Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hal Safon
Morior Invictus.
2
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 18:50:00 -
[1] - Quote
Anyone else think these would be a lot of fun?
We have navy frigates, navy cruisers, navy BCs, and navy BS. Why not navy destroyers?
I am a huge fan of the destroyer class and would love to see navy iterations of my favorite ships. Republic fleet thrasher, cormorant navy issue, etc.
With a price point around 20-30 million they would be similar to AF's but trade resists/mobility/sig for raw damage/tank.
Here's to hoping CCP has plans for introducing navy destroyers soon!
|
Riot Girl
You'll Cowards Don't Even Smoke Crack
3001
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 19:27:00 -
[2] - Quote
I can't say I share your excitement for the idea. Oh god. |
Liam Inkuras
Aunenen Civil Liberties Union
904
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 20:07:00 -
[3] - Quote
I only see them causing a balance issue, and overlapping with Assault Frigates and current destroyers. Tech 2 destroyers than can fit a single, or maybe 2, warfare links would be incredible and really shift the game around some. I wear my goggles at night.
Any spelling/grammatical errors come complimentary with my typing on a phone |
Zarnak Wulf
In Exile. Imperial Outlaws.
1607
|
Posted - 2014.03.27 20:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
No. Hell no. **** no.
Edit - Navy Carriers would be a better suggestion. |
Dalloway Jones
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
194
|
Posted - 2014.03.28 01:34:00 -
[5] - Quote
Only Amarr. I couldn't stomach the other racial destroyers flying around with all that awful space camouflage. |
Navi Annages
The Scope Gallente Federation
173
|
Posted - 2014.03.28 18:25:00 -
[6] - Quote
Personally I believe ccp should create T3 destroyers. They would be awesome. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8-JfK-wwFU |
Nalia White
Tencus
40
|
Posted - 2014.03.29 11:07:00 -
[7] - Quote
since i started pvping i wish for that... but i guess syndicate wouldn't like that at all :D |
Fenris Orion
Rapid Withdrawal
3
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 15:54:00 -
[8] - Quote
Hal Safon wrote:
We have navy frigates, navy cruisers, navy BCs, and navy BS. Why not navy destroyers?
He's got a point. Why are destroyers the only class of ship that doesn't have a Navy version?
As for T2 Destroyers, I very, very rarely seen them used in Lowsec, and here's why: "Interdictors are destroyer-sized vessels built to fill a single important tactical niche: the breaching of enemy warp tunnels."
I think there's plenty of room for Navy Destroyers. Especially if they give them a unique shape, not just a paintjob. Here's what I'd like to see:
Federation Navy Catalyst: 7x Light Ion Blaster II's (-1 turret)
Web/scram/prop (+1mid)
DC-II, EANM, Mag-stab (same lows)
(same 3 rig slots like usual).
Maybe add 3x Light Drone capacity like it's Comet sibling, and split the base speed difference between the Catalyst and the Eris. |
Mizhir
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
60304
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 16:13:00 -
[9] - Quote
Fenris Orion wrote:Hal Safon wrote:
We have navy frigates, navy cruisers, navy BCs, and navy BS. Why not navy destroyers?
He's got a point. Why are destroyers the only class of ship that doesn't have a Navy version? As for T2 Destroyers, I very, very rarely seen them used in Lowsec, and here's why: "Interdictors are destroyer-sized vessels built to fill a single important tactical niche: the breaching of enemy warp tunnels." I think there's plenty of room for Navy Destroyers. Especially if they give them a unique shape, not just a paintjob. Here's what I'd like to see: Federation Navy Catalyst: 7x Light Ion Blaster II's (-1 turret) Web/scram/prop (+1mid) DC-II, EANM, Mag-stab (same lows) (same 3 rig slots like usual). Maybe add 3x Light Drone capacity like it's Comet sibling, and split the base speed difference between the Catalyst and the Eris.
Maybe try the algos? It does essentially the same thing and can even pack a neut.
One Man Crew - Collective solo pvp |
Fenris Orion
Rapid Withdrawal
3
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 16:29:00 -
[10] - Quote
Mizhir wrote: Maybe try the algos? It does essentially the same thing and can even pack a neut.
Except that the Algos is much slower, only has 5 turrets, and is bonused for the use of drones over turrets. Very familiar with it.
The reason I'd build it that way is because the Comet is a combination of the best of the three T1 combat frigates of the same race: nearly as fast as the Atron, tankier than the Incursus but without the rep bonus and drones like the Tristan but only 3 of em.
Figured a Navy Destroyer should follow suit and mix the best of its two T1 siblings.
Maybe call it the Meteor? |
|
Mizhir
Euphoria Released Triumvirate.
60305
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 16:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
Fenris Orion wrote:Mizhir wrote: Maybe try the algos? It does essentially the same thing and can even pack a neut.
Except that the Algos is much slower, only has 5 turrets, and is bonused for the use of drones over turrets. Very familiar with it. The reason I'd build it that way is because the Comet is a combination of the best of the three T1 combat frigates of the same race: nearly as fast as the Atron, tankier than the Incursus but without the rep bonus and drones like the Tristan but only 3 of em. Figured a Navy Destroyer should follow suit and mix the best of its two T1 siblings. Maybe call it the Meteor?
The problem is, as Liam already pointed out, that it will be hard to make some navy destroyers that don't overlap with the assault frigs. One Man Crew - Collective solo pvp |
Fenris Orion
Rapid Withdrawal
3
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 17:45:00 -
[12] - Quote
Mizhir wrote: The problem is, as Liam already pointed out, that it will be hard to make some navy destroyers that don't overlap with the assaulr frigs.
Well, Destroyers are specifically designed to outclass Frigates, so I don't see the problem with this. Brawling dessys would still be vulnerable to kiting AF's like an arty Wolf or a light-missile Hawk, and kiting dessys will still be vulnerable to brawling AF's like the blaster Enyo.
Additionally, spreading demand a little could bring the cost of assault frigates down some, making a faction dessy more expensive than an AF. Meaning it would be reasonable that a navy-destroyer could outclass an assault-frigate.
I say make it happen.... |
Last Wolf
Umbra Wing
31
|
Posted - 2014.03.30 18:32:00 -
[13] - Quote
This game is about choices after all, who cares if navy dessies step on some toes? The market will balance the prices out accordingly.
But, I would be happy with pirate BC ships and tech 3 weapons before navy dessies. Vacuums suck. |
Primus Aulmais
Federal Navy Academy Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 16:08:00 -
[14] - Quote
Mizhir wrote:Fenris Orion wrote:Hal Safon wrote:
We have navy frigates, navy cruisers, navy BCs, and navy BS. Why not navy destroyers?
He's got a point. Why are destroyers the only class of ship that doesn't have a Navy version? As for T2 Destroyers, I very, very rarely seen them used in Lowsec, and here's why: "Interdictors are destroyer-sized vessels built to fill a single important tactical niche: the breaching of enemy warp tunnels." I think there's plenty of room for Navy Destroyers. Especially if they give them a unique shape, not just a paintjob. Here's what I'd like to see: Federation Navy Catalyst: 7x Light Ion Blaster II's (-1 turret) Web/scram/prop (+1mid) DC-II, EANM, Mag-stab (same lows) (same 3 rig slots like usual). Maybe add 3x Light Drone capacity like it's Comet sibling, and split the base speed difference between the Catalyst and the Eris. Maybe try the algos? It does essentially the same thing and can even pack a neut. I'd also prefer to see a Navy Algos rather than a navy Catalyst, though part of that is because I greatly prefer the aesthetics of the Algos. |
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors Late Night Alliance
5156
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 16:46:00 -
[15] - Quote
Fenris Orion wrote:Hal Safon wrote:
We have navy frigates, navy cruisers, navy BCs, and navy BS. Why not navy destroyers?
He's got a point. Why are destroyers the only class of ship that doesn't have a Navy version? Probably because Navy BCs are not all that popular?
Navy Destroyers will probably have similar issues that the Navy Battlecruiser have in that they...
- have terrible price-performance issues compared to Tech 1 (and Tech 2) variants. OR - don't really have anything that makes them stand out from their Tech 1 (and Tech 2) variants. Change isn't bad, but it isn't always good. Sometimes, the oldest and most simple of things can be the most elegant and effective.
"How did you veterans start?" |
Diesel47
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
1051
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 18:23:00 -
[16] - Quote
IMO navy BC need a be cheaper.... Never even seen them used. |
Noxisia Arkana
Deadspace Knights
308
|
Posted - 2014.04.10 19:24:00 -
[17] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:IMO navy BC need a be cheaper.... Never even seen them used.
Other than the navy brutix if you're buffer tanking and the desire to grab a pre nerf cane - there really isn't a great reason to want one. They don't really have the differentiation that makes navy battleships popular, and they are only so popular because of their PVE applications. |
Fenris Orion
Rapid Withdrawal
5
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 01:56:00 -
[18] - Quote
I'd also prefer to see a Navy Algos rather than a navy Catalyst, though part of that is because I greatly prefer the aesthetics of the Algos. [/quote]
Well, if they followed suit with the fraction frigates, they'd combine the two entirely. I'm thinking something like an overgrown, cracked out Nemesis would bridge the catalyst/algos nicely. And it'd be very interesting to see what they'd do with mixing the thrasher/talwar, corax/cormorant, and coercer/dragoon.
And it begs repeating that the T2 destroyers are notably absent outside of nullsec for a reason. Talk about reverse cost efficiency, trying to use an interdictor for heads up PvP is price prohibitive as hell. You'd have to kill 10 frigs or 5 T1 dessys just to break even. There is actually quite a gap to fill there. |
Taoist Dragon
Sh1t Happens. And then you die.
933
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 02:58:00 -
[19] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:IMO navy BC need a be cheaper.... Never even seen them used.
Since they changed FW plex's to pretty much frig/dessy/cruisers BC's have very quickly become hanger ornaments.
If they allowed BC back into some plex's or changed the spawn rates of the plex's that do allow them then they might become more popular but don't hold you breath. That is the Way, the Tao.
Balance is everything.
http://taoistdragon.blogspot.com.au/ |
Ireland VonVicious
Vicious Trading Company
305
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 03:01:00 -
[20] - Quote
I asked for this years ago before the destroyers got buffed and made ganks far more common.
Destroyers use to be much weaker and I was hoping to see navy versions roughly as strong as the standard ones are today.
They are already over powered. The dream is dead. |
|
WaterMarks
24th Imperial Crusade Amarr Empire
21
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 04:44:00 -
[21] - Quote
Im down make them use medium guns but less of them -Fly Reckless- |
Luwc
Biohazard. WINMATAR.
86
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 06:46:00 -
[22] - Quote
Just put a Navy or whatever infront of the Corax, Algos etc etc.
|
Hal Safon
Morior Invictus.
8
|
Posted - 2014.04.11 18:40:00 -
[23] - Quote
It seems like the main worry is that Navy Destroyers would be overpowered?
I really don't think that would be the case if they are implemented correctly. Especially considering that the market will balance their price accordingly. Part of the reason T1 destroyers are so powerful is that they are very inexpensive, and thus can be thrown into any situation. You get a lot bang for your buck....
Also consider that unlike many frigates, destroyers, being slower and larger, are much more vulnerable to cruiser class and above ships. |
Zarnak Wulf
In Exile. Imperial Outlaws.
1634
|
Posted - 2014.04.12 03:28:00 -
[24] - Quote
The market as a balancing concept should be well down the list. I for one remember the two year 'Age of the Dramiel' and have no desire to revisit it. |
Alaric Faelen
Sabotage Incorporated Executive Outcomes
250
|
Posted - 2014.04.13 18:11:00 -
[25] - Quote
1) T2 Command Destroyers. -- mimic the T2 battle cruiser role with smaller bonuses, giving fast moving frigate gangs a way to have a boosting role in fleet. T2 BC's tend to be about the slowest ships in a fleet, so using a destroyer to support fast frigates gives somewhat of a similar effect. Bonuses need to be smaller so the two sizes of ships don't compete-- BC's are too slow to be useful in small, fast fleets while the Command Destroyers' bonuses wouldn't benefit a fleet of larger hulls as much as the T2 BC.
2) Pirate Destroyers. --Mimic the tier 3 BC class by using the next size UP in gun class, but have virtually zero tank. I would have probably done the same when introducing the tier 3 BC's- explaining that pirate tactics justify the 'all gank, no tank' mentality, rather than make them new Empire ships.
3) Support variant. --Bonused for remote modules in general, route remote module use to high slots. DDs are high slot ships, so I feel their utility to a fleet should come from there. For example- a dedicated ReSebo or projected ECCM ship that can support many ships. People say EWAR is over-powered, well here is a ship as a hard counter- but presents the FC with a choice of using one of his fleet members for such a niche role, or bring MOAR GUNZ. Losing that ship (as it would surely become a primary) would reduce the effectiveness of a fleet, but not utterly cripple it. This would require getting creative with routing mids to high slots. Perhaps a 'splitter' module that takes a mid slot remote module, splits it's effects into two or three targets but at a somewhat reduced amount due to 'signal loss'. Then there could be a skill to reduce that signal loss and be more efficient.
If possible, I would like to see new ROLES introduced rather than just new DPS boats. Since both the DD and BC classes currently only have a single T2 variant, those are the classes I would like to see any new roles go to. Frankly, faction versions of ships are just expensive versions of the same thing. Other than being a bit 'more', they offer nothing new or innovative. So 'Navy' or 'Pirate' variants are very low on my list, at least compared to entire new roles to fly.
|
Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
204
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 01:12:00 -
[26] - Quote
Sure... why not. A CNC: Caldari Navy Corax. 4x Torps, Cov-ops cloak, no bomb bonus, no cyno. ...or 3x torps and a deck gun... er I mean large railgun/blaster. dive! dive! dive! GÇö+¬GÇö |
Jallukola
19
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 05:25:00 -
[27] - Quote
I think this'd be great! Can't decide should Tier 1 or 2 destros get that variant however. It'd be natural though, that the "staple powerhouse" version usually is the one. The greatest battle music of all time. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67MPxnPHBNk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16RCvtziXj0
|
Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
205
|
Posted - 2014.04.14 08:51:00 -
[28] - Quote
Jallukola wrote:I think this'd be great! Can't decide should Tier 1 or 2 destros get that variant however. It'd be natural though, that the "staple powerhouse" version usually is the one. I'd guess T1 as a navy version, right? I mean they are mostly souped-up T1, not quite matching T2 variants. Such as Merlin vs. Hookbill vs. Hawk or Harpy. Hookbill falls in the middle.
That was the idea for no bomb bonus nor cyno, so it's not a true T2 mufti-role cov-op, yet an added weapon over a bomber seeing it's a slightly higher class. I like the bombers so I wouldn't want to antiquate them against another variant on the grid. Little easier to get into for newbies/lower SP, but still torps, cov-ops cloak and maybe large hybrid turret (I'd prefer the 3 launch 1 turret hardpoint in fairness against bombers) can take a bit of SP to train up well. Then just adjust the LP price up enough to make them a little less disposable, maybe 30% over a bomber. Yeah, would be a fun little boat
GÇö+¬GÇö |
Ginger Barbarella
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
1898
|
Posted - 2014.04.15 23:02:00 -
[29] - Quote
Diesel47 wrote:IMO navy BC need a be cheaper.... Never even seen them used.
I used a Navy Drake once... it was fun. :)
But then I went back to my SNI. "Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |