These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New ship/class idea - Sun birds

Author
Liet Ormand
Sons of Bacchus
#1 - 2014-12-29 21:30:38 UTC
Last night while playing I noticed that really all the ships in Eve have a lot in common... they all work the same way, with infinite fuel and varying capabilities depending on module and pilot, the ships in each class are almost (not quite, but almost) identical as far as capabilities, with relatively minor differences in fits, armor, slots, etc. This aids in CCP balancing the various ship types, of course.

But how about something *really* different?


I propose a new type of ship (or ships) on which most ship's systems are based on the concept of extremely high energy use. These ships could be balanced like existing ships and tiered like them, but rather than balancing power use with cap/grid limits they would draw all energy from a rapidly draining, refillable, shielded "tank" which provides huge amounts of power for their use.

How would they fill the tank? By diving into the nearest star and harvesting matter :)

Once the tank is full, the ships could move throughout systems and warp like other ships, but their other systems would be rather different. An example would be weapons.

Weapons on one of these ships would work by drawing matter from the stellar mass tank and projecting it at a target. Each shot would be very powerful, more so than existing weapons for the same class of ship, but would have very limited "ammunition" since they draw from the tank. This would dramatically change how they would be used against other ships, because simply targeting a ship and permitting the guns to fire until they're dry wouldn't work... the capsuleer would have to limit active firing to the ranges and situations where the weapons would hit and do damage. Additionally, recklessly drawing down the tank to 0 mass would not only stop the guns from firing but would also lower the shields and power down any other system that was powered by stellar matter, sort of like bottoming out caps in the current ships, but worse. No doubt this would not be a ship type for newbros, or for those who like easy to fly ships.

The tanks would not be huge, for example a frigate might be able to fire ten to fifteen blasts from its cannons before running out of energy. Each blast might be sufficient to one-shot a frigate that does not have resists and three to destroy a destroyer, but the weapons should be balanced with regard to accuracy and other limits... they should have very short range and a slow fire rate in addition to the "ammo" limitation described above.

A pilot in a ship like this would have to behave differently. If they got jumped in a wormhole with a less than full tank, they would have a choice... warp out and escape, or head for the star? In any system, should someone with this ship spend all their time near the star, just in case of attack?

In addition to the differences due to refueling and weapons mechanics, there should be some good advantages to such a ship. For example, the availability of all that energy should make a specialized mining rig possible, maybe permitting high yields of certain limited ore types or gases, but requiring refueling trips mid-mining... perhaps these ships could be used to harvest material directly from stars, too. Maybe they could mount a special high yield tractor beam able to move asteroids around, or perhaps they would have available a special shield that would be impenetrable, but would drain 1% of the tank every second? What POS structures could be fueled by collected stellar matter?

One final suggestion for this ship class... when these ships are destroyed, their fuel tanks would be breached, and I think it would be appropriate for the fuel this liberates to at least glow and preferably detonate when this happens :)

There are a lot of possibilities for having ships that break the standard mold, and they'd add a lot of variety to game play. I'd like to see some in New Eden.

Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#2 - 2014-12-29 21:33:26 UTC
You see nothing wrong with ships having the ability to oneshot their own ship class?
Foxicity
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#3 - 2014-12-29 21:48:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Foxicity
Players will develop tactics to perform massive hit and run alpha strikes in packs to gank superior conventional forces.

What's their weakness? Short battery life isn't enough. I can see the CODE even now, using it. Warp in to gank, didn't land on target, warp out. Did land on target, blap blap super gank no skills needed.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#4 - 2014-12-29 22:19:59 UTC
Suicide ganks on Jita 4-4 undock with super alpha AND bombs on death.
How could this possibly go wrong ever.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#5 - 2014-12-29 22:32:09 UTC
I think every person who wants to present an idea here has to ask themselves three simple questions:

- In what ways can I use this idea to cause maximum chaos and damage with minimal effort?

- How does this not obsolete or "take away" from the "old" things/mechanics?

- Why?
Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2014-12-30 00:19:36 UTC
I believe I read somewhere that Amarr has the most advanced drive for their engines, since they were the first to reinvent space flight... and how Minmatar use nuclear reactors that use Plutionium for energy.
To mare
Advanced Technology
#7 - 2014-12-30 05:48:25 UTC
Celthric Kanerian wrote:
I believe I read somewhere that Amarr has the most advanced drive for their engines, since they were the first to reinvent space flight... and how Minmatar use nuclear reactors that use Plutionium for energy.


because small efficent engine doesnt make you go faster than big primitive ones.
amarr use more of their tonnage for armor plates/capacitor stuff while minmatar ship are pretty much big engines with some some scraps of metal and guns ducktaped on them with some shield as a protection.
Liet Ormand
Sons of Bacchus
#8 - 2014-12-30 19:02:15 UTC
Quote:
I think every person who wants to present an idea here has to ask themselves three simple questions:

- In what ways can I use this idea to cause maximum chaos and damage with minimal effort?

- How does this not obsolete or "take away" from the "old" things/mechanics?

- Why?



I generally agree, although if you think not "taking away" from old mechanics is a requirement for new features, I think you're in for a very upsetting future playing Eve. The game will have to change to keep things fresh and keep attracting players.

I also think that every person who wants to criticize an idea here should consider these:

- Am I having an emotional response to this idea and posting justification for my feelings instead of evaluating the idea fairly?

- Am I making assumptions about how this idea would be implemented that would produce a negative outcome, or is the idea itself fundamentally flawed?

- Am I criticizing the idea harshly because of dogma I hold, which includes things like not wanting any changes to happen in game because I currently enjoy it, despite the fact that long term not changing things might cause more problems?


..... snarkiness aside, here are some basic responses to what people have posted so far.


Quote:
You see nothing wrong with ships having the ability to oneshot their own ship class?


Well, these ships wouldn't have the ability to oneshot similar variants (obviously if their hulls are protected so they can refuel, then their weapons won't work on their own hulls) but assuming you mean frigate vs. frigate or similar, then I don't have a problem with it in limited circumstances, no. Certainly the ability would have to be tweaked or altered so it doesn't cause a problem, like for instance requiring perfect conditions for max damage, or a stationary target, or maybe shields down first. With great power comes great limitations.

Quote:

What's their weakness? Short battery life isn't enough. I can see the CODE even now, using it. Warp in to gank, didn't land on target, warp out. Did land on target, blap blap super gank no skills needed.


That's an easy one... how about eg. for "Sciency" reasons the tank of fuel can't be taken into warp, or only a limited amount of fuel can be. First stop for any of these ships in any system is the star, can't use weapons until refueling happens.


Quote:
Suicide ganks on Jita 4-4 undock with super alpha AND bombs on death.
How could this possibly go wrong ever.


It's pretty easy to think of situations for any idea where it could go wrong. The fact that if implemented improperly any game change can create problems isn't exactly news to anyone playing this game. Have some faith in CCP, and instead of thinking of situations where it would be a problem if stupidly implemented, try to imagine situations in which it would improve gameplay.

Certainly there would need to be an in-game reason for this tech. It's not terribly uncommon in the real world for a major single technology that would be a huge advantage in naval ships to not be used because it has a huge drawback in another area. Also sometimes there are great ideas that stay on the drawing board for decades because one crucial part is missing or not practical. Maybe all the empires always wanted ships powering themselves from stars but could never figure out how to build hulls that resist stellar plasma until a sleeper cache was uncovered. Maybe one of the tribal corps made a breakthrough discovery in a lab on the outer rim. Lots of ways to explain it.

Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#9 - 2014-12-30 21:17:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Liet Ormand wrote:

It's pretty easy to think of situations for any idea where it could go wrong. The fact that if implemented improperly any game change can create problems isn't exactly news to anyone playing this game. Have some faith in CCP, and instead of thinking of situations where it would be a problem if stupidly implemented, try to imagine situations in which it would improve gameplay.

You realize peer review works partly by suggesting ways for improvement and partly by punching big gaping holes in the weak parts of any proposal?

And your idea has at this time more holes that a basketball net.

You don't just get to hand-wave away everyone's criticism of your idea as "Have faith CCP won't **** it up" and "Don't be negative about how the current outline would be horribly abused"

You propose an idea. We tell you why it won't work. You then fix those aspects and we rinse and repeat until we have a workable product. And your idea in anywhere near the current form, will not work.

Short endurance in a fight is nowhere near big enough a tradeoff for being able to deal massive damage with single shots capable of killing same class ships in one blow, or having invincible shields, or super high mining yields, or any of the other crack pipe proposals that are somehow balanced.

"I blap your equally sized fleet in 1-3 shots, but then I have to go refuel at the sun, and that makes it balanced"

No
Liet Ormand
Sons of Bacchus
#10 - 2014-12-30 21:32:06 UTC
Anhenka wrote:
Liet Ormand wrote:

It's pretty easy to think of situations for any idea where it could go wrong. The fact that if implemented improperly any game change can create problems isn't exactly news to anyone playing this game. Have some faith in CCP, and instead of thinking of situations where it would be a problem if stupidly implemented, try to imagine situations in which it would improve gameplay.

You realize peer review works partly by suggesting ways for improvement and partly by punching big gaping holes in the weak parts of any proposal?



Yes, which is why I find the following....


Quote:

You propose an idea. We tell you why it won't work. You then fix those aspects and we rinse and repeat until we have a workable product. And your idea in anywhere near the current form, will not work.



to be even more amusing, because you're not following your own advice.

II don't see anywhere you're specifically pointing out what won't work or suggestions for improving the idea, but rather you're just saying "Won't work because it's OP". I also did address specifically most of the concerns brought up so far in my other post above.





baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#11 - 2014-12-30 21:58:39 UTC
Firepower of a dread in a cruiser hull... Yep, that wont go **** up.
Tiddle Jr
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#12 - 2014-12-30 22:06:48 UTC
There are still some old gaps exist, which should be fixed before any new ship class to be developed added.

Still are missing faction / pirate destroyers. Pirate battlecruisers.

We have Apotheosis & Gnosis, but nothing between them.

Tier 3 T2 Battleship, none.

Sisters of Eve destroyer.

What else i could of think of?

"The message is that there are known knowns. There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know" - CCP

Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#13 - 2014-12-30 22:07:09 UTC
Liet Ormand wrote:

That's an easy one... how about eg. for "Sciency" reasons the tank of fuel can't be taken into warp, or only a limited amount of fuel can be. First stop for any of these ships in any system is the star, can't use weapons until refueling happens.


So it's only horribly overpowered when used in system defense, or gatecamping, or if you get there first? This is a really poor excuse for a downside. It's either far more powerful that anything it meets in it's own size if it's already fueled up, or completely useless.


Liet Ormand wrote:

Well, these ships wouldn't have the ability to oneshot similar variants (obviously if their hulls are protected so they can refuel, then their weapons won't work on their own hulls) but assuming you mean frigate vs. frigate or similar, then I don't have a problem with it in limited circumstances, no. Certainly the ability would have to be tweaked or altered so it doesn't cause a problem, like for instance requiring perfect conditions for max damage, or a stationary target, or maybe shields down first. With great power comes great limitations.


A frig should not blap a frig in one shot, even under specific conditions.

A certain range is easy to set up, either close or far away. No shields is easy to set up and based against armor frigs. Near stationary targets are easy to set up.

None of these are acceptable drawbacks for letting a ship deal alpha volley bursts many times higher than any other similarly sized hull can do even with max skills, largest weapons, and a rack of faction damage amps.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#14 - 2014-12-31 01:38:56 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Anhenka wrote:
A frig should not blap a frig in one shot, even under specific conditions.

Weeeelllll.... that's not exactly true.

An artillery-fit Wolf can do that.

But it has to make VERY deep tradeoffs in terms of tank, speed, and well... actually... a frigate (even an Assault Frig) being able to one/two-shot other frigates pretty much requires sacrificing all other aspects of the ship's fit.

As I say in other threads regarding fitting a ship:

Gank
Tank
Speed
Utility/Ewar

Chose 2.5 when fitting any ship.

I guess it is a good idea to also extend this paradigm to designing a new ship. After all... If a ship can do all of the above without a problem then a ship doesn't really have a true limitation**.


**In my book... a "limitation" is something that another ship can take advantage of. Longevity (or lack of thereof) is not really a good limitation as most frigate battles are over within mere seconds. The same is true for cruiser fights when active repping is not a factor.


Having the ability to do "artillery-style damage" while also being fast, tanky, and having some form of utility (like a warp disruptor) is just broken as a concept in terms of balance.

Liet Ormand wrote:
Have some faith in CCP, and instead of thinking of situations where it would be a problem if stupidly implemented, try to imagine situations in which it would improve gameplay.

...

boot.ini
Supercapital ships
the first ship balancing attempts (before Fozzie and Rise)
SOV mk1
SOV mk2
Faction Warfare mk1
Faction Warfare mk2
Faction Warfare mk2.5
Bounty System mk1
Bounty System mk2
The Dramiel
The "Autopilot Incident" (after visible in-space lines were introduced)

I could go on.
The takeaway from this is that CCP has a nasty tendency to get things VERY, VERY, VERY wrong because they consistently miscalculate (or even ignore) how devious and good we players are with numbers and min/maxing.

Mind you... having SOME faith is good. But you also have to see the hard reality and work on that basis too.

I have faith that CCP will produce interesting things in the coming year (what it is exactly, I'm not sure).
The hard reality is that it probably won't work out of the box and the DEVs have probably overlooked something very small that will result in mind-boggling issues (both economically and in terms of warfare) that will take weeks to work out (if they can be at all).


Liet Ormand wrote:
It's not terribly uncommon in the real world for a major single technology that would be a huge advantage in naval ships to not be used because it has a huge drawback in another area. Also sometimes there are great ideas that stay on the drawing board for decades because one crucial part is missing or not practical.

Welcome to EVE where...

- money is not a real limitation if there is enough of a tactical advantage to be gained (example: Titans and Supercarriers).

- "practicality" is in the eye of the beholder... especially if the "beholder" can throw minimum wage plebs or alt characters at the "problem"/"inefficiencies."

- players will do the most mind-numbing, tedious, and downright outrageous things to gain a small tangible edge over his/her enemies.

- everything has to be balanced in a Rochambeau-like style... lest it be used en mass and obsolete other ships currently in the game.

And that last point brings me to this point:
Liet Ormand wrote:
if you think not "taking away" from old mechanics is a requirement for new features, I think you're in for a very upsetting future playing Eve. The game will have to change to keep things fresh and keep attracting players.

Obsoleting old content and ships = power creep.

power creep = bad

The reason it is bad is because it does not help new players at all. In fact, it does the opposite by increasing the gap between older players and newer ones (people who understand how to take advantage of the new mechanics versus people who have to get used to the "old" ones).

We even have a "name" for this phenomena.

Malcanis' Law: Anything done for the benefit of younger, poorer players will invariably be of greater benefit for older, richer players.
Altirius Saldiaro
Doomheim
#15 - 2014-12-31 07:08:21 UTC
How about a new capital ship, sort of dread/ carrier hybrid, that can jump 20 LY, but has to refuel at the sun? Cannot be cloaked while refueling either. Can only deploy 5 drones/fighters max. Can fit cap weapons. No logistic bonuses. No triage or siege. Oh, and of course the best part, it doesn't use cynos to jump. It jumps to a solar systems sun, which basically is a giant cyno itself.

Design the Caldari version to look just like the Daedalaus from Stargate and Ill be happy.

^^will never happen, but fun to dream about it anyways.^^
Liet Ormand
Sons of Bacchus
#16 - 2014-12-31 15:28:50 UTC
Tiddle Jr wrote:
There are still some old gaps exist, which should be fixed before any new ship class to be developed added.

[deletions]
What else i could of think of?



I tentatively agree, but on the other hand many of the gaps and problems with older ships are subjective, and if the game waited for everyone to agree on them nothing would ever get added.

Liet Ormand
Sons of Bacchus
#17 - 2014-12-31 15:46:35 UTC
Anhenka wrote:

So it's only horribly overpowered when used in system defense, or gatecamping, or if you get there first? This is a really poor excuse for a downside. It's either far more powerful that anything it meets in it's own size if it's already fueled up, or completely useless.


Okay, so maybe limit the uses of the tank power... no weapons, for instance?

The idea is to create a ship type that for reasons must refuel to perform actions like other ships, with a benefit added to compensate for the fact that other ships don't have to refuel.


Quote:

A frig should not blap a frig in one shot, even under specific conditions.


I'm curious as to why you have this as a hard and fast rule. Certainly there are a lot of larger ships that have the ability to destroy other vessels in one shot, hence the high alpha builds out there.

Perhaps a solution would be to set weapon power so that each class can one shot the next lowest class? The reason I was using the example of a one-shot was that there should be a significant benefit to having to refuel to do things.

Quote:

A certain range is easy to set up, either close or far away. No shields is easy to set up and based against armor frigs. Near stationary targets are easy to set up.


True to a point, for some definitions of "easy". For most of the weapons in the game, there is an ideal situation in which they will do their best damage, and this proposal is no different.

Quote:

None of these are acceptable drawbacks for letting a ship deal alpha volley bursts many times higher than any other similarly sized hull can do even with max skills, largest weapons, and a rack of faction damage amps.


Okay.... so, setting aside weapons for a moment..... in fact let's go more abstract with this.

I think the game would benefit from more variety in ships, specifically in how ships fuel and use weapons... the best example in-game is hybrid weapons' ammo. Effectively it's as infinite as energy weapons' power because it's possible to carry a huge amount of rounds.

So I'm suggesting that a ship type be created with advantages over the existing ships in some significant way that balances out the fact that all the ships other than this type have effectively infinite ammo and no need to refuel. This ship would need to refuel which would give it a big disadvantage, so what's a good corresponding advantage?

