resilient frig.
5 lows on the strat provides an underperforming cruiser tank
6 lows on a battleship means it'll be a joke in a firefight any of the other faction BS's could handle.

With the pricetag of the ship bieng far beyond that of any other faction BS it's wow factor should be at least equal to the current iterations of the Vindicator or Machariel. Up the ante or watch it just be a hangar decoration.

As for this bieng an answer to logis getting to fly something other than a cruiser..... a guardian or oneiros will still outperform it with ease.


But astero and stratios did thier job as exploration ships so their lower pvp aplications was acceptable. Nestor will not. We have marauders, machs and vindis for high end PvE. With 6 low slots and T1 resists I dont see this ship flying C5 capital spawn. So really give it 7 low slot because it won't be exploring anything anyway...



Instead of a 6/6/6 layout it should have a 5/5/8, after all it's not a SOCT ship, it's turrets are decorative, and it's an armor tanker and designed using aspects off 2 armor tanking races.


Every time I try to theory craft a fitting for either the BS or cruiser I always find myself having one less low than i really need and one mid slot I don't really know what to do with.

I think the cruiser should be 5/4/6 and the Nestor should be 7/5/7. you need some highs for link augs and such.


I believe the slot layout is intentionally set up for a nonspecific tank. The ambiguous layout provides for multiple potential fitting styles and potential for flexible combinations. Just because it doesn't cater to your limited EFT Fu does not mean it should be changed. With this layout you can choose any two of these with ease: dps, application, tank. If you can't see how those options mesh then you just need to think outside the box and see the truth of what this Internet spaceship can do.

That said, if you had read the thread you would already know that the ship falls short in any traditional role and, unlike the Stratios and Astero, has very limited use in even untraditional niche roles. While most people understand that this ship will never be effective as a traditional ship, a number of options have been discussed in order to allow it to fill niche roles effectively.
Silivar Karkun
Doomheim
#1684 - 2013-12-30 22:30:30 UTC
the ship is okay, you people like to whine for everything.........each time a new ship gets announced in a thread, you complain and the damned thing gets nerfed to hell........i would gladly ask everyone to NOT **** THIS HULL!
Joker Dronemaster
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1685 - 2013-12-30 22:31:20 UTC
Roy Alleyne wrote:
I believe the slot layout is intentionally set up for a nonspecific tank. The ambiguous layout provides for multiple potential fitting styles and potential for flexible combinations. Just because it doesn't cater to your limited EFT Fu does not mean it should be changed. With this layout you can choose any two of these with ease: dps, application, tank. If you can't see how those options mesh then you just need to think outside the box and see the truth of what this Internet spaceship can do.


My EFT Fu is not the one that is limited. If you cant see the benefits of a ship having the majority of its slots focused into its primary tank then, Im sorry but your beyond all hope of help. 5 mid slots is plenty to fit a prop mod 3 projection mods and still have a slot left over for utility, on the lows a 4/3 tank/dps spread is preferable to a 4/2 or 3/3.

Roy Alleyne wrote:
That said, if you had read the thread you would already know that the ship falls short in any traditional role and, unlike the Stratios and Astero, has very limited use in even untraditional niche roles. While most people understand that this ship will never be effective as a traditional ship, a number of options have been discussed in order to allow it to fill niche roles effectively.


And if you had read the thread you would already know i have already weighed in on several of those discussions. K, thanks, BYE!
Joker Dronemaster
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1686 - 2013-12-30 22:37:03 UTC
Silivar Karkun wrote:
the ship is okay, you people like to whine for everything.........each time a new ship gets announced in a thread, you complain and the damned thing gets nerfed to hell........i would gladly ask everyone to NOT **** THIS HULL!


I've only seen like one or 2 retards complain about this ship being over powered. The majority of people are weighing in on how to make it viable.
NetheranE
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#1687 - 2013-12-31 00:59:28 UTC
Rise, stop being a fool (and by that I mean leave your job that requires you to do what you "dont like doing" **theory crafting**), and just make it a damned BLOPs BS that requires 2 BS skills to fly.

