| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
   |
Posted - 2009.05.12 22:19:00 -
[1]
This is a MS change idea to give them more of a combat role. This would only be one aspect of their overall changes.
Fighters with one shot, very high alpha, firing a stealth bomber type bomb with less explosion radius and requiring higher sig radius of the target to be effective. After that one shot they have to return to the MS to "reload". Due to the constant motion you would probably need them moving fasting than normal fighters while MWDing.
The bombers would be designed to anti capital work but would probably also be effective against fighter clouds just due to the amount of them being thrown out.
When assigning these to someone they would stay at the MS until the attack command was given, at which point they would enter warp as a normal fighter, come out a certain range from the target make their strike then return to reload.
Different races obviously using different damage types, give the carrier skill itself a bonus to their MWD and warp speed or the typical damage/hp bonus.
To offset the fact normal bombs cost isk to fire, make them reload by drawing topes out of your cargo or god forbid a fuel bay if it ever gets put in.
And for anyone who is reading this and thinking "Stealth bomber" these wouldnt cloak so dont post saying cloaking fighters is gay etc etc
-------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates goonswarm for one reason or another. ... And they promote ***gotism -Zurrar
|
Lucas Tigh
United Systems Navy
Zenith Affinity
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 22:35:00 -
[2]
Supporting because I'm pretty sure EVE is one of the few (if not the only) spaceship game that has no bomber class to compliment fighters.
(Pros will note my use of the word "compliment" before they :words: on about stealth bombers.)
-------------------------------------
CCP, make me a winner. |
Keitoshi Yamada
Mjolnir Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:05:00 -
[3]
Edited by: Keitoshi Yamada on 12/05/2009 23:06:52
Supported.
This would be neat, it'd nice to see carriers have more use in Capital Warfare other than dying...
And the AoE explosions would help balance out the massive damage. Shouldn't be too hard to program drone AI to only lob bombs from certain distances...
I really like the reload idea, aswell...
|
Zapawork
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:17:00 -
[4]
Anything that makes carriers more interesting in a fkeet fight is something i will approve.
|
Vile rat
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:18:00 -
[5]
Sorry BFM I don't support this one. A simple adjustment in build cost to maybe 6-8b per ms and leave them otherwise the same would be a good compromise. Their current cost is clearly not in line with their usefulness but the answer isn't making even more powerful big ships. Could you imagine a wave of remote stealth bomber attacks on a single target while the mothership chills out at a safe pos? That would be as broken as remote doomsdays.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:21:00 -
[6]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 12/05/2009 23:21:24
 Originally by: Vile rat
Sorry BFM I don't support this one. A simple adjustment in build cost to maybe 6-8b per ms and leave them otherwise the same would be a good compromise. Their current cost is clearly not in line with their usefulness but the answer isn't making even more powerful big ships. Could you imagine a wave of remote stealth bomber attacks on a single target while the mothership chills out at a safe pos? That would be as broken as remote doomsdays.
1. They wouldn't be stealthed, they also would warp in a specific distance from the TARGET not the person commanding the drones specifically to avoid that kind of abuse. To assure the person receiving the attack had time to respond and encouraging people to use support fleets on the same grid as capitals.
2. MS are 10-13b min cost as is, dropping it by 2-4b wouldn't even begin to give them a real purpose just make them a tiny bit less worthless. They need a niche nothing else can fill.
-------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates goonswarm for one reason or another. ... And they promote ***gotism -Zurrar
|
Vile rat
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:23:00 -
[7]
I hear some corps have as many as 5 motherships that they could use at once in the same system! Could you imagine coordinated attacks of this nature with those weapons while the motherships stay perfectly safe?
|
NanDe YaNen
The Funkalistic
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:30:00 -
[8]
No support in current form. Looks more like a proposal for a giant capless remote smartbomb flack cannon.
As an aoe damager or a heavy hitter, MS's would start encroaching on dreads' or support's roles.
Bombers would be cool, but should be just larger fighters that are slower, hit harder, and track less. Slow enough that when they orbit they have trouble shooting BS's. Damage somewhere in the 2k range for a carrier. Any more encroaches on dreads.
