EVE Search - New Ship Idea

Search EVE-Online forums for:

All Channels

Features and Ideas Discussion

New Ship Idea

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 :: one page

Author	Topic
Balor Haliquin	Posted - 2008.01.13 01:16:00 - [151] I was considering that but one problem comes with making the flagship based off of the Tier 2 hulls. It steps squarely on the toes of the Murauders. That is something i want to avoid, a ship that dose prity much the same job (mission running) as the "ultimate" mission runner. Someone had sugested that the Caldari Flagship be the raven, but the same issue came up so i think is best to keep them in their own unique hull type.
Nova Fox	Posted - 2008.01.13 03:55:00 - [152] Edited by: Nova Fox on 13/01/2008 04:01:35 Have you thought adding in a field generator? something that makes a field based on the script inserted? Like reinforcement fields to add resistances repair fields to fix all those near or a recharger field or webber field for being more offensive or a a force field to give the gang a few extra seconds to get the screen loaded at a fleet battle. just my ideas for making something not run of the mill.
Balor Haliquin	Posted - 2008.01.13 06:09:00 - [153] An interesting concept, but i think that would be more oriented to a module. For the ships as they are, they have the use of the warfare link modules. That will help in dealing with giving ships in its fleet better resistances and the like.
Nova Fox	Posted - 2008.01.14 05:04:00 - [154] what better way to expand thier fleet use with none other a additional situational field generator that can be deployed when the situation calls for it? getting bombarded bad and need to get out? force field push all the guys off of yours and get the heck out of there. everyone's hulls burining? repper field! need extra long range deploy the tactical net field and increase thier tracking and the sort.
Balor Haliquin	Posted - 2008.01.14 05:31:00 - [155] As i said before, thats an awesome idea for a mod but not a ship function. These ships are to be used for bonuses to fleets and the like. These ships are supposed to make ones fleet more powerful and durable. A system to do as you propose is not in the ships abillites and would be completely out of the current version of EVE's realm.
Balor Haliquin	Posted - 2008.01.15 05:02:00 - [156] bump looking for more people to comment on the subject and hopefully approve it. Please keep the responces comming.
Korran Minare Gallente Spaced Cowboys Dread Sovereign	Posted - 2008.01.15 15:46:00 - [157] double bump, i do like the idea of that field generator, making it another warfare link mod would probly be the best way to do it Originally by: Korran Minare what would you put on space pizza anyway????
Taki Kenirou	Posted - 2008.01.15 16:40:00 - [158] The only thing I disagree with is that some have 3 warfare links role bonus. if they are advanced command ships, based on a hybrid of a BS size and the command form of the command ship, then they should all receive this bonus. example, why even put a command device on the Hyperion based ship if you have to sacrifice its ability to do anything with command processors in the mids. I would say make it a static role bonus, such as the command form version of the command ships. 3 warfare links strait up, and 99% reduction. otherwise, the Hyperion based one will just be a tech II ganking battleship. imagine a Megathron with better resistances than a Marauder.
Balor Haliquin	Posted - 2008.01.15 17:04:00 - [159] As I have said, I like the idea of the bubble but it is more of a module than a ship, and is realy off topic for the concept here. Please by all means make a new thread based around this concept but please keep the discussion on topic. One of the major sticking points I had was trying to make the Flagships versetile while still keeping them centered in their roles. One way of doing this was to give them slightly different bonuses. For example, the gallente versions of the Flagships have two styles to them. There is the combat oriented "Frontline Command Ship" and the more logistics and rear guard "Theater Command Ship" As such they have to be more oriented for there respective places. The "Frontline Command Ship" is more of a combat and direct fire ship. It is designed to sit of the combat line with its fleet and slug it out with the enemy. As such it dose not have an electronics and support system that is as effective in the fleet support role. This is why these ships get a bonus oriented to combat and have a massive bonus to just one warfare link. But also realize that they are no more effective in combat as far as damage output than a standard battleship of the same hull class. The "Theater Command Ship" is more reliant on its supporting fleet to make sure it survives the encounter. More often than not I expect these ships to be in the rear of the lines making sure their fleet is more survivable and deadly in combat. These ships have, by simply putting all the warfare links on their ship, a much better and more effective combat value not only to themselves but to the fleet they support. Their main failure in combat is that they are not as powerful as a standard battleship in combat. If caught alone or with a small fleet they are vulnerable to being overrun. So in short th reason the two ships have different bonuses is to ballance them within the group, i would like people to use both for their intended purpose and not just one exclusively. A good point to make about the bonuses non the less.