Give it logistical bonuses after that (better than what you're proposing now, which is crap as usual), and the generic SoE bonuses.

I mean seriously, you're practically dancing in the fire here, laughing that we cant proclaim whatever you do bad or effective. This ship SUCKS so bad at the moment that I'd expect it to start getting paid for illicit services.

Seriously, tired of this crappy battleship proposal.
Savira Terrant
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1688 - 2013-12-31 04:40:37 UTC
Joker Dronemaster wrote:
Roy Alleyne wrote:
I believe the slot layout is intentionally set up for a nonspecific tank. The ambiguous layout provides for multiple potential fitting styles and potential for flexible combinations. Just because it doesn't cater to your limited EFT Fu does not mean it should be changed. With this layout you can choose any two of these with ease: dps, application, tank. If you can't see how those options mesh then you just need to think outside the box and see the truth of what this Internet spaceship can do.


My EFT Fu is not the one that is limited. If you cant see the benefits of a ship having the majority of its slots focused into its primary tank then, Im sorry but your beyond all hope of help. 5 mid slots is plenty to fit a prop mod 3 projection mods and still have a slot left over for utility, on the lows a 4/3 tank/dps spread is preferable to a 4/2 or 3/3.


I would like to offer my opinion on this matter.

A truly versaltile ship, should have neither tank nor weapon bonuses and a slot layout to support this (read 8 weapon slots and a big enough drone bay). In it's current incarnation, the Nestor does not fullfill any of these. And it should not, since - as someone already mentioned - it is not a SOCT ship and also has a suggestive role as exploration ship. I actually don't even like the idea to base a non Jovian ship on this concept.
Also, let's not forget that it does have a 4% resist bonus per level, which is better than a lowslot filled with a T2 eanm... not saying the Nestor would not benefit from a 7th lowslot regardless, though.

That being said of course, still think it needs something that makes it better than another ship at something, preferably actual exploration. Even if it will end up as a boring Dominix substitute, it needs to actually perform better than that and I am hard pressed to believe that more reps than a RR Dominix is what makes people choose the Nestor instead, because the Dominix has just plain better application.

And to the one guy who was excited about this battleship "logi platform", I say read through the stats again and adjust your feelings.

.
Roy Alleyne
Dark Knowledge.
#1689 - 2013-12-31 07:18:12 UTC
Joker Dronemaster wrote:
Roy Alleyne wrote:
I believe the slot layout is intentionally set up for a nonspecific tank. The ambiguous layout provides for multiple potential fitting styles and potential for flexible combinations. Just because it doesn't cater to your limited EFT Fu does not mean it should be changed. With this layout you can choose any two of these with ease: dps, application, tank. If you can't see how those options mesh then you just need to think outside the box and see the truth of what this Internet spaceship can do.


My EFT Fu is not the one that is limited. If you cant see the benefits of a ship having the majority of its slots focused into its primary tank then, Im sorry but your beyond all hope of help. 5 mid slots is plenty to fit a prop mod 3 projection mods and still have a slot left over for utility, on the lows a 4/3 tank/dps spread is preferable to a 4/2 or 3/3.


It would be beneficial to the ship to have an extra low and I can see that it does not need that 6th mid. However, it does not need to change it's layout as you can already get a 4/3 tank/dps split if you count the 4% resist bonus, the rest of he SoE line is still very effective in their niche with the same line of slots, and the extra mids may be needed for cap mods to run RR, dual props, or any number of options that benefit from having plenty of mid slots. My point is that a single slot either way is not suddenly going to make this ship useful for anything so we need to focus on changes that will give it a niche of it's own.