Bombers should be a tradeoff from versatility to firepower like every other weapon system. |
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:30:00 -
[9]
Edited by: EdFromHumanResources on 12/05/2009 23:31:06
Originally by: Vile rat
I hear some corps have as many as 5 motherships that they could use at once in the same system! Could you imagine coordinated attacks of this nature with those weapons while the motherships stay perfectly safe?
Against someone not deploying any kind of support fleet or simply failing to react? It would be devastating. The same anti support ships that completely romp tacklers would be ideal for killing these T2 fighters(Which would be no means cheap).
When a fighter is deployed the moment you see it take damage you can recall it, these would be forced to finish their run even if it meant their destruction. The days of sieging 50 dreads and then sitting back knowing nothing short of 100-200 bs pose any real threat(Or more dreads than you) would be gone and the fleets would be more active as a whole. Positioning, support alertness, and capitals themselves would have to adapt.
In POS warfare currently if you aren't a cap or bs, you have very little to do unless a fight breaks out. These bombers would give them a role in the offtime and increase the chance a fight does break out.
5 MS of these would do a lot of damage, 20 MS even moreso but through methods like size you can limit the number each MS can use and through price you can make losing them extremely painful to the MS pilot. A fighter that costs 60-70m a pop is not something im going to gleefully suicide 20 of every given chance.
That said if a group can routinely field 20 MS and they can all afford a full flight of bombers and you cant manage to kill them fast enough to justify losses you take then you probably shouldn't be doing what you're doing anyways.
edit: Look at that I responded to everything Nande said too without ever seeing his post
-------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates goonswarm for one reason or another. ... And they promote ***gotism -Zurrar
|
Vile rat
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:35:00 -
[10]
Instead how about explore alternate roles for the mothership? Maybe a deployable platform allowing repairs for ships nearby while it burns some sort of material to maintain the deployment phase? A super repping platform? Maybe it can deploy fire and forget drone killer drones that just fly out in a cloud and kill drones independently until recalled? Anything other than a more powerful remote damage dealer because that whole philosophy was terrible when it was first dreamed up.
|
|
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:37:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Vile rat
Instead how about explore alternate roles for the mothership? Maybe a deployable platform allowing repairs for ships nearby while it burns some sort of material to maintain the deployment phase? A super repping platform? Maybe it can deploy fire and forget drone killer drones that just fly out in a cloud and kill drones independently until recalled? Anything other than a more powerful remote damage dealer because that whole philosophy was terrible when it was first dreamed up.
I love those ideas too, im just putting forth an idea I think has potential for the devs to spitball over. I would love to see MS get ANY change to make them more useful just to show they are actively looking at them and tweaking.
-------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates goonswarm for one reason or another. ... And they promote ***gotism -Zurrar
|
Vile rat
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.12 23:49:00 -
[12]
The idea of throwing your mothership into the middle of combat doing an AOE repair on ships in your fleet while in something like a siege mode would be awesome and an interesting twist on how to use expensive supercaps.
|
NanDe YaNen
The Funkalistic
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 00:29:00 -
[13]
Titans costing billions hasn't stopped anyone from ninja-DDD'ing. Overpowered with relatively low risk leads to whoring in selective circumstances, leading to virtually no vulnerability and total exploitation. At least the nano-Titans finally got nerfed.
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
In POS warfare currently if you aren't a cap or bs, you have very little to do unless a fight breaks out.
Agreed.
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Against someone not deploying any kind of support fleet or simply failing to react? It would be devastating. The same anti support ships that completely romp tacklers would be ideal for killing these T2 fighters(Which would be no means cheap).
I get it now. There have been a lot of posts about sub-cap anti-caps, and lots of angry responses about how this is nothing more than a fairy tale Luke Skywalker hull. This is more like putting a flock of Luke Skywalkers into the hands of a MS pilot though. So the circle of insanity is complete at the capital level 
And as far as blowing up fighter clouds, first of all you have remote ecm burst and second of all anything that blows up fighter clouds like this will have an even more devastating effect on support fleets, which have larger sigs than fighters.
I see how you're trying to enforce support fleets as an essential part of eve by necessitating them through the anti-capital threat, but doing it via a capital tool isn't the way. When you look at subcap combat, the reason why it's not always about who fits for the best speed, DPS, and tanking etc is because of ewar mixing things up. Right ewar makes the wrong gang mixup a total loss. What we need are better recons that focus on caps.
Personally I'd like to see MS's get some kind of really nice "uplink" mod that could be activated on a logistics to turn it into a motherphocking awesome logistics :-D Would see layered spidering and more elaborate fleet organization. Uplinked MS feeds 8 logistics a constant supply of cap, armor, and shield to let them do their thing with higher scan res and more individualized loving.
---------------------------------------
Originally by: Red Raider
A happy gamer isnt on the forums, they are playing the game unless they have an idea that they honestly think is helping out.
|
EdFromHumanResources
Caldari
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 01:10:00 -
[14]
Originally by: NanDe YaNen
Titans costing billions hasn't stopped anyone from ninja-DDD'ing. Overpowered with relatively low risk leads to whoring in selective circumstances, leading to virtually no vulnerability and total exploitation. At least the nano-Titans finally got nerfed.
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
In POS warfare currently if you aren't a cap or bs, you have very little to do unless a fight breaks out.
Agreed.
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
Against someone not deploying any kind of support fleet or simply failing to react? It would be devastating. The same anti support ships that completely romp tacklers would be ideal for killing these T2 fighters(Which would be no means cheap).
I get it now. There have been a lot of posts about sub-cap anti-caps, and lots of angry responses about how this is nothing more than a fairy tale Luke Skywalker hull. This is more like putting a flock of Luke Skywalkers into the hands of a MS pilot though. So the circle of insanity is complete at the capital level
And as far as blowing up fighter clouds, first of all you have remote ecm burst and second of all anything that blows up fighter clouds like this will have an even more devastating effect on support fleets, which have larger sigs than fighters.
I see how you're trying to enforce support fleets as an essential part of eve by necessitating them through the anti-capital threat, but doing it via a capital tool isn't the way. When you look at subcap combat, the reason why it's not always about who fits for the best speed, DPS, and tanking etc is because of ewar mixing things up. Right ewar makes the wrong gang mixup a total loss. What we need are better recons that focus on caps.
Personally I'd like to see MS's get some kind of really nice "uplink" mod that could be activated on a logistics to turn it into a motherphocking awesome logistics :-D Would see layered spidering and more elaborate fleet organization. Uplinked MS feeds 8 logistics a constant supply of cap, armor, and shield to let them do their thing with higher scan res and more individualized loving.
While I agree with you almost completely every time CCP suggests a subcap cap killer you get hordes of cap pilots who dont like their 2b isk ship being killed by 2-3 100m isk ships.
-------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates goonswarm for one reason or another. ... And they promote ***gotism -Zurrar
|
NanDe YaNen
The Funkalistic
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2009.05.13 01:42:00 -
[15]
Originally by: EdFromHumanResources
While I agree with you almost completely every time CCP suggests a subcap cap killer you get hordes of cap pilots who dont like their 2b isk ship being killed by 2-3 100m isk ships.
sub-cap cap killers always go the wrong direction. By and large, none of the stuff I threw down in my idea for upscale recons would result in capital death directly. Therefore they are not cap killers and you still need a lot of isk in ships and pilots, cap or subcap, to do the killing part.
I mean, if you increase turret cap you can cause a relatively low intelligence Moros or Rev pilot to burn up their defensive cap. The anti-spider/triage mods would undoubted affect the survivability of lone carriers and carrier groups, but the siege-mod damage reduction would provide a way to respond by gimping the heavy hitters in cap fights, thus lowering the overall damage flow anyway.
Anti-cap force multipliers of the upper-echelon subcap price point I think would be a fair solution for everyone that would really add a lot of unpredictability to large scale combat as well as adding more need for tacklers and recons to both aid and intercept those force multipliers. |
dankness420
|
Posted - 2009.05.22 05:22:00 -
[16]
make it so the mothership itself has to target the enemy to use the bombers and it would be balanced!
i love the idea though
|
killerbitsch
|
Posted - 2009.05.22 11:26:00 -
[17]
good basic idea, but bad proposal.
no support in this way.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |