The current slate of T2 battleships is pretty good at filling most of the roles I can conceive of, but I have one concept nagging at me. One I come back to occasionally.
The concept of a well tanked, command ship that is a step up from the command ship, with a light secondary support concept, based on the 3 combat battleships which do not have T2 variants to date. Mixing a bit of command ship, a bit of HAC, and a tiny touch of logistics.
Defining role bonuses:
- May fit 3 command burst module
ā The lack of Large command coprocessors holds them to this and no more.
ā Forgot about orcas using large rigs and thus large command processors. Scratch that, possibly base of 2 if 3 is too generous and might obsolete command ships fully.
- Moderate turret damage bonus
ā Compensates for 3-5 turret slots, bringing effective turrets roughly into line with t1 combat battleships
- āIntermediateā t2 resists
ā Base resists equal to tech3s, TDs, interdictors, and the like (-50% primary enemy damage type, -25% secondary)
- Small bonus to racially appropriate logistics range but not strength
Just as a utility thing
- battleship HP expander bonuses
To keep them in line with blops and t1 battleships
Then we would get to the racial specifics, an example of which is below to be generalized and give a full picture.
Tyr
-
7/6/6
-
4 Base turrets
-
650 TF 19000MW
-
8750 shield HP
50/40/40/50 EM/Them/kin/exp
-
8000 Armor HP
80/51.2/25/10
-
7000 Hull HP
33 omni
-
Role bonus
Able to fit 3 Command Burst Modules
200% bonus to remote shield booster optimal range and falloff
100% damage bonus to large projectile turrets
100% bonus to shield extender hitpoints
50% bonus to armor plate hitpoints
5% additional bonus to reinforced bulkhead hitpoints
-
Minmatar Battleship bonus /lvl
5% to Large Projectile Turret ROF
7.5% to Shield Booster Amount
-
Flagship bonuses /lvl
15% Shield+skirmish command burst range
2% shield+skirmish command burst effect and duration
3% to shield resistances
Iām not sure such a role is really needed.
The ācommandā ships arenāt at every ship size, usually only in the in-between sizes: destroyer and battlecruiser. And the aptly-named battlecruiser āCommand Shipā class already is close enough to battleships in terms of EHP and speed that it brings links to a battleship fleet with no issues.
Whouldnāt a T2 battleship command ship be competing for the role of the Command Ships too much? Itās not even that it adds much flavour, usually a fleet only takes three of these ships.
2 Likes
Itās why this has been a back burner thought for years, and finally bubbled up to the surface far enough to put forward a real suggestion.
I think weāve got enough niche ships to discuss the topic now, unlike a decade ago.
I tried to keep the thing from obsoleting command ships by dropping it into ālarge but smaller than fleet command ships stronger than fleet command ships but not as strong as combat command shipsā for the bursts, really good tank but not the raw resists of the fleet command ships, making it more dependent on actually fitting tank modules in reasonable numbers than just native resists.
It does compete, but I think itās distinct enough to be a different thing with a different but similar usecase for the reasons above.
T3 battleships. Similar in function to T3 destroyers in that they have 3 pre-defined modes (and not modules like T3C): speed, firepower and tank.
Iād rather not. If weāre going to do more Tech3, I want more actually modular ships. I have/had concepts for a 3 module slot/ 3 systems per slot paradigm for them with some mildly crazy ideas for how to get interesting results out of that rather than just bigass stat sticks with more tank and DPS than one can shake any subcapital ship at, but Iām holding the crazier ideas in for now.
But, on the topic actually proposed, opinion?
Sure, Iād be down for a tankier T2 battleship class that offered T2 resists, bonuses to hull/shield/armor plating, command bonuses and maybe a +25%-35% DPS bump over the navy equivalent.
I guess Caldari and Amarr could get extra resistance bonuses.
The Monitor is like a beta version of a flagship.
The idea OP shared would be a step closer to a real flag ship. They should probably get a bonus to the signature supressor. For example no-reactivation delay. And so they also fit in for example nimble fleet doctrines they might need a warp speed bonus too.
Bakster, so you want the flag ship to have a tiny sig radius for a battleship, have a good tank and be nimble and fast enough with a warp speed bonus to keep up with smaller ship sizes (like cruisers)?
Sounds like a Monitor to me.
Always a fan of more command ships
yeah, Iām specifically against the warp speed bonus given the tools available to increase warp speed.
Lower than average signature? could be worth discussing. A 0 cooldown signature suppressor? Hell no.
Higher than t1 agility? yes please. All the way to nimble? hell no. A good point to target is the 9.x-10.0 align time without agility modules IMO, and a highish base mass so that MWDs and ABs effect that less than average. T1 attack battleships live in the 10.x-11s tick, so a tick faster with lower prop module downside is relatively nimble without being too much.
We could always make them attack battleships and give them HAW.
The Monitor is a specific ship to fill a specific role and negate a specific problem.
The problem: FCs continuously getting headshot in big fights.
The ship: one an fc can pilot in a huge n+1 slugfest thatās very tough to kill but has almost no offensive capability.
The role: for fcs, so they can survive long enough to actually lead their fleets.
Back in the day, weād almost always try to headshot the enemy fc. If there was no one else in that fleet able to step up, the fight was as good as won.
2 Likes
So has having the Monitor improved things or made them worse?
Largely improved things in huge slugfests imo.
1 Like