Joker Dronemaster wrote:
Roy Alleyne wrote:
That said, if you had read the thread you would already know that the ship falls short in any traditional role and, unlike the Stratios and Astero, has very limited use in even untraditional niche roles. While most people understand that this ship will never be effective as a traditional ship, a number of options have been discussed in order to allow it to fill niche roles effectively.


And if you had read the thread you would already know i have already weighed in on several of those discussions. K, thanks, BYE!


I had forgotten that you were the instigator behind the 100 bonuses thing. After looking back at your post history, I liked your first post on this thread asking when BlOps would be fixed. Since then, you have contributed little constructive input to the discussion. If you are going to post on a thread, then post constructively and objectively. Don't get bent all out of shape when you think someone is attacking your honor when they are actually trying to provide a counter point to your argument to either bring out its potential or clear it away for stronger ones to be tested.
Celia Therone
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1690 - 2013-12-31 07:44:43 UTC
Savira Terrant wrote:
Also, let's not forget that it does have a 4% resist bonus per level, which is better than a lowslot filled with a T2 eanm... not saying the Nestor would not benefit from a 7th lowslot regardless, though.

Who is going to buy a 2+ billion isk hull and not spring for a 70 million isk imperial navy eanm though?

A 3 slot Nestor armor tank is strictly worse than a 4 slot domi tank, giving them both 3 lows for added damage. I just double checked and the domi appears to only tank 1 less dps (cap not considered) if you're using t2 eanms... (This is using the Abaddon as a comparison base as it has 4% armor and you can use 6 slots to tank- the Nestor's base resistances haven't been published as far as I know though.)

In fact it looks like the sweet spot where the Nestor tanks better than a domi is when it uses a 5+ slot tank vs a domi with a 6+ slot tank (both one active repairer.) Anything less than that and the reactive armor hardener seems to give the dominix an edge.)

So if you fit 2 damage mods to both ships then the domi will have a better tank. If you fit one damage mod to each ship and dual rep then the domi has a better tank.

That is just tragically sad.

My EFT fu is weak though, so perhaps I missed something?
Joker Dronemaster
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1691 - 2013-12-31 09:45:57 UTC  |  Edited by: Joker Dronemaster
Celia Therone wrote:
My EFT fu is weak though, so perhaps I missed something?


Remote Rep potential.

You have to consider the optimal use of the ship. Not how you specifically would use it; and this ship is designed to be used with other people on field (or lets just be honest and admit alts). An optimal Nestor setup would have it paired with another Nestor. Little busy with housework atm if someone wants to run those numbers.

EDIT: Screw housework...........

Using an Angel damage profile (worst case for armor tankers) i was able to get a 1583 DPS tank for the Nestor with a 3/3 tank/dps spread using 2 large t2 reps. A Dominix gets 1705 with a 4/3 split and 3 large t2 Remote reps. Anything more than 1500 DPS tank and your overtanking even for high end complexes (with a few exceptions).

2 Dominixs can tank exploration content just as well as 2 Nestors, apply damage more effectively, and costs a fraction of what the Nestor does.

Why am I going to pay 1.5 to 2 billion isk for a lateral shift in ship efficiency?
Celia Therone
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#1692 - 2013-12-31 10:10:52 UTC
Joker Dronemaster wrote:
Celia Therone wrote:
My EFT fu is weak though, so perhaps I missed something?


Remote Rep potential.

You have to consider the optimal use of the ship. Not how you specifically would use it and this ship is designed to be used with other people on field (or lets just be honest and admit alts). An optimal Nestor setup would have it paired with another Nestor. Little busy with housework atm if someone wants to run those numbers.

It seems distinctly odd that for the vast majority of use cases that a pirate hull with an armor bonus is less good at tanking than a t1 hull without an armor bonus, let alone a t1 hull with an armor bonus that has 7 lows.

Is pairing nestors up really something to get excited about? An RR domi with slightly less effective drone range/damage application and slightly more repping power? (And either a minimally better tank and worse damage or a worse tank and the same damage?) All for seven times the cost. Or more.
Joker Dronemaster
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1693 - 2013-12-31 10:12:50 UTC
LOL Read my edit. I decided the dishes can wait...........
Adoris Nolen
Sama Guild
#1694 - 2013-12-31 11:35:05 UTC
Get rid of the Energy turret bonus/etc, ADD Drone range/tracking bonus & ability to fit those drone control units.
I am disposable
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1695 - 2013-12-31 12:23:52 UTC
Joker Dronemaster wrote:

Why am I going to pay 1.5 to 2 billion isk for a lateral shift in ship efficiency?


Because you have more money than sense, and prefer the aesthetics of a handheld blender to that of a shoe?
Savira Terrant
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1696 - 2013-12-31 15:54:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Savira Terrant
Celia Therone wrote:
Savira Terrant wrote:
Also, let's not forget that it does have a 4% resist bonus per level, which is better than a lowslot filled with a T2 eanm... not saying the Nestor would not benefit from a 7th lowslot regardless, though.

Who is going to buy a 2+ billion isk hull and not spring for a 70 million isk imperial navy eanm though?

A 3 slot Nestor armor tank is strictly worse than a 4 slot domi tank, giving them both 3 lows for added damage. I just double checked and the domi appears to only tank 1 less dps (cap not considered) if you're using t2 eanms... (This is using the Abaddon as a comparison base as it has 4% armor and you can use 6 slots to tank- the Nestor's base resistances haven't been published as far as I know though.)

In fact it looks like the sweet spot where the Nestor tanks better than a domi is when it uses a 5+ slot tank vs a domi with a 6+ slot tank (both one active repairer.) Anything less than that and the reactive armor hardener seems to give the dominix an edge.)

So if you fit 2 damage mods to both ships then the domi will have a better tank. If you fit one damage mod to each ship and dual rep then the domi has a better tank.

That is just tragically sad.

My EFT fu is weak though, so perhaps I missed something?


Expect the same damage profile the Stratios has.

So, stacking penalty vs omni damage will stand in the way of that. Even balancing the resists by using a reactive armor hardener does not change that. There may be a case where having a slot more beats the resist bonus, if you fit against Thermal/Explo (30defense more), but there is no such NPC as far as I am aware and PVP would benefit more from overal balanced resists. On top of that is is not passive.


@Cecilia: Normaly spending 2 bil on a hull means it has something nice going for it and does not necessarily need more tank. In case of the current Nestor the question is rather bewildering, because I would never pay a billion for it, let alone use it for something.
@Roy: Please let's not forget that lowslots can just as easily - in the case of armor tanking even more so - be used for cap modules.

.
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Itsukame-Zainou Hyperspatial Inquiries Ltd.
Arataka Research Consortium
#1697 - 2013-12-31 16:37:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
It could be 7-5-7, but then it's just a Domi with an extra high slot. It does need a better way to fit a tank while still being able to deal damage, though- the ship will have to sacrifice tank for DPS in any situation.

First. maybe we could shift the RR bonus to Armor rep drones instead- free up the high slots and give the pilot a choice between drone DPS or rep.

I still think a ship like this should at least have a jump drive- it'd fit the "exploration" theme but still make it really useful. And really. it'll already be MORE expensive than a Black Ops, so this would be absolutely reasonable.

Don't give it other Blops bonuses, just add a jump drive.

Also, a MJD activation time bonus or +2 warp core strength would make the ship actually possible to fly more effectively..

I keep seeing this as a ship that can move around very effectively- as it is, the ship won't do any better than any other ship- it'll really not be worth it unless there's a change that makes it good to fly.

That said, I'll fly one anyhow.