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.15 21:00:00 - [160] A thought about the "Frontline Command Ship", they are not as oriented to the command function as i think players would like. I think rather than giving them the same role bonus as the "Theater Command Ship", as in the ability to activate 3 warfare links at once, it should be changed on the role bonus so that they get 10% bonus to any warfare link they put on, as aposed to the current race specific version. So they are better at the overall command function but the "Theater Command Ship" remains the better overall Flagship.

Taki Kenirou	Posted - 2008.01.15 21:24:00 - [161] I actually apologize for the post. I was skimming so fast through the thread i misread the two classes of ships. I am on board with the idea.
Xangetzu Kenirou Gallente Southern Cross Incorporated	Posted - 2008.01.15 21:39:00 - [162] The only question i still have is what is your thought on the whole marauder thing. Now that they have established themselves as expensive PVE ships, they still offer the slug fest front line thing that it seems the font line tech II BS your suggesting does, with a slightly weaker tank as the resistances are not quite tech II. are we defining the difference as it having no secondary ability such as webbing, and slightly less firepower? or what. is there a way to make it more unique so that there is room for the marauder, and it does not make it completely, worthless.
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.16 03:45:00 - [163] The difference between a Marauder and a "Frontline Command Ship" version of a Flagship is a rather important one. Marauders are an established ship in the universe of eve so there fore the Frontline Flagship has to work around it. Marauder are very mission oriented and, as far as I can tell PvP wise, they are extremely damage oriented. They do more damage and can deal with fast ships much better than the Frontline Flagship could ever hope to do. For missioning, they are probably second to none. I say probably because i have yet to fly one and try it for my self. Frontline Flagships on the other hand are more combat oriented versions of the Flagships. But their true job is still very much fleet support. The power of the ship is not oriented around its firepower but rather its tank and its support capabilities. Granted I have no way of quantifying the true difference between the two. But I think I have done a good job in making sure that the two ships are able to their own seperate jobs. Note that for missions the Marauder would be fare more capable of soloing the mission given the fallowing. The Marauders are capable of tanking specificly for the mission. The Marauder is also capable of dealing with ships via its web and other functions, the Frontline Flagship is incapable of doing this as effectively as a Marauder. So as far as missions go I belive a Marauder is the best for missioning.
Xangetzu Kenirou Gallente Southern Cross Incorporated	Posted - 2008.01.16 15:00:00 - [164] I agree with you and thinking about it i see the difference, but here is my worry. You may be able to achieve the same function as the marauder. if you think about it this way. A Deimos for example, 6 lows, tech II tank. repair, damage control, nano and explosive... fit the same tank on this flagship and you have 3 low slots to put damage on if you wanted to. The marauder, well it could do the same but have a much more insufficient tank. I am just concerned that it may not be used for its intended purpose. Again though I do like this idea. it is very intriguing. I think of a jacked up Eos or Astarte... and that to say the least sounds sexy. a machine with an impressive tank, coupled with a machine of impressive power, couple with other machines, their tech I variants, for extra damage, and of course or fellow recon, ceptor, and hac pilots. This makes for a fleet which can engage and defend at great efficiency.
