open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked new ship: juggernaut class capital ship, tech II dreadnaughts!
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3

Author Topic

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
Caldari
Posted - 2011.06.02 13:53:00 - [32]
 

Originally by: Jennifer Starling
Cruiser class stealth bombers with capital class lauchers?? Razz



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?? Razz




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?? Razz


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? Razz

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?? Razz


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? Razz

Black Khanid Harby with Citadel Launchers .. hmm ...

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 Twisted Evil


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 thereMad

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 thereMad


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 upYARRRR!!

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
The Jagged Alliance
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.






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.

northwesten
Amarr
Trinity Corporate Services
Terran United Federation
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
Minmatar
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 thereMad

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
Inner Conflict
Posted - 2011.06.02 17:07:00 - [47]
 

Edited by: Sadayiel on 02/06/2011 17:08:35
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 supers in a safe and only commision them when in need.

When field something more than 5 titans takes like 50-100b for an alliance monthly they'll 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

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.

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.


Shocked 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.


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 upYARRRR!!

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
Stark Fujikawa
Posted - 2011.06.04 09:12:00 - [60]
 

I support this product and or service!

+1


Pages: 1 [2] 3

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only