When I run 3/10s I am often still in HS. I run them when I dont find anything else worth while in a system.
Only a moron would not factor in the loss of any ship. And who says it is to PVE?
It is factored in, you can run dozens of sites and make billions before you run out of luck with your T3D. Because most things that are a threat to you are to slow to catch you, while things that are fast enough to catch you are typically not a big problem for a T3D.
PS: Navy Destroyers will have an impact on HS ganking. This needs to seriously be thought through, especially since Alphas can fly Navy ships.
thatās a good point to take in account. im not sure if people would be capable of welping a navy ship just to kill miners/haulers, and in terms of power, if things go as the concept i made, then its probable that the navy destroyers will loose some of their damage output in exchange for more survivability or extra slots, as their base hull was already focused heavily on damage dealing which is the contrary to say, the Navy BCs which for the most part were tank oriente but got those bonuses swapped for damage.
speaking of which, how about if there was a second tier of Navy BCs which was EWAR oriented. at the small level we have a navy frig, but thereās no EWAR support for medium to large ships (in general thereās not even EWAR battleships at all, just Armaggedon and Scorpion and their navy versions are combat oriented hulls).
something like:
-Navy Ferox ā 5% hibrid damage bonus per lvl changed to 5% bonus to ECM target jammer optimal range and falloff, 10% bonus to hibrid weapon optimal range changed to 20% bonus to ECM target jammer strength, -2 high +1 mid +1 low, gains dronebay to field 5 light drones or 3 medium drones (Navy Drake is the main DPS platform, Navy Ferox strips out some of the weapon mounts to focus on jamming, allthought it doesnt have the more specific bonuses of the Blackbird or the Scorpion)
-Navy Prophecy ā 4% bonus to armor resists per lvl changed to 10% bonus to energy vampire and energy neutralizer optimal and falloff, -1 turret -1 launcher (thereās no neuting platform in the imperial navy doctrine, the Prophecy fills that gap perfectly with its drone focus by loosing its resists bonuses in favour of a range bonus for neuts/vamps at the extra cost of 1 less turret or launcher to make way for the double neut/vamp thing)
-Navy Myrmidon ā 7,5% bonus to armor repair effectivenes changed to 7,5% bonus to sensor dampener optimal range and falloff or 7,5% to sensor dampener effectiveness (thereās no actual sensor dampening at BC or BS level for gallente, the 7,5 armor repair bonus gets replaced for one of the bonuses of the Celestis while the hull keeps the same fitting as the regular myrm with slightly bigger stats, besides, the Navy Maulus already has covered the extra scramble bonuses)
-āNavyā Cyclone ā 7,5% bonus to shield boost amount per lvl changed to 7,5% to target painter optimal range and falloff, -1 high +1 mid (Fleet Vigil has the web bonus and Target Painter is the main EWAR of Minmatar so it made sense, to not ā ā ā ā too much on the Bellicose the hull gets an optimal and falloff bonus instead of effectiveness, not sure on the fitting changes but i had to put that extra mid for the painter from somewhere else, besides, it was 2 utility highs)
Unfortunately, it pretty much, heuristically, explains why Destroyers dont have a Navy class.
In terms Navy Destroyers, I would recommend instead new Pirate Destroyers.
The rest of your post was interesting, but applies to BCs, which while I appreciate your effort, is outside the topic of this thread.
1 Like
Sorry, I was thinking in terms of developer resources and outcomes. Because I donāt see a niche that a Navy destroyer would fill that would make it worth the price or, more importantly, the development time. Furthermore, the only appeal I can see would be its availability to Alphas, since a Navy destroyer would likely be competing with Tech III Destroyers for any kind of relevant damage-dealing role. If you try to balance by cost, then thereās a point at which a Tech I cruiser seems like a smarter investment.
I also donāt really want CCP to be juggling more than they already have, balance-wise. Their track record is a bit spotty in that department.
1 Like
How about filling the role of an RL Aegis or Type 45 destroyers, missile support boats basically that improve application of fleet missiles, whilst having some firepower themselves.
1 Like
Hmā¦at first that sounds like a Command Destroyer. Mechanically speaking, what would be the EVE equivalent? Bonused remote tracking computers and the like?
Thatās an interesting idea, actually. We already have a precedent for navy e-war vessels, navy support vessels arenāt so far-fetched.
It was just an idea off the top of my head, but to keep in with the destroyer theme and Navy approach I guess it would be for fleet defence space superiority, so area affect enhanced missile/turret tracking/range? Should be relatively lower EHP, but also lower sig, so harder to hit at range. Pinned down or hit by AoE and it should die fairly quickly, but taking potshots at range should be trickier.
Iād say more like a fleet level support unit.
Bonuses to remote sebos, defender missiles, and drone tracking. Meaning it empowers larger fleet members, provides improved anti-bomb coverage, and has drones that excel at removing other drones or fast frigates. But without damage bonuses or gun application bonuses because its role isnāt being a solo powerhouse.
My thoughts on it were yes they would somewhat replace T2 Destroyers as straight up combat vessels leaving T2 destroyers to do their role rather than be used as a brick. Unless you were to create Assault destroyers which would inevitably be more tanky than Navy ones.
In terms of ganking I donāt think they would be more efficient Isk/dps than normal destroyers but max capability per pilot might be more depending on what a navy destroyer is. My original suggestion was that they would perhaps just be faster so if that were the case then the ganking ability would be no better than a normal destroyer.
Actuallyā¦ bonuses to existing anti-missile modules might be a niche worth exploring. That would work for two of the races.
Or a maybe introduce a targeted drone range reducing module? The other two racesā boats could be bonused for these.
Or smartbomb bonuses!
āGadget admits that the last one is a joke
1 Like
I think you are out on your own there, anti missile modules are weapon disrupters so they are Ewar, typically Amarr ewar ships do already have bonus to this. Targeted drone range reducing module Iām fairly sure you can use a sensor dampener on a drone. Smart bomb bonus on a destroyer ? yeah I have a tactic that uses them but not sure anyone else does and itās a very finite use.
I would actually like to see either navy or explo dedicated destroyers. Alternatively, add an explo mode to T3Ds. Make this particular mode longer to activate / deactivate and give it a longer then usual cooldown if necessary to prevent it from being too OP. So I kinda like it.
Beefy Destroyers sounds like a miss honestly. 30 mill, and 15 mill are not that different a cost. They also would push in AF territory. EWAR would be the only thing I think you could add to this ship class that makes it interesting. A larger exploration vessel that is not a cruiser is interesting but all four races probably dont need one. I just really dont see what it is supposed to do.
Not sure what the 30 and 15 mil are referring to but if my memory of math serves me correctly one is double the other so I would say they are quite different. Yes perhaps assault frigate territory but more the territory that assault frigates used to be in before the recent changes. Looking at the Battlecruiser class there is a reasonable likelihood that the destroyer class will end up mirroring that, in which case there will most likely be no covert cloaky exploration torpedo assault destroyers with a bonus to ECM except as AT prizes. Itās almost like assault frigates have been moved to make space for navy destroyers so thatās why I was wondering.
1 Like
Navy Cormorant with missiles would be nice.
It would probably need some launcher hard points too
1 Like
Yes please. Sansha destroyer.
5 high slots
4 mid slots
4 low
4 turrets allowed, with one extra high slot to play with. Same bonuses as all sansha ships.
150% bonus to small energy turret
20% bonus to afterburner per level
7.5% bonus to turret tracking per level
A cloaky SoE Destroyer would be nice.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.