What I'm trying to do by suggesting this is add lots of variety to play and combat... the more choices a player has, the better for the game (provided they're not trivial ones) so if players can choose to use a ship that needs fuel in exchange for a benefit, that means combat gets a lot of variety with new tactics required to handle the fact that some ships will need to keep combat short or take a break to refuel, and the others will need to change tactics to take advantage of/prevent refueling.

Thoughts?
Liet Ormand
Sons of Bacchus
#18 - 2014-12-31 16:05:33 UTC
I agree up to this point:

ShahFluffers wrote:


Obsoleting old content and ships = power creep.

power creep = bad

The reason it is bad is because it does not help new players at all. In fact, it does the opposite by increasing the gap between older players and newer ones (people who understand how to take advantage of the new mechanics versus people who have to get used to the "old" ones).

We even have a "name" for this phenomena.

Malcanis' Law: Anything done for the benefit of younger, poorer players will invariably be of greater benefit for older, richer players.


Obsoleting old content and ships (actually obsoleting them) is not ideal, but it's also somewhat natural, and not inherently bad. It's when the new ships break the game mechanics that the old ships were designed for that power creep happens. An example would be a cruiser designed to be able to mount battleship weapons, which is good for variety until a ship is introduced that gives you 90% of the dps of the cruiser with only 10% of the drawbacks (armor).

It also happens when a ship type is created/optimized for a particular, popular play style that did not have a perfect tool before. Suddenly the game is imbalanced because the true measure of a ship's power isn't just what's on paper, it's the ship plus the tactics plus the individual pilot. Suddenly an activity that was popular in game becomes the reason half the player base logs in, to the detriment of everyone/everything else it interacts with. Similar to what some people predict will happen when Proteus goes in and recon ships are D-scan immune (I don't believe this personally).

I'm actually not trying to suggest a new super-powerful ship here.

What I'm suggesting in the abstract is that PvE and PvP combat in eve is in a rut in the sense that all ships have a bottomless gas tank, effectively a bottomless ammo well, the pilot's skills give the same set of bonuses depending on level and those bonuses act in exactly the same way on each ship. This is a natural consequence of using a computer to determine things.

My idea in my first post which I've given in specific rather than in abstract form is to shake this up by creating a ship that works radically differently. Simply put, add a ship type that does not have infinite ammo and fuel and must therefore pause combat to fuel up or must in other ways behave differently in order to operate. In exchange there has to be a big benefit of some sort, because no one would use a ship that has a big disadvantage but no advantage.

The example I used was chosen because it has an interesting in-game explanation (diving into a star), it would force different combat mechanics because of the need to refuel/re-arm, it would force different navigation behavior because the fuel source would be at the center of each system (well, most... don't try to re-fuel from a black hole) and it was simple to understand.

So maybe a super-powerful weapon (which I chose as an in-game explanation for what to do with stellar plasma) isn't a good choice... I suppose you could use the stuff as fuel for POS structures or to make materials... but that won't affect combat or navigation as much/at all.

Any ideas on what could create a refuel/rearm mechanic? What's a good way to make a ship type that has to re-fuel and re-arm at specific locations in game?
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#19 - 2014-12-31 16:22:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Liet Ormand wrote:

My idea in my first post which I've given in specific rather than in abstract form is to shake this up by creating a ship that works radically differently. Simply put, add a ship type that does not have infinite ammo and fuel and must therefore pause combat to fuel up or must in other ways behave differently in order to operate. In exchange there has to be a big benefit of some sort, because no one would use a ship that has a big disadvantage but no advantage.

And there lies the basic problem.

In order for a ship to be forced to frequently refuel, the benefit it gains has to be commensurately as great to make it worth flying. And since it is a very significant downside, it means a very significant benefit.

This locks you into a binary state where a ship either has massive advantages over a similar size ship if already fueled, or massive disadvantages if not fueled.

This is fundamentally unbalanced. It's just not something you can balance, because if the fueled ship is close enough in combat performance to a conventional ship that requires fuel to not cause major balance issues, it's just a ship that has no significant upside and major drawbacks.


Imagine it as a boxing match where one side is your traditional boxer, and the other side flips a coin at the start. If he gets heads, he gets a baseball bat and body armor. If tails, he's stripped naked and tied to a chair for the match. No matter if he get's heads or tails, it's never going to be an even remotely even or enjoyable match to watch.

It just doesn't work.
DaeHan Minhyok
Logical Outcomes
#20 - 2014-12-31 16:45:45 UTC
If you want a ship that gets a cap bonus when its within a certain AU of the sun and a penalty when its too far from the sun with a neutral no effect band in the middle, that could be fun and interesting. The rest of your idea, don't think so...
12Next page