These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

"Berzerker"-class Anti-Capital Ship T2 Battleship
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
scimichar
Deep Hole Explorers of New Eden
#61 - 2014-03-15 23:37:31 UTC
Chusa Unholy wrote:
There is a very important role in the EVE microcosm that is completely vacant. There are no sub-capital ships specifically designed to kill capital ships,..


Tempest. Thread over.
Damien White
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#62 - 2014-03-15 23:42:58 UTC
Actually, there are already cheap, easy to train anjd mobile sub capital ships designed as dedicated Capital hunters.

Tornado
Oracle
Naga
Talos


And we have a class of ships whose whole purpose is the fighting and destroying of Capitals as well as Structures, they are called Dreadnoughts.

97% of girls would die if Justin Bieber were about to jump off a cliff. Post this in your sig if you`re part of the 3% yelling,

"DO A BARREL ROLL!"
Chusa Unholy
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#63 - 2014-03-16 02:06:19 UTC
scimichar wrote:
Chusa Unholy wrote:
There is a very important role in the EVE microcosm that is completely vacant. There are no sub-capital ships specifically designed to kill capital ships,..


Tempest. Thread over.


Sub-caps can kill capital ships. Collect your internet prize on your way out the virtual door.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#64 - 2014-03-16 02:25:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Chusa Unholy wrote:
scimichar wrote:
Chusa Unholy wrote:
There is a very important role in the EVE microcosm that is completely vacant. There are no sub-capital ships specifically designed to kill capital ships,..


Tempest. Thread over.


Sub-caps can kill capital ships. Collect your internet prize on your way out the virtual door.

You seem to have solved your own problem without knowing it.
Chusa Unholy
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#65 - 2014-03-16 02:51:45 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Chusa Unholy wrote:
scimichar wrote:
Chusa Unholy wrote:
There is a very important role in the EVE microcosm that is completely vacant. There are no sub-capital ships specifically designed to kill capital ships,..


Tempest. Thread over.


Sub-caps can kill capital ships. Collect your internet prize on your way out the virtual door.

You seem to have solved your own problem without knowing it.


Rookie ships can kill battleships.

Shall we abandon all ships besides pods and Ibises?
HiddenPorpoise
Jarlhettur's Drop
United Federation of Conifers
#66 - 2014-03-16 03:35:04 UTC
Rookie ships have never killed a Titan in 50 (non tidi) seconds by pushing it out of a pos while no one was looking though.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#67 - 2014-03-16 04:23:01 UTC
I like the idea, and I think it is well thought out. I'd give them less ancillary weapon power though. They look like they're designed to be fielded alone, but I'm pretty sure that's a bad idea. They should have a powerful subcap support fleet along with them. They may as well use all 8 high slots for primary weapons, so they'd be forced to lose DPS in order to fit anything else in the top. I also disagree a bit with the high calibration. If you want them to have the ability to fit two damage rigs, why don't you give them a larger damage bonus instead of the calibration? Tech II ships aren't supposed to be very flexible, that's why they have less rig slots and (sometimes) less calibration, among other things.

I like the ammo bay a lot. It would be neat if the ships had a really high rate of fire so they burn through ammo really fast. It would make it more expensive for them to use faction ammo. It wouldn't be a huge price increase considering the cost of the ship but it would make their impact on the ammo market much more significant. It might also get some fleets to carry an ammo industrial along on strat ops--which also would get those Hoarders to undock more often. You could accomplish this by giving them a 50% rate of fire role bonus and changing the skill bonuses to +15% damage and +5% rate of fire (for 8 weapons). This way they will burn through ammo 2.67x as fast as an attack battlecruiser, and their ammo bay will become more important to them.



Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Likely cheaper price after insurance
I rather doubt that, especially considering most people probably don't insure their dreadnoughts to platinum very often. You wouldn't normally send a dreadnought fleet into a fight if you expected to lose the majority of them.

However that does raise an interesting point. Perhaps rather than make these into tech 2 ships, they could be a special purpose minicapital, about the size of an Orca but with otherwise basically the same attributes. Maybe they could have a larger sig radius than a battleship but also more HP, just as long as they are still hard for dreadnoughts to shoot down. The primary benefit would be that their cost would be mainly from the basic 7 minerals, so you could insure them and cut your losses. This would further expand their roles to include going into suicidal fights, which let's face it, a lot of capital brawls are.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#68 - 2014-03-16 04:35:44 UTC
Chusa Unholy wrote:
Rookie ships can kill battleships.

Shall we abandon all ships besides pods and Ibises?

Why would we need to? Your post is about the apparent need for a subcapital ship to kill dreads, because you say there is no ship to fill this role. There are ships to fill this role. They already exist and perform their tasks.

