But specifics are where we determine whether the idea is good or not.
I can say as a general concept “CCP should make ganking in highsec easier” but if I don’t provide any specifics, there’s no further development that can had from that statement.
If you wish to leave your idea as nothing more than just a poorly fleshed out idea, that’s fine too. But I cannot support this non-specific idea.
You dont determined if the idea is good or not, thats the issue.
**
this is not a vote if you think it should go in the game
, and if you think that you should get off the forums**
Invalid point, I am not that ambiguous. Creating a m3 battleship that is designed with capital level weapons is far more specific.
Are you honestly trying to have a conversation here, or just trolling? because it seems like you rjust being a troll.
That is probably the niche where they actually don’t overlap. However if ABC’s didn’t exist there are other options which could be used for similar fleets. And I’m not convinced this niche is large enough to justify the class. Of course, the class exists now, I’m not advocating for deleting the class now it exists.
Nice royal ‘we’. Everyone else around here actually lays out some concept. It may not be final numbers, but if you don’t start with numbers it’s pointless.
Also…
Total Rubbish.
I mean, given that you refuse to provide any specifics, I can already determine it’s a pretty bad idea.
But you don’t explain how they would work. You don’t explain what range they’d be used at. You don’t explain how much health they would have. You don’t explain how much they would cost to build, or what skills a pilot would need to fly them.
All of this lack of information does not help support your idea.
And a vigilant does 1000dps and has the option of fitting an immobilizer, what is your point?
Link that fit or nobody will believe that. Bear in mind, there is no such thing as a polarized disintegrator in the game.
More the point, link that fit as a realistic option that could be flown as a fleet.
Some LOL perfect Abyss rolls on 5 Officer Mag stabs with Officer Guns vindi fit doesn’t count as realistic.
18 Posts removed with several kicked back for review by the posters.
All players have the ability to post on the forums to share ideas. Whether you agree with the idea, or the poster or not, keep the thread on topic.
- Specifically restricted conduct.
The purpose of the EVE Online forums is to provide a platform for exchange of ideas, and a venue for the discussion of EVE Online. Occasionally there will be conflicts that arise when people voice opinions. Forum users are expected to courteous when disagreeing with others.
In order to maintain an environment where everyone is welcome and discussion flows freely, certain types of conduct are prohibited on the EVE Online forums. These are:
Trolling
Flaming
Ranting
Personal Attacks
Harassment
Doxxing
Racism & Discrimination
Hate Speech
Sexism
Spamming
Bumping
Off-Topic Posting
Pyramid Quoting
Rumor Mongering
New Player Bashing
Impersonation
Advertising
Already exist and widely (ab)used in form of Leshaks, and i fear T2 Triglavian battleships will be even worse (more broken) balance-wise.
The worry i have with giving sub caps capital weapons with high dps is that they could be used for ratting.
Rats are slow and dumb, even capital weapons land decent hits and these ships will become dominant mission running ships in hi-sec. Possibly even better than dreads in null/wh if they don’t need to be in siege mode.
Currently we have bombers with void bombs and dreads themselves for taking out other caps.
this is a valid point, but like many of the base parts of eve, are a problem themselves. we cannot fix everything by 1 change, and the more changes we try to fix with one change, the more likely we will break the game. small steps, and corrections are the way to go, unless something out right needs a fit.
capitals themselves are not really an issue, its them in groups that are.
You wouldn’t want battleships with capitals weapons for a few reasons.
Battleships can get fairly large EHP and get reps, you don’t want a fleet of 500 anti-capital battleships that can wreck a fleet of capitals and possibly subcaps (like BC’s or other BS, which can already be done by LR Titans/Dreads).
Battleships retain their mobility unlike a seiged dread and are faster than a Titan. Plus they can MJD, which can make it difficult to pin them down as they take apart your capitals.
Capital guns have long range, they can use this range to compensate for their poor tracking (again, LR Titan/Dreads can hit sub caps already).
There could be some counters like using frigates, but again, it comes back to them having BS sized tanks that can be logi’d.
In the end, it makes them too strong and not able to be countered easily, which will put us in the same boat we have now with capitals, just switching the ship type.
If you want an actual anti-capital subcap, arguably it would be better to make either a T2 or T3 Attack Battlecruiser.
Let it continue to use battleships sized guns, but give it either a high slot module (or a mode if T3, like T3D’s), that when activated, increase damage to the 2000-2500 dps range, but lower tracking by 99% (or equivalent of capital tracking, with other possible modifiers such as decreasing speed and possibly decreasing signature so capitals can’t apply as well).
This changes the fleet dynamic. As, ABC’s by default are squishy, even if T2 or T3, i wouldn’t expect to see their EHP higher than 70-80k. This means a fleet of Ferox can just erase them as a hard counter, and T1 ferox countering a T2 or T3 ship, will trade well in the isk war department.
With them being battleship sized weapons, they are now range limited the same as battleships. Which means a sniper ferox can out range them, and it also means they can’t just go to 250km with LR capital weapons and track everything, since they most likely won’t be range bonused.
This means that the “Anti-Capital” ABC would be something in the 50-60km range, doing a lot of damage as a glass cannon, but can be countered easily by other subcaps or bombs, but will be big damage dealers against capitals. If supported properly, they can bring down capitals with ease, but when another subcap fleet lands on grid, they are then countered.
Scope creep is not the cure for past scope creep.
All this does is make the gulf between new players and existing players worse.
Yes, i do. Thats the point of the suggestion, to find a blob counter to the blob capitals to restore balance.
Thats part of the intended design. They are bs’s and can easily get eaten by carrier spam, so tank and high damage is needed, adding in logi plays a big role in making them viable, an issue that is no open for m3bc and one of the reasons why they are not really used for countering capitals.
No,
heavy weapons will improve the change of hitting subcaps and bcs dont have the tank to fight capital blobs, especially when we take into consideration their own reps and logi, and how fast a bc will be eaten by fighters.
putting the weapons on large scale will only break t he suggestion. the point remains a bs with capital weapons is a better option, far less likely to be abused. keep in mind the skill poins will still have to be trained for the weapons themselves, so its a good “in the middle” option with out having to create an entire class (something between bs/dread).
not a valid point, we can add - range % to the ships, thats something we already do on other classes.
fyi, cap weapons wont track everything at 250km thats subcap especially the smaler stuff. Learn mechancs.
Your suggestion would replace the a blob with another blob. You’re not solving any problem, you’re just replacing it with another problem.
So are you advocating that these ships of your’s will have range that’s greater than 250km?
Huge difference is that one of the two costs loads, and can smart bomb other groups to dead instantly.
Solution of the problem has been posted many times. Delete capitals, but you dont wanna do that, so Meh. Deal with a half-ass fix like every other dev choice in this game.
As a self proclaimed game designer of 18 years, you seem to forgetting that people don’t like to play games when there is zero counterplay. Being able to “smart bomb other groups to dead instantly” sounds like an incredibly unfun mechanic that doesn’t actually solve a problem. It replaces the problem with another one, namely being one that can easily delete another ship class instantly.
Not a fun mechanic, bad idea.
You don’t provide any compelling reasons for why Capitals should be deleted. I don’t care what your “solutions” are because you never point out a problem in the first place.
Great we agree.
Lets delete super caps at once! Since there is obviously no “counter play” for it, much less for new players.
You really gotta work on your arguments, my 13 year old nephew can do better.
Pssttt. This is not a suggestion, its something in eve NOW.
Do you even play this game?
No, let’s not. You still have yet to provide a compelling reason for the deletion of capital ships.
Ok, Whats the counter play?