But the Nestor should have stats a little like this in my (humble) opinion:

Amarr BS Bonus:
4% bonus to armor resists per level

Gallente BS Bonus:
10% bonus to drone damage and hitpoints per level

Role Bonuses:
100% bonus to armor repair drone effectiveness
50% bonus to large energy turret and drone optimal range
50% increased strength for scan probes
+15 virus strength for relic and data analyzers
50% reduction to micro jump drive activation time

(has a Jump Drive)

Slots: 7H, 6M, 6L; 5 turrets, 0 launchers
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 85km / 115 / 7
Fittings: 15250 PWG, 680 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 8900 / 9950 / 9900
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 6200 / 1044 / 5.9
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 92 / .18 / 56000000 / 13.97
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 500
Sensor strength: 24 Magnetometric
Signature radius: 465
Cargo Capacity: 825
Fuel Bay Capacity: 1250

"A City made of Dreams is built in heaven"
Savira Terrant
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#1698 - 2013-12-31 23:51:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Savira Terrant
Hey Uriel,

shifting to drone reps I like very much as you might know. I just would not like it as a role bonus. I'd rather have two racial bonuses each, than having a freaking huge list of rolebonuses...

I am also all about the jumpdrive, but if it get's one I don't think it would need an MJD activation delay bonus. What did you envision to do with it? Or did you mean reactivation bonus? The latter would make it perfect for DED sites, so long as we are unable to jump directly to the next gate.


Adoris Nolen wrote:
Get rid of the Energy turret bonus/etc, ADD Drone range/tracking bonus & ability to fit those drone control units.


I'd say the opposite. Remove the drone damage bonus. Give it a 100% turret bonus, only four turrets slots and change the range bonus to a tracking bonus per level amarr bs. Than has two highs left to make sure the rep drones are not out of drone control range when using the MJD.


So my proposal for the bonuses:

Amarr:
4% armor resist bonus per level
7.5% tracking bonus per level

Gallente:
20% to speed and armor tranfer amount of drones per level
15% reduction of MJD reactivation delay per level (I know it is a little awkward as Gallente bonus, but makes sense when looking at the lore, with Duvolle Laboratories being the last hands-on corporation for this tech)

Role:
100% bonus to energy weapon damage
useless exploration bonuses (should be substituted with a jumpdrive)

.
Joker Dronemaster
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#1699 - 2014-01-01 03:43:38 UTC
I am disposable wrote:
Joker Dronemaster wrote:

Why am I going to pay 1.5 to 2 billion isk for a lateral shift in ship efficiency?


Because you have more money than sense, and prefer the aesthetics of a handheld blender to that of a shoe?


Unfortunately neither of those things are true.............
I am disposable
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#1700 - 2014-01-01 04:09:51 UTC
Savira Terrant wrote:
Hey Uriel,

shifting to drone reps I like very much as you might know. I just would not like it as a role bonus. I'd rather have two racial bonuses each, than having a freaking huge list of rolebonuses...

I am also all about the jumpdrive, but if it get's one I don't think it would need an MJD activation delay bonus. What did you envision to do with it? Or did you mean reactivation bonus? The latter would make it perfect for DED sites, so long as we are unable to jump directly to the next gate.


Adoris Nolen wrote:
Get rid of the Energy turret bonus/etc, ADD Drone range/tracking bonus & ability to fit those drone control units.


I'd say the opposite. Remove the drone damage bonus. Give it a 100% turret bonus, only four turrets slots and change the range bonus to a tracking bonus per level amarr bs. Than has two highs left to make sure the rep drones are not out of drone control range when using the MJD.


So my proposal for the bonuses:

Amarr:
4% armor resist bonus per level
7.5% tracking bonus per level

Gallente:
20% to speed and armor tranfer amount of drones per level
15% reduction of MJD reactivation delay per level (I know it is a little awkward as Gallente bonus, but makes sense when looking at the lore, with Duvolle Laboratories being the last hands-on corporation for this tech)

Role:
100% bonus to energy weapon damage
useless exploration bonuses (should be substituted with a jumpdrive)


Pirate faction ships only get one bonus for each racial ship skill.