Navy Destroyers


(Agent 5B) #1

Destroyers seen to have the smallest part of the ship tree at the moment and are the only sub cap combat ships that do not currently have navy version. I was wondering if this is in the pipeline or is there room for a navy version ? What do people think ?


(LouHodo) #2

Destroyers and Battle cruisers are kind of an after thought.

I have been asking for a couple of new destroyers for a while.

What I have wanted to see is these two destroyers show up.
1- an Exploration/scout destroyer class. Bigger than the frigate, and not a special edition ship. Currently the only exploration sized destroyer is the Sunsis.

2- An EWar destroyer. Really for most of the races there is no options for EWar till you get to cruisers then nothing for most of the races after that.

It makes sense that the Gallente and the Caldari would have a EWar version in a destroyer class. And in a Battlecruiser class ship.

But the Amarr and Minmatar would not have one in those classes because well they dont put the same emphasis as the other two. That and their EW bonuses dont really do much good on big ships. Target painting a Battleship is like using a laser range finder to hit a mountain.


(Trigori) #3

1- an Exploration/scout destroyer class. Bigger than the frigate, and not a special edition ship. Currently the only exploration sized destroyer is the Sunsis.

T3Ds are very well suited for (combat) exploration.


(LouHodo) #4

No bonuses to ANYTHING exploration oriented.
-Scanning bonus… nope.
-Covert cloaking device, or any cloak bonus… nope.
-Hacking or Relic scanner bonus… nope.

Well hell they are just like a exploration ship except those things.


(Trigori) #5

They can fit probe scanner without any compromise, they don’t need cloaks because they are already pretty slippery and hacking can be done pretty well without bonuses.


(Gian Bal) #6

Destroyers and Battlecruisers are purely combat vessels. It’s sorta in the ship class name ‘Destroyer’ 'Battle’cruiser.

Navy destroyers would be nice, no need for exploration ones.


(LouHodo) #7

Ok, fine, you can. But you can also put a probe launcher on a Burst and explore with that. Or put a probe launcher on a Corvette and explore with that. (Yes I have done JUST that and taken it into WHs.)
Does it mean that it is good at it…no it is like putting lipstick on a turd and calling it a prom queen.

Well Frigates are combat ships by definition, so are Battleships and Cruisers. According to modern maritime definitions of classes.


(Trigori) #8

Can the Burst or the Corvette instawarp? Can they do combat signatures effectively? Hacking isn’t the only type of exploration. Why the heck do you even want a destroyer with hacking bonuses? How does that improve anything? If you want to run relic and data sites use a explofrig, cov-ops or SoE ship.


(Agent 5B) #9

He has a point , the fitting bonus for T3D is only really helpful for expanded probe launchers.
Destroyers could probably be expanded in every type Ewar Logi Exploration but where do you stop ?
Assault destroyers ? Cloaky Torpedo destroyers ? Maybe Navy ones wouldn’t need much more than to be not brick slow or something other than just being better in every way than the normal ones.


(Solonius Rex) #10

You lumped the Sunesis into the exploration destroyer group, and yet the Sunesis only has the scanning bonus. And so does the T3 destroyer, have a CPU bonus, so not much difference there as they both provide bonus to scanning modules in some form or another, while giving no cloaking or hacking bonus.


(Solonius Rex) #11

Why stop there? What about Carrier destroyers that launch fighters? Or Dreadnought destroyers that have seige modules? Maybe Titan destroyers that shoot doomsday beams?

Infact, these should exist for every class of ship. Carrier Battleships, id love to have one of those.


(Agent 5B) #12

Yeah the Sunesis is not great for exploration.

Torpedoes on the Corax it could finally be a U Boat.


(LouHodo) #13

Actually yes.

I think my Burst has a align time of 2.1s and I dont even have it fitted that well.

And my Minmatar corvette can align in under 2.4.

The Burst can do combat sigs about as well as a Probe.

The point is, why should you have to fall back on pirate ships (SOE) ships which are WAY overpriced and OP for what should be covered by a cheaper less effective version by the factions. Did they not do exploration prior to the SOE coming around with their space ambulances?


(LouHodo) #14

Actually you have those.

Mini-Battlestar Galactica Algos.
And the Dragoon.

Both have more drones than any other ship of their class or even a class bigger in some cases. And they have firepower.


(Erethond) #15

Maybe they did exploration in their exploration covert ops frigates?

Hacking hardly seems to fit for a Navy. Now I would totally take an Algos Navy Issue with even better drones, but I can’t say it all that needed. The destroyers are already pretty decent at what they are supposed to do.


(Trigori) #16

To get those ships to those align times you need to give up their tank and offensive capabilities, T3Ds can do it while being fully viable combat ships.

The Burst can do combat sigs about as well as a Probe.

So its absolute ■■■■? T3Ds can solo DED 5/10 and C3 WH sites, try to do that in a Burst or Probe.

The point is, why should you have to fall back on pirate ships (SOE) ships which are WAY overpriced and OP for what should be covered by a cheaper less effective version by the factions. Did they not do exploration prior to the SOE coming around with their space ambulances?

Surprise, people got along just fine without bonuses to scan probe strength and hacking, or used cov-ops.


(Agent 5B) #17

Who says a T2 destroyer exploration ship would be cheaper than an astero ?


(Gadget Helmsdottir) #18

And both have command variants whereas the other classes do not.

–Commander Gadget


(GoPackGo Aurilen) #19

I don’t understand the aversion here to more ships being added to the game…variety is fun.


(Agent 5B) #20

I understand the point of not overlapping the role of an existing ship