These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Upcoming Feature and Change Feedback Center

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[December] Command Destroyers

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#261 - 2015-11-17 21:22:03 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
CCP Rise wrote:


MAGUS
Gallente Destroyer Per Level:
10% Bonus to Drone Damage
4% bonus to armor resists
Command Destroyer Per Level:
2% to Armor and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link

PONTIFEX
Amarr Destroyer per Level:
10% Bonus to Drone Damage
4% bonus to Armor Resistances
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Armor and Information Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link

STORK
Caldari Destroyer per Level:
10% to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
4% Bonus to Shield Resistances
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Siege and Information link effectiveness per level
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link


BIFROST
Minmatar Destroyer per Level:
10% bonus to Rocket and Light Missile Damage
4% bonus to shield resists
Command Destroyer per Level:
2% to Siege and Skirmish Warfare link effectiveness
5% reduction in MJFG spool up time
Role: 95% Reduction in Powergrid Requirements for Warfare Links
Role: 50% Reduction in MWD Penalty Signature Bloom
Role: Can fit Micro Jump Field Generators
Role: Can fit one Warfare Link


And for their attributes I'm using a google doc this time for better readability: ATTRIBUTES

Thanks !

Ok, so several things stand out to me here as alarming and needing immediate change.

1. The Stork? Seriously? That's the BEST animal/bird name you could come up with? Did you swindled by a Caldari merchant as a child or something?

2. If these are getting full resists, then the Gallente and Minmatar Command dessies should get an active tanking bonus like the command ships, which do just fine with active tanking (especially the sleipnir).

3. Give the Magus and Pontifex 4 turrets (while removing the launchers), and apply bonuses as listed below.

4. The MJFG field is completely redundant and wastes a bonus to the ship; you can either increase the spool-up reduction into the skill itself or remove it and leave it as-is. Here is what you should replace it with on each ship:
-Magus gets 10% bonus hybrid turret damage per level
-Pontifex gets 10% bonus to laser turret damage per level
-Stork (gag PLEASE choose another name) gets 10% to missile velocity per level
-Bifrost gets 10% to missile velocity per level

5. Change PG values to
-Magus and Bifrost get 60 base PG each
-Stork (again, change the ******* name) gets 65 base pg
-Pontifix gets 75 base pg

6. The speed values are really weird. Magus and Stork (or whatever else it's going to get its name changed to) should get their max speed values exchanged, and Magus and Bifrost should get their total mass amounts exchanged.

Please consider these. ESPECIALLY RENAMING THE STORK. What?

+100
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#262 - 2015-11-17 21:24:40 UTC
In fact, this should MOST DEFINITELY carry a suspect flag so I can't bounce a fleet off a lowsec gate under gate gun protection.

They should be able to shoot me without angering the gate guns if I'm about to port their fleet, or part of it, away.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#263 - 2015-11-17 21:30:31 UTC
Nou Mene wrote:
why is ppl discussing hs uses of it when ccp said it was banned from hs?

also missions needs to be scanned, from the moment you get there to when the dessie would be bothering you, you have a couple minutes (if that player is completely focused on ruining you), if you taking much more than that to run one mission (L4) then i'll get worried about my isk/hr in some other aspects (i used to run L4 in a pvp drake in LS, and/or t2 mach in HS, and it cant get any easier)


Because the only reason this new module cant be used in hi-sec is due to a niche crowd. The rest who use hi-sec have to be cut off. As you can see from the incursion runner posts, they are incapable of adjusting to game changes and have prior secured RISE's assistance via secret financial aide to secure future additions to the game do not affect their game play. As long as Incursion runners continue to back Rise. Hi-sec will suffer and be denied future additions like this to the game. As he said, this cant be allowed due to Incursion runners.
Captain StringfellowHawk
Forsaken Reavers
#264 - 2015-11-17 21:33:26 UTC
Catherine Laartii wrote:
afkalt wrote:
Catherine Laartii wrote:
Querns wrote:
Torgeir Hekard wrote:

While in low/null/wh you can shoot a dessie on sight, in hisec you have to patiently wait for it to finish flinging you/NPC out into the void before having a reasonable way to deal with the consequences (assuming it even gets any kind of flag for the trouble). You can't really suicide every command destroyer you meet out of probability it being after you.

Or, the MJFG could create a Suspect Flag upon activation. Pre-target any that land inside your dungeon, and if they go suspect, apply the Warp Scrambler. Then, switch targets, and take it to the MURDERZONE.

Or you could read the part in the thread where it states explicitly that MJFG are banned from activation in hisec...
Roll



Or you could read the comments out of context and debate at hand....Roll

Why wouldn't i? It's not like the devs take anything in these release threads seriously anyway, why should I?


That is true, they do pay more attention to reddit. the final adjustments to the ships almost always from from /r/eve discussions. It's their preferred communications platform.
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#265 - 2015-11-17 21:47:33 UTC
afkalt wrote:


Hyperdunking or undermanned ganking would still use bumpers because of the headcount, the MJD cooldown timer, the fact the bumper is protected by concord and the dessies would not be. Hell ganking as a whole will still use bumpers, it's a 3 minute cooldown on MJD mods, that's an eternity, you would need a fair few to make that work. More efficient, safer and predictable to continue using bumping machs.



As for suspect: Because criminal is binary, it doesn't really create good interaction opportunities.

It also basically kills all the nifty uses of this I already listed.

When you think about it, there are most of equivalents these in game already. Not all, but most and they have suspect/no flagging attached.


>Nicking mission rats/items is analogous to ninja looting and that is suspect.

>Moving ships around against their will is essentially bumping which carries no flagging at all (albeit the reasons may be mechanical rather than intention). No problem with a "mass bump" carrying a flag, that is reasonable.

Most important thing is, it's a dial that can be turned. It could start suspect then go criminal if it was really bad or LATER removed from highsec if that was still not enough. Banning it outright, out of the gate means we will never know and an opportunity is lost.



Moving someone without their consent, (fleet warps have consent as you accepted the fleet invitation and then the allow fleet warps option) shouldn't result in a scenario they are immediately destroyed or helpless to escape. A bump will not result in your ship being tackled by NPCs and subsequently destroyed. A MJD jump can. By removing the logi from the incursion group, ships melt and anyone tackled can't warp off. By moving a missioner into the dead center of a spawn normally means they will be tackled and killed by the NPCs. A bump for ganking doesn't necessarily mean you are done and helpless, as there is significant counterplay.

As far as dials go, high sec isn't the place to introduce new modules and tactics. Start in null and work your way to high sec. Something that would carry this much consequence for the victims should not begin usage in the largest concentration of new players in the game. Titan doomsdays were only just allowed into low sec. Disruptive technology should not be released in a distributed manner without seeing how the community uses it.
FT Diomedes
The Graduates
#266 - 2015-11-17 21:53:32 UTC
DeadDuck wrote:
I can't imagine nothing worst to kill the small gangs roaming in deep hostile areas where your only way to survive is kitting then watch a cloud of intys instantly jump 100km and be on top of you.

And to make it even easier the only guy that has to be aligned to the target is the command dessie... orbit at 500m and wait for the dessie to activate the module. Shocked


You are right, this is going to make for awesome gameplay.

In your example, the only person who actually gets caught is someone microwarpdriving straight away from a gang that is 30km from him. If he stays in a straight line, they can land on top of him. But if he is further away than that, they can only land on him if he is stationary at 100km. The kiting pilot would simply have to manually change direction every so often. So, it benefits skilled pilots who can manually pilot and dodge this device. I exempt myself from that category (skilled pilots).

CCP should add more NPC 0.0 space to open it up and liven things up: the Stepping Stones project.

afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#267 - 2015-11-17 21:57:46 UTC
Rosal Milag wrote:
afkalt wrote:


Hyperdunking or undermanned ganking would still use bumpers because of the headcount, the MJD cooldown timer, the fact the bumper is protected by concord and the dessies would not be. Hell ganking as a whole will still use bumpers, it's a 3 minute cooldown on MJD mods, that's an eternity, you would need a fair few to make that work. More efficient, safer and predictable to continue using bumping machs.



As for suspect: Because criminal is binary, it doesn't really create good interaction opportunities.

It also basically kills all the nifty uses of this I already listed.

When you think about it, there are most of equivalents these in game already. Not all, but most and they have suspect/no flagging attached.


>Nicking mission rats/items is analogous to ninja looting and that is suspect.

>Moving ships around against their will is essentially bumping which carries no flagging at all (albeit the reasons may be mechanical rather than intention). No problem with a "mass bump" carrying a flag, that is reasonable.

Most important thing is, it's a dial that can be turned. It could start suspect then go criminal if it was really bad or LATER removed from highsec if that was still not enough. Banning it outright, out of the gate means we will never know and an opportunity is lost.



Moving someone without their consent, (fleet warps have consent as you accepted the fleet invitation and then the allow fleet warps option) shouldn't result in a scenario they are immediately destroyed or helpless to escape. A bump will not result in your ship being tackled by NPCs and subsequently destroyed. A MJD jump can. By removing the logi from the incursion group, ships melt and anyone tackled can't warp off. By moving a missioner into the dead center of a spawn normally means they will be tackled and killed by the NPCs. A bump for ganking doesn't necessarily mean you are done and helpless, as there is significant counterplay.


Precisely, this is why bumping has no flags but this should.

Lets leave incursion out of it since we've already demonstrated fairly clearly that it is a) trivial to stop and b) boils down to a question of isk/hour.

Missions only have tackle in frigates, and they get to you fairly quickly. It's highly, HIGHLY unlikely you can be MJDd into tackle frigates with no counterplay. I cannot think of a single one (to be fair I ignore faction kill missions) where that would even be possible. Unless the missioner MJD himself away at the start, in which case he will have 100km of deadspace for the dessie to burn before he can align and warp - basically impossible.

Indeed, I can think of but a handful of missions where the rats start at 100km away and none where they're actually a threat at that range.

Plus remember there's nothing stopping the rats from deciding to vaporize the destroyer, either. It's a hell of a punt for the small ship which (if you are correct and you somehow do manage to land it in tackle) might get webbed and die horribly.


Significant counterplay AFTER a bump? Are you mad? There is exactly ONE play and one play alone - get an alt/friend out ahead of you and hope you get the align right for a warp to them. This would also work just fine for these mods, so....not seeing the issue.

Or perhaps you mean the pre-emptive counterplay of webbing, or scouting and not jumping if known bad 'uns are around? Well, scouting is still viable and simply replace "web", with "scram" and the protection is entirely unchanged.


Rosal Milag wrote:
As far as dials go, high sec isn't the place to introduce new modules and tactics. Start in null and work your way to high sec. Something that would carry this much consequence for the victims should not begin usage in the largest concentration of new players in the game. Titan doomsdays were only just allowed into low sec. Disruptive technology should not be released in a distributed manner without seeing how the community uses it.


Again it only carries consequences to the unprepared and the unwilling to adapt. People getting regularly stomped by this need to reassess their behaviour every bit as much as a 50 billion autopiloting freighter does.
Moac Tor
Cyber Core
Immediate Destruction
#268 - 2015-11-17 21:59:20 UTC
Captain StringfellowHawk wrote:
That is true, they do pay more attention to reddit. the final adjustments to the ships almost always from from /r/eve discussions. It's their preferred communications platform.


Topic has been completely derailed by a stupid discussion about MMJD being used in high sec which isn't going to happen. No wonder Devs refer to reddit despite the fact I think the contributions to eve forums are generally better and more well informed.
Mr Floydy
Questionable Ethics.
Ministry of Inappropriate Footwork
#269 - 2015-11-17 22:01:41 UTC
+1 to renaming the Stork. Don't let such an awesome looking ship have such a lame name!
Shrike would be much better :)

As for the ship stats. They sound fun and interesting, not read enough to comment on balance though. When they are released can the balance be closely watched so we don't end up with a repeat of what has happened with other recent new ships (T3Ds) being released OP and not getting reigned in for a long time?
Michael Oskold
Beyond Good and Evil.
#270 - 2015-11-17 22:16:04 UTC
the leaqs in this thread are delicious.
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#271 - 2015-11-17 22:22:40 UTC
god these are so broken.......

Links... god why more links...

WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

Yaay!!!!
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#272 - 2015-11-17 22:26:23 UTC
I don't believe we've ruled out incursions. ISK/HOUR isn't the argument. Losing your ship because one person pressed one button is what bugs me. He isn't going to vaporize in 5 seconds if suspect. And bringing dedicated tackle, ie HIC is absurd as the only reason they would be in fleet is for anti-tackle roles. Not to mention a fleet of folks in these ships. If 10 talwars can reach the incursion fleet to kill one blinged ship, so could 10 command destroyers, but the catch is the whole fleet. With a much bigger payout too. How many HICs do you need to have on hand? Is the fleet warping the moment the destroyer gang lands on the gate? That dooms anyone currently tackled by the rats. So the destroyers don't even have to use their MJD to get kills.

Change the volume of isk from incursions to a tenth of what it is currently, people will still run them, and my argument of easy disruption stands. Battleships are not designed to track destroyers. And HICs don't have the dps to be included, especially if tackle is their only role. They have the tank but are taking up space that a dps could be sitting in. Gankers can be scaled up, infinitely. HIC's can't.

Add to all this discussion about suspect flags, the limited engagement timer. Destroyer lands, is pointed by HIC and popped by fleet. Pilot reships and comes back in a PvP ship. Fleet can't help the people who engaged the suspect earlier without getting a timer themselves. Which adds to the growing chaos. Logi for the ganker comes in and now limited engagement timers are spread across the fleet. So tell me, how is this intended play? Its content for sure. But it's no where near the intended activity of PvE.

Criminal flag reflects the side cases where use can be devastating. Whether the main or majority use is different is irrelevant. The potential for abuse is so high that it cannot be allowed in high sec without a heavy penalty.

Talk about the sandbox all you want. You want freedom to play, go to null. Leave high sec for the bears, the newbies, and the afk. There are enough current mechanics to force people to pay attention. Adding substantial ones like this into high sec will only lead to more ragequits and a less healthy game.
afkalt
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#273 - 2015-11-17 22:32:42 UTC
We're never going to see eye to eye because you want to put "PvE" in one bucket and "PvP" in another. Essentially you're wanting a risk free area to grind isk in. You can't do that.

I mean, most people do the same (ref: afk cloaking threads), but you can't do that.

No-one in their right minds is going to say with a straight face incursion isk is balanced by risk. Whether or not THIS would be the nerf that many feel it needs so badly is neither here nor there, the problem is the arguments revolve around isk/hour and the (in)ability to be effectively disrupted.

In the name of protecting the incursioners, all other possibilities are stifled. That's pretty uncool.
Aivlis Eldelbar
State War Academy
Caldari State
#274 - 2015-11-17 22:35:44 UTC
Much of what I have to say has already been repeated by dozens of players, but here it goes, for the record:

1. Stork is a pretty bland name, even for people who don't have english as their first language and don't immediately asociate it to a frog-eating, mute bird with a silly walk.

2. Give the Caldari destroyer railguns! It was already a bummer when you made the Jackdaw (another meh name, but w/e) a missile boat.

3. Give the Amarr destroyer lasers, maybe? At least we got the Confessor as a laser platform, so it's not as annoying as 2. above.
Rosal Milag
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#275 - 2015-11-17 22:40:44 UTC
afkalt wrote:
We're never going to see eye to eye because you want to put "PvE" in one bucket and "PvP" in another. Essentially you're wanting a risk free area to grind isk in. You can't do that.

I mean, most people do the same (ref: afk cloaking threads), but you can't do that.

No-one in their right minds is going to say with a straight face incursion isk is balanced by risk. Whether or not THIS would be the nerf that many feel it needs so badly is neither here nor there, the problem is the arguments revolve around isk/hour and the (in)ability to be effectively disrupted.

In the name of protecting the incursioners, all other possibilities are stifled. That's pretty uncool.



I agree with that. Incursions are stifling neat possibilities that would exist otherwise. I would be fine with incursions reducing payouts, increasing risk, or going away completely (as was hinted at earlier).


On a different subject, I'm surprised people are crying over the links. A 1 link combat ship or 2 link tissue is not going to change the meta while 4+ link T3's are commonplace. Command processors have 150 cpu, each. Requirements to use links have not changed, its still loads of time to learn to use even the T1 link. All this ship does is make it slightly faster to step into a bonused link ship, which can only be a good thing for newer players. By the way, don't forget a T1 battlecruiser can fit links. Several in fact while keeping a tank as well.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#276 - 2015-11-17 22:49:42 UTC
1. I'm very disappointed with an area MJD effect being given to a class that didn't even have a personal MJD before this ship.
The area MJDF would have been much better given to a BC or BS class ship.

2. For everyone wailing on incursions, firstly, it's not just incursions, secondly, your 'counterplay' arguments are all ridiculous since the destroyer can't be engaged as soon as it lands on grid, and ignore all the other abuses of it that WOULD occur in highsec as well. It's not 'protecting' incursions. It's just that Incursions are the best fleet example in highsec to show how much griefing you can do with a MJDF in highsec.
Ovv Topik
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#277 - 2015-11-17 22:58:23 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Lord Jasta wrote:
Yet another item that can't be used in high sec, :( why not have this with a criminal timer?


We really wanted to but even with a criminal timer you would pretty easily be able to destroy incursion fleets, which seemed over the top :(

Couldn't they be allowed in hisec, but the Incursion 'effects' block their use?

"Nicknack, I'm in a shoe in space, on my computer, in my house, with a cup of coffee, in't that something." - Fly Safe PopPaddi. o7

Boyamin
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#278 - 2015-11-17 23:14:18 UTC
-1

Fix links first, then develop ships to provide on-grid support. Why on earth would you poop before you pull your pants off ?
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#279 - 2015-11-17 23:15:45 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Lord Jasta wrote:
Yet another item that can't be used in high sec, :( why not have this with a criminal timer?


We really wanted to but even with a criminal timer you would pretty easily be able to destroy incursion fleets, which seemed over the top :(
Is this truly just for incursion fleets or are there other highsec abuses you are trying to prevent? If the former that reasoning seems weak, if the latter it makes more sense.
Archetype 66
Perkone
Caldari State
#280 - 2015-11-17 23:27:22 UTC
Awesome ! I don't know where it will lead us but that will shake the meta for sure. Long time we didn't such kind of introduction to the game.

One remark a lot of others made in this thread: please consider more diversity between the four hulls and bonus.

One question: I suppose it will not jump ships in invulnerable states, correct ? Even cloacked after a jump ?

As for counters, I think their is a lot of options even for BS doctrines. 6km is a really limited range and within range of smartbombs...50 BS activating SMB should be enough to kill those desto, nah ?!