Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Rubicon 1.1] Sisters of EVE Battleship

First post First post First post
Author
TOHA Conglomerate
#761 - 2013-12-05 12:31:36 UTC
Brib Vogt wrote:
The least i think should be granted is a limited BlackOps ability.


agree

Brib Vogt wrote:

Version B: it gets the cloak bonus from BlackOps but lacks all jump drive related properties.


agree

Brib Vogt wrote:
I mean, c'mon, be serious. And I mean both, the players and CCP Rise. Request reasonable things, but RISE, please don't try to make a (sorry for the German word) "Eierlegende Wollmilchsau". translation: Something which should be able to do everything, but in the end becomes something which can't use anything properly.

Try to focus it on something.

There are indeed some nice suggestions in this thread.


Totally agree.

Embers Children is recruiting carefully selected pilots who like wormholes, green killboards and the sweet taste of tears. You can convo me in game or join the chat "TOHA Lounge".

#762 - 2013-12-05 12:55:22 UTC
Reading between the lines somewhat...

There seem to be several things going on at the moment with new developments.

1) The introduction of SOE ships, with their mysterious ring structures (which give cloaky bonuses to the frigate and cruiser, but not the battleship)
2) The introduction of ghost sites, which at the moment drop BPCs and materials for implants and yurts.
3) The trailer for Rubicon, which shows the SOE frigate in a ghost site - is there some lore related link here?
4) The dev blogs which suggest that there will be some new kind of player-owned space, with player built star-gates, or similar.

I can't help but wonder if the cloaky bonus on the ships is possibly a 'side-effect' of these ring sutructures, and that there is some kind of deeper link between the SOE and ghost sites. Maybe the ring-structures are related to a new propulsion mechanism yet to be introduced, that relates to player-owned gates, and the opening up of new space. Some sort of wormhole generator perhaps?
It could be that, once all is revealed about the future plans from CCP, we will find that there is a new role for these ships, justifying their cost - after all there is little that even the battleship can do that a properly fit T3 can't for less money. Making a general purpose ship makes little sense, when a T3 already fills that role, unless there is a yet-to-be-revealed hidden purpose to the whole thing.

I really hope this is the case, and I for one will continue to farm those SOE LPs in the anticipation of the payout these will give when this ship is released...
#763 - 2013-12-05 13:03:08 UTC
Random27 wrote:


I really hope this is the case, and I for one will continue to farm those SOE LPs in the anticipation of the payout these will give when this ship is released...



Basically, the frigate and cruiser paid for all four of my accounts for a good few months
Infernal Octopus
#764 - 2013-12-05 13:12:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Savira Terrant
I don't like the idea of a supportcarrier in yet proposed ways, those are too powerful compared with a real carrier - like the ability to transport multiple ships, having SMA functionality, a really strong RR bonus and field more than 5 drones.

I do not want to water down the experience a player gets when he actually can fly a carrier and learns how much it makes one's life so much easier moving your stuff around and supporting a fleet.
I don't like more than 5 drones for subcapitals either if only for the sake of seperating capital ships and subcapitals, this is something that should never be touched in my opinion.
While interesting I also do not like to have a battleship that remote reps just like a Logistic only with more EHP and signature.
The above are just my feelings and I don't want to offend anyone. There are no bad ideas while brainstorming.

Here I wrote about my vision of how a Nestor could support the other two SOE ships (and others also of course) and I would like to iterate on that with a few specifics:

Quote:
NESTOR

Amarr Battleship Bonuses:

10% bonus to Large Energy Turret optimal range per level
4% Armor resistances per level


Gallente Battleship Bonuses:

20% drone hitpoints per level
15% bonus to Armor Maintenance Bot transfer amount per level


Role bonuses:

100% bonus to Large Energy Turret damage
Can Jump to Covert Cynosaural Fields (that's it - no cloaking whatsoever, no interdiction nullification, no warpstrength and no Covert Cynosural Field Generators or Covert or otherwise Jump Portal Generators!)
"Can transport one Stratios (or any one cruiser maybe - but no SMA functionality just the fitted ship and charges in it's cargo"

Slot layout: 6H, 6M, 6L; 4 turrets, 0 launchers
Fittings: 11250 PWG, 680 CPU
Defense (shields / armor / hull): 8900 / 9950 / 9900
Capacitor (amount / recharge rate / cap/s) : 6200 / 1044 / 5.9
Mobility (max velocity / agility / mass / align time): 92 / .18 / 56000000 / 13.97
Drones (bandwidth / bay): 125 / 250
Targeting (max targeting range / Scan Resolution / Max Locked targets): 75km / 85 / 9
Sensor strength: 24 Magnetometric
Signature radius: 465
Cargo Capacity: 400


Personally I would make the jumprange the same as a carrier, but it should at least have 9 ly range with Jumpdrive Calibration 5 to make any sort of sense as a support ship for a scanning frig without the need to have a cyno chain. Also I'd tie the range to both battleship skills, I did not mention it in the stats, because I am not clear as to how much.

So much to my proposal for the Nestor.

Making this viable together with the other SOE ships though, would require the Astero to have a third highslot and ability to use covert cyno (I know there is the possibility to refit in space now, but for the sake of this concept not having the cyno already online would be kind of half assed.
Also to make the SOE ships a real dreamteam, I would make the Stratios a real droneboat with no Laser bonus and 5 drones and make it so that the Stratios can make a capchain with the Nestor and rep 600 omni dps on the Nestor with medium reppers. This combination should make both ships capstable while running an afterburner and have a microwarpdrive fitted.

---

I don't know about this rumor about clones and and stuff for the WH peeps, but that sounds more befitting for a POS module if that was really more than a rumor.

--

By the way Relief and Aid could also mean to remove the "Rogue Drone" threat encountered when rescuing yet another mining crew from them.

.

Gallente Federation
#765 - 2013-12-05 13:27:45 UTC
Turns the battleship into nothing but a self jumping transport ship.

I'm apt to say that maybe the concept of black ops in anyway shape or form being attached to this ship is overblown. We're all basically thinking "ok how do we get it there"?

Maybe it should not be. Even humanitarians have armed escorts. Those who don't run the risk of actual harm (happens in RL a lot).

Let's face the facts. This is not an astero or a stratios. This is also not a gunship.

It should suffer the same issues all battleships suffer, and that's getting from point a to point b without dying.

So I'm going back off my high horse ideas.

No cloak or cloak bonuses whatsoever.
No jumping whatsoever

Let's make this a useful battleship, but not some overkill hybrid. Damn the price arguments. It maybe just a toy, but let's have a toy with a use. Well figure out how to get it from point a to point b ourselves.

Yaay!!!!

Caldari State
#766 - 2013-12-05 13:39:24 UTC
Great job for this SOE battleship but i dislike the top of the ship, it looks like a capital ship part or a station part in the current concept art.

Why not choose one of these following alternatives (some already cited) or a better available in this topic.

- move the ring more close to the center.

- move the ring somewhere at the back part with a new design for the top.

- reduce the size of the ring and add an other ring (or a similar thing) at the back.

- change the design to have a center ring (BS Hyperion style).

Please do something about the ring, don't let the ship like that.

Your effective personal standings need to be higher to see the player's signature.

Infernal Octopus
#767 - 2013-12-05 13:44:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Savira Terrant
Phoenix Jones wrote:

It should suffer the same issues all battleships suffer, and that's getting from point a to point b without dying.


All battleships?

Edit: Actually, not one battleship has this problem... especially if ISK is to be made in the target system. Use your imagination.

Phoenix Jones wrote:
Turns the battleship into nothing but a self jumping transport ship.


Well, guns blazing transport ship with repdrones equal to 2.5 unbonused Large Remote Repairs... yes, nothing but that. Roll

Phoenix Jones wrote:
Let's face the facts. This is not an astero or a stratios. This is also not a gunship.


So a ship dealing up to 1100 dps (as per the current proposal by CCP) is not a gunship? Please elaborate. Blink

.

Gallente Federation
#768 - 2013-12-05 13:45:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
I'll just put some thoughts out and CCP or you all can decide what way to go.

1) Slot layout is fine (Yes we know ya want low 7 slots, I don't see it happening). This should not be in direct competition with the Dominix Navy issue or the Abaddon (Tank wise).

2) The Amarr and Gallente Bonuses probably wont change (they seem to be static with the other sisters ships).

3) Role bonuses: The bad bonuses here is the scan probe bonus and analyzer bonus, and possibly the optimal range bonus (see below).

Now this ship could go one of two ways.

a) Can become a support logistics ship. Meaning you modify this ship to be a sort of space medic, an inbetween of the Logistics ships and the carrier, focused on repairing damage than dealing it..

b) Can become a gobetween for the Abaddon and the Dominix. Meaning you can save the laser optimal bonus, and turn this into somewhat of a armor drone platform that competes with all the other drone platforms such as the Dominix, Navy Issue, Ishtar, Armageddon, Eos, etc.

Safe to say, the relic/data analysis bonus is wasted on this ship (I believe the majority of the people on this forum agree to that). The rest is nitpicking on how to make this ship worth it.

Yaay!!!!

Infernal Octopus
#769 - 2013-12-05 13:58:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Savira Terrant
Spugg Galdon wrote:
Krimishkev wrote:
Spugg Galdon wrote:
To those complaining about the asthetics of the ship:

I would suggest replacing the front ring with a smaller, flatter Astero type ring/wing and move the large complete ring to the rear quarter of the ship.


Vertical stabilizers to the middle too maybe.



Someone beat me to it!

http://i.imgur.com/tTJXrN8.jpg



OMG THAT LOOKS AWESOME. I'd buy this thing any day!

Edit:

I already wondered why the hell the Frig and Cruiser look so NICE and the BS so comical. But this really fixes it.

.

Gallente Federation
#770 - 2013-12-05 14:14:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Phoenix Jones
Savira Terrant wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:

It should suffer the same issues all battleships suffer, and that's getting from point a to point b without dying.


All battleships?

Edit: Actually, not one battleship has this problem... especially if ISK is to be made in the target system. Use your imagination.


Imagination only goes so far until you have to balance out a ship based on its ecology.

SOE is a humanitarian organization and explorers. There ships should match that. The first two ships (astero and stratios) fit that moniker. The Nestor battleship though, while it fits the SOE setup, is not practical to be used by the Eve player (no one would realistically use this 2 billion isk ship in any realistic form outside of ship spinning in a station). It is not worth it....

But just because it is not worth it, does not mean we have complete liberty to add in whatever we believe will make it worth it (I'm just as guilty of having grand re-imaginations of this vessel).

I'd like to see CCP's second going on this ship. Because while the current ship fits the Sisters of Eve ethos, the ship has no actual or practical use in the game at the moment. This doesn't mean that it should be usable by everybody for anything for any reason, but it should have a real stated purpose. Right now the concept of a exploration battleship does not fit the current biology of the game (it is a nice concept, but does not work in a practical manner).

Yaay!!!!

#771 - 2013-12-05 14:15:56 UTC  |  Edited by: DJ P0N-3
CCP Rise wrote:
Hi hi

I haven't been in the office today so sorry for the break in communication. I'm still not in actually, so I don't have time to go into tons of depth here but I wanted to address a few of the trends I see so far in the feedback.

First, I think we should get some kind of range bonus on the reps. 100% sounds about right, but we need to talk about this as a team before anything gets committed to. I'll get back to you once we can figure out where to go.

Second, It's really not getting a covert cloak . This is an extremely powerful capability and it's possible that it should stay off limits for battleships completely. On top of that, if there was going to be a covert battleship, black ops is where we need to start. We will be looking at them for a balance pass eventually, they are one of the remaining classes that haven't gotten their tiericide pass yet, and we can approach this topic when that happens.

Last, I'm seeing some complaints or concerns that it feels kind of all over the place. This is definitely intentional. In the posts for the Stratios and Astero I think I mentioned that one of the designs we are trying to emulate is the Gnosis. Ships capable of doing many things but being the absolute best for few. The hacking and probing bonuses are a good example of that here. We didn't choose them over something else that would make the ship a powerful fighter, we just included them to give the ship more options.

I'll be back in the office tomorrow and I'll catch up on the thread fully and try to cover anything big that I missed here.


The Gnosis didn't seem like its bonuses were fighting each other. A battleship, especially a deliberately slow battleship, shouldn't have bonuses that play up its vulnerabilities (uncloaked scanning, moving from can to can to hack/analyze things). The mass reduction on the Nestor isn't worth it for what the ship does now. I'm not bringing it to anything instead of three cruiser hulls. If the bonuses don't work in synchrony, I will get better performance out of three cruisers each doing one job better than the Nestor can.

Save the mass reduction for another ship. Balancing around it is hampering the rest of the ship. An uncloaked scanner fifty times the mass of a covops is not useful in w-space. I would suggest ditching the scanning bonus for the ability to fit a single command link and/or give it a ton of base capacitor/capacitor recharge rather than a mass reduction.
C C P Alliance
#772 - 2013-12-05 14:25:02 UTC
Okay, another short update:

Adding role bonus: 100% bonus to remote armor repairer range

We agreed that this will make quality of life a lot better when attempting to use the remote repair bonus without adding too much power.

Possibly a more detailed post in a couple hours regarding the discussion on black ops/bridging/cloaking and the all-over-the-place design, but I'm super busy atm and just wanted to make sure you guys knew about this change as soon as possible.

Thanks

@ccp_rise

Infernal Octopus
#773 - 2013-12-05 14:26:02 UTC
Phoenix Jones wrote:
Savira Terrant wrote:
Phoenix Jones wrote:

It should suffer the same issues all battleships suffer, and that's getting from point a to point b without dying.


All battleships?

Edit: Actually, not one battleship has this problem... especially if ISK is to be made in the target system. Use your imagination.


Imagination only goes so far until you have to balance out a ship based on its ecology.

SOE is a humanitarian organization and explorers. There ships should match that. The first two ships (astero and stratios) fit that moniker. The Nestor battleship though, while it fits the SOE setup, is not practical to be used by the Eve player (no one would realistically use this 2 billion isk ship in any realistic form outside of ship spinning in a station). It is not worth it....

But just because it is not worth it, does not mean we have complete liberty to add in whatever we believe will make it worth it (I'm just as guilty of having grand re-imaginations of this vessel).

I'd like to see CCP's second going on this ship. Because while the current ship fits the Sisters of Eve ethos, the ship has no actual or practical use in the game at the moment. This doesn't mean that it should be usable by everybody for anything for any reason, but it should have a real stated purpose. Right now the concept of a exploration battleship does not fit the current biology of the game (it is a nice concept, but does not work in a practical manner).



Making this ship useful for exploration is just what I proposed. Nothing more. There is no difference in transporting my Marauder to the target system for the much needed dps in DED plexes or jumping a different ship direcly to a cyno, other than directly being useful for both and maybe cheaper due to less mass.

Also I ninja edited my earlier post again if you care to know some more thoughts from me.

.

Infernal Octopus
#774 - 2013-12-05 14:27:28 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Okay, another short update:

Adding role bonus: 100% bonus to remote armor repairer range

We agreed that this will make quality of life a lot better when attempting to use the remote repair bonus without adding too much power.

Possibly a more detailed post in a couple hours regarding the discussion on black ops/bridging/cloaking and the all-over-the-place design, but I'm super busy atm and just wanted to make sure you guys knew about this change as soon as possible.

Thanks



I really hope you read the more recent posts before discussing that stuff.

.

Caldari State
#775 - 2013-12-05 14:29:03 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
We can certainly discuss this amount vs range thing. Can you guys help me out saying specifically in relation to it:

Do you feel you need added range to be able to run PVE content, or just to PVP, or both?
Are you asking for bonus to amount AND bonus to range or bonus to range INSTEAD of amount?

Not sure when it gets to sisi but there will be plenty of time before release to play with it.


The Guardian & Onieros Don't like where this conversation is going !!!!!!!!!!! Remote rep range + bonus Sentry Damage + Armor resistance bonus is tooooo Op. So OP that I would put it next to BS that can warp Cloaked. Lets go in an entire different direction and give it it's own Identity. it's mass makes it a great wormhole ship. Why not give it a fleet bonus like Titans that it lowers the mass of other ships that it's fleet commanding.
#776 - 2013-12-05 14:29:06 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Okay, another short update:

Adding role bonus: 100% bonus to remote armor repairer range

We agreed that this will make quality of life a lot better when attempting to use the remote repair bonus without adding too much power.

Possibly a more detailed post in a couple hours regarding the discussion on black ops/bridging/cloaking and the all-over-the-place design, but I'm super busy atm and just wanted to make sure you guys knew about this change as soon as possible.

Thanks

Could you consider adding that 100% range bonus to Remote Capacitor Transmitters as well, it is an Amarr ship as well.

If you don't follow the rules, neither will I.

#777 - 2013-12-05 14:31:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Alvatore DiMarco
For Lucky Post #777, I want to make a somewhat outside-the-box suggestion.

After looking at the cloaks ingame, I've come up with something. For the Astero and the Stratios, the ring structure facilitates the use of CovOps cloaks. Having the same ring on the battleship without any cloaking bonuses at all just doesn't make any sense whatsoever and certainly doesn't feel like it's a ship in the same series as the others.

While a cloaked velocity bonus on the Nestor would be nice, I do feel that it would step on the toes of Black Ops ships unless they're getting a significant rework during their balance pass. A cloak reactivation bonus or a reduction in targeting delay after decloaking would be nice too, but the other two ships haven't got either of these and they seem to be just fine. Letting the Nestor use a CovOps cloak isn't going to happen, so that really leaves us one viable (and potentially very useful) option:

Give the Nestor a bonus to nullify the scan res penalty when a cloak is fitted.

If you want to be truly unique, go even further and give it a bonus that actually increases the ship's scan resolution when a cloak is fitted. Something like "-200% to scan resolution penalty of fitted cloaking devices".

On an unrelated note, I strongly agree with others that the RR bonuses should be scrapped off completely and replaced with logi drone bonuses. It would be another unique bonus that follows along nicely with the drone-centric theme of the ship.
Guardians of the Asylum
#778 - 2013-12-05 14:45:01 UTC
Love the Jump Portal Generator and the Jump Drive.. Good Job..



... oh wait that was a dream.. Damn you space rings :p
#779 - 2013-12-05 14:45:24 UTC
Seriously 1,000,000 LP? How long will that take to earn?

Super cali hella yolo swaga dopeness.  -Yoloswaggins, in the fellowship of the bling.

#780 - 2013-12-05 14:54:02 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:
Okay, another short update:

Adding role bonus: 100% bonus to remote armor repairer range

We agreed that this will make quality of life a lot better when attempting to use the remote repair bonus without adding too much power.

Possibly a more detailed post in a couple hours regarding the discussion on black ops/bridging/cloaking and the all-over-the-place design, but I'm super busy atm and just wanted to make sure you guys knew about this change as soon as possible.

Thanks


Its a start... though you have me intriguing what else is planned for 1.1?

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.

Forum Jump