Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.11 13:47:00 -
[1]
I was just reading about how the only counter to a dread is another dread... seems kinda silly, but that's how it is atm - the only counter to capital ship fleets are, well, your own fleets of capital ships.
Not good tbh.
I think it's time for a new ship:
The Heavy Stealth Bomber (or maybe the Heavy Bomber?)
Gallente Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Citadel Torpedo explosion velocity and flight time per level 20% bonus to Citadel Torpedo velocity per level
Covert Ops Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to citadel torpedo range per level 15% bonus to Citadel torpedo thermal damage per level
Role Bonus: -99.99% reduction in Citadel Torpedo Launcher powergrid needs -99.5% reduction in Cloak CPU Use -100% targeting delay after decloaking
CPU: 450 TF PG: 1500 MW High Slots: 5 Mid Slots: 3 Low Slots: 5 Turret Slots: 0 Missile Slots: 3
Shield Capacity: 1,750 hp Armor Capacity: 3,350 hp Hull HP: 2,150 hp Cap Capacity: 2,750 points Cap Recharge: 500,000 ms
Max Velocity: 150 m/s Warp Speed: 3 au/s Mass: 10,250,000 m3 Drone Space: 0 Cargo Bay: 500 m3
Scan Resolution: 250mm Signature Radius: 250mm Magnometric Strength: 22 points Max Targeting Range: 80,000 meters Targeting Speed: 5,000 ms
Pretty much paper thin, but able to hit hard against anything capital sized or higher. I'm THINKING however, that the cloak is too much... but what would take it's place?
Reduction to Sig Radius per level Increase to Armor Resists per level (and make it a little harder to pop)
Ideas/Questions?
|
Bentakhar
|
Posted - 2009.09.11 14:05:00 -
[2]
I like the idea... its pretty much the same idea as the siege BS i posted on the forum. A non capital ship capable of BIG volley dmg to take out capitals. Check it out. I also hesitated to put XL weapons on BC hulls... but i chose BS instead. Its probably a good idea to use BCs as there are very few BCs ingame and i have the BC skill to lvl5^^
I wouldnt stick to torps as having the same ship for 4 races is a bit boring.. the amarr one would have a laser, minmatar artilleries etc..
|
Haxfar Portlaind
|
Posted - 2009.09.11 14:30:00 -
[3]
lol, please don't use citadel like that. Remember the description? The launcher is the size of frigs . I would rather give it dmg bonus, maybe marauder style?
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.11 15:41:00 -
[4]
The reason I'm going with Citadel Launchers compared to uprated Torps or the like is because I don't WANT it to be able to attack anything smaller than a dread with any degree of success. It's an anti-capital ship, not an anti-battleship weapon :)
As for the reason for Missiles and nothing else - it's a Torpedo Bomber :D There ya go! That and mounting the Dreadnaught sized turrets would look... silly... to say the least :)
|
Haxfar Portlaind
|
Posted - 2009.09.11 17:01:00 -
[5]
Originally by: Kittamaru The reason I'm going with Citadel Launchers compared to uprated Torps or the like is because I don't WANT it to be able to attack anything smaller than a dread with any degree of success. It's an anti-capital ship, not an anti-battleship weapon :)
As for the reason for Missiles and nothing else - it's a Torpedo Bomber :D There ya go! That and mounting the Dreadnaught sized turrets would look... silly... to say the least :)
Good word again
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.11 17:14:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Haxfar Portlaind
Originally by: Kittamaru The reason I'm going with Citadel Launchers compared to uprated Torps or the like is because I don't WANT it to be able to attack anything smaller than a dread with any degree of success. It's an anti-capital ship, not an anti-battleship weapon :)
As for the reason for Missiles and nothing else - it's a Torpedo Bomber :D There ya go! That and mounting the Dreadnaught sized turrets would look... silly... to say the least :)
Good word again
Not sure what you mean by Good Word Again
|
Cors
It's A Trap
|
Posted - 2009.09.11 20:00:00 -
[7]
The easy solution is to just up the explosion radius of the Torpedo's till they're 1000m or more. That way they'd do 1/3rd damage to BS's, and even less to smaller ships, but full damage to caps. Or make the explosion velocity very low, so any ship moveing 50m/s or high avoids most of the damage.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.11 20:10:00 -
[8]
that could work, but the thing is SB's already use Torps. I was looking at using the next weapon system up - if having Citadels on BC's is out of proportion, what about on the T3 Battleship hulls? Have them be the hull design for em?
|
Saul Elsyn
INTERSTELLAR ENTERPRISE
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 04:27:00 -
[9]
Actually I really like the idea of a fast moving Cruiser sized Capital ship hunter... I'd actually suggest decreasing the size from Battlecruiser to Cruiser. I mean, if we can miniaturize a battleship torpedo tube to the point a frigate hull can carry three of them then miniaturizing a siege torpedo tube so a cruiser can carry 2-3 wouldn't be that far out of reach.
I'm suddenly engulfed with a vision of a Caracal with a pair of huge torpedo launchers hanging beneath it's wings. It MWD in on a capital ship launches its citadel torpedoes and runs like hell as the escort ships try to blow it out of the sky.
A speed and explosion velocity is probably the wrong bonus for this sort of ship. What we want is volley damage, buffer tank, and speed. So perhaps a 5% bonus to Citadel Torpedo damage per level would be more appropriate. 5% bonus to max velocity per level. 5% bonus to resists per level. 5% reduction in Microwarpdrive capacitor use per level.
|
Grut
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 10:43:00 -
[10]
Edited by: Grut on 12/09/2009 10:43:59 Its a cool idea. You could ditch the launcher models and just have the torps "plopping out" like everything else.
One problem is cost/dps a t2 cruiser is going to be over 100 mil, a t2 BC 250mil.
A phoenix with 3 launchers, 2xdamage bonus and 5x bcu2 does 500 dps with a 10k volley before seige. Base + max skills cap launcher DPS is 67!
Given that bombs do 8k noone in their right mind is going to pay over a 100mil for something that can't outdamage an unsieged dread... you'd be better off getting a standard HAC, you'd do asmuch if not more damage and still be able to hit small stuff.
Volley damage is all very well but caps have over 2mil hp, you'd need ALOT of damage / salvo to make it worthwhile. Don't forget that cap weapons take alot of skill training aswell.
Say you used a cerb as a base. Give it 3 HS 2 Launcher slots, you'd need something like;
Role: 99.8% reduction in grid needs for cap launchers - brings them down to 180 grid.
Cruiser
+25% resists -5% mwd cap penalty
T2
+20% damage / level -15% ROF / level
That'd give 1080 dps before damage mods so ~ 2k max gank.
Sounds like a lot, but dreads do well over the 4k mark and their dps/hp favours hp.
Kinsy > deadman you there? Kinsy > are either of us in pods, becase we dont know...
Mostly harmless [ 2005.12.09 19:22:50 ] (notify) You have started trying to warp scramble the Dreadnought |
|
Nekmet Awai
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 11:07:00 -
[11]
the idea is good but the dmg calculation need some tweaking since as you posted it now with max skills your at a dps of around 350-400 which isn't more then the normal stealth bomber. (and a burst dmg of around the same as a sb).
i like the idea but would give it a 200% roles bonus to citadel dmg and -75% rof (should give the same dps but with a volley dmg 3 times higher then the SB).
the shield, armour, hull hp is to high, it shouldn't be more then half if you want it as a "stealth" ship, else make a HBS (heavy battle ship) with the capabillity of laying a hell of dmg on stationary targets and taking around 1300-1500 dps itself while moving.
|
Fille Balle
Ballbreakers R us
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 11:22:00 -
[12]
Wow, this sounds pretty awesome to me. Only real problem I can see is that it's role might conflict with dreads. Trust me, people WILL use this ship to siege pos'es. But that being said, I don't really see this as an issue, as having ONE ship for pos bashing is a bit meh.
On a positive note, this could help create a totally new tactic: covert pos takedown! Which would be totally awesome.
And I also agree with poster above: NEEDS MOAR DPS! With 400 dps, you needs a crapton of these things in order to take down one single dread (load up eft and put a tank on a dread, you'll see what I mean).
|
jemos
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 12:36:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Fille Balle Wow, this sounds pretty awesome to me. Only real problem I can see is that it's role might conflict with dreads. Trust me, people WILL use this ship to siege pos'es. But that being said, I don't really see this as an issue, as having ONE ship for pos bashing is a bit meh.
On a positive note, this could help create a totally new tactic: covert pos takedown! Which would be totally awesome.
And I also agree with poster above: NEEDS MOAR DPS! With 400 dps, you needs a crapton of these things in order to take down one single dread (load up eft and put a tank on a dread, you'll see what I mean).
I don't think they would conflict to much with dreads. If you for some reason attack a pos with a cruiser, is it manned. You will be dead fast actually ^^ The dread is all about survival.
I do know that there have been some POS takedowns with SB's! Would be kinda awsome to actually do that. What I've heard (I never been present on a POS takedown with bs fleets) a blob of bs's need a ****load of time to take a pos down!
If the `heavy bomber¦ should be able to take down a Captial I think need to have similar dps to dreads, but with stupidly slow ROF. I can actually think of a +100% ROF to these ships. And about the hulls, they should be cruisers, not BC's since these ships are "super" glass cannons. And should really only be usuable in nullsec. (Just had a fun picthure of a pair of BC `Heavy bombers¦ganking a por freighter )
Originally by: FireT
If you have capitals..... well for the love of Raptor Pope, use them before they rust away.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 12:40:00 -
[14]
Well, that's why I was going for the Heavy Bomber idea :) Not so much a glass cannon, but mega cannons. And true, we need to find a way to stop them being used to gank freighters.
I like the idea of them being able to tank decently, and I wonder - should they be limited to SIZE of the ship they can hit, or SPEED of the ship they can hit? I want this to be anti-capital, but not freighter-suicide-gank material... hmm...
|
jemos
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 13:01:00 -
[15]
Edited by: jemos on 12/09/2009 13:01:46
Originally by: Kittamaru Well, that's why I was going for the Heavy Bomber idea :) Not so much a glass cannon, but mega cannons. And true, we need to find a way to stop them being used to gank freighters.
I like the idea of them being able to tank decently, and I wonder - should they be limited to SIZE of the ship they can hit, or SPEED of the ship they can hit? I want this to be anti-capital, but not freighter-suicide-gank material... hmm...
Well, reducing them to glass cannons would probably help quite alot against freighter-roam-gank-bombers.
"Heavy bomber ships were put into research to counter the ever so steadily growing tide of capital sieges that also could threaten the main factions of New Eden. The result was a stable anti capital Battle cruiser platform that sacrificed electronics to house and handle the huge Citiadel torpedo launchers."
`Heavy bomber¦Brutix hull.
Reduce sensor resolution to match it with the align time. Increased Mass 75% Max speed 100m/s
5 highslots 3 Turret hardpoints 2 utillity. 2 Medium slots. 7 Lowslots
T1 bonus: 7.5% to all armor repair systems. 5% to armor ammount? (Discussable just got this to support the gallente way) t2 Bonus: +x damage to racial torpedos. +5-10% to citadel torpedo velocity?
Role: - 99.5% cpu for cov op cloaks. - needed ammount of PG to fit citiadel launchers.
This will give a slow but durable ship that will survive the alignment and being able to pretty much only target and volley at capital ships. The slot layout is pretty much to fit an MWD and SEBO. + some tank/gank.
Shield tanking ships will have something like
5 High 6 medium 3 Low
Thoughts. 4 tank 3 gank.
Originally by: FireT
If you have capitals..... well for the love of Raptor Pope, use them before they rust away.
|
Andra McKay
GSZ Magnum Opus.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 15:59:00 -
[16]
I like this idea. If it's implemented with a clear focus on it's role, it will be a fun boat to fly. Keep the citadel torps in the concept to keep it only useful against capitals. I'm playing with the thought if this should have the ability to fit bomb launchers, 2 of them, but I'm not sure yet.
|
Mike C
Caldari Ipuvaepe Industries
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 16:18:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Mike C on 12/09/2009 16:25:48
Originally by: Kittamaru I was just reading about how the only counter to a dread is another dread... seems kinda silly, but that's how it is atm - the only counter to capital ship fleets are, well, your own fleets of capital ships.
Not good tbh.
I think it's time for a new ship:
The Heavy Stealth Bomber (or maybe the Heavy Bomber?)
Gallente Battlecruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Citadel Torpedo explosion velocity and flight time per level 20% bonus to Citadel Torpedo velocity per level
Covert Ops Skill Bonus: 5% bonus to citadel torpedo range per level 15% bonus to Citadel torpedo thermal damage per level
Role Bonus: -99.99% reduction in Citadel Torpedo Launcher powergrid needs -99.5% reduction in Cloak CPU Use -100% targeting delay after decloaking
CPU: 450 TF PG: 1500 MW High Slots: 5 Mid Slots: 3 Low Slots: 5 Turret Slots: 0 Missile Slots: 3
Shield Capacity: 1,750 hp Armor Capacity: 3,350 hp Hull HP: 2,150 hp Cap Capacity: 2,750 points Cap Recharge: 500,000 ms
Max Velocity: 150 m/s Warp Speed: 3 au/s Mass: 10,250,000 m3 Drone Space: 0 Cargo Bay: 500 m3
Scan Resolution: 250mm Signature Radius: 250mm Magnometric Strength: 22 points Max Targeting Range: 80,000 meters Targeting Speed: 5,000 ms
Pretty much paper thin, but able to hit hard against anything capital sized or higher. I'm THINKING however, that the cloak is too much... but what would take it's place?
Reduction to Sig Radius per level Increase to Armor Resists per level (and make it a little harder to pop)
Ideas/Questions?
OP is trying to fix a problem that does not exist. 5 or 6 BS (epically RR BS) can kill a dreadnought. A moros may kill one or two in the process, but its a ****ing dreadnought. Dreads are capital killers, T2 frigates/cruisers are NOT.
EDIT 1/3: Bring neuts tho EDIT 2/3: Even battlecruiser sized is ridiculous. This would have to be something capital-sized itself which a dread is actually capable of killing (but having to enter siege). This would also have to be more skill-intensive then a dreadnought, cap weapons, jump skills to 5, siege mod, and drones time-wise. Maybe require racial dread to 3 and require the ship to be in siege to do any realistic amount of damage (10% modifier to damage, but 10x modifier to damage effectiveness of siege mod?) Tracking would also have to be next to nothing. This ship should also not be jump-capable. After all of this what do you have? a ****ING STARGATE DREADNOUGHT! EDIT 3/3: Also **** cloaking. __________________________________________________
Originally by: Mike C Trolls - We keep Humanity alive... and kicking...
|
Saul Elsyn
INTERSTELLAR ENTERPRISE
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 16:18:00 -
[18]
I really dislike the idea of this being a tankable ship, actually I really dislike the idea of making it based off a Battlecruiser. I'd think of this as a swarm ship with a combat doctrine akin to a torpedo boat. They swoop in, blast the target and swoop out. If you're going to make a vessel that's meant as a hunter a tankable vessel its going to be used as a mission-runner or fleet lineship.
Not a hunter.
You're right about the volley damage, we're talking about taking down a ship with several million hitpoints with alpha. That doesn't seem very reasonable in retro-spec. So lets go with DPS. Without role specific bonuses or a siege module 3x Citadel Torpedo Launchers with 3x BCS IIs do about 446 DPS. That's nowhere near sufficient.
So it'd need a Role Bonus of around 625% to Citadel Torpedo Damage to match the siege output. But you're still talking 10 volleys at the very least to get through the tank of Dreadnaught. Not to mention 625% damage bonus just sounds outright ridiculous.
To achieve a sufficient damage output to put a capital ship to bed maybe a better idea would be massive bonus to rate of fire and a comparable penalty to missile range.
A citadel torpedo travels 154 km before detonating on a Dreadnaught with max skills. For a hunter killer, especially one designed to be a fast hit and run type ship that's excessive.
So... Theoretical Caldari Torpedo Boat...
Berkut-class Torpedo Boat:
Caldari Cruiser Skill Bonus: 10% bonus to Kinetic Missile Damage and 5% bonus to missile velocity per level.
Torpedo Boat Skill Bonus: 5% to Shield Resistance and 10% reduction in Microwarp Drive activation cost.
Role Bonus: 75% reduction to Citadel Torpedo - Rate of Fire. 50% penalty to Citadel Torpedo - Flight Time. 99.9 % reduction in Citadel Torpedo Powergrid use.
This set of bonuses produces a Cruiser with a 2672 DPS with max skills. Which for a cruiser is about 4x the norm. The use of Citadel Torpedoes makes it specifically useful against capital ships and little else. It's quite a bit of damage to packed into a cruiser hull. Not sure we could up the output much more before it starts to become a threat to battleships.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 17:14:00 -
[19]
I'm going to re-work the intial post to reflect the discussion :) Re-read in about 5 minutes and see what you think
|
Grut
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 17:23:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Mike C
OP is trying to fix a problem that does not exist. 5 or 6 BS (epically RR BS) can kill a dreadnought. A moros may kill one or two in the process, but its a ****ing dreadnought. Dreads are capital killers, T2 frigates/cruisers are NOT.
EDIT 1/3: Bring neuts tho EDIT 2/3: Even battlecruiser sized is ridiculous. This would have to be something capital-sized itself which a dread is actually capable of killing (but having to enter siege). This would also have to be more skill-intensive then a dreadnought, cap weapons, jump skills to 5, siege mod, and drones time-wise. Maybe require racial dread to 3 and require the ship to be in siege to do any realistic amount of damage (1/10x modifier to damage, but 10x modifier to damage effectiveness of siege mod?) Tracking would also have to be next to nothing. This ship should also not be jump-capable. After all of this what do you have? a ****ING STARGATE DREADNOUGHT! EDIT 3/3: Also **** cloaking.
Bringing 5-6 more ships to take one is not a counter, eve works on numbers of people not straight isk efficiency alliances can already spam dreads to their hearts content. Also dreads work better the more you have but basically, what happens if your fighting 20 dreads? you need 120+ bs, alliances can field 200 odd bs so for your counter you'll need 1000+ bs to counter.......
EVE works on rock, paper, scissors. Currently Dreads are the rock, paper and scissors, the best fleet you can have would be 100% dreads no support. Breaking that up so bombers can kill dreads, dreads can't kill bombers, support can kill bombers isn't a bad thing.
Its not like their much of a threat with cruiser / bc hp.
Kinsy > deadman you there? Kinsy > are either of us in pods, becase we dont know...
Mostly harmless [ 2005.12.09 19:22:50 ] (notify) You have started trying to warp scramble the Dreadnought |
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 17:34:00 -
[21]
Well, I'm against the Cruiser HP (mostly so they can survive long enough for their torpedoes to hit home unless the support fleet is on their toes), but they have NO way to even hit anything smaller than a dreadnaught, and even if they did, the missile would do such low damage it wouldn't matter :)
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.12 21:20:00 -
[22]
I updated the topic title to reflect the changes from a stealth bomber to a Heavy Torpedo Bomber :)
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:46:00 -
[23]
Anyone else have anything to add to this?
I think it's in a good iteraton atm - it brings back the Rock Paper Scissors of fleet warfare... right now, he who fields the most dreads likely will win, regardless of supporting fleet.
Adding this in makes the support fleet important again:
Torpedo Bombers best Dreads Dreads best Supportin Fleets (because anything other than crazy large battleship fleets can't do squat) Supporting Fleets best Torpedo Bombers
This adds a nice balance to the mix, making Frigates, Destroyers, Cruisers, and Battle Cruisers (and their T2 cousins) important again - Battleships, Dreads, and so on won't be able to lock these fast enough to kill them, yet smaller ships can (and can easily kill them)
|
AtheistOfDoom
The Athiest Syndicate Advocated Destruction
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 16:54:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Kittamaru Anyone else have anything to add to this?
I think it's in a good iteraton atm - it brings back the Rock Paper Scissors of fleet warfare... right now, he who fields the most dreads likely will win, regardless of supporting fleet.
Unless it's made up completely of Moros I highly doubt it. A decent (20-50) man rr bs/hic fleet can pretty easily pwn an unsupported dread fleet. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ |
Thaliya Dejar
Dark Rising Shadow Ev0ke
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:06:00 -
[25]
i like the idea.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 17:22:00 -
[26]
Originally by: AtheistOfDoom
Originally by: Kittamaru Anyone else have anything to add to this?
I think it's in a good iteraton atm - it brings back the Rock Paper Scissors of fleet warfare... right now, he who fields the most dreads likely will win, regardless of supporting fleet.
Unless it's made up completely of Moros I highly doubt it. A decent (20-50) man rr bs/hic fleet can pretty easily pwn an unsupported dread fleet.
I dunno, I mean, even a carrier or two can kick the crap out of Battleships, RR or not. Add in a moros or two, and their drones will seriously screw you up :)
Plus, what do you consider a fleet? I'm thinking 20+ dreads, 2-5 carriers as a capital "fleet", minimum.
|
Grut
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 18:12:00 -
[27]
Originally by: AtheistOfDoom
Originally by: Kittamaru Anyone else have anything to add to this?
I think it's in a good iteraton atm - it brings back the Rock Paper Scissors of fleet warfare... right now, he who fields the most dreads likely will win, regardless of supporting fleet.
Unless it's made up completely of Moros I highly doubt it. A decent (20-50) man rr bs/hic fleet can pretty easily pwn an unsupported dread fleet.
Dreads do easily sniper BS damage when out of seige and hit bs just fine. Ontop of that out of seige they can be RR'd and have 2.5mil odd hp.. thats what? over 10x a fleet bs?
Once you get a critical mass of dreads the only thing thats a threat to it is a bigger fleet of dreads.
Kinsy > deadman you there? Kinsy > are either of us in pods, becase we dont know...
Mostly harmless [ 2005.12.09 19:22:50 ] (notify) You have started trying to warp scramble the Dreadnought |
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.14 18:55:00 -
[28]
Exactly! These ships are designed to swoop in in groups of 5-10 and take them out one at a time :) However, if there is a support fleet, they have to be removed first :)
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.15 03:15:00 -
[29]
Nobody else has anything to add?
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 13:44:00 -
[30]
Getting my bump on :D
|
|
buttesauce
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 13:46:00 -
[31]
i love the idea but immunity to bubbles may be a bit too much
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.17 13:50:00 -
[32]
The reason for immunity to non-targeted warp disruption is simple - these NEED to get in and out fast or die trying (or, rather, just die). Chances are, you AND the enemy are going to have bubbles up over their cap ships or around them in order to prevent your/their escape. Making these torp bombers immune to such disruption takes the place of the Cloak (note, these ships are paper thin and have no cloak)
They have to launch their weapons within like, 25km of the dread, which means close to their supporting fleet (if there is one). They tank worse than wet toilet paper They don't cloak
Makes them vulnerable IF not flown properly and with backup.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.20 04:45:00 -
[33]
bump
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 02:10:00 -
[34]
babump
|
Saul Elsyn
INTERSTELLAR ENTERPRISE
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 02:37:00 -
[35]
Wait... we're talking about a small, low hp ship designed to penetrate capital fleets and knock out Dreadnaughts.
Maybe we should give it a bonus to reduce signature radius, increase its survivability.
We are talking about an uncloaked ship that has to penetrate a fleet to deliver its ordinance. Make it a cruiser, give it a bonus to speed and lower its signature radius like an interceptor.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 02:41:00 -
[36]
Yes, it is uncloaked, low HP, but it has a tiny sig radius, making it vulnerable to cruisers/frigates/destroyers and their T2 counterparts.
|
Vespoi Filar
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 04:26:00 -
[37]
One thing this idea fails to take into account is the nature of the Dominion Sov system and de-emphasis of POS bashing.
Do we really want a ship type that can do kinda dread like damage that will be firing on targets near a stargate? I doubt it.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 04:59:00 -
[38]
Uhm... it's using citadel torps. Against something moving even a few M/S, the damage will be non-existant. Hence the reason for using citadel torps with no explosion radius reduction bonuses - against stationary targets (siege mode dreads, triage mode carriers) or things with incredibly large sig radius's (titans, supercarriers, maybe MWD Dreads, lawl) these should hit fairly hard.
With their small sig radius, battleships and above will have issues targeting them.
HOWEVER
With their light tanks, even a T1 Cruiser can take these down with no problem.
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 07:55:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 24/09/2009 07:57:36 Stop bumping this thread and use the ****ing search. You're about the thousandth person to be posting this exact idea and frankly fitting capital weapons to smaller ships is not going to work unless you put the negative features of siege mode in as well. 3 unsieged launchers on a Phoenix does in the area of 10k volley, 1000 exp. radius and 45 velocity.
Now, ever seen what happens when a few existing stealth bombers get tackle and target painting on a cruiser? If this goes through, hello insta popped battleships. In fact I just ran this scenario through on EFT - double painted + webbed Raven takes around 90% damage, a painted + webbed geddon around half. When we're talking alphas that high it's more than enough.
Immunity to bubbles is stupid as well. It's nothing but a luxury thrown in for the sake of it. You say a t1 cruiser could take it? Then you're going to die the second a battleship looks your way.
What does all this mean in practice? For one thing, using them against capitals, ie their intended target is a very expensive suicide. Using a few of them to instawtfpwn a battleship and GTFO on the other hand in, say, piracy - becomes quite an interesting application. So in short they end up being terrible at what they're meant for and overpowered for what they're not. This is why you don't stick capital weapons on smaller ships - they're so out of synch with other weapon sizes that crazy **** like this happens.
Edit: Typo
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 11:39:00 -
[40]
You're quite wrong in many aspects, but judging by your reply, telling you why is a waste of my time so I'm not going to bother.
|
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.09.24 15:54:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Kittamaru You're quite wrong in many aspects, but judging by your reply, telling you why is a waste of my time so I'm not going to bother.
And you've bumped this thread 4 times acting like it's something new and original when in fact it's either a hilariously badly thought out idea or a very poorly disguised plea for more oversized weapon ships. (which is about the last thing that should be implemented)
Seriously take a hint - you're just one of many suggesting the same useless thing.
Now let's throw some figures into the mix just to hammer a few more nails into the coffin. At all 5 skills, an unsieged Phoenix with 3x BCU puts out 874 dps. As the OP ship has another 5% damage bonus over that, we can assume the damage should reach around 1000.
Congrats. You have a ship that does damage on par with a battleship at higher cost with lower tank that needs half a dozen target painters, scram and web to shoot anything smaller, is uninsurable and as such will also be insta primary. And as you said yourself, as it's so vulnerable to a support fleet, this is not something I'd want to fly once your average cookie cutter geddon gets a lock on me. Looks like a nice toy on paper but in reality if I had the skills to fly this thing I'd be in a Torp Raven, and would make a point of laughing at anyone who picked this instead. In short - trash.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 00:56:00 -
[42]
Edited by: Kittamaru on 25/09/2009 01:05:01 Edited by: Kittamaru on 25/09/2009 01:03:38 Uhm... buh. Did you even read the first post since it was initially posted? It's changed a LOT... hence why I keep bumping it and referring people TO the first post...
At lvl 5, you get a 500% bonus to the Purgatory Torpedo (for Gallente) damage... that brings it up to 9,000 thermal damage from just the torpedo and that bonus, NOT including ANY other skills! And you can launch FOUR of them! 36,000 thermal damage before missile skill bonuses! I'm going to assume all the missile warhead upgrade bonuses total 10%, that's 39,600 damage a volley in thermal damage BEFORE damage mods.
In a ship that cannot realistically be targeted by the dreadnought it is attacking, making supporting fleet VITAL again, bringing VARIATION back to the game.
So get off your high horse, aight? At best your torp raven has a 6k damage volley.
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.09.25 15:40:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Kittamaru
At lvl 5, you get a 500% bonus to the Purgatory Torpedo (for Gallente) damage... that brings it up to 9,000 thermal damage from just the torpedo and that bonus, NOT including ANY other skills! And you can launch FOUR of them! 36,000 thermal damage before missile skill bonuses! I'm going to assume all the missile warhead upgrade bonuses total 10%, that's 39,600 damage a volley in thermal damage BEFORE damage mods.
Which leads right back to the earlier point of lolonevolley'ing anything webbed and painted. Great stuff. Totally what I'd want to see.
Quote: In a ship that cannot realistically be targeted by the dreadnought it is attacking, making supporting fleet VITAL again, bringing VARIATION back to the game.
So basically you want these ships to provide target practice for a few battleships brought in. Yeah, I can see it now: "hey, they brought in a few of those heavy bombers, apocs?" "on it boss." ... "all dead." "dreads, how're you doing there?" "just fine, idiots only got one shot off at us, lololol"
Quote: So get off your high horse, aight? At best your torp raven has a 6k damage volley.
Which comes down to 1.7k dps at all 5, likely breaking around 2k with damage mods. I think I'll stick to my tanky, insurable torp raven thanks, it takes more than one sniper apoc to pop that and needs far less skills to fly.
But oh wait! Another bit of the OP I missed. 75% penalty on rate of fire? I assume here you mean they fire slower than normal, so let's factor this in. 75% penaltied launchers with all 5 skills comes to... 571 dps. Less then half what a torp raven of equivilent skills puts out. With BCUs it'd be lucky to hit 800.
But say this spectacular alpha volley actually hit. We'll use the 39600 you presented - cutting off 70% of it to account for inevitable resists, you get a whopping 11k damage. Once a minute. Which can be repped with one capital shield booster cycle. I'll be generous though. I'll assume it's been significantly boosted from BCUs. The damage they did is now reppable in two cycles.
This is not adding variation. This is adding an instapop toy which would be vastly better off just blasting target painted battleships at some gate camp. And I'm no dev, but I'm pretty sure that a ship that fails this spectacularly at it's main job is not going to work.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 16:19:00 -
[44]
Then how about instead of being an insufferable ***** you offer some insight as to how to make it perform it's designed function? Or do you just like being an ass? *shrugs*
And no, it won't be insta-popped by sniper battleships. The idea is to give it a LITTLE survivability, enough to get in, launch, and GTFO. Hence the super high maneuverability and speed for it's size - the idea is to get in, pop the MWD (which only gives half it's normal sig radius penalty) and maneuver to avoid whatever fire it can. With decent resists it should last to get one or two volleys off easy, then warp out.
If the numbers are coming in too low, fine, they can be tweaked. No reason the scrap the idea altogether. The point is, not everyone LIKES flying Ravens... believe it or not, a lot of people actually like other races.
Though, i wouldn't expect you to understand :)
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 17:54:00 -
[45]
Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 26/09/2009 17:55:41
Quote: And no, it won't be insta-popped by sniper battleships. The idea is to give it a LITTLE survivability, enough to get in, launch, and GTFO. Hence the super high maneuverability and speed for it's size - the idea is to get in, pop the MWD (which only gives half it's normal sig radius penalty) and maneuver to avoid whatever fire it can. With decent resists it should last to get one or two volleys off easy, then warp out.
Quote: their sluggish speed and re-align time makes it easy enough for anything cruiser sized and below to lock and tackle them (considering them MUST stay on grid for their torpedoes to hit home)
You've completely contradicted yourself there. Get it straight please? Is it sluggish with a tank or agile without one? And no, it won't survive to make 2 volleys. Even with your newly reduced rate of fire penalty, it's hanging around more than long enough for them to lock it, tackle it, laugh at it, write a lengthy essay on why it's a lolship and then blast it out of the sky, and in the meantime the Dread has repped up from your attack and is joining the others in laughing. But I can't say any more on this because even you don't seem to know what its speed/tank capabilities are. Even with the lower sig radius, it'll still be more than enough to land an accurate hit on it. You're a battlecruiser after all.
Quote: If the numbers are coming in too low, fine, they can be tweaked. No reason the scrap the idea altogether.
Actually it is, because it's become abundantly clear that no matter what you do you're going to end up with is either hanger ornament trash or a world ending pwnmobile. Personally my money is on the former because countering this thing is just so stupidly simple. Even if you managed to get it flawless, IE something that can do noticable damage while being incapable of hitting anything else - it's still not worth using over an equivilently skilled battleship.
Quote: To those that say this will be used to lolpop battleships and such: not really. The explosion velocity will only be around 21 m/s with a damage reduction factor of 5... so yeah. Assuming a non-AB or MWD battleship can move 100 m/s... even with target painters you're going to be doing minimal damage, far less than he can do to you.
Wrong. Scrammed/webbed battleship - 23m/s, give or take 1 or 2. With painters its sig radius is upped from anywhere to 600 to 1k+. That's easily close enough to the threshold for the damage to cross over into the "overpowered" category. For a gang specialised for this sort of attack, extra webs/painters/whatever actually skew it even more in favour of the torps.
Quote: you offer some insight as to how to make it perform it's designed function?
Ok here you go - it can't, because the principles behind how this is meant to work are so laughably out of synch with reality. You're trying to suggest people should use a highly vulnerable one trick pony to do the job a cheaper, tankier and easier to skill for battleship could do better.
Quote: The point is, not everyone LIKES flying Ravens... believe it or not, a lot of people actually like other races.
I saved this for last because it's so brilliantly ironic. By putting this ship in - you're actually making people skill up in missiles to the level of a Caldari Dreadnought pilot. Why exactly would I want to do this when I could hop in an Abaddon or a Megathron and be good for more than just kamikaze runs against capital ships? Not to mention getting a large chunk of training for a Moros or Revelation done in the process. The torp raven pilots are the only ones who would be realistically considering this.
But I wouldn't expect you to understand, as you evidently can't even keep the ships capabilities consistant :)
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 18:03:00 -
[46]
Edited by: Kittamaru on 26/09/2009 18:03:50 I keep varying the ship capabilities (called tweaking if you didn't know) to try to balance it out. It's supposed to have a light tank (after all, you don't want the random smartbomb to be enough to blow it up) but not enough to BE a tank.
It's fast enough to avoid larger ships (BS and up) but slow enough for BC's and below to catch it, and light enough for assault frigs to take it down.
As for webbed battleships - that's called teamwork, and hardly makes this ship a solo pwnmobile... by your reasoning, a Moros is overpowered because it can *****slap a webbed/tackled/painted battleship with it's drones and blasters...
As for the whole "dread pilot" thing, I think I see what you're getting at - because of how missile skills are tied together... *ponders*
|
Anton Cyldragen
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 18:09:00 -
[47]
add a new kind of launcher to the game that only has room for like 1 Citadel torp so it has to reload every time it shoots and can only be fit to this ship type
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.09.26 18:11:00 -
[48]
Edited by: Duchess Starbuckington on 26/09/2009 18:15:07
Originally by: Kittamaru Edited by: Kittamaru on 26/09/2009 18:03:50 I keep varying the ship capabilities (called tweaking if you didn't know) to try to balance it out. It's supposed to have a light tank (after all, you don't want the random smartbomb to be enough to blow it up) but not enough to BE a tank.
It's fast enough to avoid larger ships (BS and up) but slow enough for BC's and below to catch it, and light enough for assault frigs to take it down.
As for webbed battleships - that's called teamwork, and hardly makes this ship a solo pwnmobile... by your reasoning, a Moros is overpowered because it can *****slap a webbed/tackled/painted battleship with it's drones and blasters...
As for the whole "dread pilot" thing, I think I see what you're getting at - because of how missile skills are tied together... *ponders*
Right, now we're getting somewhere. So really all people have to do to bring this thing down is have a few MWDing assault frigates and interceptors on standby? That's a bit of a fault if it's going to cost somewhere around 200million. Obviously it does lack drones or sensible sized weapons to defend itself so fair enough there.
Fast enough to avoid battleships sounds fine in theory, but the likelihood of them coming without tackler ships is pretty slim, and as made clear above, one good tackler ship is pretty much certain death.
I'd also like to mention at no point did I refer to it as "solo". Just "pwnmobile". And getting a few of these ganged up on a battleship isn't teamwork, it's i-win.
Quote: add a new kind of launcher to the game that only has room for like 1 Citadel torp so it has to reload every time it shoots and can only be fit to this ship type
For details of why this wouldn't work, please see previous posts.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 05:06:00 -
[49]
Well, by that reasoning, a Deimos is a pwnmobile because if a gang with a munnin, curse, and deimos go after someone, the deimos is going to do ungodly DPS... :)
|
Isaac Starstriker
Amarr Smegnet Incorporated Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 06:01:00 -
[50]
I'm sorry, but no, I don't support this. We have too many bombers as it is. We don't need more ships killing capital ships as we will now have: (in dominion)
Titans Focused DD Supercarriers Torp Fighters Dreads Battleship fleets.
Tbh, if we implement more anti-capital platforms, we're just going to drive ppl away from training them as they'll worry about getting insta-popped all the freaking time.
So until we get 3+ more types of capitals, no thank you.
Its a good idea otherwise.
--Isaac Isaac's Haul*Mart - Closed
|
|
Duchess Starbuckington
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 10:13:00 -
[51]
Originally by: Kittamaru Well, by that reasoning, a Deimos is a pwnmobile because if a gang with a munnin, curse, and deimos go after someone, the deimos is going to do ungodly DPS... :)
Uhh, no, because the Deimos works completely differently and doesn't deal enough alpha to twoshot a battleship...
|
Grut
Deep Core Mining Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.09.27 14:27:00 -
[52]
Originally by: Isaac Starstriker I'm sorry, but no, I don't support this. We have too many bombers as it is. We don't need more ships killing capital ships as we will now have: (in dominion)
Titans Focused DD Supercarriers Torp Fighters Dreads Battleship fleets.
Tbh, if we implement more anti-capital platforms, we're just going to drive ppl away from training them as they'll worry about getting insta-popped all the freaking time.
So until we get 3+ more types of capitals, no thank you.
Its a good idea otherwise.
--Isaac
Titans Focused DD - Capitals Supercarriers Torp Fighters - Capitals Dreads - Capitals Battleship fleets. - Outnumbering someone 10-1 isn't a counter its bashing n00bs.
So all in all capitals are countered by .... more capitals and nothing else. Doesn't that strike you as odd?
Kinsy > deadman you there? Kinsy > are either of us in pods, becase we dont know...
Mostly harmless [ 2005.12.09 19:22:50 ] (notify) You have started trying to warp scramble the Dreadnought |
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.28 05:12:00 -
[53]
Well, lets see - if you are so worried about this ship alpha popping battleships... *ponders* well, what would it take to prevent that? What about reducing their scanners so it takes longer to lock anything sub-capital? And what about implementing a penalty to all the missiles stats that influence damage (exp radius, exp velocity, etc?)
The problem is, there ARE no capital killers in the game EXCEPT other capitals... and that is a problem.
I'm also thinking of re-working this to be less like the Stealth Bombers and more like Gunships... the problem that was brought up is true - this would force people to train all the missile skills... what would it take to make a heavy gunship instead... *ponders* problem there is, especially with lasers and projectiles, their range and tracking.
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.29 16:08:00 -
[54]
What if we went with a new kind of bomb instead of citadel launchers? Make this a true next step up of the stealth BOMBER...
Heavy Bombs:
Plasma Bomb Skills: Heavy Bombs I Bomb Deployment V Missile Bombardment V Missile Launcher Operation I
Area of effect: 30 km Thermal damage: 15,000 HP Used with (launchergroup): Missile Launcher Bomb Max Flight Time: 30.00 sec Tech Level: 1 Explosion Velocity: 50 m/sec Explosion Radius: 1000 m
Sig Radius: 375m
Armor Hitpoints: 1000 HP Armor Thermal Damage Resistance: 99.9% Armor Kinetic Damage Resistance: 50% Armor EM Damage Resistance: 50% Armor Explosive Damage Resistance: 50%
Hull Hitpoints: 750 Hull Thermal Damage Resistance: 99.5% Hull Kinetic Damage Resistance: 50% Hull EM Resistance: 50% Hull Explosive Resistance: 50%
This gives us a few things we can do:
For one, it's targetable, and destroyable. Large Smartbombs would work great if the person using these isn't careful. Frigates, Interceptors, Assault Frigs, Destroyers, and Interdictors would be perfect for intercepting these as well, while even battleships can lock onto these things large-ish sig radius. Due to their small size though BS sized guns may have an issue hitting them, though.
The other thing is, just move. If you can exceed 50 m/s, you should be pretty much fine, especially if you have even 50% thermal resistance, and you should survive just fine.
Also, this can NOT be used in empire space or low sec - 0.0 only.
I figure, anything small enough to be one-shot by this is fast enough to escape unscathed, especially since you cannot tackle without a heavy tank to it's damage type... with a 30km explosion radius, you'd have to be VERY careful not to blow up your tackler :)
|
Kittamaru
Gallente Democracy of Klingon Brothers Wicked Nation
|
Posted - 2009.09.30 16:26:00 -
[55]
bump
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |