Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 01:35:15 -
[1] - Quote
Bombs are an interesting form of combat and unique in Eve as one of only two AoE attacks in the game (the only other being smart bombs) This give them at times unfair power and CCP has worked towards limiting it but I believe another approach would work better and that would be to expand on the bomber role across other ship hulls and sizes.
There are many ways it could go but adding these new ships would allow for better tweeks to current stealth bombers while adding other interesting changes to how bombing fleets could operate.
For instance if there was a bomber cruiser it could have 4 large turrets and a bomb while also being able to fit cloak. It's larger size and lower agility will make it harder to use in bomb runs but it's robust hull in comparison to a frigate would allow it to have better survive-ability. This in tandem with current frig bombers would be too strong but this allows us to re-evaluate current stealth bombers.
If the cruiser sized stealth bomber was around, current stealth bombers could receive changes such as raising their speed and tank while removing their bomb. This allows their bonuses to be focused on their torpedoes or other bonuses. These would be the only bombers not able to fire actual bombs but still heavy ordinance for the platform. Basically strengthen their ability to fly with blops fleets or ambush fleets. With a removed bomb module they can drop a high as well for either a medium or low slot for further balance.
With stealth bombers being more fragile not direct combat ships this opens for destroyer and BC sized bombers. A destroyer sized bomber would fly using small weapons and a bomb slot. They would have the ability to skirmish if they had to but they would mostly focus on survive-ability. Agile, likely with some kind of speed or tank bonus. Uncloaked they will need the extra tank or speed to survive. The agility would let them align rapidly for bombing runs in larger fleet fights. Having a few of these could give fleets lots of utility if they were loaded with void and or target breaker bombs.
Finally a heavy bomber in the BC size class. Able to field 2 bomb launchers and med weapons. These are fighting platforms that would make use of a MJD bonus, a bomb reload bonus, and a decent pool of EHP. The key to these is mobility. Their agility, while decent for a BC would still be relatively low. They would likely be long range focused as well.
With the ability to field more bombs, bombs themselves will likely need a rework in their stats.
I with held any solid stats because I don't really 100% know how this would affect all aspects of combat in eve. Would these concepts work, or could they be ridiculously abused, if so how? |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
750
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 04:52:00 -
[2] - Quote
Bomb were given to frigates as the size of tank was considered a fair caveat. That and it was the consolation prize given when cruise frigates were removed. Ask the older bitters about cruise kestrel lol.
Lots of damage....paper bag tank. Some call this balance.
Second issue is some bombers if you run them torp only spec....do not need love. really they don't. this is where you get us more purist style players who say fit your bomber to run torps well or run bombs well ...do not try to do both well. It will suffer for it. Torp spec hound for example is anything but lacking really. Now if your racial bomber is not shining as bright as hound, that would be more of a hey ccp fix my racial bomber thread really. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
2420
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 04:58:33 -
[3] - Quote
If any size bomber was covert cloak, it will get used like at present when used for bombs. As it won't be as good as a normal fleet ship. So will be in warp 1 second after it decloaks to shoot bombs. If it doesn't have covert cloak it will be too easy to shoot off the grid as it aligns after launching. Especially if it's larger so faster to lock.
Neither are desirable outcomes. |
Joe Risalo
State War Academy Caldari State
912
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 05:47:05 -
[4] - Quote
Ya know, I would like to see them be given the same bonuses (minus CPU and PG of course) for frig sized missile systems as well. That way you can choose between torps or rockets/lights.
Would help to make them more effective in small gang pvp, as well as make them a bit more versatile in their fitting capability... Maybe get a little tank on it, as well as some damage.. Or, be able to more easily fit a bomb launcher, but at the cost of damage and range by reducing missile size, though getting more application.
I mean, their lower velocity and tank compared to most frigs would still make them easily countered, even with frig class missiles. |
Amarisen Gream
Divine Demise Apocalypse Now.
108
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 06:12:59 -
[5] - Quote
I only wanna see stealth bombers lose their covert cloak (lose all ability to cloak) and go d-scan immune.
xoxo
Amarisen Gream
|
Lyra Gerie
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
65
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 13:03:17 -
[6] - Quote
Nevyn Auscent wrote:If any size bomber was covert cloak, it will get used like at present when used for bombs. As it won't be as good as a normal fleet ship. So will be in warp 1 second after it decloaks to shoot bombs. If it doesn't have covert cloak it will be too easy to shoot off the grid as it aligns after launching. Especially if it's larger so faster to lock.
Neither are desirable outcomes.
That is sort of the point. The cruiser stealth bomber would be a slower both in speed and aligning making it more difficult to pull off successful bombing runs. These would be meant to be used like current stealth bombers. Being a cruiser means they could still have a light tank while still being more surviveable than frigate sized SB.
Zan Shiro wrote:Bomb were given to frigates as the size of tank was considered a fair caveat. That and it was the consolation prize given when cruise frigates were removed. Ask the older bitters about cruise kestrel lol.
Lots of damage....paper bag tank. Some call this balance.
Second issue is some bombers if you run them torp only spec....do not need love. really they don't. this is where you get us more purist style players who say fit your bomber to run torps well or run bombs well ...do not try to do both well. It will suffer for it. Torp spec hound for example is anything but lacking really. Now if your racial bomber is not shining as bright as hound, that would be more of a hey ccp fix my racial bomber thread really.
This is a bit confusing because it's comparing old eve to the current eve. Further they do lots of damage, but mostly to larger targets. The issue here to me is more their slot layout which in addition to that damage can also fit a decent amount of E-war making them powerful platforms. This could be solved by balancing out some of their other stats with slot layout balancing and since they won't be fitting bombs other balances as well.
As for the racial bomber thing, the issue isn't individual bombers, it's the whole class. Highly agile with the potential to decimate fleets in seconds if well coordinated should not necessarily be a surprise. This is why it should be a bit harder, thus moving the SB to the cruiser platform which is larger, slower and less agile but still fragile.
The other two non-cloaking bombers make up for the weakness needed in the stealth versions to balance them. These platforms unlike those are meant to be and stay in the fight. Move some of the utility of having extra slots for E-war to these in addition to small/med weapons gives an entirely different role to bombers that they haven't really had before supporting a fleet in multiple ways. |
Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
751
|
Posted - 2015.08.29 13:38:30 -
[7] - Quote
Lyra Gerie wrote:
This is a bit confusing because it's comparing old eve to the current eve. Further they do lots of damage, but mostly to larger targets. The issue here to me is more their slot layout which in addition to that damage can also fit a decent amount of E-war making them powerful platforms. This could be solved by balancing out some of their other stats with slot layout balancing and since they won't be fitting bombs other balances as well.
Damage to target targets was the intent. Like I said...it was the caveat given after cruise kestrel removed. Players wanted a frigate that hit large targets hard, there were issues with cruise kestrel (watch the old school videos of these gangs...looked like good times really). Voila...bombers. Torps have their downsides versus cruise to not be the (op) fun cruise was.
E-war is there...if you fit it. Manticore says hi here. Grass isn't greener here....and I say this after flying maniticore a fair bit in the past. I switched to a hound, went damage heavy and said now, now I am much happier. Ninjya crew needs e-war....bring force recons.
Or not on ninjya op we have an e-war frigate already. EAF says hi. Already a red headed step child at times....lets not make it worse for them really. Wanting some more balls to e-war frigs....discussing altering them a possibly better option really. |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |