open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked True T2 Destroyers
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7

Author Topic

Kessiaan
Minmatar
Vagrants Inc
Posted - 2009.01.23 06:56:00 - [61]
 

I really can't see a role for a T2 combat destroyer - I can't see how any ship that tries to straddle being halfway between an AF and a HAC would ever work - it'd still have a huge sig radius for what it is, and it would still be underpowered compared to a cruiser (which can hit it for full damage). If you want a ship that can shred AFs and inties well-flown T1 destroyers can do that already.

My T2 destroyer ideas...

Salvager - No weapon slots, but has a big hold and bonuses to tractor / salvager range and speed.

E-War Support - Immune to ECM, gets bonuses to remote ECCM and sensor boosters, can drop a special probe to find cloaked ships.

Skirmisher - Instead of a 'heavy' destroyer, this would a 'fast' destroyer. Low mass, high speed, immune to webs.

Point Defense - 8x launcher slots, has bonuses to defenders to make them not suck (as well as go after drones as well). Would also have a TD bonus.

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.01.23 14:54:00 - [62]
 

Originally by: Kessiaan
I really can't see a role for a T2 combat destroyer - I can't see how any ship that tries to straddle being halfway between an AF and a HAC would ever work - it'd still have a huge sig radius for what it is, and it would still be underpowered compared to a cruiser (which can hit it for full damage). If you want a ship that can shred AFs and inties well-flown T1 destroyers can do that already.


It's role would be what it's always been: Destroyers - Anti-frigate gunboats. The middle ground between a frigate and a cruiser. Since the speed changes, t2 frigates have become the ships of choice for small scale pvp. Nothin wrong with that but... T1 destroyers used to handily take out 'ceptors and AS's. While it's still possible, not so much the case anymore. Not to mention if a cruiser so much as looks at a destroyer, it's dead.

So again I say destroyers need looking at, and I'd still like a t2 version with resists/hp/pg/slots to match.

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.01.27 01:55:00 - [63]
 

Bump for a better destroyer.

Nox Virago
Order of Sarum
Posted - 2009.01.28 13:13:00 - [64]
 

Good idea. Currently there's no point training destroyers except if you want to be a dictor pilot, while with frigates for example you can go either AF, inty or EA ships pilot. I'd love to see another use for this skill...

DrDooma
Posted - 2009.01.28 14:20:00 - [65]
 

nice idea.

I do think tho that this ship should also be a threat to figs and t1 cruisers but not anything bigger.

So what if this new ship had 'special' damage type that would apply to T1 ships but not T2 ships.

One way this would work is if all t2 ships would get additional resistance eg 20% per ship type level to this 'special' dmg type.

This way, it will do standard lethal damage to small ships and lethal damage to cruisers but not anything bigger.

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.02.08 13:00:00 - [66]
 

We need a better destroyer.

Kalia Masaer
Amarr Border Defense Consortium
Posted - 2009.02.08 14:51:00 - [67]
 

We need the equivelant of a torpedo boat destroyer, something capable of droping fast ships once thye have closed range.

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.02.09 21:17:00 - [68]
 

Did I mention I like destroyes?

libertarian cole
Posted - 2009.02.09 22:31:00 - [69]
 

Originally by: Torothanax
Did I mention I like destroyers?


There have been plenty of good ideas.

What other bonuses could you give to a destroyer to help it kill frigates?
The cat has:
Destroyer Skill Bonus: 10% Bonus to Small Hybrid Turret tracking speed and 10% bonus to Small Hybrid Turret falloff per level

Penalty: -25% rate of fire for all turrets
Bonus: 50% bonus to optimal range for small hybrid turrets

It is given both the range and DPS to be a pain in the ass to frigates. What else do you want?

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.02.25 02:46:00 - [70]
 

Edited by: Torothanax on 25/02/2009 02:47:08
Originally by: libertarian cole
Originally by: Torothanax
Did I mention I like destroyers?


There have been plenty of good ideas.

What other bonuses could you give to a destroyer to help it kill frigates?
The cat has:
Destroyer Skill Bonus: 10% Bonus to Small Hybrid Turret tracking speed and 10% bonus to Small Hybrid Turret falloff per level

Penalty: -25% rate of fire for all turrets
Bonus: 50% bonus to optimal range for small hybrid turrets

It is given both the range and DPS to be a pain in the ass to frigates. What else do you want?


Some more hp would be cool. Maybe some resists. Another slot. Some PG/cpu. Ya know, the stuff other T2 ships get.

As for bonuses, since most t2 ships have 3 or 4, maybe drop the -25% rate of fire. Or reduce it by 2-5% per lvl.

UnseenChaos
Gallente
b.b.k
Posted - 2009.02.25 08:52:00 - [71]
 

Be nice to see a T2 destroyer take on a similar setup as a marauder, take some gun hardpoints out add a fair damage bonus, remove the RoF penalty and free up some utility slots in highs for salvaging ect, extra mid/low slot depending on the race and you got a decent ship to mess around in =)

Falun Assad
Caldari
Perkone
Posted - 2009.02.25 11:57:00 - [72]
 

Edited by: Falun Assad on 25/02/2009 11:58:29
t2 destroyer anti frig:

can mount assault launchers

signature decrease per destroyer skill level
50% velocity bonus to missiles per t2 skill +

amarr: resist bonus
gallente: armor hitpoint bonus
caldari: resist bonus
minmatar: shield hp bonus

Reven Cordelle
Caldari
Total Mayhem.
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2009.02.25 13:22:00 - [73]
 

T2 Destroyers.. Oh what you mean... Destroyers that cost 30m and can STILL get one-shotted by a well placed volley of Arties because the sig radius is so ****ing massive on Dessies in comparison to their defenses?

Harhar.

Seeing a bunch of sturdy mini 8-guns would be fun though, so I wouldn't mind...

They're probably avoiding making destroyers any stronger for the reason that - if they became sturdier, and faster.. they'd kill the frigate in general, no one would fly frigs because people would swoop in with a T2 destroyer and just 2-volley every frigate around.

Then again - that is the idea behind destroyers...

Chaos Hellbreth
Caldari
Drusus Mercenaries
Sylph Alliance
Posted - 2009.02.25 14:21:00 - [74]
 

my idea for T2 destroyers has always been the "Heavy Bomber/Torpedo Bomber"concept or what I like to call a counter-ordnance or force protection ship. The Heavy bomber/Torpedo Bomber is self explanatory, but I would really like to see a force protection craft.

In my mind, a force protection ship would provide fleet defense vs. drones and missiles (of course that would require missiles to get a boost of some sort, as it stands they are ineffective enough at pvp). I imagine a Caldari Force Protection craft would be able to be loaded to the brim with defender missiles with suitable bonuses (bonuses/ability vs. drones as well). A new module would have to be implemented for the other races. Lets call them "point defense batteries" for the short range versions and "Anti-Ordnance Artillery batteries" for the long range version. Basically extra-small turrets, that come in the usual hybrid, projectile, and laser flavors, that get all sorts of bonuses vs. things like drones and missiles (they would function in a manner similar to defender missiles. A point defense battery would have a range of say 15km +10km falloff whereas a anti-ordnance artillery battery would have a range of say 50km +50km falloff(but a much much much slower rate of fire to compensate). These weapons should do mediocre(if any dps) to any sort of vehicle that isn't a drone etc.

Also, fun idea, a new type of drone for the Gallante version, call it an "interceptor drone" which again, gets bonuses vs. enemy drones and missiles and autotargets etc.

I think that would go a long way to making the game more tactical. It would also go a long way to alleviate the capital vs. subcapital issue that is currently developing. Dropping a carrier on an enemy would become much less of a no-brainer if the carrier pilot knew that there were ships in the enemy fleet that were capable of easily countering fighters. You would need to send in a sub-cap fleet in that case to neutralize that threat before a carrier could come in (which if you cant tell would bring much more thought into the process of engaging a non-npc enemy. Dropping drones instantly upon arrival at a gate etc. would also become less of a no-brainer, because there would be increased risk of losing your drones etc.

Likewise, it would still be pretty balanced, because lets face it, destroyers are paper-tigers, they aren't exactly thick-skinned. They would still require support from larger ships for protection, as well as to actually deal dps to an enemy. In some ways this kind of mimics modern naval warfare(for the US anyway). Where fleets are composed of a carrier + an escort screen. The carrier is the heavy hitter, you have cruisers/frigates for the close-defence/offense role + a further screen of AEGIS ships to provide support vs. anti-ship missiles and enemy airpower which might otherwise destroy the carrier.

Arbiter Reformed
Minmatar
Garnet Resources
Posted - 2009.02.25 14:38:00 - [75]
 

give it a sig rad reduction bonus and the same 7 slot gun / cool too see caldari have 7 missiles. tank bonus and t2 resists and lots of speed (basicly bring back nano)

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.02.26 06:26:00 - [76]
 

Originally by: arbiter reformed
give it a sig rad reduction bonus and the same 7 slot gun / cool too see caldari have 7 missiles. tank bonus and t2 resists and lots of speed (basicly bring back nano)


A sig reduction bonuse might be cool. Destroyers are gun boats though. I'd like to see a T2 version stay true to the idea of the T1 destroyer.

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.03.20 15:20:00 - [77]
 

I'd still like a real T2 destroyer.

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.03.29 06:54:00 - [78]
 

Did I mention I'd like a real T2 destroyer? I really would.

Unit ADA
Posted - 2009.04.01 05:19:00 - [79]
 

Edited by: Unit ADA on 01/04/2009 05:30:09
Edited by: Unit ADA on 01/04/2009 05:28:46
Corvettes

Destroyer Skill: +10% turret range and falloff and +5% turret damage per level.

Corvettes Skill: +7.5% tracking and +5% rate of fire per level

99.5% cpu reduction on special racial small turret type

They should have a special type of small turret that only they can use. A concept similar to Strip miners for a mining barge. (high 9000 cpu costs reduced by 99.5% when fit on corvettes)

The new destroyer will have only 4 turrets, but for a good reason. The new turrets are Gatling types(True Gatling fire - continuous stream, not short pathetic burst) with a high rate of fire, but less damage per shot compared to the normal small turrets. The shots will however will not be influenced as much by resistances of the target ship.

The rate of fire will offset the weaker hits with a sheer number of hits. Not to mention the tracking on the guns are higher than their conventional counterparts.

All frigs (including Assault Frigs) will fall apart quickly under barrage of fire from these guns.

To compensate for the high dps it produces, the ammunition is depleted fairly quick and requires a longer time to reload. This applies to projectile and hybrid types.

For energy types since they don't have a a reload time or have a limited ammunition, the lasers as in normal tradition will consume much more energy than their counterparts, forcing the pilot to turn off his guns while waiting for the caps to recharge.

In exchange for less high slots the corvettes will have more med and low slots. +2 for each. High -4.

The corvettes will be slower than their t1 cousins. speed of between: 200-220 m/s and will take longer to warp out.

However their signature size will be lower around 50. (Research was made by corporations on reducing the signature with special materials) Which is more than 50% larger than a frigate's 30, but only about a third of the cruiser's 135.

They will have hits points around that of a cruiser.

Nothing will kill frig classes better than these guys.

Fille Balle
Ballbreakers R us
Posted - 2009.04.01 14:50:00 - [80]
 

YES PLEASE! Destroyers aren't used much apart from being cheapo salvage mobiles. Make Destroyers useful! A fast one and a sturdy one would be perfect. But tbh the hard hitting massive tank seems more interesting to me. As for role: anti AS boat or counter tackle. Maybe even have a new module for this ship alone: "remote warp core stabilizer". There's a role for you. Me, I just want a destroyer that can open up a can of whoppa**! T2 resists, maybe a bit more speed, more slots, more pg more cpu. Perfect. More bonuses? DIVINE! I'd use it, wouldn't you? He**, I'd pay up to 50mil for one of those!

/signed

Martineski
Posted - 2009.04.02 04:26:00 - [81]
 

the term corvettes would be a good name, but as far as making them uber ships of doom for frigates is a little extreme. agreed they should be good at killing frigate class ships but one volley is bad. why not, as mentioned before, give them more survivability?
giving them a speed boost would be good but not faster than frigates. since the destroyer class was meant for long range bombardment, to better aid them in the destruction of frigates give them bonuses similar to the racial marauders, such as webbing bonuses and target painter bonuses respectively.

an alternative could also be a close range tackler type of destroyer tuned for using short ranged weapons. but i will have to do some thinking on that one before i post. :)

Fullmetal Jackass
Posted - 2009.04.02 05:36:00 - [82]
 

Destroyers are supposed to be the anti frigate ship. Why not give the man what he asks for?

Kal'Panda
Posted - 2009.05.08 19:05:00 - [83]
 

Why not consider the role of Commerce Raider for the Destroyer, make the T2 a little stronger (CPU, Power) to take damage with lots of guns to take out escorts, cargo space to haul the goodies. And able to run away from anything bigger. It could also be used to escort freighters, capital ships, bombers, etc.
Now adding a dual mount small gun as a T2, would make the Destroyers super frigate killers but soft enought to be in real danger one on one (PVP) with a crusier.

The Frigate Command ship would be a nice touch, one Destroyer and five Frigates would make a force that could not be ignored.

My two cents for what it's worth.

Torothanax
Posted - 2009.05.10 07:06:00 - [84]
 

We need a t2 destroyer that can hold up on today's battle field. The t1 hulls fold too quickly in real combat.

E villMonkeigh
SPORADIC MOVEMENT
Posted - 2009.05.10 10:02:00 - [85]
 

Edited by: E villMonkeigh on 10/05/2009 10:10:04
Destroyers are great fun as they are. Boosting them too much could remove viability of other classes and make it the new noob FOTM a la the stealth bomber.

Best idea so far:
T2 Destroyer: Command Ship for Frig Gangs
-99.99% on Mind Links; bonuses maybe to Skirmish (speed) mindlinks, and gunnery ones...

Should only boost ships 1 size above (cruiser) or all below, similar to BC

Potential problem:
T2 Combat Destroyer (anti-frig): The T1 already does what it is intended to do, and improving the T2 version would unbalance matters if not done right. Gun bonuses for T1 are already good. Increase resists to AF-level, adding +1 mid/low slot or an extra gun risks unbalancing things.
A web bonus for catching inties might be useful, though

What I would prefer as less 'major' changes:

*reduce sig radius closer to frigate size radius (keep the paper tank, but make it somewhat harder to lock/hit)
*Add a 5-10% speed boost(7.5%?) per level of destroyers (make it easier to run down inties and frigs)
*(perhaps) web bonus - to give a 15-20km web; kinda a mini-rapier; or have web with standard range bur that has -90% speed like old web
*I also REALLY liked this idea: Remote warp core stabiliser. This would really fit the anti-frig role as 'counter-tackle' and could be a module like Interdictor launcher.
This could be the t2 bonus, along with slightly better resists, sig radius, etc.


At all costs the destroyer should not become a heavy tackler and usurp the AF and standard frigate role. It is there to SWAT tacklers, not be the ubertackler. I'd even support a -50% to warp disruptor/scram optimal range... this would have to happen if it got a web bonus to stop it becoming OP

Potential Problem:
Decloaking Destroyer
Yes why not make 0.0 gatecamps impossible to run. Nice idea -too unbalancing to the cloaking dynamic.

There are some great ideas here!











E villMonkeigh
SPORADIC MOVEMENT
Posted - 2009.05.10 13:26:00 - [86]
 

I saw another topic titled 'Web Bubbles'

As these would primarily inconvenience fast ships (20km bubble slowing ships 50%), this could also be a T2 destroyer function and fits with existing Interdictor mechanics/classes.

silken mouth
Gallente
Core Genes Applied Technologies
Posted - 2009.05.10 13:51:00 - [87]
 

how about:

role bonus: can mount assault launchers

destroyer bonus:
40% to light and defender missile velocity per level
20% to racial light and defender missile damage

t2 destroyer bonus:
20% assault launcher ROF increase per level
and a racial tanking bonus (amarr, caldari = resists, gallente, minmatar efficiency bonus)

ShadowDraqon
The Quantum Company
Independent Faction
Posted - 2009.05.10 15:02:00 - [88]
 

I'd like to see the T1 destroyers themselves get buffed. Many good ideas here, we need destroyers that actually "destroy", or at least do less of "get destroyed".

E villMonkeigh
SPORADIC MOVEMENT
Posted - 2009.05.13 06:08:00 - [89]
 

Well if you compare sig radius to HP; a destroyer would need 4000-4500 EHP to be comparable to frigs and cruisers. A simple HP increase could be all that is needed.

Increasing resists marginally and bringing sig radius down to more frig size would be good; the rist of excessive buffing would be to negate the role of an AF and make the dessie the tackler instead of frigs.

Add 5-10% speed boost per level would make them more useful without being gamebreaking.

McEivalley
Cutting Edge Incorporated
RAZOR Alliance
Posted - 2009.05.13 10:44:00 - [90]
 

Edited by: McEivalley on 13/05/2009 10:46:45
It should've been a short reply, but I found myself ninja-ign on yet another t2 dessie thread with some input of my own. Here we go - wall of text inbound:

T1 destroyers are crap. Seeing one in PvP is a plain comedy killmail. The only one that might cut it is a thrasher. The rest are just plain sadness to use, and completely pointless to hold, except for salvaging lvl 4 missions in empire.

OP, making a t2 destroyer is basically asking ccp to make a t1 destroyer better, a subject I'm completely supporting. But the fact is that the role of the destroyer is already secured by the assault frigate, which does better than what I would expect from what a t1 destroyer should be. Hence, ccp has no urge to change t1 destroyer at all.

A t2 ship with a destroyer hull should have a purpose that is different than a destroyer's. A destroyer is an anti-frigate ship. To be exact - anti t1 frigate ship.

A t2 ship with a destroyer hull, with a purpose different than that, that I can forsee would be:

1) Up to T2 Cruiser killer - Big guns, less hi slots, more grid, more cpu, more meds/lows (racial dependent) for the sig/speed/tank/damage game. Would probably be able to kill smaller ships as well, including t2 AFs with more ease. Should provide a small sniper role for all races in fleets. Even after the speed nerf, the only good counter for a t2 cruiser is another t2 cruiser, especially HACs. While no other ship can effectively counter them without gimping its natural role, the UTT2CK (Razz) will be born to do just that.

2) Mine layer - A new weapon will be created along with the ship. Basically a mine is a cloaked bomb, that decloaks on proximity to targets. It can be programed to decloak andengage due to standings (Ranging from any but self to only -7.51 and below). Would be less powerful than a bomb, and with a smaller AEO.

Mines can be locked and shot at, much like drones. Basically, they will be stationary cloaked drones, that will decloak and act as bombs do once they sense a target around them.

Decloaking mechanics will apply to it (so trying to deploy one next to another will require them to be 2501m apart or more for their cloak to work). A friendly ship (i.e. one the mine would not decloak to attack) approaching in decloaking range will decloak a mine.

Mines can be anchored, which will make them more resilient and powerful, as well as magnify their proximity activation range. However, anchoring time will compensate for the added power, maybe requiring the mine layer dessie to linger near it for a penalty calibration time to make it so.

The ship itself will sport a covert ops cloak as well as the ability to warp cloaked. Once again, less hi slots, and a bit more med/lows and PG/CPU enhancements in order to bring it into the t2 game. However, tank/speed should not be much better than the t1 version. Faction bonus to mine type/damage should apply rather than an all around bonus. It will be able to mvoe via covert jump portals.

3) Covert interdiction ship - basically we're talking about a HIC infy-point - no bubble - with a super specific racial resist based on opposing faction (i.e. 95-99% resistant to EM for minmatar ships), covert cloaking ability and very little tank otherwise. Besides intelligence gathering as a secondary role, this ship is made to first tacklers of super-capitals. it should have the smallest of signature radii, and should be able to move quickly while using the super-point. In all other aspects it should be out-performed by ships of its class or better. It should be able to survive the opposite faction DD and it should have enough sensor strength to resist more than not a mothership's AEO jammer. It will be able to mvoe via covert jump portals.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7

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