I don't see what distinction you were trying to make there. Enough frigates can kill a battleship, enough battleships can kill a capital, enough capitals (or battleships) can kill a supercapital.
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#69 - 2014-03-16 04:36:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Rowells
Damn forums doin weird ****

(double post)
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#70 - 2014-03-16 04:44:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:

I like the ammo bay a lot. It would be neat if the ships had a really high rate of fire so they burn through ammo really fast. It would make it more expensive for them to use faction ammo. It wouldn't be a huge price increase considering the cost of the ship but it would make their impact on the ammo market much more significant.

Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Likely cheaper price after insurance
I rather doubt that, especially considering most people probably don't insure their dreadnoughts to platinum very often. You wouldn't normally send a dreadnought fleet into a fight if you expected to lose the majority of them.

*scratches head*

Extra special no comment. With a side order of complete bafflement.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2014-03-16 05:28:12 UTC
Rowells wrote:
Chusa Unholy wrote:
scimichar wrote:
Chusa Unholy wrote:
There is a very important role in the EVE microcosm that is completely vacant. There are no sub-capital ships specifically designed to kill capital ships,..


Tempest. Thread over.


Sub-caps can kill capital ships. Collect your internet prize on your way out the virtual door.

You seem to have solved your own problem without knowing it.
You're confusing CAN and DESIGNED FOR. I guess since several badgers can kill a vagabond, anyone who wants to hunt a vagabond should get fleetmates into badgers.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#72 - 2014-03-16 05:39:42 UTC
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
You're confusing CAN and DESIGNED FOR. I guess since several badgers can kill a vagabond, anyone who wants to hunt a vagabond should get fleetmates into badgers.

Certain ships do specialize in certain areas but like your example with the badgers, you don't necessarily have to follow their intended uses to get the desired results. Not that it isn't already common logic to bring heavy tanking, high dps ships that most people can us: your everyday T1 Battleships. The ships doesn't need to have the name "Anti-Capital Ship" for it to be used in such a way. I doubt dreads were ever designed with PVE purposes in mind, but there are people who use them effectively in wormholes.

We don't need a ship to have special bonuses against capital ships when there already are ships that can and do get the job done.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#73 - 2014-03-16 05:51:56 UTC
Ah but I think the OP makes a wonderful point, that subcap DPS tends to be a little lacking when it comes to fielding what you need to kill capitals. And of course they will fall short when they have the tracking that they have. The OP's proposal is both simple and sane: cut their tracking and boost their DPS--then you will have a ship that makes capitals easier to shoot down with subcapitals.

I like it and I don't get what the opposition to it is all about.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Kasenumi Ozuwara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#74 - 2014-03-16 06:33:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Kasenumi Ozuwara
I propose a dreadnaught like counterpart to this ship.

The Herblewerfer. It Werfs Herbles.

It would have 8 highslots with 8 large turret hardpoints.

Role Bonus: 100% Tracking Bonus, 50% Optimal Bonus, + 500% ammo capacity (+10% damage for Amarr) 800% Scan Resolution Bonus (Or whatever is needed to get it on par with a BS).

(When using Siege) -10% gun cycle time per level, 125% damage bonus per level.

Because let's face it. If you have the technology to mount most of a dreadnaughts worth of slow tracking firepower onto a BS for a specialized anti-capital role, being able to mount quite a few BS's worth of fast tracking firepower onto a dreadnaught for a specialized anti subcap role should be simple and easy. Why not mount a giant minigun to a dreadnaught after all?

Of course it will have all the typical Dread tanking bonus in siege, and all the typical buffer and mid/lowslots of the racial dreadnaught.

Oh it will only have about 6K dps, a good 40% drop in DPS from a normal dread, but it will be able to precisely apply it within slightly larger than normal large gun range, casually swatting cruisers and BS's out of space.

It's a perfectly reasonable ship. Right?

Right? If you disagree, state your reasons, then state why those same reasons can not be used to argue that an anti-capital subcap is equally toxic to gameplay.
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#75 - 2014-03-16 07:06:00 UTC
Kasenumi Ozuwara wrote:
Because let's face it. If you have the technology to mount most of a dreadnaughts worth of slow tracking firepower onto a BS for a specialized anti-capital role, being able to mount quite a few BS's worth of fast tracking firepower onto a dreadnaught for a specialized anti subcap role should be simple and easy. Why not mount a giant minigun to a dreadnaught after all?
Because that goes against the spirit of EVE ship design. The OP's proposal is rather in keeping with it, on the other hand.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Kasenumi Ozuwara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#76 - 2014-03-16 07:24:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Kasenumi Ozuwara
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Kasenumi Ozuwara wrote:
Because let's face it. If you have the technology to mount most of a dreadnaughts worth of slow tracking firepower onto a BS for a specialized anti-capital role, being able to mount quite a few BS's worth of fast tracking firepower onto a dreadnaught for a specialized anti subcap role should be simple and easy. Why not mount a giant minigun to a dreadnaught after all?
Because that goes against the spirit of EVE ship design. The OP's proposal is rather in keeping with it, on the other hand.


Really? And here I thought that EVE had some odd designs about heavy tradeoffs for specialization?

A Stealth bomber gets lots of DPS and a cloak, but is exceptionally flimsy, dying in a few seconds to even another frig.
A Dreadnaught gets tons of offense and defense, but has to remain immobile while attacking.
A Supercarrier does tons of damage, can move while attacking, but is ineffective vs anything below a capital, and can't be insured.
A Tier 3 BC can fit large guns, but is exceptionally flimsy, and (excepting the Talos) typically unable to reliably engage small ships. Even here the DPS is only comparable with a ship one size step up.

But this ship does a large chunk of a Drednaughts damage, without the downsides of immobility or massive price, can still effectively deal with other BS class ships while dealing huge damage, is cheap, mobile, insurable, with the alpha levels 3x or more a gank fit BS, and 5 times the DPS.

It has as much tank as a Megathron, a third the DPS of an excellent faction fit Moros, the Alpha of three Maelstroms on a cycle time half of a Maelstrom.

It's "downside" is that it's weak to small ships. No ****? Just like every other long range BS in the game? Imagine that.

This ship is far far outside the spirit of EVE's Ship designs because it's frankly awesome at everything you would want to use it for. Fit it for brawling, fit it for sniping, fit it for destroying caps. Fit it for POS bashing. Fit it for destroying everything in your path with the ease with a bit of support.

Deal only 20% of your damage to a cruiser? Noooo Problem! Cause you do 5x as much damage as a BS before that reduction!
Got that enemy BS at 50Km Painted with a Hughin? Alpha it with 6 people! Pesky carrier not dying? Poor thing. Alpha it with 50 people!

Have a pesky Cap fleet? Good thing the Minmatar one has 30K alpha on a 10 second cycle! Just Blap your worries away!
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#77 - 2014-03-16 07:33:19 UTC
Do you notice something that's missing from that list of ships with heavy tradeoffs? It's the one that can tank the DPS of ships a size up while blapping ships a size down really easily. All the ships that blap ships smaller than them are either weak to ships their own size and larger, or they are catching their targets at a time when they have low angular velocity.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Kasenumi Ozuwara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#78 - 2014-03-16 07:41:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Kasenumi Ozuwara
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
Do you notice something that's missing from that list of ships with heavy tradeoffs? It's the one that can tank the DPS of ships a size up while blapping ships a size down really easily. All the ships that blap ships smaller than them are either weak to ships their own size and larger, or they are catching their targets at a time when they have low angular velocity.

Nor any that can deal 5x as much as any other ship in the same size class with only slightly higher drawbacks than the other ships possess. While having tanks and mobility on par with any other ship in the class.

Or are there any BC's with the tank of a Harbinger, and the speed / 5x as much damage as a Brutix running around I never noticed?
I'd love me some 150k EHP, 2.5k DPS BC's. Yum. Of course, they would track slightly less than a normal BC. And they would easily do full damage to BS's. And most of their damage to other BC's with a TP or two applied.

But they would still be balanced. Because they are ineffective vs frigates.

RIGHT?
Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2014-03-16 07:45:09 UTC
I don't think you understood the OP's proposal very well. Do you know how signature resolution works?

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."
Kasenumi Ozuwara
State War Academy
Caldari State
#80 - 2014-03-16 07:53:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Kasenumi Ozuwara
Reaver Glitterstim wrote:
I don't think you understood the OP's proposal very well. Do you know how signature resolution works?

Quite well.

Do I know that if I put a few painters on the target of a tracking dread dropped into a fleet fight, It can blap BS's in a few shots, despite them being a smaller ship? I do.

And if I can do that on an immobile massive ship with ships that have half the tracking and 5x the scan resolution of a large gun BS, can do it far far easier on a mobile ship that has double-triple the tracking, only 4x the scan resolution of a large gun, and a third of the DPS of a dread? I most certainly can. Especially considering they cost around 1/6 - 1/3rdth the cost of a blap dread.

It wold be glorious. They would be the ultimate anti-BS fleet. Capable of alphaing past even the largest of BS buffers with less than 10 ships, with enough painters to light up the targets like a Christmas tree. Logistics would be useless against them.

And of course, should anyone try and do something as foolish as bring capitals onto the field, they would be dealt with in short order by the overwhelming DPS and alpha.

TLDR: Broken as hell.