Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Scarlet des Loupes
Gallente University of Caille
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 13:51:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Scarlet des Loupes on 02/06/2011 13:51:45
Originally by: Ingvar Angst Give me a tech II harby with lasers that play Pink Floyd's "Shine on you Crazy Diamond" when fired and all will be right in the universe.
Only if it's "Shine on you Crazy Diamond part I" though.
It makes for great space music too, btw.
|
Ana Vyr
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 13:53:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Jennifer Starling Cruiser class stealth bombers with capital class lauchers??
I kinda like this idea.
|
quigibow
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 13:54:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Jennifer Starling Cruiser class stealth bombers with capital class lauchers??
that would be aweseom!!! give ehm cover ops cloaks and captial missle bonus... useless against sub caps but would be awesome against caps!
|
Anne Arqui
Minmatar Diamonds in the Rough Enterprises
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 14:04:00 -
[34]
Originally by: quigibow
Originally by: Jennifer Starling Cruiser class stealth bombers with capital class lauchers??
that would be aweseom!!! give ehm cover ops cloaks and captial missle bonus... useless against sub caps but would be awesome against caps!
Perhaps a nice role for the T2 version of our tier 2 battlecruisers?
|
Cathy Drall
Amarr Royal Amarr Institute
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 14:08:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Anne Arqui
Originally by: quigibow
Originally by: Jennifer Starling Cruiser class stealth bombers with capital class lauchers??
that would be aweseom!!! give ehm cover ops cloaks and captial missle bonus... useless against sub caps but would be awesome against caps!
Perhaps a nice role for the T2 version of our tier 2 battlecruisers?
Black Khanid Harby with Citadel Launchers .. hmm ...
"Im not nearly as paranoid as people think I am" |
MeBiatch
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 14:13:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Copine Callmeknau Edited by: Copine Callmeknau on 02/06/2011 11:20:54 To be honest I like this, although I think the ship should be nerfed in some way to make them more role specific as anti-super ships. I mean, if this ship can be used in POS bashes etc, or can be deployed against dreads, carriers, or subcaps then you will simply see them replace dreads, and probably all supercaps as the ship of choice in any engagement.
Something along the lines of the capital neut/nos not being able to activate on anything other than a super or titan, and subcaps shouldn't even be possible to lock in siege mode
But CCP implementing them any time soon is as likely as them implementing my request for T3 weapons to be introduced as space shotguns on my tempest
this.
|
MeBiatch
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 14:20:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Jennifer Starling
Originally by: Asuka Smith Or we could just delete motherships from the game, which would rock.
+1
Originally by: HELIC0N ONE dreadnoughts are already obsolete, we don't need T2 versions to make them even more so.
Indeed, what about making half the ships in EVE that nobody flies because they're subpar or subsubpar useful again instead of crying for "moar new ships"?
if you dont get how having an anti-super cap ship that can be easilly countered by sub caps fleets does not make what you call sub par shps usefull again then there is not much hope for you is there
|
quigibow
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 14:23:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Satsujinn Good suggestion
CCP devs - lift a hull from the recent create a starship contest, copy/paste the capabilities and code them into the game, 3mths later - nerf them in the interests of balance.
OP - they won't even LOOK at a new ship of fix the current problems with the game for the next 18mths, but keep up with the suggestions
come now that 18 mths was last summer (july) so its what 8 months left (right after winter expansion) will they expand on content...
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 14:37:00 -
[39]
Originally by: MeBiatch
Originally by: Jennifer Starling
Originally by: Asuka Smith Or we could just delete motherships from the game, which would rock.
+1
Originally by: HELIC0N ONE dreadnoughts are already obsolete, we don't need T2 versions to make them even more so.
Indeed, what about making half the ships in EVE that nobody flies because they're subpar or subsubpar useful again instead of crying for "moar new ships"?
if you dont get how having an anti-super cap ship that can be easilly countered by sub caps fleets does not make what you call sub par shps usefull again then there is not much hope for you is there
I have absolutely no idea how introducing a new ship like this to counter supercapitals makes currently existing ships useful. And neither do you.
Introducing new ships to counter supercapitals is a stupid idea, It's stupid because a) it means that other subcapitals remain worthless in a supercapital fight and b) the supercapitals immediately kill the "new ship" and then we're back to square one.
The correct solution is to make all subcapitals effective against supercapitals. This means removing tackle immunity and preventing supercapitals from applying meaningful DPS to subcapitals.
|
MeBiatch
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 15:07:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Gypsio III
I have absolutely no idea how introducing a new ship like this to counter supercapitals makes currently existing ships useful. And neither do you.
Introducing new ships to counter supercapitals is a stupid idea, It's stupid because a) it means that other subcapitals remain worthless in a supercapital fight and b) the supercapitals immediately kill the "new ship" and then we're back to square one.
The correct solution is to make all subcapitals effective against supercapitals. This means removing tackle immunity and preventing supercapitals from applying meaningful DPS to subcapitals.
i was wondering how long it would take for you to show up
1. the jugger has low sensor strength meaning that it can be shut down but sub cap ewar... 2. all those fancy cap mods are only good against caps... 3. you're correct solution is just a solution its not right or incorrect infact its you're oppinion thats its the correct one... i happen to like my solution... cest la vie...
|
|
icechip
Caldari Angelus.Mortis Detrimental Imperative
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 15:22:00 -
[41]
Why dont you just have a capital size NUET/NOS that current carriers/dreads can use. Give them more uses.
" Mankind must put an end to war, or war will put an end to Mankind" "Unknown" |
Hecatonis
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 15:49:00 -
[42]
the only problem with this idea is that you have made a cap ship that can kill cap ships.
the idea is good, but the the class of ship is too bid, killing a cap or super cap should be the job of a sub cap. it promotes fleet diversity.
__________________________________________________ stop acting like tw*ts and use your brain |
northwesten
Amarr Trinity Corporate Services
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 15:51:00 -
[43]
no thanks! ------------------------------------
|
MeBiatch
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 15:57:00 -
[44]
Originally by: icechip Why dont you just have a capital size NUET/NOS that current carriers/dreads can use. Give them more uses.
the most i could see is siege mode reduced to 5 min for dreads too...
the reason why is dreads already have a niche (roll) in the game... they were intoduced to kill large stationairy objects such as pos shoot at outposts and ihubs...
carriers are logistics ships
super carrier are anti capital
titans are OMG this is OP ships
and Juggers are anti supercap/cap tackle
|
MeBiatch
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 16:04:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Hecatonis the only problem with this idea is that you have made a cap ship that can kill cap ships.
the idea is good, but the the class of ship is too bid, killing a cap or super cap should be the job of a sub cap. it promotes fleet diversity.
but the juggers have weak sensors making them prey for sub cap e-war ships... e-war ships get chewed up by bc/bs... the point of the jugger is to provide balance to force fleet diversity...
|
Daniela Darr
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 16:59:00 -
[46]
Originally by: MeBiatch if you dont get how having an anti-super cap ship that can be easilly countered by sub caps fleets does not make what you call sub par shps usefull again then there is not much hope for you is there
Personally I think it will make the game a little more balanced again. Supercaps are immune to subcapitals, where battleships are still vulnerable to frigates a supercap is a "iwin" ship against everything smaller.
Even if there's subcap hull anti-supercap stealth bombers that can be easilly countered by sub caps fleets it at last means there's a purpose and need for subcap ships. And I think that's very very good for the game and makes newer players a lot more useful in big fleet fights.
|
Sadayiel
Caldari Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 17:07:00 -
[47]
Quick fix, upgrade both supercarriers/titan to some grade of awesome solo pwnmobiles, but also add for them a kind of Corp/alliance maintenance that Grows exponentially each time more and more are fielded this way you get both a massive moon goo isk drain and a limit of cap use to most of alliances and even single corps.
Now let's say that if the cap it's destroyed the maintenance fee it's pardon for that month this way most of ppl can keep their carriers supersin a safe and only commision them when in need.
When field something more than 5 titans takes like 50-100b for an alliance mostly they start to consider them something less expendable unless you plan to get it blow up.
P.S: i do not held responsible for my 99th personality brain farts today
|
Ripley Nostromo
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 17:29:00 -
[48]
Great !!!
More ships no one will be able to afford unless, botting, rmting or/and in a big alliance and we can't fly in Empire...
How about some Tech 3 Frigates, Battle Ships, and more inportant, Tech 3 Mods to use on a Tech 3 ship...
|
|
CCP Zymurgist
Gallente C C P
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 18:24:00 -
[49]
Moved from General Discussion
Zymurgist Community Representative CCP NA, EVE Online Contact Us |
|
MeBiatch
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 18:47:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Daniela Darr Personally I think it will make the game a little more balanced again. Supercaps are immune to subcapitals, where battleships are still vulnerable to frigates a supercap is a "iwin" ship against everything smaller.
Even if there's subcap hull anti-supercap stealth bombers that can be easilly countered by sub caps fleets it at last means there's a purpose and need for subcap ships. And I think that's very very good for the game and makes newer players a lot more useful in big fleet fights.
right i also like the idea of stealth-cruisebombers... but also remember one of the things that keeps sc's alive is thier ability to nuet hics and jump out... having the jugger being the capital tackler will fill this role...
tbh there is a need for both juggernauts and stealth-cruisebombers...
it will be interesting where you have a situation where the sc fleet will need a sub cap fleet to stay alive or else it will be eaten up by juggernauts... but then juggernauts will need its own sub cap fleet to counter the other sub cap fleet so it can target...
|
|
Forever A Clone
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 19:35:00 -
[51]
I support the idea of a capship designed for capacitor warfare but a couple of suggestions:
1) no weapon slots, it can nos and neut and maybe give it a smart bonus to defend against bombers
2) capital webs shouldn't be necessary
This means that you can neut all tanking and remote reps from a mom, stop it from jumping and let dreads finish it off, an infinipoint might be OP but ccp should consider it.
|
Nova Fox
Gallente Novafox Shipyards
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 20:51:00 -
[52]
Oh I designed these ships years ago, mostly as a counter super capitol and a planetary bombarder (if and when planets can shoot back hard enough to take out dreads easily)
Amarr Testament Caldari Jorgumnd Gallente Hephatus Minmatar Kaja
even had pictures and models made. but they where tier 2 hullts not tech 2 hulls. Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 3APR11
|
MeBiatch
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 21:17:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Nova Fox Oh I designed these ships years ago, mostly as a counter super capitol and a planetary bombarder (if and when planets can shoot back hard enough to take out dreads easily)
Amarr Testament Caldari Jorgumnd Gallente Hephatus Minmatar Kaja
even had pictures and models made. but they where tier 2 hullts not tech 2 hulls.
i would love to see these pics :) nova i got mad respect for you what are your opionions on the ships (tech II ones)
Originally by: Forever A Clone I support the idea of a capship designed for capacitor warfare but a couple of suggestions:
1) no weapon slots, it can nos and neut and maybe give it a smart bonus to defend against bombers
2) capital webs shouldn't be necessary
This means that you can neut all tanking and remote reps from a mom, stop it from jumping and let dreads finish it off, an infinipoint might be OP but ccp should consider it.
cap web is to augment sc ability to speedtank dreads (yes sc can speed tank a dread not cool at all) the infinant point can only be used when in siege mode and as it stands a sc can nuet a hic to death and jump out... but it would have consiterable more difficulty nueting out a juggernaut...
|
Nova Fox
Gallente Novafox Shipyards
|
Posted - 2011.06.02 21:23:00 -
[54]
Edited by: Nova Fox on 02/06/2011 21:25:23 Well currently I have to agree current capitols need to be fixed before we think about adding tech 2 versions.
One things to always consider is overfielding any of these ships. For example if I show up with 100 of these ships am I garanteed a win despite the other team showing up with a mixed bag of 100 similar roled ships? If answer is yes then you need to start poking holes or give it weaknesses.
For example make sure the tech 2 dreads have no real defenses against subcapitol ships would be a good idea, unfourtunately thats current situation now and probably why dreads arent considered useful anymore as motherships dont have that problem.
Further more I only have one ship semi done with my curerent art standard the Testament. Which is under construction and yes thats a providence freighter there.
Pre-order your Sisters of ≡v≡ Exploration ship today, Updated 3APR11
|
MeBiatch
|
Posted - 2011.06.03 02:09:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Nova Fox Edited by: Nova Fox on 02/06/2011 21:25:23 Well currently I have to agree current capitols need to be fixed before we think about adding tech 2 versions.
One things to always consider is overfielding any of these ships. For example if I show up with 100 of these ships am I garanteed a win despite the other team showing up with a mixed bag of 100 similar roled ships? If answer is yes then you need to start poking holes or give it weaknesses.
For example make sure the tech 2 dreads have no real defenses against subcapitol ships would be a good idea, unfourtunately thats current situation now and probably why dreads arent considered useful anymore as motherships dont have that problem.
Further more I only have one ship semi done with my curerent art standard the Testament. Which is under construction and yes thats a providence freighter there.
i have a feeling that current capitals are going to be fixed pretty soonish... as people have mentioned reducing hp of FB or increasing thier sig radius will help... i could also see siege modee being reduced to 5 min...
as for the overfielding examples being drakes abadons sc's (formerly dreads) i think giving the juggernauts the same sensor strength as a battleship will make it so it can be countered... how often is a marauder used in pvp? but then again the juggernaut has so much going for it its just tempting enough to bring one out (with the proper sub cap fleet)
it would also have a heavy training... cap ship V Dread V tactical recogfiguratoin V advanced tactical recogfiguratoin i jump drive operation V Jump drive calibration V Jump drive fuel conservation V plus there would be capital energy emisions 12x capital propulsion jamming 12x
plus all the TECH II components would have to be made for the ship so it would also be pricy... but for its worth i am guessing around 5 billion build cost... i have dreads and carriers and faction bananza so 5 billion is not too pricy for a capital supercapital tackler imo...
think of the capital webber being like a officer webber but costs the same as other capital mods... and when in siege mode it only works on capital ships but goes 70 km...
plus the ships also target as fast as a regular dread (maybe even a little slower) so that way ewar games will kill a juggernaut only fleet...
|
Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
|
Posted - 2011.06.03 07:33:00 -
[56]
Originally by: MeBiatch
Originally by: Gypsio III
I have absolutely no idea how introducing a new ship like this to counter supercapitals makes currently existing ships useful. And neither do you.
Introducing new ships to counter supercapitals is a stupid idea, It's stupid because a) it means that other subcapitals remain worthless in a supercapital fight and b) the supercapitals immediately kill the "new ship" and then we're back to square one.
The correct solution is to make all subcapitals effective against supercapitals. This means removing tackle immunity and preventing supercapitals from applying meaningful DPS to subcapitals.
i was wondering how long it would take for you to show up
1. the jugger has low sensor strength meaning that it can be shut down but sub cap ewar... 2. all those fancy cap mods are only good against caps... 3. you're correct solution is just a solution its not right or incorrect infact its you're oppinion thats its the correct one... i happen to like my solution... cest la vie...
How do any of these points make currently existing ships useful? Why do you even want to introduce a new class of ships instead of simply changing ones that we already have? Why do you not want subcapital pilots to be useful in large-scale battles?
|
HELIC0N ONE
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
|
Posted - 2011.06.03 10:04:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Ripley Nostromo How about some Tech 3 Frigates, Battle Ships, and more inportant, Tech 3 Mods to use on a Tech 3 ship...
If there's one thing that EVE needs less than T2 dreads its T3 frigates.
|
Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
|
Posted - 2011.06.03 10:23:00 -
[58]
Same issues as the suggestion for the super heavy bomber: Balance.
Introducing a new ship with all the balance woes it brings to counter a single OP class is a stupid waste of resources.
Nerf SC's slightly and buff Dreads slightly, problem solved.
Besides, we should need/want to get away from the lame EHP based mechanics not add to them. Just Sayin'.
|
Kersh Marelor
Amarr
|
Posted - 2011.06.04 07:40:00 -
[59]
SCs do not need many changes - in fact those ships work fine. The troubles with balancing lies elsewhere - the dreads lack a good role (apart from that we have waaay to many supers in Eve...). How about making it impossible for super-carriers to engage structures with fighter bombers? Then all those TCUs, stations and other crap needs to be engaged by a dread fleet. Imho the fist thing to be done is fixing the dreads and triage so that they can be usefull again in the environment where SCs are a real threat to capitals.
As for all those suggesting sub-caps need more love... A bunch of battleships and cruisers killing 15 supercarriers with carrier support -> that is totally what you gus would want and what should NEVER be possible. It is just plain stupid - a capital ship is supposed to be powerfull and tough to kill, it is supposed to be the leading force of large scale warfare. The problem is atm CCP designed it so that some have such massive ammounts of those ships they need no support. But this issue does not start with supers being overpowered - it's EVE economy what's screwed and allowed for 50+ super blobs :/
|
Asuka Solo
Gallente Defenders of Sovereignty
|
Posted - 2011.06.04 09:12:00 -
[60]
I support this product and or service!
+1
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |