Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 08:24:00 -
[1]
Seriously. You may have crippled my Falcon, you may have still failed to fix my black ops, but bombers are now fixed, and that kind of makes up for it all. Ignore the whiners who can't figure out how to make torps work effectively. Don't you even think of changing my wonderful new gank ships and shattering my dreams after giving such beautiful hope for my future recon gangs.
All you have to do is one simple thing: ensure the CPU/grid requirements as described in this post are met, and the ships will be perfect. -----------
|
Kateryne
Minmatar Nisaba Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 08:53:00 -
[2]
I'll second Merin's pat on the back for you, Mr.Fixed-The-Bomber-Class, for you have done a very good job of it.
Including Covert-Ops cloaks that players have been begging for for ages, but in a limited way, was inspired.
Now i have just one question... Can we expect to see a new type of bomber, designed at taking out pos/capital ships and equipped with citadel torps? I've been thinking something in the destroyer size category, as there's currently only 1 tech2 variant for each destroyer hull.
|
retro mike
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 09:05:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin Seriously. You may have crippled my Falcon, you may have still failed to fix my black ops, but bombers are now fixed, and that kind of makes up for it all. Ignore the whiners who can't figure out how to make torps work effectively. Don't you even think of changing my wonderful new gank ships and shattering my dreams after giving such beautiful hope for my future recon gangs.
All you have to do is one simple thing: ensure the CPU/grid requirements as described in this post are met, and the ships will be perfect.
Just because the proposed 'focused role' torp bomber meets your blob and gank requirements, it does not justify the destruction of the cruise missile bomber class.
The cruise missile Bomber merely requires a small bonus to explosion rad/velocity per level. Once it gains this, it will remain a useful and dangerous little ship.
|
Khornne
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 11:48:00 -
[4]
Well, they are _bombers_ at all, not any kind of long range missile platform.
Fitted right and with the bonuses they get you still have a kind of range on those ships to work with and can now deal a serious amount of damage.
The ship you are looking for would be more like be a missile bombardment platform with lots of cruise launchers, explosion radius/vel. bonus to suppress smaller targets at long ranges (maybe with a drawback in damage).
Well at all, my opinion.
-- si vis pacem, para bellum If you wish for peace, prepare for war. |
Peter Powers
FinFleet KenZoku
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 12:22:00 -
[5]
Seriously, no.
This is a huge nerf to the bomber, making it a close range, and unable to recloak in an appropriate time makes it a suicide bomber, not a stealth bomber. the changes pretty much mean "either your able to kill all hostiles in first volley or your dead."
|
RedSplat
Heretic Army
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 12:31:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Peter Powers Seriously, no.
This is a huge nerf to the bomber, making it a close range, and unable to recloak in an appropriate time makes it a suicide bomber, not a stealth bomber. the changes pretty much mean "either your able to kill all hostiles in first volley or your dead."
2 Falcons or Arazu, 4 SB's. Cloak gang of DOOOOOOM.
I dont want SB's that can 1 vs 1 a BS, i want SB's that do serious damage and can pop a BS swiftly when in groups with apropriate spport.
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
I don't sleep. I am always here. Watching. Waiting.
|
Kateryne
Minmatar Nisaba Syndicate
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 12:42:00 -
[7]
The bomber is all about large vessel threat now. And since it can warp in cloaked, they won't even know it's coming. If you are uncloaking and get killed straight off the bat, you are doing it wrong. Also, torps rock if you know how to use them.
|
Mohenna
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 12:45:00 -
[8]
Obvious captatio benevolentiae is obvious. It might even work
|
Mikael Izra'il
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 12:48:00 -
[9]
I agree with you Merin, however, the CPU grid requirements you're asking for are a bit over the top.
I would make the specifications you ask for available at once except one. You can have MWD, tank and Ewar, but then less damage. You can have MWD, Ewar and strong weaponry but leave tank out.
I'm vouching for diversity. Otherwise, if they follow your suggestion there will be a cookie cutter build for each SB without any logical variations.
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 13:12:00 -
[10]
How exaclty do the bombers now work?
I have not had the chance to log to Sisi and read up on it thoroughly the last days.
Tho it do indeed sound interesting :).
|
|
Khornne
Caldari
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 13:44:00 -
[11]
I'm too lazy to do the math at the moment but what would be the range of javeling torps with a fuel cache and hydraulic thruster rigged on a SB on SISI? Maybe with some missile speed implants.
I think it's not that bad with the SB bonuses.
-- si vis pacem, para bellum If you wish for peace, prepare for war. |
Irida Mershkov
Gallente War is Bliss
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 16:31:00 -
[12]
I've been training up to fly bombers this last week, time to stack on Torps, how effective are these little beasts now? Surely they can't have suddenly become that awesome.
|
Sidus Isaacs
Gallente
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 17:26:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Irida Mershkov I've been training up to fly bombers this last week, time to stack on Torps, how effective are these little beasts now? Surely they can't have suddenly become that awesome.
From what I understand a pack of them in a cov ops gang can be bad. They add supprise dps, and if you got other cov ops force recons like arazu and more importently a falcon, it can be pretty devestating.
Suddenly out of the blackness of space a falcon + 4 or 5 SB uncloaks and kills you. while you are jammed :P
|
James Lyrus
Lyrus Associates The Star Fraction
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 17:27:00 -
[14]
I'm just very appreciative of the discussion and reasoning we've been seeing in this forum the last couple of weeks.
It's really nice to see 'decision making in progress' as it were.
|
Merin Ryskin
Peregrine Industries
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 18:10:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Mikael Izra'il I agree with you Merin, however, the CPU grid requirements you're asking for are a bit over the top.
I would make the specifications you ask for available at once except one. You can have MWD, tank and Ewar, but then less damage. You can have MWD, Ewar and strong weaponry but leave tank out.
I'm vouching for diversity. Otherwise, if they follow your suggestion there will be a cookie cutter build for each SB without any logical variations.
Sorry, but you're wrong here. You may notice a pattern with the good T2 frigates (and to a slightly lesser degree with bigger ships, since they have more slots for grid/cpu mods): all of them have enough grid/CPU to fit ideal setups. At most, you might have to use lower-tier guns, but the dps loss is pretty minimal in most cases, and that option doesn't exist with only a single tier of torp launchers. -----------
|
Ephemeron
North Eastern Swat Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 19:21:00 -
[16]
I just hope he's got more common sense than CCP Nozh
If he figures out that creating a new ship for torp based bomber is better than deleting cruise based bomber, then I'd be happy enough, knowing someone on the game design team actually uses common sense. Not that I care for stealth bombers much, it's just a logic test
|
moola
Band Of Frogs
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 20:31:00 -
[17]
I agree, his work in the S&I section is sterling too, long live the Chron.
|
Bronson Hughes
ADVANCED Combat and Engineering
|
Posted - 2009.04.02 21:15:00 -
[18]
Originally by: retro mike
Just because the proposed 'focused role' torp bomber meets your blob and gank requirements, it does not justify the destruction of the cruise missile bomber class.
No, but the fact that the cruise missile bomber was a joke of a ship with no real role does.
Originally by: retro mike
The cruise missile Bomber merely requires a small bonus to explosion rad/velocity per level. Once it gains this, it will remain a useful and dangerous little ship.
The old Stealth Bomber already had a pretty significant reduction to Cruise Missile explosion velocity per level. It still sucked. The new Stealth Bomber has 20% per level bonuses to Torpedo velocity, explosion velocity, and damage. This produces a frigate-sized ship that can warp while cloaked and has the alpha-strike of a Raven at better-than-Raven ranges that is less dependent on a Target Painter to do full damage.
Read that last sentence to yourself again. Let it sink in. Think about the kind of capability this gives cloaky Recon gangs, and then come back and complain about the death of the old Stealth Bomber. The only thing of use that the Stealth Bomber is losing is its long engagement range and while I agree that engaging at closer ranges in a paper-thin ship increases your chances of getting killed, the benefit you get from the changes far outweighs it. Risk vs. Reward dontchaknow?
The new Stealth Bomber is a stealthy, frigate-sized platform that has good capability against cruisers and bigger or massed frigates (depending on fitting). They will not be solopwnmobiles because they are still paper-thin and anything that survives the first salvo will either run away (since SBs still don't have room for tackle) or look at it the wrong way and kill it. They will need to coordinate and work in teams. But this is a good thing.
Kudos CCP. -------------------- "I am hard pressed on my right; my centre is giving way; situation excellent; I am attacking." - Ferdinand Foch at the Battle of the Marne |
ratamnimb
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 18:58:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin Seriously. You may have crippled my Falcon, you may have still failed to fix my black ops, but bombers are now fixed, and that kind of makes up for it all. Ignore the whiners who can't figure out how to make torps work effectively. Don't you even think of changing my wonderful new gank ships and shattering my dreams after giving such beautiful hope for my future recon gangs.
All you have to do is one simple thing: ensure the CPU/grid requirements as described in this post are met, and the ships will be perfect.
Uhm, Nah. Reprocess new torp Stealth Bomber, build: RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN...
See, I can do it too when you get excited.
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari Typo Corp
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 20:30:00 -
[20]
Originally by: ratamnimb Reprocess new torp Stealth Bomber, build: RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN...
QFT. The Raven will be superior to the new SB in every way imaginable. ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006. |
|
MotherMoon
Huang Yinglong
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 20:52:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Allen Ramses
Originally by: ratamnimb Reprocess new torp Stealth Bomber, build: RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN RAVEN...
QFT. The Raven will be superior to the new SB in every way imaginable.
lolz, good luck with that.
a SB would beat a raven pretty bad. Lets ingore the fact the raven can warp away.
The raven won't be able to hit the SB with missles, it's too small. The SB however cans till hit the Raven.
When The raven finally gets a lock the SB can cloak, then unlock and lay more smackdown.
Now couple this with the fact that it can warp cloaks.
|
Rordan D'Kherr
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 21:15:00 -
[22]
Nerf stealth bombers.
|
jinkoti boslin2
TORCLAN
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 21:21:00 -
[23]
Ill be honest, I don't actually fly stealth bombers a lot, and i will have to train torps on the alt that does! Grrr.. lol (Im not arsed, they sound like fun, i certainly wont threaten to sue unlike some other comedy thread posters)
What I will say is a massive thank you for the way you have communicated with the player base over the current changes to game.. Everything i wanted to see from a Dev for a long time, and I sincerely hope that others follow your lead.
|
Allen Ramses
Caldari Typo Corp
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 22:49:00 -
[24]
Originally by: MotherMoon The raven won't be able to hit the SB with missles, it's too small. The SB however cans till hit the Raven.
The raven doesn't need to hit the SB with missiles. Light drones + no tank = dead SB.
Originally by: MotherMoon When The raven finally gets a lock the SB can cloak
No, it can't.
Originally by: MotherMoon Now couple this with the fact that it can warp cloaks.
It shouldn't. It's a combat vessel, not a recon vessel. Personally, I don't think this will stick. ____________________ CCP: Catering to the cowards of a cold, harsh universe since November, 2006. |
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2009.04.13 22:49:00 -
[25]
if we have no greater concerns than stealth bombers.... - putting the gist back into logistics |
Yon Krum
The Knights Templar Intrepid Crossing
|
Posted - 2009.04.14 05:10:00 -
[26]
Putting aside the specific SB changes for a moment (though I do agree with them), I'd like to thank CCP Chronotis for putting on the flame-suit, wading into the forums, and laying out the dev vision for these ships.
Whether or not you agree with the changes to jammers, SB, black-ops, and agility, the opportunity to discuss and for CCP to refine alongside the community that uses and loves the game is a phenominally good change in behavior.
It's a hell of a lot of fun, too. Consider that previously changes showed up (if we were lucky) in the dev blog a little bit before going live, and the best players could hope for was some vocal *****ing *possibly* revising things in a future patch (but not often).
So, this is the difference between sitting in a diner and being forced to eat (or leave) whatever the cook shoves through the window, versus being invited into the kitchen to look at and sample the ingredients going into your meal. You still have to trust the cook, but your confidence in the food goes up greatly.
My fondest wish is that you, Chronotis, and the rest of the development team will continue putting up their draft changes and involving the players in debate on the details. It takes time (and therefore money), but I'm convinced it gives a better product.
--Krum
--Krum |
Grek Forto
Malevolent Intentions Dark Solar Empire
|
Posted - 2009.04.14 05:11:00 -
[27]
News from FFA 1.
Stealth Bombers primaried my Rokh --------------------------------------------------
Originally by: CCP Abraxas All major capsuleer ships have crews. Battleships are manned by thousands of people.
|
Saietor Blackgreen
Capital Construction Research
|
Posted - 2009.04.14 06:50:00 -
[28]
Guys, for real. SBs will finally be able to do what they were designed to do at leastr a little better than before - annihilate blob. It is a fix. Cruise bomber was a joke. We have enough cloaking gankers in game as it is. --- Redesign local/scanner feature - make the place huge, dark and scary again! |
Sera Ryskin
|
Posted - 2009.04.14 06:58:00 -
[29]
It's hilarious to see how many people still don't understand how to use bombers. Here's a hint: you're now welcome in recon gangs, since you can fit the required covops cloak. Tank and screwing around with moving around under cloak between shots and all that, it's just a pointless worry. Your target will be crippled by ewar from your friends in recons, all you need to do is drop 500+ dps on the target and break its tank. ==========
Merin is currently enjoying a 14 day vacation from the forums. Until she returns, you've got me to entertain you!
|
Crewman Jenkins
|
Posted - 2009.04.14 07:10:00 -
[30]
embrace the change
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |