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 : ... 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 ... : last (57)

Author Topic

Rivqua
Caldari
Omega Wing
Snatch Victory
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:00:00 - [691]
 

Originally by: Murashu
Originally by: Saibin Gias

900 per volley vs 60% resist implies 1500 raw volley damage. This seems incredibly low from what I've been seeing. What is your cov-ops and missile skills at? Was the dominix moving, painted, etc?



Cov-ops 4, Torp 3, All the other missile skills that would effect torp damage are lvl 3. This has been one of my complaints...switching from cruise to torpedos robs us of 20+ days of skill training for a new weapon system. CCP Please perform a new character copy soon Razz

The domi was sitting still and a single named target painter. 900 damage every 11ish seconds is bleh, having to be under 20km and inside scrambling range is a killjoy for me.

The cov-ops cloaking is freakin awesome though. Again, I have no idea why this was never done before considering the lack of DPS we have.

Range used to be our only defense, now it shall be warping out before the target lock. The domi pilot was locking me just over 15 seconds which gives you enough time to send in one volley (900 damage), launch another volley and be locked before it impacted the target. I tried timing the recloak just as the 2nd volley hit but I would be locked before then.


I have no problem shooting my torps from 40km at stationary targets, I guess your skills are not up to spec. You can get that to 50km with rigs, and 60km with jav torps.

I see no problem here, and I doubt CCP does either.

yani dumyat
Minmatar
Pixie Cats
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:13:00 - [692]
 

Originally by: Eigof Tahr

Not emo, just a belief that if you don't know what you are talking about, stop talking. Would you want someone with no kids telling you how to raise yours? Nope.




You're correct in that i don't use stealth modules much at the moment as i prefer speed and range though I used to fly the bomber a lot. There's been many cloaking changes since then and i am currently skilling a toon to use bombs so have a vested interest in what happens here as much as anyone else.

Telling people to get out of a thread and comparing internet space ships to raising kids is:
mature / emo / kewl / makes your epeen hard (delete as applicable) Very Happy




My primary concern is the ability to take on groups that are larger or better equipped and range, speed, ewar and tactics have have always played a part in this however glass canon gank ships haven't. By definition close range gank requires either overwhelming force or overwhelming ewar support.

My usual targets are cruisers and removing a ship from the game that can evade gate camps and deal damage to cruisers from range sucks. The cloaked speed of a manticore is kinda pathetic on sisi and certainly not up to the tactical standard of the old bomber.

Dropping the price of bombs is a welcome change to make breaking up blobs easier and increase the tactical use of the new bomber, dropping the sig radius and cloaking delay would be welcome changes that would allow for more diverse tactics.

Given that you are set on this torpedo lark giving the ability to choose between an improved II with speed bonus and no reactivation delay or a cov-ops cloak with no speed bonus and 30 sec delay would preserve much of the ships tactical ability.

Seishi Maru
doMAL S.A.
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:31:00 - [693]
 

Originally by: Eigof Tahr

Not emo, just a belief that if you don't know what you are talking about, stop talking. Would you want someone with no kids telling you how to raise yours? Nope.




Failed logic! A psychiatrist that studied child education his whole life and had o children knows better how to raise a child than a lot, in fact than most stupid parents around the world.

Same way a smart person why good analytical eye that flew very little SB but observed them a lot in combat might and very likely will know more about SB than a stupid pilot that flies one everyday.

Experience does not always make competence!

Treelox
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:38:00 - [694]
 

Dammit it Chronotis, didnt the last thread teach you anything?

Removing Cruise Missles from bombers totally is a real kick in the balls for many of us, both time invest in SP that we only use for that single ship, and forcing us to get in and close.

The Cov-ops cloak addition you make is welcome, but it should of been a part of the ship from when it was first introduced.

TL:DR = Screw Torps, LONG LIVE Cruise.

AK Archangel
Warhamsters
Against ALL Authorities
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:52:00 - [695]
 

Wonder what we need to do for CCP start listen his customers...

Shana Lioni
Ministry of War
Posted - 2009.04.03 22:53:00 - [696]
 

Edited by: Shana Lioni on 03/04/2009 22:55:59
These changes are bad form in my opinion. Where is the reward in the risk of flying this expensive dixie cup? The beauty of a Stealth Bomber gang is you can choose to attack many different types of fleets. Many of the fleets that roll around New Eden are not Battleship Gangs. They are small, BC, HAC, Inty and Dictor gangs. These changes make Stealth Bombers obsolete against these fleets. Frankly, being stuck into a singular role is going to prove that Stealth Bombers will not be piloted. It is already bad enough that you nerfed Cruise Missiles verses any ship with decent velocity and a small signature radius. Now you want to nerf Stealth Bombers against every ship except Battleships. Why are these changes necessary? What sense do changes like these make? You want to nerf something, nerf the Titan.

Toyo Italari
Posted - 2009.04.03 23:04:00 - [697]
 

I just want to reinforce this:

The process of locking does not prevent one from cloaking. The actual lock being achieved does.

This is why the blink tactic was so successful. It was vulnerable to drones and fast tackle, but most ships would be unable to attain a lock before cloaking. Being able to fire a volley and recloak pretty much immediately helped safety at close ranges tremendously (thanks to the person who took the time to test the ranges of the tactic). Merin's considerably noisy view that cloaking removed all your DPS from the fight is incorrect: provided you decloak just before your weapon's cycle is up and, with sensor boosters (scan res), reacquiring your own lock just in time to fire the next volley.

The CPU/Grid upgrades were needed regardless, although fitting a small extender/plate won't likely get it anywhere. I would definitely like to see the 5-8 second recloak delay already suggested, not because I want a ship that's more "winsauce" than current suggested build, but because decloak tactics are far more successful when at relatively close range.

A BS'/BC's support can still achieve a lock within that 5 second window (tacklers and the like), you're close enough and slow enough that even a BS with an afterburner (Dominix speed with an afterburner: 337 m/s, Hound current SiSi speed: 307 m/s) can force you into a situation where you are decloaked, not to mention other tactics such as assigning drones to small, fast ships.. Which are then able to tackle you upon decloak.


With the 15% (or 20%.. 20% was nice :P ) bonus, the ship will still be a glass cannon, but one that doesn't have to warp out (severely reducing DPS potential) or wait until the second volley before safety cloaking (severely increasing the likely-hood of going pop). In close, they're already far easier to decloak as is, with much tighter range of cloak safety, particularly in fleet engagements.

I suppose if all else fails, I might try and see what my DPS is like with an ODI/Nanofit MWD combo, assuming that the PG/CPU grid upgrades are sufficient to fit such a thing. Not the fastest ship in the world, but it can still reach close to 4 km/s with good skills. Somehow though, I don't think a speed tanking bomber is what CCP had in mind.

Viskov Kyvarri
Posted - 2009.04.03 23:04:00 - [698]
 

*imitates Chronotis*

You will like these Changes.. *waves hand*

Okay Obi-Wan I think the counsel (customers) have spoken. Silly mind tricks aren't going to work here.

Zantaz
Posted - 2009.04.03 23:05:00 - [699]
 

Chronitis, don't you realize that such a crappy fix to a busted ship means you get to do twice the work???

You're going to do all these changes, 5% here and 5% there, balancing and tweaking, thinking and debating, reading and ignoring 40 pages of your customers opinions, and guess what: it's all for naught!

Put this abortion on tranq and eventually you'll notice that there's still nobody flying the thing, it's still not being used for what you see as its purpose, and you've got to do it all over again. Cheap bombs mean the ship will see some very limited use in 0.0, and that's about it. Nobody wants to engage a battleship from close range, it's suicidal. It does not bloody well compute! You need to try hunting targets in a stealth bomber to understand what it's all about. Being 100km away from an enemy blob with 10 inties is exciting and risky... you want us within half that range? You ever try that? Bring a fleet, you say... why would I want to be in a fleet in a ship that can be insta-popped and contributes so little?

Why do the work twice? Why don't you listen up and make the changes that we've been begging for? Fix the ship the right, and blatantly obvious way, or leave it the hell alone.

Murashu
Liberal Frontier Enterprises
BricK sQuAD.
Posted - 2009.04.03 23:38:00 - [700]
 

Originally by: Rivqua

I have no problem shooting my torps from 40km at stationary targets, I guess your skills are not up to spec. You can get that to 50km with rigs, and 60km with jav torps.


Yeah my torp skills are only lvl 3....never had a use for them before. Still hoping they do something to convert our cruise missile specs over.

Saggy Glands
Amalgamated Transport And Trade
Posted - 2009.04.03 23:49:00 - [701]
 

This post has been cleared of inappropriate content.

Regards,
The EVE Online Moderation team

Ephemeron
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.04.04 00:02:00 - [702]
 

Chronotis' idea for the new torp based stealth bomber is actually good. You may not like it, but is is logically sound

what I'm really disappointed in is his failure to come to simple logical conclusion that this new idea deserves a new ship class, and that upsetting people by deleting current stealth bomber is unproductive and egoistic

place1
Amarr
Orion Ore Industries
Posted - 2009.04.04 00:18:00 - [703]
 

Ok for all of you that are still complaining that this ship is worthless. Today around 11:00 eve time I was agene on the test server for the 3rd day in a row now testing this ship.

THEY ARE NOT SOLO SHIPS.

The results came out to be this ship is getting very good and I can't wait to get home and test with the new PG/CPU I just hope they didn't drop the damage down to 15%, it was fine at 20% with 30sec recloak people just need to come up with different tactics.

Purifier 401k missile SP vs. Drake ended in a draw after about 5mins of continues fighting my SB didn't have enough damage to break a passive tank drake though the drake could not get past my armor.

Purifier same setup as Drake battle, plus a Pilgrim vs. Apocalypse the Apoc died in a very short time less than 1 minute I would say.

Purifier,Pilgrim,Rokh vs. Kronos the kronos was dieing fairly fast not as fast as the Apoc but still fast and was just entering structure when a Onyx and I believe it was a Wolf showed up to help the Kronos. Are fleets Pilgrim went down first then my Purifier and lastly the Rokh witch to me seams how the fight should have gone.

So yes there still may be a few tweaks and changes needed to SB but over all they are becoming very effective ship's and if you cant see that your not testing or just simply not trying anything other than what role they used to be used for. 60+ purifier's later and I still like the changes you just need to work on how to set them up and how to use them in there new role. THEY ARE NOT SOLO SHIPS. A fleet consisting of 2-3 SB 1-2 Recon's would be a very deadly small gang that could be dropped into jammed systems and harass the locals or to draw off fire from a main fleet or to intercept a main fleet reinforcements.

Purifier setup

3x Arbalest' Siege Missile Launcher (Mjolnir Torpedo's)
1x Cov Ops Cloak

1x 1MN Afterburner II
2x BZ-5 Neutralizing Spatial Destabilizer ECM

1x Small Armor Rep II
1x Damage Control II
1x 200mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I

2x Warhead Calefaction Catalyst I

THEY ARE NOT SOLO SHIPS.

Yun Kuai
Posted - 2009.04.04 00:45:00 - [704]
 

Nemesis Fitting (requires some modifications to the current version):
High: install 3 x siege missile slots, 1 x bomb bay*, and room for 1 x cov ops cloak
Med: Allow for an AB or MWD to be fit, keep the same number of slots
Lows: Keep the same number of slots

*Bomb Bay, have the bomb drop out behind the ship as it's moving through space

You said you wanted a bomber designed to take out BS, so this is how it can be done. With this setup, 3-5 cov ops could fly in to 15km cloaked, uncloak, fire volley of torps, keep getting closer to the BS, fire the next round of torps, then drop the payload (aka the bomb), recloak and move to safety. This set up though would require the recloaking delay to be down to 10 secs, which is more then enough time for well trained BS polits, tacklers, and other ships to lock and scram, thus eliminating the cov ops threat and keeping the ships balanced.

The torps dps and bomb dps would have to be tweaked so that 3-5 cov ops firing 2 rounds of torp vollies and 3 bombs can take out a BS. This would be balanced enough, bc the defending ships would have time to lock the cov ops, but the cov ops have enough dps to take out the BS. Yes you might lose a cov ops or 2 in the process, or a bomb may not get deployed, but that would be part of the game.

This kind of setup would balance the cov ops against BS, and it requires skill and teamwork to pull off. So what I'm saying, is if the nemesis could have 3 torps slots and 1 bomb bay, I would be all for using this ship.

And keep the cloaked velocity speed boost so that the ships can get into position effectivley.

CrestoftheStars
Caldari
Recreation Of The World
Posted - 2009.04.04 01:16:00 - [705]
 

Originally by: place1
or to draw off fire from a main fleet or to intercept a main fleet reinforcements.
[/b]


hahaha, this just made me laugh.
yer they are gonna draw of agro for around 1-2 volly's and you lost yourself 40mill+ XD
they really need some signature decrease and a speed boost (just around 10-15% in both would do), attacking a bs is garenteed to get them killed just from the drone fire alone within a VERY short amount of time, even 2 or 3 of these will most likely be dead before the bs, just by his drone fire alone.

and they are utterly useless against anything but bs's and bc's.

i am thinking about the abillity to use cruise missiles to have something that is designed to attack cruiser sized ships, as it stands now there is no real counter for cruiser sized ships.
cruisers will at any time kill anything smaller then a cruiser and used correctly they are the perfect attacker on bs's.
the only thing they would have a problem with is command ships (but then again these are a semi cruiser class and have the same attribute problems in this aspect).

so let the stealth bomber choice, either to use torps and attack bs's/bc's or use cruise missiles being a cruiser killing ship (ofcause some seriously dmg + against cruiser sized ships would be needed for this.)

Abrazzar
Posted - 2009.04.04 01:20:00 - [706]
 

Wait.

Cover Jump Portal + Stealth Bombers + Torpedo Damage + Covert Cynos possible in Cyno Jammed Systems =
= A pretty nifty solution to Cyno Jammers.

Now why are you crying again?

place1
Amarr
Orion Ore Industries
Posted - 2009.04.04 01:34:00 - [707]
 

Edited by: place1 on 04/04/2009 01:36:54
Originally by: CrestoftheStars

yer they are gonna draw of agro for around 1-2 volly's and you lost yourself 40mill+ XD
they really need some signature decrease and a speed boost (just around 10-15% in both would do), attacking a bs is garenteed to get them killed just from the drone fire alone within a VERY short amount of time, even 2 or 3 of these will most likely be dead before the bs, just by his drone fire alone.



In a pure SB fleet this could be a problem yes though currently the ship can be made fast enough to speed tank BS guns and with a recon or SB fit with tracking disruptors the speed you need to reach is even less. Drones are a SB number 1 threat yes but that is why you use a mixed fleet of SB and recon's the recon ships not only hold the target down but deal with any of the drones the target has then your SB open fire bring a lot of damage down on the target.

Reducing the sig radius of SB would be nice and if they get a bit of a speed boost that would also be nice just so long as they keep there torps range and damage that they have with the 20% bonuses.

Also by Draw off fire form a main fleet I meant causing ships from a main fleet to leave the fleet to chase you down/protect other assets you may be attacking like cyno jammer's

DNSBLACK
Gallente
Dirt Nap Squad
Dirt Nap Squad.
Posted - 2009.04.04 01:36:00 - [708]
 

Originally by: Abrazzar
Wait.

Cover Jump Portal + Stealth Bombers + Torpedo Damage + Covert Cynos possible in Cyno Jammed Systems =
= A pretty nifty solution to Cyno Jammers.

Now why are you crying again?


PLease stop with this cyno jamming killing stuff you are killing me

Situation :Alliance A coming to drop caps and attacka cyno jammed system

1. 200 man support fleet comes in and melts cyno jammer in coms caps and has fleet on station to defend caps.

2. no allaince is going to drop caps unless it has a support fleet.

3. This sneaking in the back door and dropping the cyno jammer is non sense and has no practical application.

4. A BO gang killing a cyno as a memeber of a small alliance then drops caps in will only lose there caps.

Becka Call
Posted - 2009.04.04 01:37:00 - [709]
 

Originally by: Toyo Italari
I just want to reinforce this:

The process of locking does not prevent one from cloaking. The actual lock being achieved does.

This is why the blink tactic was so successful. It was vulnerable to drones and fast tackle, but most ships would be unable to attain a lock before cloaking. Being able to fire a volley and recloak pretty much immediately helped safety at close ranges tremendously (thanks to the person who took the time to test the ranges of the tactic). Merin's considerably noisy view that cloaking removed all your DPS from the fight is incorrect: provided you decloak just before your weapon's cycle is up and, with sensor boosters (scan res), reacquiring your own lock just in time to fire the next volley.

The CPU/Grid upgrades were needed regardless, although fitting a small extender/plate won't likely get it anywhere. I would definitely like to see the 5-8 second recloak delay already suggested, not because I want a ship that's more "winsauce" than current suggested build, but because decloak tactics are far more successful when at relatively close range.

A BS'/BC's support can still achieve a lock within that 5 second window (tacklers and the like), you're close enough and slow enough that even a BS with an afterburner (Dominix speed with an afterburner: 337 m/s, Hound current SiSi speed: 307 m/s) can force you into a situation where you are decloaked, not to mention other tactics such as assigning drones to small, fast ships.. Which are then able to tackle you upon decloak.


With the 15% (or 20%.. 20% was nice :P ) bonus, the ship will still be a glass cannon, but one that doesn't have to warp out (severely reducing DPS potential) or wait until the second volley before safety cloaking (severely increasing the likely-hood of going pop). In close, they're already far easier to decloak as is, with much tighter range of cloak safety, particularly in fleet engagements.

I suppose if all else fails, I might try and see what my DPS is like with an ODI/Nanofit MWD combo, assuming that the PG/CPU grid upgrades are sufficient to fit such a thing. Not the fastest ship in the world, but it can still reach close to 4 km/s with good skills. Somehow though, I don't think a speed tanking bomber is what CCP had in mind.


This. All of this. Did some testing on sisi last night; and SB was not surviveable at all anymore.

place1
Amarr
Orion Ore Industries
Posted - 2009.04.04 01:43:00 - [710]
 

Originally by: DNSBLACK
Originally by: Abrazzar
Wait.

Cover Jump Portal + Stealth Bombers + Torpedo Damage + Covert Cynos possible in Cyno Jammed Systems =
= A pretty nifty solution to Cyno Jammers.

Now why are you crying again?


PLease stop with this cyno jamming killing stuff you are killing me

Situation :Alliance A coming to drop caps and attacka cyno jammed system

1. 200 man support fleet comes in and melts cyno jammer in coms caps and has fleet on station to defend caps.

2. no allaince is going to drop caps unless it has a support fleet.

3. This sneaking in the back door and dropping the cyno jammer is non sense and has no practical application.

4. A BO gang killing a cyno as a memeber of a small alliance then drops caps in will only lose there caps.


I agree with you but covertly dropping several jammer's with SB/Recon's with the support fleet a few systems away could cause confusion as to just what system you plan on attacking. Though this will require a lot of SB as there damage to structures is still fairly small. Attacking a small hybrid turret at a POS did only about 300-400 damage per volley.

Talaan Stardrifter
Universal Exports
Posted - 2009.04.04 03:14:00 - [711]
 

Edited by: Talaan Stardrifter on 04/04/2009 03:17:26
Edited by: Talaan Stardrifter on 04/04/2009 03:14:32
Originally by: "SiSi Log"
02:45:45 Combat Your group of Juggernaut Torpedo hits stonefeather [NO SA]<BLAC>(Abaddon), doing 602.0 damage.
02:45:55 Combat Your group of Juggernaut Torpedo hits stonefeather [NO SA]<BLAC>(Abaddon), doing 602.0 damage.
02:46:05 Combat Your group of Juggernaut Torpedo hits stonefeather [NO SA]<BLAC>(Abaddon), doing 602.1 damage.


Stonefeather reports having around 80% Kinetic Resists. Target was stationary.

My thoughts at the moment:

Covert Ops Cloak:
The SBs old role was to be a sniper, and as such, having undetected entry onto the grid would have been a significant boost to the role. However, the new SB role is a brawler, which requires more maneuverability, rather than surprise, given that it is now a fleet support ship will inevitably warp in after the fleet has engaged. To this end, while I like the Covert Ops, I find the ship still needs the cloaked speed bonus as a higher priority (up to 50% speed boost, 10% per level?). If this comes at the expense of the covert ops cloak, I would be disappointed, but understanding.

Torpedo Damage:
My relevant missile skills are all at level 4, including Covert Ops ships.
I have Torpedo Specialisation at level 3.
Flying a Manticore with Kinetic torpedoes.
As you can see above, I did a whopping 60 dps against a live target. I'm not sure if this is a SB-specific issue, or if it applies to Torpedoes in general, but I find that kind of damage severely lacking for an anti-Battleship role.

If we extrapolate the numbers out (roughly)...
600 resisted damage per volley @ 80% resist.
3000 raw damage @ 0% resist.
1000 damage per torpedo.

which is pretty close to the 972 damage listed in my Torpedo info


place1
Amarr
Orion Ore Industries
Posted - 2009.04.04 03:29:00 - [712]
 

Originally by: Talaan Stardrifter


Stuff




60DPS is right and its because SB are built for alpha. The fact that you doing so little damage is because your shooting at a 80% resisted target 2400 points of your damage are being resisted. Find a target that's not heavy tanked to your damage type and you will have much better numbers.

Talaan Stardrifter
Universal Exports
Posted - 2009.04.04 03:31:00 - [713]
 

Originally by: place1
60DPS is right and its because SB are built for alpha. The fact that you doing so little damage is because your shooting at a 80% resisted target 2400 points of your damage are being resisted. Find a target that's not heavy tanked to your damage type and you will have much better numbers.



Please list a combat situation where my target wont be tanked?

Revdkor Whorlstev
Minmatar
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2009.04.04 03:38:00 - [714]
 

The idea of 10 to 20 bombers in a single fleet is a little ludicrous. What fleet commander is going to want to use 10 bomber pilots to take out a single battleship when 2 battleship pilots can accomplish the same result more efficiently. Even the alpha strike gank theory doesnít hold up past the first battleship because once its known that SBís are operating in the area all a battleship pilot has to do is orbit drones and set them to aggressive. After that first torpedo hits drones will immediately lock on and attack a bomber before they can even warp away. (Iím not 100% certain on the mechanics behind this. Normally a BS pilot has to spend 5 to 8 seconds Ďlockingí onto a bomber before they can attack. If drones are in aggressive mode arenít they able to retaliate instantly without the need to for target lock?)

place1
Amarr
Orion Ore Industries
Posted - 2009.04.04 03:43:00 - [715]
 

Originally by: Talaan Stardrifter
Originally by: place1
60DPS is right and its because SB are built for alpha. The fact that you doing so little damage is because your shooting at a 80% resisted target 2400 points of your damage are being resisted. Find a target that's not heavy tanked to your damage type and you will have much better numbers.



Please list a combat situation where my target wont be tanked?


I am not saying not tanked. I am saying not heavy tanked to your damage type PVP fits are a balance of tank and gank. Your best targets are with a guessed average tank of about 65% to Kin bringing your damage up to 1050 per volley. Are the numbers perfect not if your solo but for a gang of frig size ships that's not a bad volley.

Leina Kubyeshev
Navy of Xoc
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2009.04.04 04:07:00 - [716]
 

Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Ok, this is much better, but still needs some work.

Quote:
1. Bombers will be able to fit covert ops cloak

However they will have a 30 second cloak reactivation delay. This means they can warp in cloaked and better surprise their targets in a true ambush. However once they are committed to the fight, they will not be able to recloak quickly as a drawback so choosing the right time to strike is essential.


This is fair. My only concern here is getting de-cloaked by objects. With the current covops ships, you can almost immediately re-cloak as soon as you get out of range of the object, but bombers are going to be exposed for a full 30 seconds.

Would it be possible to code the delay so it is only triggered once you activate weapons? That way you're still forced to spend a full 30 seconds uncloaked if you want to engage a target, but don't run into problems moving around.


Quote:
2. Bombers will be able to fit and use siege launchers and fire torpedoes.

This allows them to inflict a high amount of alpha damage on larger targets and be serious threat to them. In gangs with other ships and available strategies will add significant damage to the fleet. They will no longer be able to fit cruise launchers as a result.



I'm still not happy with this one. There are three fundamental problems here:


1) Torps are redundant. You already have a short-range, high-damage weapon: bombs. And it's even a weapon that is most effective against battleships. If you fix bombs correctly (most importantly, reduce the absurd cost), the only reason you'd ever need to use torps on a bomber is if you refuse to remove the 0.0-only limitation.

2) Bombers are paper. Survival odds for a stealth bomber are bad enough as it is, de-cloak within 24km of anything with guns and you'll be in a pod within seconds. The only defense a stealth bomber currently has is its long range, and now you want to take that away? I don't see bombers getting an AF's resists or an interceptor's speed without becoming too powerful, so they really need to keep their range.

3) Wasted skills suck. Since stealth bombers are the only cruise missile ship (or even missile ship at all) for a lot of players, changing them to use torps means wasted SP, especially if they trained T2 cruise.




But as I said in the other thread, there is a better way of doing this:


1) Introduce a special bomber-only weapon: covert warhead launcher. You can load one of two options:

a) 5x cruise missiles.

OR

b) 1x bomb.

The launcher itself has a very high ROF, meaning if you go with cruise missiles, you will have very good dps as long as your missiles last. However, there are two penalties:

a) Small capacity. You do huge dps, but only for a very short time.

b) Long reload time. As in, a full minute or so (ideally with just the standard 10 seconds if you reload out of combat to change missile types).

Both of these ensure that the stealth bomber is a proper ambush ship: you can do devastating damage in a very short amount of time, but if you don't plan your ambush carefully you're going to find yourself with a very angry target and nothing to shoot back with.


2) Fix bombs. Make them proper short-range AOE weapons. This means the following:

a) Reduce the cost to something comparable to interdictor bubbles. High enough that buying a stack of 500 is a noticeable dent in your wallet, but low enough to use without hesitation.

b) Remove the 0.0-only limit. No more toys for just the rich alliances. Do NOT, however, change CONCORD/sec hit/sentry response, bombs are use-at-own-risk, just like smartbombs and ECM bursts.

c) Balance their damage/blast radius/etc appropriately for their new cost (remember, you can launch up to three at once).




There. Bombers are now fixed, and everyone is happy.


Thats a brilliant idea. Really brilliant. Nice one.

Renarla
Posted - 2009.04.04 04:26:00 - [717]
 

Originally by: CCP Chronotis

1. Bombers will be able to fit covert ops cloak



Opened up the topic, saw this, and I just have to say...

**** YEAH.

Saji'us
Gallente
Pitch Black.
Posted - 2009.04.04 04:27:00 - [718]
 

It's great that they are actually trying to define the stealth bombers role any everything, but I just do not understand.

I get that they are not supposed to be solopwn ships, but....what?

Cov ops cloak is nice, 30 second delay? you can keep it if thats the case.

The main thing I dont understand is, how do we survive? If we have to get that close to fire torps, what do we do to survive for long enough to launch more than 1 volley? a tank on a SB is a joke... Warp out?...then what, wait 30 seconds and come back...? what?

Stealth Bombers, not annoyance bombers. If we are going to be Anti anything, we KINDA need the anti thing.... not just a torp launcher annoyance capability.



JVol
Amarr
The IMorral MAjority
Posted - 2009.04.04 04:41:00 - [719]
 

Originally by: place1
Originally by: Talaan Stardrifter
Originally by: place1
60DPS is right and its because SB are built for alpha. The fact that you doing so little damage is because your shooting at a 80% resisted target 2400 points of your damage are being resisted. Find a target that's not heavy tanked to your damage type and you will have much better numbers.



Please list a combat situation where my target wont be tanked?


I am not saying not tanked. I am saying not heavy tanked to your damage type PVP fits are a balance of tank and gank. Your best targets are with a guessed average tank of about 65% to Kin bringing your damage up to 1050 per volley. Are the numbers perfect not if your solo but for a gang of frig size ships that's not a bad volley.



Kinda funny.. I get close to that NOW with my cruise.... This Dev's trying to reinvent the wheel. A 'gang' of SB now is deadly as hell.. But what group of 4-5 ships, (almost ANY combat ships) piloted by decent pilots ISNT??

Adding the cov cloak alone and not changing a single other aspect wouldve made this ship see about a million percert more usage than atm. (even tho it will still just end up the new torp-buzzard)

Pigion holing it into a short range one dimentional knife fighter with a glass jaw IS NOT making this ship usefull for the job the dev wants it to fill (BS KILLER). It does that job FAR better from medium to LONG RANGE, peticularly out of light drone range.


As it sits now it can put increadable dps on targets for a frig, AND it can chase off falcons like it was BORN to do it. All from a range that keeps it safe



Ive flown bombers for years. Heres what they need,



Ditch the cov cloak, it will TOTTALLY KILL THE NEED TO FLY COV OPS AT ALL(buzzard, cheeta, ect

Add torps so we have the OPTION to do great damage to large slow moving targets


Double the cloaked speed


Make bomb rof 2 sec, so I can launch.. cloak...realign to blob and launch the bomb in my launcher on the damed blob WHILE they are still there and dissoriented!!


Decrease it sig to make it take less bomb damage and take longer to lock when bombing


Lower bomb prices to 1m


In closing, EVERY ship in eve can fit for either short or long range.. WHY should the bomber be the lone standout?


The guys that fly it know it doesnt need the cov cloak in place of the cloaked speed bonus, makes it a great scout and a crap bomber.



Saji'us
Gallente
Pitch Black.
Posted - 2009.04.04 04:50:00 - [720]
 

Oh, and does "1. Bombers will be able to fit covert ops cloak" mean that we have the CHOICE to use the covert ops cloak with this penalty? Or can we still used the improved II with the, unability to warp cloaked, but ability to recloak after 5 seconds?

Am I reading this wrong, or does this just mean we HAVE to use the covert ops cloak, kinda like we HAVE to use the torps instead of cruises now? =/

I'm for the redefining of stealth bombers, but not this way... Confused

Where is the survivability? I don't like 20mil suicide ships... and am really not a fan of the rinse and repeating of the warp in and out thing...


Pages: first : previous : ... 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 ... : 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