Thoughts on battleships

[alance]

More expesive doesn't mean better though.

Scissors cost more than paper and paper costs more than a rock.

I don't know about you, but I play that game with my hand, not real scissors and rocks. My hand costs the same in the form of a scissor or a rock.:)

On topic...

I also like the idea of big ships having weaker shields and more armor. It makes sense in a "realism" way as well as gameplay. The energy required to put up a spherical field the size of a BS would be ridiculously huge compared to putting one around a fighter or gunboat. There's the "real world" argument, run with it!:)

---

"To gain a hundred victories in a hundred battles is not the highest excellence;
to subjugate the enemy's army without doing battle is the highest of excellence."

[pipsqueak]

I dont care if they leave the shield capacity as it is. Only recharge rate is the problem as after making three or four direct hits with novas, I have to wait for them to recharge. Theoritically even a small fighters whould have a chance of destroying a battle ship (albeit miniscule). If a fighter can sit there and take pot shots at a battle ship from 700 distance without getting hit for 10 to 15 minutes, he/she deserves a victory.

---

[Snip3rNife]

Wait. Bombers can only shoot one Nova at once? In that case, Bombers should have more energy, While you're at it, Remove the turrets from the RH Bomber D:

And seriously. I don't care about the "why put battleships ingame if nobody can use them". I'd like you to think of a good RP story why a Freelancer would singlehandedly pilot a massive battleship.

---

Known as on Discovery RP 24/7:
Thomas_Hill - Train
[KNF]TakajiKimura - Chimera
You may also know me elsewhere as I'll Begin or something including "Volbeat"

[DarkOddity]

Check my signature. Granted the ship Aidan Patrick currently owns is not a battleship, but it is a Destroyer. There are ways to obtain crews. Especially on an unlawful ship.. Funding them is quite simple.:)

---

My Website

[Treewyrm]

Well, I guess it's a bad idea after all but I'll step out and put my two cents into this discussion. Oh I know I will be flamed...

First, price has never been a problem. You can make it a billion but in the end it will only result in a few more days to do trading runs. In a long run increasing price doesn't solve anything, just more traders stacking in docking ring of Harris.

Secondly, loosing a battleship isn't a problem - respawn and go on. You can loose a fighter, a bomber, even a gunboat, those are relatively cheap to made and produced in massive numbers, but battleships are quite unique and should be very expensive to produce and repair. What I'm trying to say is that there is no penalty for loosing a battleship, you just respawn and go on as if your precious behemoth didn't take a scratch. I think it's not the price that should be increased but some penalty for loosing a battleship. Right now people aren't afraid of sending their battleships just anywhere, and why should they if all they are going to get is to respawn back the last docking location, and there'll be no loss at all. I do not know yet how exactly this idea should be implemented but I think it's worth to think about it and perhaps find some way. A fighter is a minor loss, there are full hangars of those around, but a battleship is a major strategic loss.

[Drake]

Wow, six pages and still going, and not even moved to Flood! Amazing.

I agree with Treewyrm, though I'm not sure how to go about implementing anything like that. Maybe the new Battleship Licenses could be commodities instead of equipment, costing around 100mil each, but available on all bases. Then if you died, you'd have to buy a new one before undocking.

[DarkOddity]

I don't like the idea of a BS license as a commodity and purchased for 100mil.

Yeah it would increase the cost of capital ships.. BUT, people are going to start popping random battleships just because of the drop.. 100mil and sell it back to a station or back to the player who you just killed... I can see to much extortion coming from that. Though it is a good idea if there were a way to implement it another way.

I do agree that there SHOULD be a penalty for losing a cap ship in combat, especially a battleship.

Directed towards the admins: Is there any way to have FLAC identify a ship when a player dies and say if something meets the following criteria they would be "temporarily banned" from using the account for say 2 hours?

If ship = Battleship
AND player = killed by player
Ban 2 hours // OR // Subtract 100 Million Credits

It's just an idea and is a bit easier to implement.. Granted FLAC can handle something like that?

---

My Website

[alance]

Are there no commodities that can be purchased which will never drop if the ship is destroyed? Seems like there could be a flag like that for commodities.

---

"To gain a hundred victories in a hundred battles is not the highest excellence;
to subjugate the enemy's army without doing battle is the highest of excellence."

[DarkOddity]

Hmm! That is something that should be looked into.. Igiss?

---

My Website

[Unit-sk855]

Mount the shield externally so it can be destroyed upon dropping. How many sci fi universes has the phrase "Take out its shield generator!" spoken?

I do agree that regeneration rate is overpowered, and playing with numbers on it would fix the problem as well.

a ship with 4 tizonas, tizona turret, 2 advanced dibilitators does 21,644 shield damage per second. That fighter has a power capacity of 8000.

all of the guns firing uses 3,224 energy per second, allowing only 2.48 seconds of firing, allowing 53,677 shield damage before a recharge.

if this is shooting a gunboat, the gunboat shield is allowed 140,000 capacity. and would go down to 86,323. It however regenerates while being shot back to 92,027.

Now the fighter is out of energy, and regenerates it back at a rate of 800. it would take 10 seconds to get back to full power for another pass at the ship. in that time the ship regenerates 23,000 shield energy putting it back at 115,027 capacity.

Only 24,973 damage was done to the gunboat. 1/6 of it shield. So it would take 6 clockwork passes at the gunboat not missing a single shot to bring its shield down not including batteries. over a full minute of gunboat vs fighter combat just for its shields, using a full shield buster loadout.

Just trying to survive a gunboat shooting at you for one minute is a challenge enough, trying to stay on it every 10 seconds for a full 2.48 seconds of firing to get the results of effecting it is, while not impossible, way to hard to bother with.

I cannot agree more with the statement that if you are skilled enough to dodge for 15 minutes and slowly wear down a shield, that you deserve to kill it. If a cap ship pilot cannot manage to kill one fighter in that time frame, they deserve to die. A lone fighter should be able to kill the ship above it in a one vs one fight of imbalanced skill. Equal skill should be the determining factor, not the ability to float away and rely on one piece of equipment to make a fighters attempt moot.

Just my opinions, i dont expect them to be taken as more:)

---

*Wilson shows off his ham sandwich* - Armory.003
*mark placed on Unit-sk855's forehead* - Head hitting the desk as of reading the above