open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked New ship to fix capital problem.
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Author Topic

tikktokk tokkzikk
Switchblade Incorporated
Posted - 2011.05.31 16:24:00 - [1]

while reading some of the "blah, nerf, whine, carrier, blah" threads I thought that capitals shouldent be nerfed but rather get a counter. I sat down and come up with the idea of a kamikaze ship, basicly a large bomb with a pod inside.

This kamikaze ship woulde be able to fit a special kind of smartbomb that act as a large stealth bomber bomb. Once used it destroy the kamikaze ship leaving the pilot in his/her pod and damaging the suroundings.

just as the bomb got reduced damage to anything with a signature redius lower than 400m this smartbomb would get reduced damage to anything with a signature radius lower than 2-3km rendering it useless to anything smaller than a capital ship.

Arrow Completes the circle (capital > sub-capital > kamikaze > capital)
Arrow Kamikaze ships wont need to be cheap. A nice money drain!
Arrow no need to nerf or boost anything = Everyone is happy.
Arrow if done correctly wont break anything.

Arrow capitals wont be an I-win-button?
Arrow might be a problem with POS's.

feedback would be appreciated!

Boone Rodimon
Dire Wolf Industries
Posted - 2011.05.31 16:48:00 - [2]

you could make the ship itself relatively cheap, but the bomb(s) you could choose from be more expensive, and specialized based on the job at hand.

also, what if the capital targets the kamikaze pilot before it gets to him? i think, if the kamikaze is destroyed, the bomb should go off and damage everything around it (maybe even friendly fire)

tikktokk tokkzikk
Switchblade Incorporated
Posted - 2011.05.31 16:56:00 - [3]

well, you would probably need a cloaky ship as a warpin to get close enough.

Posted - 2011.05.31 16:59:00 - [4]

And when the bomb is activated everyone on the grid hears the pilot scream "DEATH TO THE INFIDELS" or some such thing.

Still I like the idea.

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
Posted - 2011.05.31 18:43:00 - [5]

no problem with this idea as long as it's restricted to null sec.

Robert Caldera
Posted - 2011.05.31 19:09:00 - [6]

people failed to build enough supercaps and now cry for "counter" destroying other peoples multi-billion property with a cheap kamikaze crap.

Gypsio III
Dirty Filthy Perverts
Posted - 2011.05.31 19:10:00 - [7]

This is a bad idea, as is any idea that attempts to solve the supercapital problem by introducing a new ship.

It's a bad idea 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.

Supercapitals are anticapital platforms. To "complete the circle", their counter should be subcapitals - not a new specialist ship, but all of them, everything from a Merlin to an Abaddon, making supercapitals require a support fleet. This mean focusing supercapitals in their anticapital role by removing their ability to easily engage subcapitals, and making them vulnerable to subcapital tackle.

Hence, DD can only be used on (super)capitals, tackle immunity is removed, supercarriers can deploy FBs only and cannot warp or jump while FBs are deployed (give them some sort of data-link module to deploy FBs that has a 2.5 min timer or something - you can move but not warp or jump while the module is active).

Amaroq Dricaldari
Vengeance Industrial Militia
Posted - 2011.05.31 20:29:00 - [8]

Edited by: Amaroq Dricaldari on 31/05/2011 20:31:59
- To solve the problem of being targeted by other Capitals, it would have a small signature radius
- To make it cost more, it would be a Specialized Tech II Cruiser
- So that it doesn't become a friendly fire issue, it would have a 50% Damage Decrease against Fleet Members
- It would have a damage increase against Titans
- It would be fast and agile compared to other ships of its size (allowing it to easily avoid the path of fire of the huge titans), but still have trouble keeping up with a well-fitted Interceptor
- It would require alot of skill to fly


Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2011.06.01 07:09:00 - [9]

I like the idea of a subcapital anti-capital ship platform but it should involve use of existing game mechanics rather than something completely new and out there.

I once proposed something along similar lines called a "Heavy Destroyer." Instead of carrying bombs like a kamikaze ship, it would fire tech II bombs from "expanded bomb launchers." These tech II bombs would deal huge amounts of damage but with heavy sig radius penalties. The bombs would have a long travel range but a slow speed so that subcaps could easily see and avoid them ahead of time (but they would nonetheless encourage pilots to spread out discourage blobs).

It would be akin to torpedo bombers vs an aircraft carrier/battleship in World War II.

tikktokk tokkzikk
Switchblade Incorporated
Posted - 2011.06.01 09:00:00 - [10]

here is some of my ideas that I think would make it balanced:
Arrow A T2 battleship (skill intensive and cost alot)
Arrow Destroy the ship after use and maybe destroy the pod too (discourage people to buy and fly them)
Arrow would need like 10 to OHKO a spider carrier
Arrow slow with big signature radius and easily destroyed (would need to warp to a fleet member and uncloak all ships inside the explosion)

so say they cost 100m each.
and say you need 10 to destroy a carrier and more for a mom.
if all the kamikaze ships manage to successfully hit the carrier it would only cost 1b to destroy it.

the carrier could of course have drones swarming it or smartbombs to destroy any cloaked warp ins.

I think this sounds nice and balanced as CCP could always boost/nerf the price, damage, speed and defence to make it perfect.

Destination SkillQueue
Are We There Yet
Posted - 2011.06.01 10:20:00 - [11]

I don't see a new suicide ship/one trick pony being a fix to anything. The best solution I can come up with on short notice is to make supercapitals simply bad and relatively vulnerable against sub capitals and increase the ways they can be tackled. The general idea is to keep them as specialized anti-capital platforms, but the downside is that they are practically useless against anything smaller than that.

Basicly make all supercapital main weapon systems pretty much useless against a subcapital fleet not standing absolutely still, so they have to be fleeted with significant support fleets, and add capital warp diruptors and maybe capital EW that works on supers, but isn't any more effective against subcapital ships. That would mean even a cap fleet would have some counters to supers, but they would have to know they are going against supers to gain any advantage of such fits, while being severely gimped if the main threat turns out to be anything else. The goal here is to give more options in engaging such targets, while at the same time retaining the ship classes intended role and keeping the weaknesses and strengths relevant.

The goal would also include that a supercap group caught by a subcap fleet should be pretty much screwed on their own. An important part of that is to make sure they don't retain any ways to easily kill the current tackling ships capable of preventing their escape. That means the deathrays can't be allowed to be effective against them and the normal drone capabilities of supercarriers has to be nerfed to hell.

Basicly make it so, that if we're thinking with the 3 groups of subcaps/caps/supercaps, that you need at least 2 groups to form a fleet that isn't heavily vulnerable to something else. Caps are vulnerable to supers, supers to subcapitals and subcapitals have the problem that you need so much more of them and in a wide variety of types to achieve their place in this cycle or the effectiveness that caps can achieve in small numbers.

There are propably problems with this, but I prefer a system where a fleet made of single ship type is always vulnerable to different ship types and that an attacking fleet can turn the fight to their advantage by targeting the weakness in the enemy fleet composition or can create such a weakness themselves by eliminating one fleet group from the enemy fleet and leaving the remaining ships vulnerable to something other than just more of the same.


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


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only