open All Channels
seplocked Test Server Feedback
blankseplocked Stealth Bombers II - A new focused role
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 ... : last (57)

Author Topic

Chinchek
khanid industries
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:24:00 - [631]
 

Originally by: Thaxllssyllia
Killed the very reasons i chose to fly a stealthbomber. Range advantage, abillity to recloak, significant alpha considering various ship classes the damage could applied to. I loved to fly a stealthbomber, but it's going to put to the shelf with a sticker "Oh my, some good times back then..." if the changes hit TQ, nor i will be able to use/sell my current arsenal of manticores ever, all fitted quite nicely with rigged setups worth over 70 mil isk atm. That's one investment down the drain.

Thanks for fixing what never seemed to be broken for me, i loved the cruise SB. Shame I rescently trained an alt of mine for a purifier especially to be able to use a SB with EM type of dmg.

i hear ya brother...
maybe im the crazy one, but i have trained cruise to lvl5, and specialized cruise to lvl 5.... other races have a bigger problem than i do because i am caldari and i can still use the cruise missiles.. but, in my case i only fly Manticores, and i only want to fly manticores (dont tell me to fly another ship, because I am the one paying for this game).

What are you going to do with people who put there couple months into Cruise skills and supporting skills CPP?

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:24:00 - [632]
 

Originally by: Sigras
what is wrong with you people? this is not a nerf, this is a buff to the role youre SUPPOSED to use the stealth bomber for.

It is not a buff, not a nerf, it's a twist. Read my post above.

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:30:00 - [633]
 

Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Actually it isn't. When the Khanid ships were changed to short-range missile boats, nobody got any SP reimbursed. I wouldn't expect bombers to be any different.


Khanid ships were a HALF of the class.
For Vengeance, you have Retribution
For Malediction - Crusader, and Malediction have kept their turret hardpoints.
For <3 Sacrilege - Zealot, and the 4 turret hardpoints for the times you need them, such as retraining.
For Damnation - Absolution (Albeit, this was a hit - complete different ships, being in same class, they have drastically different skill requirements)

Now, for Purifier - ?
Sorry, not gonna work that way. Bad business.

Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari
Veto.
Veto Corp
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:31:00 - [634]
 

I just wanted to post that I think a recalibration of anything under 30 seconds is a bad idea.

I'm not going to bother with math, as everyone else can do that for me, but that's my sentiment even as a bomber pilot.

Rivqua
Caldari
Omega Wing
Snatch Victory
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:34:00 - [635]
 

Originally by: HEPBHOE OKOH4AHUE
Let's try to do some brain job.

We'll skip the overall primary target definition, because it will be described later in each case. Also, we

1. CCP defined the "new role" as "anti-battleship" vessel.
We will skip every other combat parameter except HP and damage.
Battle occurs at range of 15 kilometres, so turrets are ineffective. 3 bombers against alone battleship.

SB - 1300 HP / ~4000 volley / ~400 DPS.
Snipe BS (without turrets, med. drones only) - 100k HP / ~600 volley / 150DPS
We suggest that BS is three times webbed and target-painted - totally immobilised and getting full damage.
Torpedo speed 3350m/s. Time to target - ~6sec (including gaining max speed).
Drone speed 2100. Fire range 4200m. Time to target before the first shot ~6sec.

Bombers will give first out volley for free, whilst BS will deploy it drones. Then bombers are getting locked.

3 bombers:
Time needed to kill BS: 100k/(12k/8sec rof)=67+6sec=73sec
Time needed to kill 3 bombers: 3*1300/(600/4sec rof)=26+6sec=32sec
============
BS survived, bombers killed or partially escaped.

6 bombers:
Time needed to kill BS: 100k/(24k/8sec rof)=33,5+6sec=36,5sec
Time needed to kill 3 bombers: 6*1300/(600/4sec rof)=52+6sec=64sec
============
BS killed, but one or two bombers also killed or escaped.

And this is stats for the most vulnerable ship against "new bombers".

Other probabilities: Raven will kill at least three of them. Drake will kill all 6 bombers. Autocannon Hurricane will kill all 6 bombers. Pulse Harbinger will kill all 6 bombers with laughing. Vagabond will kill at least 4 bombers before it will die. Ishtar - the same.

Volley Damage to Jaguar is 10!!! Every small whip will easily screw any amount of attcacking bombers.

Do anyone know any other ship that is the same masterpiece of epic fail
UNABLE TO FIGHT ANY(!) OTHER SHIP SOLO OR EVEN IN PAIR!?

If CCP wants to make Stealth Bombers to be a real anti-battleship vessel, then bomber should become as hard as assault ship and obtain the real devastating firepower. For example fit them with citadel torpedoes and fire them with old signature bonus. giving bomber about 15000 of volley damage probably will grant the bomber it's "primary role".

Second chance:
"Small" bombers: remains as is, getting additional 3% explosion signature bonus to fights versus small and medium ships.
"Big" bombers: the brand new ships with the destroyers hull, 6 siege launchers etc..

........

I really don't know what to offer more to make CCP do something smart, instead of killing the only ships that I love in this game.


Have you tried this ? Because I am telling you, there is no way that BS is living. If nothing else for the fact that med drones won't be able to hit targets that small. Please try it, come back :)

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:39:00 - [636]
 

Originally by: Marcus Druallis
Yet all I read in S&M for like a month was how crap they are? People need to make up their minds or CCP will not have any idea in which direction to go.


If you mean "people should enthusiastically agree with any change CCP propose" - not gonna happen. I've spent time and money training for SB as they are... were. I (we!) have spent months of time and pile of paper to play tactical games. Two calculators died before we went to table processor to do the maths faster and more efficient.
SB is... was a precision tool for specific tasks, and it was good, excellent in doing that. Assuming the pilot isn't a complete idiot and can at least follow the common scheme.
What now? You can few volley a lone BS. Told you what? I saw lone BS 2 times. One Hyperion and one Tempest. Most of the time it's no less than 2 BS plus at least one EWar cruiser escort. Or it is mixed Cruiser/BC/HAC gand of 3-5 ppl roaming around. What you can do to them? You could kill one probably, but you'll pay two-fold for that kill.

Major Laurentius
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:39:00 - [637]
 

Originally by: Rivqua
Originally by: HEPBHOE OKOH4AHUE
Let's try to do some brain job.

We'll skip the overall primary target definition, because it will be described later in each case. Also, we

1. CCP defined the "new role" as "anti-battleship" vessel.
We will skip every other combat parameter except HP and damage.
Battle occurs at range of 15 kilometres, so turrets are ineffective. 3 bombers against alone battleship.

SB - 1300 HP / ~4000 volley / ~400 DPS.
Snipe BS (without turrets, med. drones only) - 100k HP / ~600 volley / 150DPS
We suggest that BS is three times webbed and target-painted - totally immobilised and getting full damage.
Torpedo speed 3350m/s. Time to target - ~6sec (including gaining max speed).
Drone speed 2100. Fire range 4200m. Time to target before the first shot ~6sec.

Bombers will give first out volley for free, whilst BS will deploy it drones. Then bombers are getting locked.

3 bombers:
Time needed to kill BS: 100k/(12k/8sec rof)=67+6sec=73sec
Time needed to kill 3 bombers: 3*1300/(600/4sec rof)=26+6sec=32sec
============
BS survived, bombers killed or partially escaped.

6 bombers:
Time needed to kill BS: 100k/(24k/8sec rof)=33,5+6sec=36,5sec
Time needed to kill 3 bombers: 6*1300/(600/4sec rof)=52+6sec=64sec
============
BS killed, but one or two bombers also killed or escaped.

And this is stats for the most vulnerable ship against "new bombers".

Other probabilities: Raven will kill at least three of them. Drake will kill all 6 bombers. Autocannon Hurricane will kill all 6 bombers. Pulse Harbinger will kill all 6 bombers with laughing. Vagabond will kill at least 4 bombers before it will die. Ishtar - the same.

Volley Damage to Jaguar is 10!!! Every small whip will easily screw any amount of attcacking bombers.

Do anyone know any other ship that is the same masterpiece of epic fail
UNABLE TO FIGHT ANY(!) OTHER SHIP SOLO OR EVEN IN PAIR!?

If CCP wants to make Stealth Bombers to be a real anti-battleship vessel, then bomber should become as hard as assault ship and obtain the real devastating firepower. For example fit them with citadel torpedoes and fire them with old signature bonus. giving bomber about 15000 of volley damage probably will grant the bomber it's "primary role".

Second chance:
"Small" bombers: remains as is, getting additional 3% explosion signature bonus to fights versus small and medium ships.
"Big" bombers: the brand new ships with the destroyers hull, 6 siege launchers etc..

........

I really don't know what to offer more to make CCP do something smart, instead of killing the only ships that I love in this game.


Have you tried this ? Because I am telling you, there is no way that BS is living. If nothing else for the fact that med drones won't be able to hit targets that small. Please try it, come back :)


Indeed. Fit each of the 3 bombers with a RSD with scanres script, and that BS isnt even going to achieve a lock until he is well into structure.

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:42:00 - [638]
 

Originally by: Lindsay Logan
The current changes outweight the old sb pilots opinions since now its a ship that is actally worth somthing, not a wothless noob gangker. A ship that got a role, and an importent one at that.

Yes, good covert hauler is the role.

Quote:
Also, a game desinger can not listen to the cries of all the players all the time, some eggs must be broken to make omelets. Cause lets face it, the curret SB on TQ sucks. It can work marginally in some obscure roles, and even then a sniping ship does the job better, or a proper dps ship.

Where you saw cries? Even first thread were started from constructive suggestions before cries.
To the eggs - we have egg that never bore a chicken - the bomb launcher. Why not use it instead if ruin the ship itself?

Gartel Reiman
The Athiest Syndicate
Advocated Destruction
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:47:00 - [639]
 

Originally by: Saggy Glands
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
We believe the vast majority of pilots would and will prefer the new role...


Nice you believe that, however the threads in the assembly hall consisting of actual SB pilots is more valuable than your unfounded beliefs.

The problem with that assertion, is that "actual SB pilots" fly the ships because they believe them to be useful/worthwhile, and thus by definition think that their current role and performance is somehow adequate.

I am not an "actual SB pilot" because after flying the ship a dozen or so times, I came to realise that it just doesn't do anything very well and is outclassed by other ships in whatever role it wants to take. And I'm pretty sure that for every actual SB pilot there are many more pilots who would fly them but don't, for this reason.

So while I'm not going to claim to speak for everyone, I am personally extremely happy with these proposed changes, and the people I have spoken to in-game share this view as well.

Originally by: Polinus
I am SO disapointed by the change from cloaked speed into covert ops cloak. Before i tough SB woudl get a boost.. now this is WORTHLESS! Cloaked speed is >>>>> than covert ops cloak for anyone with a brain on tactics and usign short range weapons. Not to say anythign about the huge cost that SB will have now.

Cloaked speed is potentially better only if you don't need to warp anywhere with enemies around. If you're camping a particular grid, know that the enemy will come to you and have the time to set up beforehand then sure, it can be nice to have. But if any one of those doesn't hold, the ability to warp in cloaked and set up unseen on top of the enemy is much better than having to warp in uncloaked (presumably at range), then cloak and head towards them.

I mean, if you were to take the current Falcon, remove the covops cloak and give it a cloaked speed bonus, nearly all the whines about it would disappear. And since it's a stealthy ship with long-range "weaponry" this isn't a ridiculous comparison to make.

Also don't forget that part of the cloaked speed bonus went to offsetting the cloaks' penalty. Whereas before you could potentially travel a little faster when cloaked, now you can travel at full speed while cloaked and warp cloaked. There's no question in my mind that this is better.

As for the price aspect - if you're talking about the Covops cloak costing more than the Improved cloak then it doesn't really, they're both similarly priced (about 8m for Covops and 7m for Improved). If you're talking about a Prototype cloak, then your speed argument is moot anyway as even with the cloaked velocity bonus you travel slower while cloaked than uncloaked/with a Covops cloak and no bonus. And if you were talking about the bombers themselves getting more expensive, then this will happen only if the playerbase as a whole considers them to be more useful now. Which again undermines your point that this change makes them worse.


And to those who are thinking that torps can only hit battleships, don't forget that given the massive increase in raw damage potential you can take a roughly 50% damage reduction through sig/velocity and still be doing the same damage as cruise missiles that would have previously hit perfectly. All in all I expect the damage to be similar against cruisers and destroyers as previously (especially with a couple of painters on them), and much much better against BCs and BSes. Given that the current cruise SBs can't really hit frigates well anyway, it's essentially an all-around boost.

Originally by: Merin
the loss of 25% damage is MAJOR

Agree that personally I would much rather have 20% damage bonus and 30 seconds reactivation delay, for exactly the reasons Merin makes.

Gartel Reiman
The Athiest Syndicate
Advocated Destruction
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:51:00 - [640]
 

Edited by: Gartel Reiman on 03/04/2009 13:00:29
Originally by: Tonto Auri
Originally by: Marcus Druallis
Yet all I read in S&M for like a month was how crap they are? People need to make up their minds or CCP will not have any idea in which direction to go.


If you mean "people should enthusiastically agree with any change CCP propose" - not gonna happen.

I think the point was more than many, many people agree(d) that Stealth Bombers performed really badly in practice and there was almost no situation where they were effective. Certainly that's my belief and the opinion I got in general from reading S&M.

However, now there seem to be a lot of pilots claiming "nooooo, I love my Stealh Bomber the way it is now, it's really good" - a sentiment I haven't seen up until now.

Being opposed to the changes because you disagree with the implementation and concept is entirely fine and valid. Disagreeing to the changes because you don't think any changes are necessary, when we as a community have been pushing for some fix to these broken ship for a while now, is just weird.

Originally by: Tonto Auri
Originally by: Lindsay Logan
The current changes outweight the old sb pilots opinions since now its a ship that is actally worth somthing, not a wothless noob gangker. A ship that got a role, and an importent one at that.

Yes, good covert hauler is the role.

Well, something had to take the Pilgrim's crown. Though, it's a little outclassed by the blockade runners for that...

To my mind it does have a very good role now, exactly what you would expect from a frigate-sized bomber - the ability to deliver heavy ordnance against larger targets while being quick and fragile. Cruise SBs don't do enough damage against larger targets to be worthwhile, and don't hit smaller targets well enough to be worthwhile. Now with torps, battleships and especially BCs will be severely troubled by an SB that they can't hit.

Quote:
To the eggs - we have egg that never bore a chicken - the bomb launcher. Why not use it instead if ruin the ship itself?

Admittedly bombs could use some attention. However, if the bombers are going to get bonuses and a role for fitting battleship-class weaponry, then that weapons system should also be balanced and viable completely independent of bombs.

Vigaz
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:52:00 - [641]
 

Base attributes of the SBs MUST be checked.

Manticore has worst speed/agility/scan res/signature radius.
Manticore has best targeting range: 87km

My max skilled javelin torps with 2 rigs (Hydraulic Bay Thrusters I and Rockets Fuel Cache Partition I) + 1 implants ( 3% bonus to all missiles' maximum velocity) have max range of about 75km.

Every SB has the same missile velocity bonus, so the Caldari long range capability is only about a targeting range where no1 can do anything (well TPs in falloff).

How can it be possible to say that is a balanced situation?

Why I should fly a Manticore anymore? Hound and Purifier have less sig radius, better speed and the possibility to fit MWD + 2 BCU, and a targeting range of 70km without bonus from fleet boosters (with information warfare @ lvl1 more than 75km).

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
Posted - 2009.04.03 12:57:00 - [642]
 

Originally by: HEPBHOE OKOH4AHUE
Battle occurs at range of 15 kilometres, so turrets are ineffective


Blaster Hyperion can reach well over 20km with reasonable tracking.
Apoc/abaddon with pulse - well, optimal is 19km.
Autocannon Minnie ships - you know. Same as blasters, just better.
Caldari - Cruise - don't mind range, Torp - net a threat to frigate. Blasters - better than Gallente just for optimal - they can compensate lack of DMG bonus through heavier ammo at the same optimal.

Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
Posted - 2009.04.03 13:19:00 - [643]
 

Originally by: Gartel Reiman
Originally by: Tonto Auri
Originally by: Marcus Druallis
Yet all I read in S&M for like a month was how crap they are? People need to make up their minds or CCP will not have any idea in which direction to go.


If you mean "people should enthusiastically agree with any change CCP propose" - not gonna happen.

I think the point was more than many, many people agree(d) that Stealth Bombers performed really badly in practice and there was almost no situation where they were effective. Certainly that's my belief and the opinion I got in general from reading S&M.

How much of those many actually flown a bomber in separate CO operations or as separate CO squad in fleet? Not as k00l substitution of BS? Zero? Less than zero?

Quote:
However, now there seem to be a lot of pilots claiming "nooooo, I love my Stealh Bomber the way it is now, it's really good" - a sentiment I haven't seen up until now.

Until now, there were no signs of attempt to remove class of ships from game.
This is precedent. (Imagine WoW without priests or Lineage without archers)

Quote:
Being opposed to the changes because you disagree with the implementation and concept is entirely fine and valid. Disagreeing to the changes because you don't think any changes are necessary, when we as a community have been pushing for some fix to these broken ship for a while now, is just weird.

There was many suggestions to fix bombers even before 3rd launcher (you remember these times?), then we got a short-range weapon system that was never been used widely, thus I think it is safe to assime that system was dead-born and need a rewrite from scratch. Instead of that, we got - what? Another short-range weapon system for a price of existing long-range.
Even capital ships, most specialized ships in EVE, have option to fit long or short range weapon. SB going to have no option at all.

Quote:
Originally by: Tonto Auri
Originally by: Lindsay Logan
The current changes outweight the old sb pilots opinions since now its a ship that is actally worth somthing, not a wothless noob gangker. A ship that got a role, and an importent one at that.

Yes, good covert hauler is the role.

Well, something had to take the Pilgrim's crown. Though, it's a little outclassed by the blockade runners for that...

Pilgrim is a Recon... a bit of a training, as well as industrial ships.
For CO frig - it's like two weeks top, am I right?

Quote:
To my mind it does have a very good role now, exactly what you would expect from a frigate-sized bomber - the ability to deliver heavy ordnance against larger targets while being quick and fragile.

It's slow as brick and lack any defence against anything smaller than biggest BS.
Quote:
Cruise SBs don't do enough damage against larger targets to be worthwhile,

Noticed you've never saw SB gang in action. Cruise damage bonused by sig radius = unavoidable full damage to any large target.
Quote:
and don't hit smaller targets well enough to be worthwhile.

Although I don't really care about small targets, it's still effective to shoot down something unaware of your presence.
Quote:
Now with torps, battleships and especially BCs will be severely troubled by an SB that they can't hit.


And everything else will be happy to eat you for breakfast. And everything else is what you face most of the time. Well, me face.

Quote:
Quote:
To the eggs - we have egg that never bore a chicken - the bomb launcher. Why not use it instead if ruin the ship itself?

Admittedly bombs could use some attention. However, if the bombers are going to get bonuses and a role for fitting battleship-class weaponry, then that weapons system should also be balanced and viable completely independent of bombs.

Can't really understand what you're trying to say.

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2009.04.03 13:42:00 - [644]
 

The blink tactic (decloak, fire, recloak)

In testing on TQ with an onyx vs a buzzard it took 5 seconds after decloaking before the onyx could start to lock the buzzard. Anything over 5 seconds is the window of opportunity others have to switch off your cloak and the current proposal of 15 seconds leaves a 10 second gap of vulnerability.

In testing on TQ with a hound the maximum range of the missiles was 38km before they failed to do damage due to recloaking immediately after firing.

Once someone has started to target you the time between them beginning to target and gaining a lock is the bombers window of opportunity to deal damage, once your opponent has gained lock on your bomber you will die very quickly if you don't warp out.

The 15 second recloaking delay is a shoddy half way house that gives no protection at all. In pvp 3 seconds would be a more than adequate gap to begin targeting someone who's already been on your overview for 5 seconds.


Why does changing to an 8 sec reactivation delay make sense?

Originally by: Lindsay Logan

Now, you got the cov ops cloak that lets you decide when you want to enter a fight. And that all you need. Its is not a solo ship. Its a gang ship, and acts as supprise dps.



QFT - Surprise!! Blobagramme BOOM!

This is unfortunately the best that most people will come up with and "cloak lets you decide when you want to enter a fight" means "am i a bigger blob than their blob, if so engage". You can change the nature of the bomber but you can't change the nature of ganking.

A short timer means that engaging against superior numbers would be possible but would still leave you vulnerable to anyone who was on the ball, 5 seconds of announcing your arrival in the overview followed by a 3 second gap to ctrl click said overview is fine.

8 to 10 seconds is also the reload time of launchers thus forcing the bomber to choose between being vulnerable for longer and getting off another volley or lowering their dps to hit the cloak.

CCP please give us tactics not blobs.

BTW i do understand that black ops is a theater in its own right, it's possible to use tactics to split fleets, use creative ewar and other advanced strategies but really this is a gank ship and you only need to look at the preferred uses of a gank thorax to understand that glass cannon = blob.

Keiko Saito
Posted - 2009.04.03 13:59:00 - [645]
 

I think it's pretty obvious that about 75% of the posters really don't like the proposed changes.

CCP have already stated that people aren't using the SB for it's original purpose. Well the reason for that was obvious, it wasn't fit for that purpose. So in turn we pilots looked around, checked out the bonuses and said hang on a sec maybe we can't kill a BS with anything less than a gang of 30 but we sure as hell can make a mess of Indys, destroyers, cruisers. And so the SB got a role, not the CCP one but the one the pilots figures out.

Fast forward a couple of years and we now have CCP trying to change the SB so that it fits their original concept, the problem is that the current suggested design still isn't going to be fit for purpose and I fear that it will not have any other use either.

Plain and simple no gang of less than 10 will kill a solo BS without getting wiped out let alone engaging multiple targets behind enemy lines as part of a Black Ops raiding party. I know someone said 6 ships to kill a solo BS but that didn't take into account that every volley from the target or more likely it's drones you will loose 1/6th of your firepower.

So how do we a) make it fit for purpose and b) enhance that 2ndry role of being part of a Black ops behind the lines team And yet still make it a glass cannon

Well the Cov Ops cloak is a start. it fits in with your recons and the Black ops command ships but the Black ops damage potential is pitiful if they are going to perform the role of removing a system jammer which has been suggested.

So starting from the original SB with swap the speed bonus with the ability to warp cloaked. OK better but still it a glass cannon with no cannon

Damage. it needs to be immense but limited 2-3 volleys before reloading. the only thing that comes to mind is Citadel Torps. So new launcher very limited ammo cap specifically for SB's. Loose the PG bonus to Sieges and Cruises and have it only for the new launcher. Citadels are such that even with the SB's sig radius bonus they are not going to do worth while damage to anything smaller than a BC but BC and above they are going to be a menace.

Bonus point for the smart people who are thinking ahead here.

Citadels will also give the Black Ops gang the firepower to take on the cyno systems jammers but also allow the defenders to be able to use small fast ships to interdict the attack.

Congratulations you now have an SB that's fit for purpose, has a decent secondary role but is still a blatant glass cannon and it can still use the bombs for spalsh damage when they finally fix them.

Now you just have to tinker with the bonuses to make them strike for full against a stationary BS, for less vs a BC or AB'ing BS and for sweet FA vs a cruiser or smaller. Shouldn't be too much of a stretch for you.

So will people fly it? Absolutely.

Will it die in vast numbers? yep you bet it will, emphasis still on the glass part of the cannon.

Will bit be any fun to fly? Yes, it will be an absolute hoot, this time emphasis on the cannon.

Are there any decent counters? Yes drones for a start, plus any AF or Cepter or Destroyer or Long range HAC will make a complete and utter mess of a huge blob, in fact anything smaller than a BC will do just fine.

Are the BS pilots going to moan like hell? Yep with out a doubt. Suddenly there is something other than a Titan about to DD you that might want to make them warp out.

Is it a solopwnmobile? roflmao. With sweet FA damage to anything smaller than a BC sized sig there will not be any combat ship that is not afk that it could kill solo plus chances are the target is just going to warp anyway but when it can be one shotted by just about any ship in the game including a fair number of T1 frigates and at a cost roughly 1/3rd of a Tier 2 battleship would it really be such a bad thing?


Drakoulia
Caldari
Resource Collection and Management
Tri Sol Syndicate
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:02:00 - [646]
 

Does this mean Merin won?

SemiCharmed
Clans of the Sanctums
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:02:00 - [647]
 

Edited by: SemiCharmed on 03/04/2009 14:23:11
Edited by: SemiCharmed on 03/04/2009 14:08:27


I say break the 20% damage bonus and replace it with a Rate Of Fire bonus! (or just leave the stealth bombers alone _)

Give missile users there power back and if people ***** and whine about it then they obviously fail them self's and at fleet operations and if this upsets you, then you are this person that fails...

I tell you something CCP, you know dam well I'm right.

Zaraki KenpachiSan
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:34:00 - [648]
 

So i'll be able to fit a torp launcher on a frig, but not a large gun? why?
i don't like to be forced to skill missiles, that's why i never skilled bombers, if you are going to change something, why don't you let us poor turrets users have our stealth ship without training for yet another weapon system?

and btw: bombers now are able to instapop frigs and even cruisers, will they be able to instapop bs then?
you made changes to large weapons so they can't hit frigates, how am i supposed to fight back?

IHaveTenFingers
Caldari
Origin.
Black Legion.
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:39:00 - [649]
 

Has anyone made the suggestion that we have both

A. Stealth bombers: made to sneak up close and fling torps and bombs at unsuspecting BS pilots.

and

B. Precision bombers: made to bombard targets from standoff ranges with high-precision cruise missiles; Like the old bombers but with a missile velocity bonus rather than bomb bonus. Also lacking a cov-ops cloak.

Eh? Ya know ya like it.

CCP Chronotis

Posted - 2009.04.03 14:40:00 - [650]
 

Hey Folks,

Quick update before the weekend:

There are some minor powergrid/cpu tweaks being tested on sisi with the next reboot.

The general concept and feel with these adjustments is the choice between all out damage and ewar fits and survivability. It is possible with the latest changes to choose a medium shield extender or 400mm plate for example but you will find it difficult to fit and benefit from T2 sieges and the benefits they bring for instance. Which fit and strategy you go for is up to you but now you have a much more flexible choice depending on your scenario.

We are much happier with what we have now and the choice given to you within the role of the glass cannon combined with secondary abilities of scout and such. These bombers now very much have a good place and role to fill in any gang. There is definitely a lot of winsauce with these and raw potential for the innovative amongst you.

Bombs

We are looking at increasing the batch count from 3 to 20 per manufacturing run. This means the material cost of bombs will be near 800k using current TQ prices.

That's it for the changes being tested on sisi over the weekend with the next reboot.

Please continue with the constructive feedback and we will respond further to comments and suggestions of the last few pages later.

As a reminder, nothing is set in stone with these changes :)

Abrazzar
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:47:00 - [651]
 

Maybe vary the abilities and tactics between the different races a little.

Like Caldari using cruise missiles, Amarr using shorter range cruise missiles, Gallente using short range but higher damage torpedoes and Minmatar using higher velocity torpedoes with reduced flight time to maintain range.

I'd love to see more difference between the races' designs to spice things up a little more. Smile

Thenoran
Caldari
Tranquility Industries
Posted - 2009.04.03 14:58:00 - [652]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Hey Folks,

Quick update before the weekend:

There are some minor powergrid/cpu tweaks being tested on sisi with the next reboot.

The general concept and feel with these adjustments is the choice between all out damage and ewar fits and survivability. It is possible with the latest changes to choose a medium shield extender or 400mm plate for example but you will find it difficult to fit and benefit from T2 sieges and the benefits they bring for instance. Which fit and strategy you go for is up to you but now you have a much more flexible choice depending on your scenario.

We are much happier with what we have now and the choice given to you within the role of the glass cannon combined with secondary abilities of scout and such. These bombers now very much have a good place and role to fill in any gang. There is definitely a lot of winsauce with these and raw potential for the innovative amongst you.

Bombs

We are looking at increasing the batch count from 3 to 20 per manufacturing run. This means the material cost of bombs will be near 800k using current TQ prices.

That's it for the changes being tested on sisi over the weekend with the next reboot.

Please continue with the constructive feedback and we will respond further to comments and suggestions of the last few pages later.

As a reminder, nothing is set in stone with these changes :)


What off the recloaking delay, will it remain 15 seconds?
Although 30 seconds is acceptable at long ranges, for short range it would be a garantueed death sentence.
Why not keep the 20% dmg bonus and 15 second recloak delay? (or 30 second base decloak delay, with -4 second per level of Cov Ops)

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:01:00 - [653]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

We are looking at increasing the batch count from 3 to 20 per manufacturing run. This means the material cost of bombs will be near 800k using current TQ prices.



Very Happy\o/Very Happy\o/Very Happy



Tonto Auri
Vhero' Multipurpose Corp
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:02:00 - [654]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Bombs

We are looking at increasing the batch count from 3 to 20 per manufacturing run. This means the material cost of bombs will be near 800k using current TQ prices.

Does that mean that bombs still be wasting DB space without any real use?

Murashu
Liberal Frontier Enterprises
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:20:00 - [655]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

Bombs

We are looking at increasing the batch count from 3 to 20 per manufacturing run. This means the material cost of bombs will be near 800k using current TQ prices.



Any chance of making them useable in low sec? You can make them 500 per manu run and they would still be worthless to the majority of players. You've made the SB useless for the role I enjoyed playing but I would be happy again if I could use bombs in low sec.

Fzhal
Caldari
Retribution. Inc.
E-P-O-C-H
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:21:00 - [656]
 

I am looking forward to these changes.

The reason I haven't liked SB's is because it takes 20-30 seconds for the cruise missiles to reach a target at range. Compounded with the fact that it can only take out frigates that can warp out in 5 seconds.

I still think that the Torp SB needs more damage. I did the math yesterday and it isn't that great when you take into account resistances. Lets say a BS with 75% resistances and the SB has 500 DPS.

At range it takes 10 seconds for the Torps to hit the target doing 5,000 Damage. 1,250 after resistances.
At 20 secs the second volley hits for another 1,250 damage after resists.
Etc.
So it would take a SB 106 seconds, including 10 second delay, to break the main defensive 10,000 point layer of a BS. And that isn't taking into account repping.

With 5 stealth bombers it would take 30 seconds to get the the 10,000 point layer.
10 seconds for the volley to get to the target.
At 20 seconds they do 6,250 after resists.
At 30 secs the total is 12,500 accumulated.
So we are talking about 40-50 seconds for 5 SB pilots to take out a lone BS. That is a bit long don't you think?

CrestoftheStars
Caldari
Recreation Of The World
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:38:00 - [657]
 

Originally by: Fzhal
I am looking forward to these changes.

The reason I haven't liked SB's is because it takes 20-30 seconds for the cruise missiles to reach a target at range. Compounded with the fact that it can only take out frigates that can warp out in 5 seconds.

I still think that the Torp SB needs more damage. I did the math yesterday and it isn't that great when you take into account resistances. Lets say a BS with 75% resistances and the SB has 500 DPS.

At range it takes 10 seconds for the Torps to hit the target doing 5,000 Damage. 1,250 after resistances.
At 20 secs the second volley hits for another 1,250 damage after resists.
Etc.
So it would take a SB 106 seconds, including 10 second delay, to break the main defensive 10,000 point layer of a BS. And that isn't taking into account repping.

With 5 stealth bombers it would take 30 seconds to get the the 10,000 point layer.
10 seconds for the volley to get to the target.
At 20 seconds they do 6,250 after resists.
At 30 secs the total is 12,500 accumulated.
So we are talking about 40-50 seconds for 5 SB pilots to take out a lone BS. That is a bit long don't you think?


same, the dmg is too low, even 2 stealth bombers on a normal fit bs will be killed by the drones before killing the bs, considering they cost 40-50mill a piece and the bs cost about 20-40 mill a piece (because of insurence) and the stealth is specifically designed in ONLY killing bs's their dmg is just way too low for this..

Kyra Felann
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.04.03 15:41:00 - [658]
 

Overall, these changes sound good.

I'm not sure what the point of removing the ability to fit cruise missile launchers is, though. Would being able to fit those be somehow overpowered? I've flown these ships before and range (or being able to recloak quickly, which will now be impossible) was about the only defense they had. Being able to fit torpedoes is good, but why remove cruise missiles? I'm not much of a missile user (only trained them for stealth bombers), but torpedoes are higher damage, right? So you would have to pick long range or high damage, which seems balanced to me.

Hesperius
Posted - 2009.04.03 16:01:00 - [659]
 

After several hours on the test server - I still do not like this. One guy had a decent fit for a bomber that was sig tanking, which was pretty nice for this new role. I just want my cruise launching frig back...

I can see making a bomber that is easier for rookies to fly, but really why not give us a secondary bomber? OR give us (the current SB pilots) a pirate faction frig that would fill the role you are taking away from us?

Vall Kor
Minmatar
Brutor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.03 16:17:00 - [660]
 

Edited by: Vall Kor on 03/04/2009 16:18:14
I still think the damage needs to be looked into. This is not a ship that is be on the field for more than a few seconds. I'm thinking a gang of 5 SB (plus recon EW support of course) should be able to knock out their target in 20 seconds or less (assuming full DPS fit). I think the design of a get in hit and run ship will be very popular. If it does what it's designed to. If it can't meet the hit and run model, this will be used as a stepping stone to transports ships.


All in all this should be a fun ship to fly if it meets design goals. Sorta of like AFs should be Shocked









Pages: first : previous : ... 18 19 20 21 [22] 23 24 25 26 ... : last (57)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only