Should have had mode switch like T3d’s
Base stats as they are in OP apart from resists. 0 Resists for the mode not selected. cannot change mode while agressed.
Shield mode, 100% bonus to Ahield HP, 94% Shield resists
Armor mode, 100% bonus to Armor HP, 94% Armor resists
I feel like this ship is way too specific in it’s use-case, and it almost painfully sticks out as an unrealistic design from a lore perspective. It is also very unflexible in it’s abilities, so basically only a large fleet FC would ever want to use it.
Instead of designing it to be completely useless, I’d rather would have liked to see it as a somewhat useful ship that is sub-par compared to others, but comes with a defense mechanism that increases with the number of locks. I.E. take a BC-hull with no damage bonus, and limited slots (like 3/3/3), so that even with 3x damage bonus in low slots you can’t get it above 200 dps. Give it it a good resist/repair bonus, so you can get it over 500 dps tank. And on top of that the “Monitor” bonus (if you want to call it like that), which causes the signature to be reduced by a factor of 0.75 times the number of locks (not counting fleet members or ppl with a blue stranding). So if you get one lock, your signature drops from 250 to 187.5, if you have ten locks it’s down to 14.
This way the ship gradually gets more tanky, yet is neither completely useless, nor a pain in the ass for a 3-men gang, and there is actually a strategy to beat it. Also the FC can then flit the ship according to his grand plan, and is not limited by what you allow.
Perhaps they should have a dis-incentive that way, have a stacking penalty on the target in relation to fleet so that for every player shooting the “primary” target over say like 3 would receive a damage reduction of 10%/player. It would encourage more than one target at a time to be engaged rather than follow the leader and pick off one at a time.
I’m sorry but I cant support a ship that does nothing but allow someone to stay on field to direct traffic…the FC should be involved in the combat. If you want to give a 25% bonus to defenses to the FC role in a fleet than fine, flagships should be harder to kill, but 90% reduced damage for no damage dealing just to issue commands…no thank you, that is only putting a band-aid on a broken arm.
This is a great idea! Then all you have to do is bring enough logi, with heavily-enough tanked ships, and diminishing returns on the incoming damage will ensure nobody dies!! [/sarcasm]
The target painter is a kind bonus, but any FC worth the name should care more about winning fights than generating personal killmails, that’s what your fleet is for. The ship itself is a great idea, nice way to encourage people to be FCs and make fights last longer by preventing FC deaths.
That said if you want to make it better give it something that nerfs the ■■■■■■■■ that is microjump fields, even if it’s just making bubbles prevent them so that at least a tiny bit of skill is required to use them. Easily the most ridiculous idea to enter the game ever.
It isn’t about scoring on kill mails? It is more about the realism of the fight. We talk about EvE and how glorious it is, we tote it around as being more a simulator than a game. We have a very realistic economy, scale of space and such…but soon as we involve PvP tactics all that goes right out the window in favor of the “mob mentality” I can guarantee you that you would never see a naval fleet fighting another naval fleet of equal size and have every ship follow a single ship against a single primary target…they would choose targets of opportunity thus not really fighting efficiently. Not in EvE, PvP has degraded to the blob factor, one person leading the rest into combat with no established chain of command, just a single individual making or breaking the fleet.
To make matters worse you have a single nearly impenetrable ship conducting commands, in that case why even bother having the FC on the field, why not just have the FC sit at a station with the ability to “spectate” from across the solar system or whatever. So the FC can look at whatever ship they want…after all isn’t that what this ship is supposed to accomplish anyway? Why even bother putting the FC on grid.
As I said, if you want to buff up the FC with a flagship bonus to defenses you could nerf the offensive capabilities to match thus allowing the FC role in the fleet to get the bonus instead of a ship hull. This keeps the FC in the fight where they belong, not back behind the field calling the shots and doing nothing to contribute to fleet victory other than give commands. This ship is a terrible idea as I am sure most will discover later in the future.
What’s your experience in large strategic operations?
Ones where there are separate scouts, capital fleets, dps fleets, logi, etc.