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.16 16:05:00 - [165] Here is the fundamental issue facing anyone designing a ship in EVE, you can not force a person to use a ship for its intended purpose, you can only influence the player to use it that way. I have been talking to people in game and they have made some suggestions to do just that. I am going to increase the bonus given by the ships to warfare links from 3% to 5%. They are supposed to be batter at the fleet job than command ships, I suppose I should make them so. Second i will be upping the bonus given to Frontline Command Ships from "10% to (race specific) warfare links" to "15% to warfare links". This should influence players to use the ships for command and control rather than Missioning. There is no way I can possibly prevent the Flagship from being used in Missions. I honestly hope it is, but used in the fassion of supporting Marauders in L5s. But if i was to try and prevent the Flagship from being used in missions i belive it would become so horribly crippled by highly restrictive fitting stats and ocward bonuses that no one would fly them. I'm trying to make a usable ship for EVE, not a one off special. Not to say anyone was suggesting anything of the sort.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen	Posted - 2008.01.16 16:06:00 - [166] Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 16/01/2008 16:08:27 Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 16/01/2008 16:06:54 I dont really understand this need. Just seem like just another "uber-pvp" ship to me.. Nobody even seem to use command links anyway. Also the current command ships fill that role very well. Furthermore there are already "big command ships" in game. They are called; Carriers, Motherships and Titans edit: I would however welcome the ability to fit command modules on dreads (sacrificing either one weapon or the siege module if one chooses to fit it)
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.16 16:16:00 - [167] To be honest i was trying to make a ship that a small corperation could use in high sec for their command and control abilities. I don't see these as uber PvP ships, they may have good tanks but are not more dangerous than their Tier 3 base hulls. As for a purpose for these ships, i think they have a few. High sec POS takedowns, fleet command and control, evolution to the battleship (in the same way a command ship is for the battlecruiser), stepping stone for the future dreadnought and carrier pilots (in the same way assault ships and heavy assault ships are for battleships, a lot of the skills needed make the battleships much better), and giving a massive boost to combat fleets in small or large fleet battles.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen	Posted - 2008.01.16 22:31:00 - [168] Originally by: Balor Haliquin To be honest i was trying to make a ship that a small corperation could use in high sec for their command and control abilities. I don't see these as uber PvP ships, they may have good tanks but are not more dangerous than their Tier 3 base hulls. As for a purpose for these ships, i think they have a few. High sec POS takedowns, fleet command and control, evolution to the battleship (in the same way a command ship is for the battlecruiser), stepping stone for the future dreadnought and carrier pilots (in the same way assault ships and heavy assault ships are for battleships, a lot of the skills needed make the battleships much better), and giving a massive boost to combat fleets in small or large fleet battles. Not sure I see why the current command ships dont fill that role? In fact people hardly seem to use the fleet command ships as it is. Why would they use another command ship for bossting of fleets if the current ships arent used at all? Lets face it people use the field command ships just because they are uber-pvp ships. The fate of the Eos proves this in a very significant way. Once they took away the 2 blasters it almost halfed in price (ie demand) because it no longer was uber-pvp. Now its in line with the other fleet ships and filling its role as fleet booster. And so noone use it. And looking at your proposed ships ideas they strike me as being the field command version. And as such they will be thought of and used as pvp-mobiles . Not as fleet ships.
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.17 05:31:00 - [169] I am curious as to which version of the Flagships you are looking at. The very first ones are nothing but uber gank platforms, they have since been highly retooled.
Penelope Perminas	Posted - 2008.01.17 05:35:00 - [170] Wow, this an awseme idea. +1 for Devs to take note. Give this man a medal or a job in Iceland. I like the stepping stone approach of this betfore Captial ships. If you specialise in Cammand ships (or head down that path), this gives you something else to aspire to as well.

Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen	Posted - 2008.01.17 14:17:00 - [171] Originally by: Balor Haliquin I am curious as to which version of the Flagships you are looking at. The very first ones are nothing but uber gank platforms, they have since been highly retooled. Ill agree that i havent been following the entire thread. Tbh I werent all that interested after reading the first ship layouts. Seeing the thread growing to 6 pages I still felt it was worth looking at. Took a look at the latest incarnation and they do look better. But. I still cant see what these ships add over the current commandships. Can you put it in a few gathered words why these ships are needed and why the job cant be done by the current command ships? And at a price of 500-800 million they fall very close to that of carriers (at least atm) so i wouldnt see them as something for small corporations. Also i wonder, is pos warfare really something for small corps to do? Also why would these ships be used over the current commandships? I mean since the current command ships (the "real" ones the fleet command) arent being used? (personally thats a problem with the command links in my view but still like to hear your opinion). Its not that Im totally against ideas like this. But I have a hard time seeing what role they will fill. Also I must object to the idea of assault ships being a stepping stone to bs. They are not. In fact cruiser is the last stepping stone before BS (you dont need battlecruiser to fly one). I can agree though that there is something missing between BS and dread/carrier. Although you now have the marauder that could be viewed as filling that hole. But I still cant escape the feeling that the current fleet command ship is doing its job and doing exactly what the command ships are meant to do.
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.17 18:27:00 - [172] Fist of all I would like to thank you for giving me a good argument on the subject. POS warfare: I think one of the areas that these ships could help any fleet take down a POS because of the bonuses it gives to the fleet and the added benefit of a battleship tank. As for smaller corperations and alliance it gives them the option of attempting to take down a POS. Ships like the Flagship also make High sec POS take downs a more viable and practical operation, giving the ships in their fleets a better chance of surviving against such targets. An Evolution to the Command Ship: These ships would be an evolution to the command ships currently in the game. What would they do better? They are far more command and control oriented than the current command ships. They are also based on larger hulls than the original command ships. I belive that makes them an evolution of both the Command Ship and the Battleship. Another item to consider is the fact that the Flagship has a bonus that is given to the fleet regardless to weather or not there are any Warfare Link Modules attached, the command ship does not do this. Cost: True a Flagship would cost close to 750mil isk, but it is not nearly as much as a carrier or dreadnought. The overall cost to train, build, and outfit a Dreadnought at least is running close to 1.5 to 2 billion isk. The Flaaship would at max (by my estimation) run a person only 900mil to skill, build, and fit. And thats assuming rigs and all tech to fittings. Flagship Verses Carrier: The carrier is a big combat/logistics/command ship. It dose suffer some drawbacks that the Flagship does not. Carriers are so far not allowed in high sec space, and thus are not able to command. Carriers do not get the command ship role bonus, which Flagships do. And lastly carriers do not get a ship based bonus to any and all ships in their fleet, the Flagship does. So as far as command and control are concerned, the Flagship can do a much better job. Replace or Enhance: As far as my experience with command ships has gone, though it may be very limited, they seem to be nothing more than enhanced Battlecruisers out to gank everything they come across. Even the field command ships seem to be used toward this end. I am trying to make a ship that will be used by the fleet commander to aid in his fleets ability to deal with the functions of war. To that end i have tried to give the ships bonuses that encourage the use of warfare links. And even reduced the ability of players to fit the ships out as solo gank platforms. For what they are intended for and what players will use them for is beyond my control. I can only hope that commander swill see the value of these ships for what they are designed for.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen	Posted - 2008.01.17 21:34:00 - [173] Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 17/01/2008 21:35:40 Ok. Ill try and give a more constructive take on this. First off I agree that the current commandships are broken. The field command ship is are used as big HACs and the fleet command isnt used at all. But I dont necessarily view it as a problem with the ships, rather a problem with the warfare links. So my suggestion is first to reconsider the links. I have been over and over this. The the whole idea of having racial links is abit off to me. Why not make the links general purpouse links instead. Also more links should be available for more modulation and specialization. Breaking it down I can see a number of links; Hull (amount, resistance) Armor (amount, resistance, repair amount, repaire cap use, repair duration) Shield (amount/recharge, resistance, boost amount, boost cap use, boost duration) Capacitor (size, recharge) Sensors/Targeting (sens str, targeting range, resolution, signature size) Movement (agility, speed, boost amount, cap use) These are only examples. But I do feel these are the areas the links should be working (ie enhancing ship inherent attributes). Things that enhance modules other than repairers/boosters and ab/mwd I dont feel are necessary. (ir no ecm boost or dampeners or what ever). And not necessarily race specific at all. Or a limited variant (like support for one specific link like armor res for amarr, boost amount for gallente, shield res for caldari and shield boost for minmatar or similar). I think changing the links would make a difference when it comes to people using them. they must not only feel that they give a reasonable boost. They should also be fair to everyone and flexible enough to give everyone the same chance at niche their fleet. Now the ships. The current command ships are doing exactly what they are ment to do. That is the fleet command ship. Thery have strong defenses, limited weaponry to allow for the links. They are not dmg dealers and are not supposed to be. They fill a supportive role and are there to boost and coordinate the fleet. Perhaps, being a battle cruiser they arent sturdy enough. But they still can take some beating. Also having less signature radius they take less dmg than bs making them stronger than they might appear. So to the field ship. For sure we dont need another field commandship that is going to be used as a big HAC. I hope we can agree to that? As such there is only need for one ship. Further it should build on the same concept as the fleet command. Ie a big fleet command ship. Or if you like the fleet command ship, opening for the current commandships to become the wing command ships or similar. (with the availability for more versatile command links this could make for truly powerful boosted fleets). So what should this ship do? Looking at the fleet command ships we get some clues. Primary - boost the fleet trough warfare links Secondary - Be sturdy and tough to make for a recilient command platform Tertiary - Provide supportive fire So we many high slots for the links. this goes agains (3) but could be solved by the new direction of limited guns with large dmg bonus. So we could maybe have 3 weapon slots with 100% dmg. Freeing up 5 slots for add-on links or other gang assist modules. Also it should free up pwg and pcu so that you can fit all the links. Weapons should also be set for fairly long distance since the ship is not primarily for the front battles. Also they should have a supportive role. And as such should not be the main damagers. But maybe it could have the dmg output as a tier 3 bs. Or perhaps slightly less to avoid overpowering the ship. (especially since it will have the strong tank) Sturdy is self explainatory. A reasonable HP and resistance. As for a fixed fleet bonus as bonus im not enterily sure. It seems a bit off to me. But it would depend on the bonus i guess. So what do you think?
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.18 00:49:00 - [174] First off I agree totally that the last thing EVE needs is a bigger HAC. We have all seen what the Field Command Ship is really used for and what its capabilities are. For the way the Warfare Links work, I really think they do need a rework. They seem to provide very little incentive on their own to putting them on a ship. Only on ships that give the bonuses do they really come into their own. As for what the modules should be and how they work, that is a discussion for a different thread, which I would be happy to join. On to your proposal, now i mean no harm by anything here just retort and constructive criticism. The setup you suggest for the ships as far as requirements is almost exactly what the current designs are capable of. With few exceptions to the exact method of the ship in question they are all Command oriented/good tank/long range. They do the same if not less damage than the base hull they are based off of. Your deigns remind me of the marauders that I'm trying to avoid making obsolete. The method you used is almost exactly the concept behind the Marauders, High damage from a few guns/good tank. One of the main reasons that I did two versions of the same class of ship was because of ensuring there was diversity in the ships. One version of the ship is not going to be able to fill all of the roles that the ship might be tasked with doing. So to ensure that players have options on what the ships can do, and instead of trying to make a Flagship that dose everything, I made two more specialized versions of the ships. For what they are they both are not that much more impressive than the Hull they are based off of with one exception. Their command ability makes them more powerful when the player equips it. Which fills all the roles you have put forth. There are some changes that I am going to do to them, one of which I am almost certain of is increasing the bonus that all the ships get for their race specific fleet bonus from 3% per level to 5% per level. Second I'm going to change the role bonus on the Frontline Command Ship to 10% to warfare link modules instead of the race specific ones. Overall very good criticisms of the ships so far.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen	Posted - 2008.01.18 10:36:00 - [175] Edited by: Ceanthar Cerbera on 18/01/2008 10:41:54 The problem i see with having two different types of ships is that the more dmg oriented, the one you call front line ship, is the one that people are gonna use. Lets face it people like being the one on the killmail and so they want to do all the dmg them selfs. The number of logistics pilots you see in the game reflects this fact and so does the popularity of the fleet command ships. That is why I think its a problem having two versions of the flagship. If you do have two versions the should be equal in role and just offer different weapon platforms. One short range and one long range for each race (or in the case of caldari missiles and rails). Also I suggsted the marauder idea just to avoid the case of people just fitting all their high slots with weapons and leave the links out. That is what you see in game atm with the command ships and the low level of multilateral thinking you have from most players in this game would result in the same usage of the flagships. Using 3 weapon slots for weaponry you will have a average dmg output and as such not compete with the four slots of the marauders. Also it will force people to fill those remaining 5 slots with supportive modules instead of weaponry. The ships will have the same pre-req as marauders so why not use the same weapon system?
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.18 16:42:00 - [176] By copying the Marauders in form i am afraid that the Flagship will fallow in function. As in the flagship will replace the Marauder in the mission running buisness. Limmiting the ability of players to fit modules is by far one of the most frustraiting and annoying things i have ever seen in eve. Versatility is survivability. As for the short range and long range versions of the ships for each race i would like to point out that 3 of the races, their versions have different ways of doing damage. For the Amarr; their second ship is a torpedo boat, for the Caldari; they get a rail and missle boat, for the Gallente; they get a rail and a drone boat. I have been trying to think of something creative for the Minmatar but nothing has come to mind. So the ship varients are much more than, one has more damage output than the other. In fact when you get down to it, neither varient really has more damage output than the other. They both get one for of a damage bonus, and thats it. I think highly restricting the hard points and then giving the ship a massive bonus to damage makes little sence. It seems to me that all it would be doing is threatening the exsitance of the Marauders.
Ceanthar Cerbera Minmatar Lone Gunmen	Posted - 2008.01.18 19:37:00 - [177] Try this then. A kind of siege module-light. Ive seen another suggestion here on forums that works in the line of creating a new "light dread". One problem of course is the fact that the siege module is high slot. But there shouldnt be much reason the light module could not be midslot. Possibly a totally new ship model could be used in that case also. I still must say though that one ship is enough. And from the looks of it others have said the same in the post. There really is no need for two kinds of ships. Also i cant see how these ships would treathen marauders. They wont have tractor beam bonus or the extended cargo bay. And i still maintain that it would be a mistake to allow the ships the possibility of a full weapon rack. 5-6 weapon mounts at most.
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.18 22:21:00 - [178] Flagship are not meant to be "Light Dreadnoughts" in my design. That is a topic for another discussion. The risk of any ship being used fore something other than its intended purpose is a risk that every ship has when it is created. For a light dreadnought and associated modules are a little more complex than theses ships were ever intended to be. Also, as a light dreadnought it would potentialy out damage even a Marauder, but most certainly a standard Battleship. All things considered and adding in what the flagship already dose , I think that the ships would become a seficiantly more dangerous ship than either of intend to have. As for having two versions, this is assuming a lot from CCP. If they are ever incorperated into the game. And honestly, if I had to dump the two version idea, I would take the bonuses from both and try and make some sort of ship out of that. But working with the Amarr ones, because I know Amarr best, all I have come up with are ships that are super nerfed or amazing too good. I am working on the next version of the ships and i can tell you this, i have removed more hard point for most of the ships. I will probably have them up by monday.
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.20 04:14:00 - [179] CALDARI Name: Tsunami Hull: Rokh Role: Frontline Command Ship Developer: Kaalakiota As befits one of the largest weapons manufacturers in the known world, Kaalakiota's ships are very combat focused. Favoring the traditional Caldari combat strategy, they are designed around a substantial number of weapons systems, especially missile launchers. However, they have rather weak armor and structure, relying more on shields for protection. Cladari Battleship Bonus: 5% bonus to Missile Launcher rate of fire per lever, 5% bonus to shield Resistances per skill level Flagship Bonus: 5% bonus to fleet member's maximum Shield Hit Points per level, 5% bonus to Missile velocity per level Role Bonus: 99% reduction in CPU cost for warfare link modules, 10% bonus to Warfare Link module effectiveness Fitting slots: 8/7/5/2 Power Grid: 14900 CPU: 770 Hard points: 1 Turret/7 Launcher Shield HP: 9000 Shield Resistances: 0/60/55/32.5 Shield Recharge: 2500.00 Armor HP: 6500 Armor Resistances: 60/10/25/45 Hull HP: 7500 Velocity: 115m/s Drone Bay: 50m^3 Drone Bandwidth: 50 MgBits/sec Cargo Bay: 625m^3 Capacitor Capacity: 6000 Capacitor Recharge: 1250.00sec Maximum Targeting Range: 90km Maximum Lock: 6 Sensor Strength: Gravometric 24 Signature Radius: 510m Scanner Resolution: 75 Inertial Modifier: 0.155 Propulsion Strength: Magpulse 7 Required Skills Primary Skill Required > Flagship I -> Command Ship IV --> Battlecruiser V --> Spaceship Command IV -> Fleet Command III --> Wing Command V ---> Leadership V -> Warfare Link Specialization IV Secondary Skill Required > Caldari Battleship V -> Spaceship Command IV -> Caldari Cruiser V --> Spaceship Command III ---> Caldari Frigate V ---> Spaceship Command I Tertiary Skill Required > Command Ship IV -> Heavy Assault Ship IV --> Assault Ship IV --> Mechanics V --> Engineering V --> Targeting V -> Gunnery III --> Weapon Upgrade V Name: Oni Hull: Rohk Role: Theater Command Ship Developer: Ishukone Most of the recent designs off their assembly line have provided for a combination that the Ishukone name is becoming known for: great long-range capabilities and shield systems unmatched anywhere else. Caldari Battleship Bonus: 7.5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret optimal range per level, 5% bonus to shield Resistances per skill level Flagship Bonus: 5% bonus to fleet member's maximum Shield Hit Points per level, 3% bonus to Siege Warfare Link module effectiveness per level Role Bonus: 99% reduction in CPU cost for warfare link modules, activate 3 warfare link modules simultaneously Fitting slots: 8/6/6/2 Power Grid: 14900 CPU: 770 Hard points: 7 Turret/1 Launcher Shield HP: 9000 Shield Resistances: 0/60/55/32.5 Shield Recharge: 2500.00 Armor HP: 6750 Armor Resistances: 60/10/25/45 Hull HP: 7250 Velocity: 110m/s Drone Bay: 50m^3 Drone Bandwidth: 50 MgBits/sec Cargo Bay: 625m^3 Capacitor Capacity: 6000 Capacitor Recharge: 1250.00sec Maximum Targeting Range: 90km Maximum Lock: 6 Sensor Strength: Gravometric 24 Signature Radius: 510m Scanner Resolution: 75 Inertial Modifier: 0.155 Propulsion Strength: Magpulse 7 Required Skills Primary Skill Required > Flagship I -> Command Ship IV --> Battlecruiser V --> Spaceship Command IV -> Fleet Command III --> Wing Command V ---> Leadership V -> Warfare Link Specialization IV Secondary Skill Required > Caldari Battleship V -> Spaceship Command IV -> Caldari Cruiser V --> Spaceship Command III ---> Caldari Frigate V ---> Spaceship Command I Tertiary Skill Required > Logistics V -> Signature Analysis V --> Electronics V --> Mechanics V --> Engineering V -> Long Range Targeting V --> Siege Warfare Link V
Balor Haliquin Amarr	Posted - 2008.01.20 04:17:00 - [180] GALLENTE Name: Athena Hull: Hyperion Role: Frontline Command Ship Developer: Duvolle Labs Duvolle Labs manufactures sturdy ships with a good mix of offensive and defensive capabilities. Since the company is one of New Eden's foremost manufacturers of particle blasters, its ships tend to favor turrets and thus have somewhat higher power output than normal. Gallente Battleship Bonus: 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turrets damage per level, 7.5% bonus to armor repair amount per level Flagship Bonus: 5% bonus to fleet member's maximum Armor Hit Points per level, 5% bonus to Large Hybrid Turret falloff per level Role Bonus: 99% reduction in CPU cost for warfare link modules, 10% bonus to Warfare Link module effectiveness Fitting slots: 8/5/7/2 Power Grid: 15650 CPU: 590 Hard points: 7 Turret/1 Launcher Shield HP: 7000 Shield Resistances: 0/60/40/20 Shield Recharge: 2500.00sec Armor HP: 8350 Armor Resistances: 60/10/50/47.5 Hull HP: 8650 Velocity: 130m/s Drone Bay: 100m^3 Drone Bandwidth: 100 MgBits/sec Cargo Bay: 675m^3 Capacitor Capacity: 7200 Capacitor Recharge: 1500.00sec Maximum Targeting Range: 65km Maximum Lock: 6 Sensor Strength: Magnometric 23 Signature Radius: 495m Scanner Resolution: 110 Inertial Modifier: 0.155 Propulsion Strength: Ion 8 Required Skills Primary Skill Required > Flagship I -> Command Ship IV --> Battlecruiser V --> Spaceship Command IV -> Fleet Command III --> Wing Command V ---> Leadership V -> Warfare Link Specialization IV Secondary Skill Required > Gallente Battleship V -> Spaceship Command IV -> Gallente Cruiser V --> Spaceship Command III ---> Gallente Frigate V ---> Spaceship Command I Tertiary Skill Required > Command Ship IV -> Heavy Assault Ship IV --> Assault Ship IV --> Mechanics V --> Engineering V --> Targeting V -> Gunnery III --> Weapon Upgrade V Name: Artimus Hull: Hyperion Role: Theater Command Ship Developer: CreoDron As the largest drone developer and manufacturer in space, CreoDron has a vested interest in drone carriers. While sacrificing relatively little in the way of defensive capability, the Artimus can chew its way through surprisingly strong opponents - provided, of course, that the pilot uses top-of-the-line CreoDron drones. Gallente Battleship Bonus: 10% bonus to drone Hit Points and Damage per level, 7.5% bonus to armor repair amount per level Flagship Bonus: 5% bonus to fleet member's maximum Armor Hit Points per level, 3% bonus to Information Warfare Link module effectiveness per level Role Bonus: 99% reduction in CPU cost for warfare link modules, activate 3 warfare link modules simultaneously Fitting slots: 8/6/6/2 Power Grid: 15650 CPU: 590 Hard points: 7 Turret/1 Launcher Shield HP: 7000 Shield Resistances: 0/60/40/20 Shield Recharge: 2500.00sec Armor HP: 8500 Armor Resistances: 60/10/50/47.5 Hull HP: 8500 Velocity: 130m/s Drone Bay: 125m^3 Drone Bandwidth: 125 MgBits/sec Cargo Bay: 675m^3 Capacitor Capacity: 7200 Capacitor Recharge: 1500.00sec Maximum Targeting Range: 65km Maximum Lock: 6 Sensor Strength: Magnometric 23 Signature Radius: 495m Scanner Resolution: 110 Inertial Modifier: 0.155 Propulsion Strength: Ion 8 Required Skills Primary Skill Required > Flagship I -> Command Ship IV --> Battlecruiser V --> Spaceship Command IV -> Fleet Command III --> Wing Command V ---> Leadership V -> Warfare Link Specialization IV Secondary Skill Required > Gallente Battleship V -> Spaceship Command IV -> Gallente Cruiser V --> Spaceship Command III ---> Gallente Frigate V ---> Spaceship Command I Tertiary Skill Required > Logistics V -> Signature Analysis V --> Electronics V --> Mechanics V --> Engineering V -> Long Range Targeting V --> Information Warfare Link V

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.