I ask, simply because my own experience in the game is different to what you’ve written. Even at the individual fight level, there normally is a chain of command when the span of control becomes too large to be effective otherwise.
I can guarantee you that in a modern naval fleet engagement, you would never see a naval fleet in range to directly fire on another naval fleet, and they haven’t been since 1942.
And when they have engaged, yes, all the firepower of multiple carriers attempted to focus their firepower on single targets until those targets were judged to be incapacitated (Kaga, Akagi, Yorktown, etc.) or until the defenses were judged to be too stiff, and another target was selected by the air group’s on-site lead.
. . . ahahahahahahahahah.
Usually we’ve got 1 FC, a Recon guy running the fleet’s scouts, Logi Lead, backup FC (usually, this person organizes the boosters as well as being the FC’s second), a Coordinator (if there’s only one fleet on the op, this person’s job is largely administrative. If reinforcements are needed, or a support fleet, their job is to find an FC for that fleet and get scouts and recon spun up to support the reinforcement/support elements), to say nothing of command staff who’re available in case an escalation path is needed.
Sooooo… one person? MMMmmmmmno. Sorry.
But yes, this ship is a terrible idea.
Will everyone get one of these as a redeemable item? I feel that would be awesome, being it is a new ship to New Eden. 
I liked the phony Biomass Accumulator, Deployable Structure better than this abomination…
Not much longer before this abomination gets released. I expect it to be used for bumping for the first days only.
Question? Instead of making a whole new ship for FC’s why can’t the Overview settings get nerfed to not allow player names to be seen in null sec?
. . . wat?
‘Ok, folks, everyone keep on the Avatar.’
‘Which one?’
‘The one in fleet.’
‘Which one?’
‘The one on the left.’
‘from which direction?’
Seriously… wat?
You see, that isn’t strictly true.
Many years ago (maybe about 7 years) I proposed a diminishing returns damage model that was designed to “beat the blob” and force fleets to engage multiple targets at once.
The way it worked was to use signature radius as the key. I had done all the math on it but would have to dig it up to find is but…
Each ship would have a “Signature pool” of signature multiplied by y
Then you would use the signature radius value of the weapon (old mechanic which is no longer visible) shooting at the ship. So a large turret has a signature of 425mm (IIRC). You would add all of these up and apply it to the signature pool.
The way I had mathed it out was that approx ten ships shooting at a target of the same size class (BS vs BS or Frig vs Frig) would get approx 99% damage applied. Each additional ship over that had drastically diminishing returns; for example, 15 ships would be as effective as 11. 20 ships would be as effective as 12 and so on.
Now because remote reps would easily be able to overcome this diminishing damage when a ship receives remote reps it gets a large increase to it’s signature pool which would allow more ships to apply damage.
Also, because this was all linked to the signature radius of weapons used it means that more smaller ships can engage a larger ship than a ship of the same size.
Do you understand what I’ve just brain vomited into the thread @Arrendis ? I know that it is extremely disjointed and makes sense in my head but on the screen I may not have articulated it very well without basically necro’ing the old thread.
It’s much easier to implement a simple numeric hard-cap citadel like.
Your proposal about number of ships means everyone has to fly arty doctrines to maximise volley per ship.
Sig radius also means everyone has to fly armour tanks.
A simple hard-cap citadel like also means you can put a similar hard cap on remote reps & capacitor transfer to avoid 8 local reps instead.
Is it the best solution, I don’t know, but I do know that it avoids the sillyness of this ship being needed, and it solves the ‘Your name starts with A, you get to always die at the start of a fight in an instant volley’ problem, because while a line member getting volleyed isn’t as problematic as the FC, it’s still a significant problem for enjoyment.
My proposal actually mathed out really well and alpha fleets wouldn’t have been the be all and end all. It could easily also have been balanced by adjusting weapon sig radius here and there as required.
Also, the method used did mean that shield tankers could potentially take more ships worth of damage but this was minimal and it actually depended more on the number of weapons fired at the target rather than number of ships. Shield tank ships usually get to deal more damage than armour so damage per weapon would be higher than armour which means it balances out. It also meant that target painters would become very valuable.
There was also the option of the signature pool being before modifiers are applied.
Also, having a universal system means that it works everywhere, not just where there are citadels running effects and the result is predictable which is necessary in a game.
Would you like me to dig up the old thread and get all the details?
Yes, I understand what you’ve vomited into the thread. No, I don’t want you to go digging up the old thread, because it’s a bad idea.
Trying to artificially remove focusing fire is silly, and it’s not a matter of ‘but the math…!’ You know what happens in your scenario? The entire fleet still focuses fire on the first guy the FC calls, because they locked him up as soon as the FC said his name and they’re lazy. Worse, you’ll get people who wind up confused by the multiple target-calling because they’re only half-paying attention. Fleet effectiveness degrades, people get frustrated, and the one thing they wanted out of the damned game—explosions—has just been expressly taken away from them. So they stop playing.
Then comes the math. You have to go on and math out ‘well, I’ve got Halos in’ or ‘but I put a LSE II on’ when figuring out how many ships can shoot at a given target. And while your FC (who apparently has had to get someone in there with a ship scanner or gotten the enemy fit from a spy) works out this math on the fly (because nobody here is saying ‘ONE PERSON DOING EVERYTHING WAAAAAH’, already, right?), the line guys start to bicker amongst themselves that I’m not the one getting diminishing returns, you are, so you need to shoot another… SHUT UP I’M ON THE RIGHT TARGET!..
… yeah. That’s gonna go over well.
Then we add in the question of ‘ok, so if we have this diminishing returns model, then we can math out exactly how many logi we need per ship’. Sure, the logi gets diminishing returns, too, but bringing just enough highly-effective logistics is such a force multiplier, it’s worth pimping them out. Deadspace tanks. Scythes carrying 3 Large reppers—not only do they rep more than a Scimitar, they do it from farther away (max range: 88.5km before dipping into 2nd falloff, compared to the Scimitar’s 80.2). And yes, with boosts, they can target that far.
Or, if it’s per-ship, then we just bring triage. Oh, and now we’re on the capital escalation path, where any fight of any size becomes ‘can we hold them here for 67 minutes while our capitals make 4 jumps and do a lot of gating?’ Because if you think you can, then 4j + gates is more than enough to consider ‘do we move the supers up as a deterrant on their supers?’ and now everyone’s tidi’d to hell.
Mind you, this problem isn’t unique to your idea. Every idea that trots out ‘well you can diminishing returns the logi’ runs into ‘then we’ll just bring this stupid build out that shouldn’t exist, and we’ll bring more of them’. The end result, though…
FFS, people ■■■■■ and moan all damned day about how risk-averse everyone in this game has gotten, and you’re suggesting ways to make fewer ships be at risk or blow up.
If you’re referring to the ‘Signature Resolution’ attribute, it’s still there, and a 1400mm Howitzer Artillery II has a value of 40,000m
Dont like it, and Dont want it… This will not be a good thing at all!
This proposal would not remove focus fire? Lmao it would however keep from 30 v 1 when those 30 pilots may have a choice of up to say 20 targets. Focus fire would still apply but instead FIRE EVERYTHING at one tary and go down a list till fleet is dead…which if you ask me is a very unsophisticated and boring way to fleet fight, you would instead be able to have 4-6 targets that are being primaried as it were, forcing FCs to have better strategy, more options, less headshot potential, more realistic fleet fights, and promotes line members to learn what an FC does, pick a target of opportunity but still be able to choose your targets instead of a FC dictating every single target to focus fire on they could read off a few and let the fleet choose. Blob warfare is a cancer to fleet fights, fighting should NOT be so simplistic as to group one target 1 person from group 2 and group 2 target one person from group 1…maybe in small scale fighting but larger fleets should have variety, structure, and complexity at least more than currently exist.
With all due respect; but if you need to introduce this ship when there is already an extremely skill point intensive COMMAND SHIP line, then i must ascertain that it’s design is not fulfilling it’s purpose.
As of now Command Ships are really just support ships and very boring to fly despite the potential for high bonuses.
But the introduction of the Monitor cruiser will once and for all cement that the existing Command Ships will never be used to actually command a fleet from.