EVE Search - bombers on sisi, still placeholders though

All Channels

Ships and Modules

bombers on sisi, still placeholders though

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
EtherealPain	Posted - 2005.03.22 00:08:00 - [1] havent seen a post about this here yet, so i thought id bring it up. (p.s. havent gone on sisi yet but alliance mates have and posted screens of the stats on the UK forums) are these going to be 'Stealth' bombers? if so i say scrap the idea.... why fly a covert opps ship instead of a bomber? they should just be normal bombers imho... still i want one CHANGE THE NAME OF THE MINMATAR ONE! HOUND is just stupid.... now... Manticore, that sounds badass, hound dosnt...i say name the minmatar bomber something simmiler to Breacher, because thats what its baced off..... decimator? except not as 'uber' sounding idk, think of names people -------------------------------------- I saw a hobo once, he was holding a sign that said: Parents killed by ninjas, need money for samurai lessons. i gave him everything i had.... i hope he killed those damn ninjas
Rod Blaine	Posted - 2005.03.22 01:20:00 - [2] Edited by: Rod Blaine on 22/03/2005 01:20:32 Ever seen "hound of the Baskervilles" (sp) maybe ? Hounds rule, period. _______________________________________________ Yes yes, blogging is passÚ I know. Rod's Ramblingz on Eve-Online Solutions to your issues.
Joker Girl	Posted - 2005.03.22 01:21:00 - [3] Sisi? What is this?
jamesw	Posted - 2005.03.22 01:54:00 - [4] Originally by: Joker Girl Sisi? What is this? Its the test server.... I got called that in school alot tbh -- jamesw Rubra Libertas Militia Originally by: RollinDutchMasters I fly a dominix, its like a portable blob in a can
Mistress Dominica	Posted - 2005.03.22 01:55:00 - [5] Edited by: Mistress Dominica on 22/03/2005 01:55:43 Someone post stats damnit. Must have stealth bomber
ErrorS	Posted - 2005.03.22 02:11:00 - [6] the stats don't show anything. Same reqs as covert ops but they have like 270 PG, kestrel version has 3 missle hardpoints and a low cargo capacity (150 or something). ________ I'm strict Caldari "The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think? -ErrorS
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.03.22 02:16:00 - [7] They also heavy as a bricks, "kestrel" if like 2.8k tons. Speed of around 200. 5 highs. 5-2 and in between meds/lows. Says that they have -90% cpu to the mods which require "advanced gunnery". Targeting around 60km.
Ardor	Posted - 2005.03.22 02:37:00 - [8] I have an idea regarding bombers. Most likely the idea lab would be the better forum but here it is.... Most people think about bombers as improved missile boats. But bombs are not missiles. When I think about a bomb I usually think about weighty things that fall down from air planes (bombers) because of gravity (and because there is a war, argh). Of course there are 'stationary' bombs, too. My idea about bombers is that they are ships that can drop the new weapon type bomb. In space there is no gravity (do not argue...) so it wont fall 'down'. A bomb doesnt have its own propulsion like missiles/torpedos so a bomb cant change direction. Speed and direction of the bomb is a result of the speed and direction of the bomber at the time the bomber dropped the bomb.
archangel sean	Posted - 2005.03.22 02:49:00 - [9] Originally by: Ardor I have an idea regarding bombers. Most likely the idea lab would be the better forum but here it is.... Most people think about bombers as improved missile boats. But bombs are not missiles. When I think about a bomb I usually think about weighty things that fall down from air planes (bombers) because of gravity (and because there is a war, argh). Of course there are 'stationary' bombs, too. My idea about bombers is that they are ships that can drop the new weapon type bomb. In space there is no gravity (do not argue...) so it wont fall 'down'. A bomb doesnt have its own propulsion like missiles/torpedos so a bomb cant change direction. Speed and direction of the bomb is a result of the speed and direction of the bomber at the time the bomber dropped the bomb. And these bombs do around 1k damage each, so a squad of them can be deadly to capital ships! ...sounds nice..^^
Gabriel BriGGs	Posted - 2005.03.22 04:33:00 - [10] hound is a bada$$ transformer who lobs rockets! -------------------------------------------- I've had the same Gurista Imputor on my tail for the past 16 systems.. 2004.08.16 21:38:37 - Combat: Your 250mm Prototype I Gauss Gun perfectly strikes Blood Sage, wrecking for 324.9 damage.
babylonstew	Posted - 2005.03.22 12:19:00 - [11] check out the stealth modules on the obex. its lists 4 sizes of mod to reduce your sig rad, but the large requires an awfull lot of cpu, maybe stealth bombers get a bonus to use these? i think it was 250 cpu or something (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
Jim Steele	Posted - 2005.03.22 12:25:00 - [12] hmm the placeholders only have limited stats so im sure they are still being tested, as for why get a covertops over a bomber, well you are forgetting the new bonus they get to probe launchers, Bombers will get no such bonus. Death to the Galante
Glarion Garnier	Posted - 2005.03.22 12:56:00 - [13] I wan't a metacraft
Streetrip	Posted - 2005.03.23 00:52:00 - [14] call minmatar one wolverine :)
H0ot	Posted - 2005.03.23 01:04:00 - [15] Hound screenshots please? (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.23 02:43:00 - [16] Edited by: Selim on 23/03/2005 02:43:11 Isn't it kind of getting old, how they keep making the caldari ones the best at what they are supposed to be doing? Interceptors: Crow, its the second/third fastest overall inty after malediction and maybe crusader, with 3 midslots for web and scrambler Assault frigates: Good damage over super range and decent resists Covert ops: Most CPU and midslots And now the bomber has the most missile slots? I mean, yeah, the caldari are supposed to be missile *****s, but when the WHOLE SHIP CLASS is apparently meant to be based on missiles, don't you think that precedent needs to be broken? At the very least, give the minmatar one the same amount of missiles... jeez. Its like making a ship class entirely based on drones, and making all of them kinda crappy compared to the gallente one. It may seem OK but its not. In this situation, they should be pretty equal. Differences being in order of HP - Minmatar, Gallente, Caldari, Amarr - speed being the opposite. Differences based on CPU and powergrid amount, lock range and sensor scan res, and something else too. I also second the motion of changing the Hound's name... thats kinda lame.
Sadist	Posted - 2005.03.23 02:54:00 - [17] Quote: Its like making a ship class entirely based on drones, and making all of them kinda crappy compared to the gallente one. It may seem OK but its not. When are we looking at drone carrier ships and tech 2 drones? They better come soon for all of us gallente lovers _______________________________________________
Naphtalia	Posted - 2005.03.23 19:58:00 - [18] where did you get the 270 grid info?
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.03.23 20:34:00 - [19] Originally by: Selim Edited by: Selim on 23/03/2005 02:43:11 Isn't it kind of getting old, how they keep making the caldari ones the best at what they are supposed to be doing? Interceptors: Crow, its the second/third fastest overall inty after malediction and maybe crusader, with 3 midslots for web and scrambler Assault frigates: Good damage over super range and decent resists Covert ops: Most CPU and midslots And now the bomber has the most missile slots? I mean, yeah, the caldari are supposed to be missile *****s, but when the WHOLE SHIP CLASS is apparently meant to be based on missiles, don't you think that precedent needs to be broken? At the very least, give the minmatar one the same amount of missiles... jeez. Its like making a ship class entirely based on drones, and making all of them kinda crappy compared to the gallente one. It may seem OK but its not. In this situation, they should be pretty equal. Differences being in order of HP - Minmatar, Gallente, Caldari, Amarr - speed being the opposite. Differences based on CPU and powergrid amount, lock range and sensor scan res, and something else too. I also second the motion of changing the Hound's name... thats kinda lame. Crow isn't that great, it has to use light missiles afterall, its fast but it has almost no HP, at all. Stilleto is much better for tackling. ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2005.03.23 20:45:00 - [20] PLACEHOLDERS. Sigh. "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.03.23 20:49:00 - [21] Originally by: Maya Rkell PLACEHOLDERS. Sigh. Only Selim would whine about placeholder stats, they are clearly imbalanced! ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Discorporation	Posted - 2005.03.23 21:16:00 - [22] Originally by: Jim Raynor Originally by: Maya Rkell PLACEHOLDERS. Sigh. Only Selim would whine about placeholder stats, they are clearly imbalanced! This made me laugh, out loud. [Heterocephalus glaber]
Jim Raynor	Posted - 2005.03.23 21:26:00 - [23] Manticore Hull: Kestrel Class Role: Stealth Bomber Specifically engineered to fire cruise missiles, stealth bombers represent the next generation in covert ops craft. Advanced techniques in spatial distortion technology enable them to actually fly faster when cloaked than when uncloaked - a fact which, coupled with their considerable firepower, makes them extremely dangerous in the hands of an accomplished pilot. Developer: Lai Dai Lai Dai have always favored a balanced approach to their mix of on-board systems, leading to a line-up of versatile ships but providing very little in terms of tactical specialization. The Manticore, however, differs from other stealth bombers by virtue of its additional launcher hardpoint. Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 19.65% reduction in Cruise Launcher powergrid needs and 5% bonus to Cruise Missile kinetic damage per level Covert Ops Skill Bonus: 5% reduction in Cruise Launcher powergrid needs and 25% bonus to cloaked velocity per level CRUISE MISSILES ON FRIGS ARE BACK BABY????? ------ ROBBLE ROBBLE
Anything	Posted - 2005.03.23 21:37:00 - [24] The Minmatar one isn't called the hound. Minmatar: Dagger Gallente: Nemesis Amarr: Purifier Caldari: Manticore Dagger is a rather fitting name, considering the err... cloak and dagger nature of the class.
mightygerm	Posted - 2005.03.23 21:45:00 - [25] Screenshots. Please.
Carmen Priano	Posted - 2005.03.23 22:02:00 - [26] If that's accurate, Jim... mmm.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.03.23 22:11:00 - [27] Its accurate Singularity has been updated with new info. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.23 22:12:00 - [28] So would you care to share the info for those of us who can't login to SiSi? Pretty please? /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.23 22:44:00 - [29] no, I'm whining about the general dev mindset on the caldari. And apparently they have indeed given the caldari more missiles than the others... which is totally ridiculous considering the ship class is entirely meant for missiles.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.03.23 22:48:00 - [30] Edited by: Pottsey on 23/03/2005 22:52:10 Only got time for 1 ship and as I like Gallente best here is the Nemesis http://www.dissonance-corp.com/files/2005.03.23.22.40.52.jpg As for the comments on everyone should have the same missile slots, as these are missiles ships, I donÆt agree. When we get drone ships I expect Gallente to have the most drone space and most bonuses same for missiles ships, Caldari should have the best missile ships or pure missiles ships. It makes sense to me that Gallente are not missile uses so I expect them to sneak in a few blasters. Balanced ships does not mean everyone has to be the same. One thing that does seem odd is these are the combat covert op ships yet they have less hull and shields then the scout covert op ships. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Carmen Priano	Posted - 2005.03.23 22:50:00 - [31] Edited by: Carmen Priano on 23/03/2005 22:51:15 I'm sure, Selim, there'll be all manners of Gallente celebration when drone carriers and advanced-tech drones come into the game. 'Til then, well -- c'est la vie. I'm sure Ammarians and Matari will deal, as well. (and thanks, Pottsey!)
Zanthiuse	Posted - 2005.03.23 23:11:00 - [32] i'm willing to bet that even with the grid bonus they will only be able to fit 2 or so cruise launchers, so it won't matter. Gallante will have 2 cruise and guns, caldari 2 cruise and light missles. Of course i havn't actually done the math... ____________________________ Waiting to cut out the deadwood. Waiting to clean up the city. Waiting to follow the worms.
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.23 23:19:00 - [33] Just because the caldari usually use more missiles than the rest doesn't mean that their bomber should have more, too. To put this in perspective, lets say you have two cheapo car companies. One generally makes cheap sedans, the other one makes cheap SUVs. Now, one day they both decide to put forth a design for a luxury sedan. Why would the sedan maker put forth a superior car? Just because they usually make sedans doesn't mean the other company will not make one as good. Caldari shouldnt have more missile launchers than the others. Why would amarr for example, not put mostly missiles on their MISSILE SHIP? The argument that the other races all have their specialty - nonsense. These are tech 2 frigates and they're all supposed to be rougly balanced. It would make sense if these ships weren't entirely made for the launchers, but they are, and its total nonsense that the caldari one should obviously be superior at its intended role... Besides, what on earth would the amarr and minmatar 'focus' in?
Ithildin	Posted - 2005.03.23 23:21:00 - [34] Oh great, look at that. They'll be good for a few until the Cruise Missiles start working as they should. Seriously, I'd expect some more missile slots on a bomber than a mere two, even from a Gallente ship. Atleast they've got the resistance bonus that Assault ships should have (that is a bonus that isn't tied to ship skill) -- If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please.
Damocles Ician	Posted - 2005.03.23 23:25:00 - [35] I notice that there's no reduction of CPU for covert ops cloaking devices. On another note, will the reduction in grid for cruise launchers be 1000(519.65%) or ((((1000-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%) I'm really happy about the cloaked speed increase - that's nice :) -------------
Famine Aligher'ri	Posted - 2005.03.23 23:25:00 - [36] Originally by: Zanthiuse i'm willing to bet that even with the grid bonus they will only be able to fit 2 or so cruise launchers, so it won't matter. Gallante will have 2 cruise and guns, caldari 2 cruise and light missles. Of course i havn't actually done the math... Far as I know, Cloaking Devices are High Slots only? So "a Gun". If they use jammers ect it might just be "2 Cruiser Missiles, A cloaking Device and Small NoS" for cap. Famine Aligher'ri, of The Aligher'ri -The Frig-
Herugrim	Posted - 2005.03.23 23:25:00 - [37] Of course they're just place holder stats on the bombers, but I hope they don't end up as just low-risk gank ships, lobbing cruise missiles from long distance. I'm imagining more of a WW2 style bomber that has to evade enemy fire before reaching its target, dropping its devastating payload, and getting out.
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.23 23:28:00 - [38] Edited by: Selim on 24/03/2005 00:05:10 Originally by: Damocles Ician I notice that there's no reduction of CPU for covert ops cloaking devices. On another note, will the reduction in grid for cruise launchers be 1000(519.65%) or ((((1000-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%) I'm really happy about the cloaked speed increase - that's nice :) Cruise Launchers will use 17.5 grid, 13 on the caldari one. It does suck that there is no CPU decrease for covert ops cloaks. Regular cloaks suck because they cant lock quick enough. One other thing... even the caldari one does poo damage. I'd rather use a taranis, which is quicker, probably cheaper, more survivable and does more damage. I expect to see that the Manticore will be the only one worth using due to what basically amounts to 50% more missile damage, and a much higher lock range. The other ones are crap because they only have 2 launchers, a useless bonus (gun bonus stupid on missile ship!). Not to ignore the fact that they need to fit 2 guns, thats alot of extra powergrid to be using. And the caldari one has a second powergrid reduction bonus which makes fitting 3 cruise launchers only minimally more difficult than fitting 2 on any others. If you actually had to fit 2 micro aux to fit 3 cruise launchers it would be understandable. Its really a joke how they say that an extra small gun is equal to an extra large missile launcher... you'd need 3 tech 2 ballistic controls, which aren't out yet, to roughly equal the damage of the manticore, meanwhile it will have one lowslot and one midslot open that you do not (it needs one low for a micro aux).
Zanthiuse	Posted - 2005.03.23 23:50:00 - [39] Originally by: Selim Edited by: Selim on 23/03/2005 23:29:07 Originally by: Damocles Ician I notice that there's no reduction of CPU for covert ops cloaking devices. On another note, will the reduction in grid for cruise launchers be 1000(519.65%) or ((((1000-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%) I'm really happy about the cloaked speed increase - that's nice :) Cruise Launchers will use 17.5 grid, 13 on the caldari one. It does suck that there is no CPU decrease for covert ops cloaks. Regular cloaks suck because they cant lock quick enough. they are anti battleship, so maybe they shouldn't lock super fast? I don't think they should be shooting down frigs. Also, i'd assume they don't use covert ops cloaks. ____________________________ Waiting to cut out the deadwood. Waiting to clean up the city. Waiting to follow the worms.
meowcat	Posted - 2005.03.24 00:01:00 - [40] Edited by: meowcat on 24/03/2005 00:03:12 re-releasing frigates that fire cruise missiles BEFORE doing missile agility is a really really bad idea IMHO. they will be vulnerable to new EW with their crummy lock times (no covert ops cloak) ~~~~)\~~~~~\o/~~~~ yeah but no but yeah but no but
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.24 00:08:00 - [41] I was thinking, if cruise missiles were totally crap at killing frigs, then the 3 non caldari ones would be alot better due to their turrets, because they could fight frigates alot easier than the caldari one. Then again, these things are fragile enough that a navitas could take one down if the cruise missiles didn't work on it...
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.03.24 00:24:00 - [42] ...think even an impairor would be able to take them out.... ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Roy Focker	Posted - 2005.03.24 00:49:00 - [43] Originally by: Zanthiuse Originally by: Selim Edited by: Selim on 23/03/2005 23:29:07 Originally by: Damocles Ician I notice that there's no reduction of CPU for covert ops cloaking devices. On another note, will the reduction in grid for cruise launchers be 1000(519.65%) or ((((1000-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%)-19.65%) I'm really happy about the cloaked speed increase - that's nice :) Cruise Launchers will use 17.5 grid, 13 on the caldari one. It does suck that there is no CPU decrease for covert ops cloaks. Regular cloaks suck because they cant lock quick enough. they are anti battleship, so maybe they shouldn't lock super fast? I don't think they should be shooting down frigs. Also, i'd assume they don't use covert ops cloaks. You hit the nail right on the head. Bombers, should have longer lock times. Those longer lock times would ofcourse leave them vulnerable to attack. I see this as a step towards have specific rolls instead of everyone fighting in battleships. -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- I am not paying $15 a month to play a immature a-hole.
Tairos Hakonnus	Posted - 2005.03.24 01:14:00 - [44] Originally by: Jim Raynor Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 19.65% reduction in Cruise Launcher powergrid needs and 5% bonus to Cruise Missile kinetic damage per level Minmatar frig skill is required to fly the Manticore? ---------------------------- http://spla.sh/bp/bp_files/main.htm
MOOstradamus	Posted - 2005.03.24 01:28:00 - [45] /me begs / wishes for/ hopes / dreams / prays that one of his Research Agents will discover a Stealth Bomber BPO MOOrovingian "Following & supporting EVE (since Jan 2001) is like wiping your arse with sandpaper."
Sorja	Posted - 2005.03.24 01:52:00 - [46] Originally by: Tairos Hakonnus Originally by: Jim Raynor Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 19.65% reduction in Cruise Launcher powergrid needs and 5% bonus to Cruise Missile kinetic damage per level Minmatar frig skill is required to fly the Manticore? Either it's a bug (bad copy paste) or a hoax If those ships can't use a covert ops cloaking devices, how can they be faster cloaked than uncloaked? There's a 75% speed penalty on the advanced cloaking tech II, isn't it? Anyways, very interesting concept!
ErrorS	Posted - 2005.03.24 02:25:00 - [47] These seem alright, I'm a bit disapointed though. I wanted bomb launchers. Lots of grid, but a skill bonus for the ship so they could use them. Bombs are 50m3, launchers hold 100m3 and have a RoF of 60 seconds. They do 1000damage a hit, have a top speed of 200m/s and a flight time of 30 seconds. Cloaked Manticore comes in cloaked at near full speed, gets within 2000meters of a battleship, uncloaks and unloads a full payload of bombs. It would either die, or have to warp out. The battleship would be nearly crippled. They should be slow, well tanked but easy to hit, they should have almost no penalty for moving speed while cloaked. 200m3 cargo so they can hold 4 extra bombs. But after 1 or 2 alpha strikes, they gotta dock or pick up more ammo. Hell, even make them use torpedos with a 50% damage increase and -50% speed penalty with a special launcher that only holds a few. Ultimate gank ship, but useless against frigates and cruisers. ________ I'm strict Caldari "The grass is always greener on the other side" - Maybe they're not as uber as you think? -ErrorS
Armenilla	Posted - 2005.03.24 03:10:00 - [48] Originally by: Tairos Hakonnus Originally by: Jim Raynor Minmatar Frigate Skill Bonus: 19.65% reduction in Cruise Launcher powergrid needs and 5% bonus to Cruise Missile kinetic damage per level Minmatar frig skill is required to fly the Manticore? This is most likely a placeholder value. Most ships, before they are released, tend to have completely wrong racial ship skills. The value in the database has probably not been initialized yet, but it has to be something, and minmatar happens to be the default.
Glarion Garnier	Posted - 2005.03.24 03:16:00 - [49] The nice part of these new ships is that now having the Electronics Upgrades skill to lvl 5 is quite handy. Will boost Covert OP frigate sales as a by product.
VossKarr	Posted - 2005.03.24 03:44:00 - [50] /emote checks the market for Arby cruise launchers and then makes a note to himself: "quick, get a couple of launchers before the selles got the wind of this!"
Tar Magen	Posted - 2005.03.24 03:55:00 - [51] Edited by: Tar Magen on 24/03/2005 03:55:33 Originally by: Pottsey Edited by: Pottsey on 23/03/2005 22:52:10 Only got time for 1 ship and as I like Gallente best here is the Nemesis http://www.dissonance-corp.com/files/2005.03.23.22.40.52.jpg As for the comments on everyone should have the same missile slots, as these are missiles ships, I donÆt agree. When we get drone ships I expect Gallente to have the most drone space and most bonuses same for missiles ships, Caldari should have the best missile ships or pure missiles ships. It makes sense to me that Gallente are not missile uses so I expect them to sneak in a few blasters. Balanced ships does not mean everyone has to be the same. One thing that does seem odd is these are the combat covert op ships yet they have less hull and shields then the scout covert op ships. What is the "Ion Propulsion Strength" that appears in the bottom right corner of the screenshot? Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.
jbob2000	Posted - 2005.03.24 04:03:00 - [52] just guessing here, but it might be the t2 components kicking in ----------------------------------------------- CANADIAN
Cracken	Posted - 2005.03.24 04:13:00 - [53] Edited by: ***en on 24/03/2005 04:20:54 Edited by: ***en on 24/03/2005 04:14:29 that appeared with the new ew changes. No clue what it means though. also omg el crap resists on the nemisis it isn't going too survive long enough too get close with those resists. Either it needs 2 more lows or the resists bumped up a bit. Also 2 cruise launchers uses up almost all the ummodified grid. hmmz 45 base grid would solve that problem though.
Harry Voyager	Posted - 2005.03.24 04:34:00 - [54] The Ion Propulsion strength is there because either Webs or Warp Scramblers are now Racial items. Might be both; I haven't really been keeping up on them. Harry Voyager
Letifer Deus	Posted - 2005.03.24 05:26:00 - [55] Originally by: Zanthiuse i'm willing to bet that even with the grid bonus they will only be able to fit 2 or so cruise launchers, so it won't matter. Gallante will have 2 cruise and guns, caldari 2 cruise and light missles. Of course i havn't actually done the math... Manticore with lvl 3 covert ops and 2 micro aux can fit a T2 MWD and 3 cruise launchers. I am the OG PIIIIIMP
Gierling	Posted - 2005.03.24 05:33:00 - [56] Im sorry no, I don't want cruise missile launching stealth frigates to have uber resists as well. Bastards we are lest Bastards we become.
Famine Aligher'ri	Posted - 2005.03.24 06:06:00 - [57] Yeah you do don't lie. Famine Aligher'ri, of The Aligher'ri -The Frig-
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.03.24 09:16:00 - [58] ôTo put this in perspective, lets say you have two cheapo car companies. One generally makes cheap sedans, the other one makes cheap SUVs. Now, one day they both decide to put forth a design for a luxury sedan. Why would the sedan maker put forth a superior car? Just because they usually make sedans doesn't mean the other company will not make one as good.ö ThatÆs easy the Sedan builder has been making them longer so know more tricks of the trade and can fit more for the same cost due to what they learnt in the past. Look at real life cars two companies building the same type of car often have very different styles. BWM favour using back wheel drive while say Ford or Mitsubishi favour using front wheel drive. Same for Eve Caldari favour missiles so fit more missiles and have the engineerÆs that know how. Gallant favour Blasters so they add the option of using blasters and bump up the powergrid as thatÆs there thing. The person who specialises in something is almost always going build the better product and each company has its style which they always apply. The Gallant Bomber is built by the formost builders of blasters so it makes sense it has the tell tile signs of a blaster ship, extra powergrid, blaster turrets e.c.t Look at real life bomber planes. Bomber A might be able to drop bombs only while Bomber B from another company has none bomb weapons added onto it. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
NoNameNewbie	Posted - 2005.03.24 10:25:00 - [59] wow ... 1 more useless Shipclass ...
Damocles Ician	Posted - 2005.03.24 10:40:00 - [60] stats might not be finalised yet -------------
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.03.24 11:05:00 - [61] Originally by: Letifer Deus Originally by: Zanthiuse i'm willing to bet that even with the grid bonus they will only be able to fit 2 or so cruise launchers, so it won't matter. Gallante will have 2 cruise and guns, caldari 2 cruise and light missles. Of course i havn't actually done the math... Manticore with lvl 3 covert ops and 2 micro aux can fit a T2 MWD and 3 cruise launchers. points out the stupidly high mass of the ship ...they might be placeholders thou... ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Nafri	Posted - 2005.03.24 11:08:00 - [62] lol, a cruise launchers does the same damage as a heavy launchers, and less damage then a neutron blaster on taranis , a lot less damage looks like CCP wants to get cruise launchers used Wanna fly with me?
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.03.24 11:10:00 - [63] Originally by: Nafri lol, a cruise launchers does the same damage as a heavy launchers, and less damage then a neutron blaster on taranis , a lot less damage looks like CCP wants to get cruise launchers used indeed... it looks like just another useless ship, unless the ships get a RoF bonus aswell... ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Nafri	Posted - 2005.03.24 11:12:00 - [64] Originally by: Grimpak Originally by: Nafri lol, a cruise launchers does the same damage as a heavy launchers, and less damage then a neutron blaster on taranis , a lot less damage looks like CCP wants to get cruise launchers used indeed... it looks like just another useless ship, unless the ships get a RoF bonus aswell... only good thing thy could do is killing frigates that are stupid enough to get hit by missles without speed bonus Wanna fly with me?
DB Preacher	Posted - 2005.03.24 11:56:00 - [65] I can't wait to try these out :D dbp Current RKK Ranking: (CAL4) Soldier Drop by and say hi in Reikoku Forums.
dethanor	Posted - 2005.03.24 11:58:00 - [66] Originally by: DB Preacher I can't wait to try these out :D dbp you and me both There is no art more beautiful nor diverse than the art of death!!! Oberon Tech II Sales.
Turiya Flesharrower	Posted - 2005.03.24 12:45:00 - [67] 1) You can be that these ships will end up with the ability to use covert ops cloaks. Without that ability no-one would want them since a Raven with an improved cloak could do a better job and would (probably) be cheaper too since you'd at least get plenty of moolah from insurance when you die. 2) Stop looking at them as a general-use ship; they're not for use in general combat, that's why they're called covert ops craft. Anyone with some imagination could think up a million uses for a ship like thise; its potential for surgical strikes on enemy industrial operations alone gives it a great use. 3) Stop interpreting the SiSi stats as if they were the be-all and end-all; they'll almost certainly change before they hit TQ.
Discorporation	Posted - 2005.03.24 13:13:00 - [68] hoo boy, cloaked in your Stealth bomber, waiting for stupid indies/frigs to pass you and blasting them with a missile volley as they fly past, whee. [Heterocephalus glaber]
Jim Steele	Posted - 2005.03.24 14:42:00 - [69] Hmm shame you wont be able to use a covert ops cloak but i guess the quick lock would defeat the point of these beasts, im sure an improved cloak would give a ok velocity cloaked when all the bonuses are factored in, in fact it might be worth trying a dread cloak on them. Im sure they will cost about 10-20mil once prices stabalise which aint bad and they will be used primarily to take out indys i think, might see a rush for t2 industrials tbh will certanaly make piracy a bit more fun if you can actually fight in one, but i would like to be able to warp while cloaked but i think this would mabye make them too powerfull. Death to the Galante
Vigilant	Posted - 2005.03.24 14:51:00 - [70] I am just happy that the Kestrel and Breacher will finally be T2.... I have been waiting for this day... Both great ships to fly
SLIM	Posted - 2005.03.24 18:14:00 - [71] Originally by: Nafri lol, a cruise launchers does the same damage as a heavy launchers, and less damage then a neutron blaster on taranis , a lot less damage looks like CCP wants to get cruise launchers used There's something to be said for a huge burst of damage, though. Else, why would people use tachs? ---------------------------
Icarus Thorne	Posted - 2005.03.25 00:48:00 - [72] Bit and pieces have been posted about the (placeholder?) stats, so I'll extrapolate them into a round guess here: Amarr Purifier (estimate): 4 high slots (2 missile, 1 turret) 2 mid slots 4 low slots 30 grid, 195 cpu Caldari Manticore (estimate): 5 high slots (3 missile, 1 turret) 5 mid slots 1 low slots 30 grid, 250 cpu Gallente Nemesis (as posted): 5 high slots (2 missile, 2 turret) 4 mid slots 2 low slots 35 grid, 230 cpu Minmater Dagger (estimate): 5 high slots (2 missile, 2 turret) 3 mid slots 3 low slots 30 grid, 215 cpu Some observations: The single-volley power punchers here are obviously the Manticore with its three missile launchers (up to 1406 kinetic) and the Dagger (two missile launchers plus potentially two howitzers = 937 explosive plus ~260 mixed). It will therefore take three or four to menace a cruiser. A BS will take a hit but not be overly concerned by bombers on their own. It's not certain they'd get a second volley, especially if interceptors are around. A Minmatar destroyer with 7 howitzers would rival the Dagger's firepower (and be fully insurable). The bombers are flying bricks. 1 MN AB's will be semi-useless and they'll have the agility of cruisers.
Saerid	Posted - 2005.03.25 00:54:00 - [73] Originally by: Discorporation hoo boy, cloaked in your Stealth bomber, waiting for stupid indies/frigs to pass you and blasting them with a missile volley as they fly past, whee. Sarcasm aside, the decloaking and sensor recalibration means the targets are going to be two systems away by the time you can lock them Good for killing AFK miners,maybe?
Sadist	Posted - 2005.03.25 01:58:00 - [74] Edited by: Sadist on 25/03/2005 02:01:23 sniff-sniff Do I smell another useless class of ships, like covert ops? At least theese ones arent as requiring skill-wise. The people at CCP really need to watch something like Babylon-5 series or Star-trek to understand what people want from covert ops. _______________________________________________
Leshrac Shepherd	Posted - 2005.03.25 02:14:00 - [75] Originally by: SLIM Originally by: Nafri lol, a cruise launchers does the same damage as a heavy launchers, and less damage then a neutron blaster on taranis , a lot less damage looks like CCP wants to get cruise launchers used There's something to be said for a huge burst of damage, though. Else, why would people use tachs? Range. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
Vicker Lahn'se	Posted - 2005.03.25 04:04:00 - [76] I think the stealth bomber oughta be able to lock right after uncloaking. Otherwise there's really no point to this ship.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.03.25 08:41:00 - [77] ôSarcasm aside, the decloaking and sensor recalibration means the targets are going to be two systems away by the time you can lock them ö With the right skills and modules you can get a lock in 5 to 10 seconds. I use a Auto lock module so its 10 seconds for me but you should be able to get faster then 10 seconds. Most people donÆt watch the scanner none stop all it takes is for them to look away for a few seconds IE moving ore to a tin then a few more before they spot you on the scanner. More then enough time to get a lock. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Farjung	Posted - 2005.03.25 09:17:00 - [78] Originally by: Sadist Edited by: Sadist on 25/03/2005 02:01:23 sniff-sniff Do I smell another useless class of ships, like covert ops? At least theese ones arent as requiring skill-wise. The people at CCP really need to watch something like Babylon-5 series or Star-trek to understand what people want from covert ops. Covert ops ships are far from useless ;) The skill requirements for the ships are the same; if you can fly a Helios you can fly a Nemesis and vice-versa. Only difference is that the bombers (at least for now) don't seem to be able to mount a covert ops cloak, which makes them more a camping tool than an attacking tool imo :(. Someone really needs to keep me away from the Taranis
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.03.25 09:28:00 - [79] Pretty sure they can use covert cloak as they are meant to be faster cloaked then uncloaked. With the normal cloak module that wouldnÆt be the case. It could be like a Mining Barge with a hidden ûxxx% to cpu. Also it seems strange that a covet op ship cannot use a covert op module. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.25 09:48:00 - [80] Well, who says theyre Covert Ops. They're Stealth Bombers. The reason they'll go faster cloaked then uncloaked it because they get 25% speed per level. They sound utterly useless to me. DpS lies around 40, which aint that good atall. They're heavy as ****, have barely any armor, and seem to be unable to warp cloaked. Their only use will be to wait for people at a gate. And even then you'll need alot of luck, as even Interceptors can barely catch someone with instas. Oh and one other thing, about people not watching scanner. I don't know where you live, but down where i come from people safespot once they see someone in local, let alone see him on their scanner. I'm not convinced. /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
Tar Magen	Posted - 2005.03.25 10:29:00 - [81] Edited by: Tar Magen on 25/03/2005 10:29:51 Originally by: Elve Sorrow Well, who says theyre Covert Ops. They're Stealth Bombers. The reason they'll go faster cloaked then uncloaked it because they get 25% speed per level. Pottsey has a point. They're Covert Ops because they're under that tab on SISI. It would be odd if they couldn't fit the covert ops cloaking module. And they would not be faster while cloaked if only using an improved cloak II. (base speed x 0.25 x 2.25 = base speed x 0.5626, which is slower rather than faster). The idea seems to be that they can sneak in and deliver a sudden blast, rather than sustain a high DoT. However, even the Manticore doesn't deliver enough to be a threat to more than a frigate or destroyer, so it's not clear how useful these bombers will be. Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.
MOOstradamus	Posted - 2005.03.25 10:32:00 - [82] /me rams into Disco at full speed in his Impel MOOrovingian "Following & supporting EVE (since Jan 2001) is like wiping your arse with sandpaper."
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.25 10:34:00 - [83] Edited by: Elve Sorrow on 25/03/2005 10:34:35 Rather, they would be even more useless if they can't fit them. Considering they all get a utility highslot, they'll be able to fit some kind of Cloaking Device i guess. As for the speed calcs, thats what i would expect. Knowing CCP, its mostlikely something like, every level of Covert Ops skill removes 25% of the Cloaking Device speed penalty. So at lvl2 Covert ops, youd only get a 0.75 (0.25 + (2 * 0.25)) speed penalty, and at level5 you're 25% faster. EDIT: Spelling. /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
Meridius	Posted - 2005.03.25 10:38:00 - [84] Does this mean i can use my cruise armed frigs legally now ________________________________________________________
Legomyeggo	Posted - 2005.03.25 10:51:00 - [85] Edited by: Legomyeggo on 25/03/2005 10:54:29 Here's the stats for the ships off the test server (other than gallente which was already posted: Purifier Dagger Manticore ENJOY!
Nero Scuro	Posted - 2005.03.25 11:00:00 - [86] Just a random thought, but would letting them fire Torps instead of Cruise make them seem more appealing to people (because as it stands, they seem pretty useless...)? Or would that make them overpowered? ---------------- Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun!
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.25 11:18:00 - [87] Edited by: Elve Sorrow on 25/03/2005 11:18:45 I just realised something rather disturbing. If the maths work like i posted in my last post, these Bombers will be faster then Covert Ops ships. If they can, in addition, use Covert Ops Cloaks, why would anyone use a Covert Ops ship? All that matters in a Covert Ops is speed, agility and the Cloaking Device. (Waits for Pottsey to claim Helios' are a good shieldtank) However, the rest of this universe uses them to gather intell on enemy ships and fleets, and to get warpin positions. Admitted, they're used to deploy Scan Probes too, but hey, you need to decloak for that. (Which should be changed.) /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
DARTHxFREE	Posted - 2005.03.25 11:31:00 - [88] OMG a t2 tristan, i have bean wanting this creation since i was born to eve, a shame its not an assult frig, but stealth bomber will do they are tech2 right? >:-E3 !!!rrraY I'm an anti pirate,...life's the wrong way round.
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.25 11:33:00 - [89] They are, although their resistances are messed up as far as i can see. They all get modified Thermal resistance, but to some odd number...34.75% or something. /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
Kaboom22	Posted - 2005.03.25 12:03:00 - [90] Id like to see them in a more Anti-Captial role, how cool would it be doing strafeing runs against a dreadnaught as a squad of these? I realy think they should use bombs rather than cruise missiles. The bombs should be high damage (about 750 ish) and be completely dumb fire (in other words, you have to aim your ship at the target, and the bombs will travel in a straigt line forwards of your ship) and have a velocity of about +10% of whatever velocity your ship is going at release. the bombs should also have and explosion radius, meaning release timing and getting out of range will be crucial. Even though the bombs are dumb fire, they should still require a lock (for dynamic detination of the bomb to maxiise dmaage or some other RP reason). locking times should be about the same as your average run of the mill Tech 1 frig. Each ship should have about 3 launchers, with a reload time of about 60 secs. the launchers should only be fitable on these ships. As for the cloak, i think a covert ops would make them overpowered, but what i would like to see is a bonus that alows a cloak to break a lock after a pierod of time after activation (reduceable with skills). This will allow hit and run cloaking tactics, whilst still making them vulnerable on warp in and whilst their on a attack run. The ships should have poor agility and fairly slow speed (about assault frig levels). the armour should be fairly large, but resists should be poor (for a T2 ship). Sheild should be utter crap. Bombers as they are at the momnent look only usefull for indy ganking, and even then id rather use a inty. ---
Dzikus	Posted - 2005.03.25 12:30:00 - [91] Edited by: Dzikus on 25/03/2005 12:30:37 Dumb bombs in age of spaceship travel is pretty lame idea for me. But it would be nice to use torpedos on these. Anyway, for scouts loving combat it could be nice to travel in one of these and have some more fun when a battle begins. And for covert ops usage - they will have some big boost in system scanning capabilities. Which will hopefuly finally make big use of them in finding hidden enemies. Interesting times ahead. _________________ Never Give Up, Never Surrender!
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.25 12:35:00 - [92] Except Scan Probes are still bugged in that they can't scan good safespots. Untill that gets fixed, Scan Probes are damn near useless. /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
Kaboom22	Posted - 2005.03.25 12:54:00 - [93] Originally by: Dzikus Edited by: Dzikus on 25/03/2005 12:30:37 Dumb bombs in age of spaceship travel is pretty lame idea for me. But it would be nice to use torpedos on these. Well maybe torpedos might work, but they would have to have their agility nerfed first. As for dumb fire in age of space, i thinik there would still be room for it, simply because you can fit more bang in a smaller space if you dont have to worry about propulsion. ---
Magunus	Posted - 2005.03.25 13:34:00 - [94] Originally by: Kaboom22 Originally by: Dzikus Edited by: Dzikus on 25/03/2005 12:30:37 Dumb bombs in age of spaceship travel is pretty lame idea for me. But it would be nice to use torpedos on these. Well maybe torpedos might work, but they would have to have their agility nerfed first. As for dumb fire in age of space, i thinik there would still be room for it, simply because you can fit more bang in a smaller space if you dont have to worry about propulsion. Or a lock... Give up an auto-hit for the ability to fire without first getting a lock? Especially with a ship that can get into point blank range without being detected? Sounds good to me... Even at point blank range (ie, between 2500 meters and 5000 meters because of the decloak range) I wouldn't imagine it to be very easy to hit a battleship without guidance. --- In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe'
Magunus	Posted - 2005.03.25 13:39:00 - [95] Originally by: Tar Magen Edited by: Tar Magen on 25/03/2005 10:29:51 Originally by: Elve Sorrow Well, who says theyre Covert Ops. They're Stealth Bombers. The reason they'll go faster cloaked then uncloaked it because they get 25% speed per level. Pottsey has a point. They're Covert Ops because they're under that tab on SISI. It would be odd if they couldn't fit the covert ops cloaking module. And they would not be faster while cloaked if only using an improved cloak II. (base speed x 0.25 x 2.25 = base speed x 0.5626, which is slower rather than faster). The idea seems to be that they can sneak in and deliver a sudden blast, rather than sustain a high DoT. However, even the Manticore doesn't deliver enough to be a threat to more than a frigate or destroyer, so it's not clear how useful these bombers will be. Ja. I'm guessing alone they'll only be a threat to a tech 1 industrial. So, tech 2 industrials might become more popular just to sustain fire from one of these. In small groups, though, they'd be a threat to a battleship. Particularly if those stealth modules make it in. Battleships would have a tough time getting a lock or hitting once they have one. But again, this means that the current missile system would need to be changed, cause one cruise missile would seriously screw these things up. Hey... how about this? Mount a cloak and a stealth module. Decloak, activate stealth to increase BS lock time, lock, fire, recloak (which you could concievably do if the enemy didn't yet have a lock on you). Move around to another position, rinse and repeat. The bomber couldn't prevent the BS from just warping away, but one ship can't do everything... --- In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe'
Grimpak	Posted - 2005.03.25 13:50:00 - [96] Edited by: Grimpak on 25/03/2005 13:50:59 only things that the bombers would need to be deadly to bigger ships (as they are intended to): - ability to cloak even if locked (kinda hard and I would see many peeps screaming "OMGNERF!1") - they should have an extended delay between recloak. something like 60 seconds? like that they would be in the open while they would be shooting missiles. Perfect sitting ducks to the faster frigates/intys (specially intys) - ability to use torps, instead of cruise missiles, while having Rof and speed bonus to them. (bombers are suposed to be heavy pounders) ....that, coupled with the stats that are in SiSi, they would be what a bomber should be: frail, slow and capable of dishing out very nasty damage. ...ofc that the missile changes would needed to be made if they could implement this. ------------------- Quote: Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
Jack Amarr	Posted - 2005.03.25 14:11:00 - [97] i say bombers would be better based on the destroyer models. bit more chunkyer. -------------------------- Amarr but not proud of it!
Nero Scuro	Posted - 2005.03.25 14:16:00 - [98] Originally by: Jack Amarr i say bombers would be better based on the destroyer models. bit more chunkyer. Except... Destroyers are strictly turret ships (all of 'em, even Caldari) and Bombers are strictly missile ships (ditto). That doesn't make much sense. Besides, bombers aren't supposed to be 'chunky', they're supposed to be frail and easily destroyed by fighters, but able to heavily damage large, slow objects. ---------------- Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun!
Arimas Talasko	Posted - 2005.03.25 15:14:00 - [99] Who ever heard of bombers bombing with cruise missiles, shouldn't it at least be torps, as numerous people have remarked Supremacy Keepin it Real
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.03.25 17:18:00 - [100] ôWell, who says theyre Covert Ops. They're Stealth Bombers.ö They are listed under Covert op ships on the market which makes them a Covert op ship. They even have Stealth in the name which is a part of covert ops. Changeing subject the other reson I hope covert cloak is used is normal T2 cloak would eat up to much CPU at 60 for the cloak and 120 for the 2 missile weapons puts you at 180 now fit in the 2 lowest CPU blasters 10 CPU each and your left with 30 CPU free for 4 mid slots and 2 low slots. I find that hard to believe. ThatÆs the Gallante ship. A covert cloak would give you enough CPU to fit modules into the mid and low slots. A while ago there was bomb ammo on singularity I wonder if that ammo is coming back? ô(Waits for Pottsey to claim Helios' are a good shieldtank)ö Sorry cannot resist and you make that sound like they are not good. They can have x4 more hitpoints along with 2 shield hardeners and no cap problems over T1 frigates. As frigateÆs go I thought that was good, 813 shield hitpoints and 11.1 hitpoints per second. Not as tough as an Assault Frigates but then again they shouldnÆt be. Which isnÆt that bad compared to other popular frigate like an Incursus which have 200 shield hitpoints and after fitting 2 shield hardeners you only have 1 mid slot free which if you fit a small shield booster gives you 10 hitpoints per second and you have cap problems. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.25 17:25:00 - [101] I'm sure it is. I'm not contesting it. I'm just noticing you jumping on the 'Passive Shieldtanking ftw' tour everytime it's remotely mentioned. On the other hand. I still think its crap on a Covert Ops. Woo, shieldtank a 30mill ship. Grab a Punisher, add 3 hardners, an Armor rep. Better tank, and it only cost you 1mill (And thats assuming you use tech2 Armor rep!) /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.03.25 17:37:00 - [102] ôI'm sure it is. I'm not contesting it. I'm just noticing you jumping on the 'Passive Shieldtanking ftw' tour everytime it's remotely mentioned.ö I misunderstood you then before. But youÆre right about the passive tanking stuff. Trying to cut down how much I mention it now unless itÆs really needed or a direct question about it. If you didnÆt bring up shield tanking I wouldnÆt have mentioned it in this thread and I dont plan to mention it again. Hey and I am getting better I even got to page 6 of this tread before mentioning it. 5 weeks ago that would have been page 2. But I promise to try and cut down any talking of passive tanking. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Vicker Lahn'se	Posted - 2005.03.25 17:45:00 - [103] Originally by: Nero Scuro Originally by: Jack Amarr i say bombers would be better based on the destroyer models. bit more chunkyer. Except... Destroyers are strictly turret ships (all of 'em, even Caldari) and Bombers are strictly missile ships (ditto). That doesn't make much sense. Besides, bombers aren't supposed to be 'chunky', they're supposed to be frail and easily destroyed by fighters, but able to heavily damage large, slow objects. Actualy, destroyers in real life were used to attack battleships in swarms and launched torpedoes. Destroyers in real life were the tiny ships meant to swarm big ships. I wouldn't really call them "bombers", though. Just thought I'd interject that random thought...
Arte	Posted - 2005.03.25 17:49:00 - [104] Freaked a moment when I looked at the grid use, even when I factored in the bonuses. Then forgot about engineering skill!! Hope we get a chance to play with them on the test server first. Surely they'll give us a chance to test them first instead of releasing them and then nerfing them.
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.25 18:28:00 - [105] I sort of agree that it should be torps instead of cruise, since right now a taranis will outdamage all these bombers... even the caldari one.
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2005.03.25 22:06:00 - [106] Not from 50+ km. "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Tar Magen	Posted - 2005.03.25 22:43:00 - [107] Hmm. I wonder how well FoF cruise missiles would get around the target lock delay. Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.
H0ot	Posted - 2005.03.25 23:59:00 - [108] Edited by: H0ot on 26/03/2005 00:00:40 Why not make it rockets, with INSANE damage/RoF bonuses? Something about an all-Caldari Navy Rocket Launcher Raven spamming Thorn's has always appealed to me. Oh and as they are right now, they do look a little useless. Hopefully Covert Ops Cloak will be an option, or atleast something to help with lock times. (\_/) (O.o) (> <) This is Bunny. Copy Bunny into your signature to help him on his way to world domination.
Nero Scuro	Posted - 2005.03.26 00:06:00 - [109] Originally by: Vicker Lahn'se Actualy, destroyers in real life were used to attack battleships in swarms and launched torpedoes. Destroyers in real life were the tiny ships meant to swarm big ships. I wouldn't really call them "bombers", though. Just thought I'd interject that random thought... Yeah, but destroyers ingame do exactly the opposite of what bombers will (probably) do. Destroyers - shred Frigates. Bombers - attack Battleships? ---------------- Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun!
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.26 00:32:00 - [110] Originally by: Maya Rkell Not from 50+ km. At 50km, battleships will hit you with their guns, and 50km is nothing for a taranis.
Roy Focker	Posted - 2005.03.26 01:12:00 - [111] Edited by: Roy Focker on 26/03/2005 01:14:42 This is not looking good. -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- I am not paying $15 a month to play a immature a-hole.
Cracken	Posted - 2005.03.26 01:34:00 - [112] yes they should be allowed too use torps because bombers role is too destroy very large targets aka battleships only problem is the fact that they're stealth bombers maybe make 2 bomber classes. 1 can use cloaks but has less firepower. 1 that can't use cloaks but has tremendous firepower can launch torps and generally cause massive havoc. Something like a tristan developed by roden shipyards. basically these ships pack a gruesome punch 15% thermal torp damage per level and maybe high resistances. They should have light weight too facilitate delivering their weapons. Imho stealth bombers are only good for scaring someone not much else.
Naal Morno	Posted - 2005.03.26 02:07:00 - [113] Edited by: Naal Morno on 26/03/2005 02:07:44 Can I have your stuff? (to the 2 posts above dude) Your Heavy Neutron Blaster II perfectly strikes Serpentis Chief Sentinel, wrecking for 660.4 damage.
Nafri	Posted - 2005.03.26 12:55:00 - [114] Originally by: Maya Rkell Not from 50+ km. without speed bonus on missles you are not very usefull from 50km + your tacklers would have killed that ship before you even hit Wanna fly with me?
Magunus	Posted - 2005.03.26 16:48:00 - [115] Originally by: Nafri Originally by: Maya Rkell Not from 50+ km. without speed bonus on missles you are not very usefull from 50km + your tacklers would have killed that ship before you even hit Well, true, but that's comparing a single bomber against a group. Now if we presume two groups, both being comprised of elite frigs, cruisers and battleships, there's more of a point. Do the interceptors tackle, or kill the bombers? Interceptors also have to worry about assault frigs. If they go for the you (in the bomber) your buddy in the battleship is free and clear. Using the caldari bomber, with long range targeting 4, you'd be able to lock at around 84 km. Presuming an enemy interceptor has a MWD fitted, he'd be able to go, what? 4km per second? That'd mean he'd take about 30 seconds to get to you, after adding in the time it takes to notice you and then to alter course and accelerate. That's enough time for the bomber to get off 1 salvo, and then to recloak if he's lucky. It'd be really tight, though. Could go either way. That just adds to the fun. :P I'd say that's fair. If the bad guy is coming straight for you, your own interceptors can either catch him if they're fast enough, or leave it up to assault frigs or evem cruisers since that interceptor's transversal will be horrible. If those stealth modules aren't vaporware, they'd also help bombers quite a bit against larger ships at longer ranges. Given their cloaked speed bonuses, I'd be far more likely to fit a stealth mod than an afterburner, since I'd be doing most of my moving around cloaked. It's not the end-all, be-all of ships, granted, but it's pretty decent. Especially if you have 2 or 3 of them in a mixed group with some other bigger ships. --- In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move. -- Douglas Adams, 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe'
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.26 18:24:00 - [116] Erm, cruise missiles are not supposed to be good on frigs... But the bombers don't do enough damage to justify their training or cost. They NEED to use torpedos. And the caldari one NEEDS to have one of its launchers ripped away before its released. Or, the other ones need an extra launcher. Caldari shouldn't have more missile slots. They can always get some velocity bonus or something, to make them distinct. Otherwise the caldari one will be the only one worth using... 50% more damage and no drawback to this is certainly not a way to make the other ones worth training for. The gallente one in particular is a bit sad. Its only got two lowslots for ballistic controls, which you'll need if you want to even compare to the caldari one.
The Enslaver	Posted - 2005.03.26 18:54:00 - [117] Ouch, agreeing with Selim. Has to be torps... They need a special launcher with same PG/CPU reqs as standard launchers that can fit a few torps with a 10 second ish RoF to make them useful. Cruise missiles don't have the damage required, and they will be taken out by a single defender. You fire at something from 50km, and it has enough time to load defenders and fire enough off to counter the cruise missiles. Hence, if cruise missiles must be used - do both of these: Give a 300% boost to missile HP's, so it takes three defenders each - and increase the damage bonus to 10%. -------- FireFoxx80: If you think you can do a better job, go find yourself a datacentre to host a box, get a copy of Visual Studio, and STFU.
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2005.03.26 19:27:00 - [118] Psst, you don't have the reqs to fit 3 launchers, Selim. So heh. And I can see a LOT of uses for these ships as-is. Stop whining :/ "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Atandros	Posted - 2005.03.26 19:40:00 - [119] Originally by: The Enslaver Cruise missiles don't have the damage required, and they will be taken out by a single defender. You fire at something from 50km, and it has enough time to load defenders and fire enough off to counter the cruise missiles. But, er...their whole point is to get into a good position, and then fire (else why the extra speed when cloaked boost?)
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.26 19:41:00 - [120] Originally by: Atandros But, er...their whole point is to get into a good position, and then fire (else why the extra speed when cloaked boost?) Because otherwise they would be even more useless then they are as is? /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
Tar Magen	Posted - 2005.03.26 19:46:00 - [121] A key question here is: Is there anything these bombers can do that a cloak-fitted Caracal can't do as well or better? The Caracal will cost less. The Caracal can be insured for its full value. The Caracal has stronger defenses and might even last long enough to get off another volley! Aut viam inveniam aut faciam.
The Enslaver	Posted - 2005.03.26 19:57:00 - [122] Originally by: Atandros Originally by: The Enslaver Cruise missiles don't have the damage required, and they will be taken out by a single defender. You fire at something from 50km, and it has enough time to load defenders and fire enough off to counter the cruise missiles. But, er...their whole point is to get into a good position, and then fire (else why the extra speed when cloaked boost?) And at closer range you are going to die a lot quicker. These things can't kill another frigate - one volley will put a ceptor into structure, but considering the fact you have to wait another 20s more to fire again - you are dead before that. -------- FireFoxx80: If you think you can do a better job, go find yourself a datacentre to host a box, get a copy of Visual Studio, and STFU.
Selim	Posted - 2005.03.26 20:03:00 - [123] Edited by: Selim on 26/03/2005 20:06:05 Originally by: Maya Rkell Psst, you don't have the reqs to fit 3 launchers, Selim. So heh. And I can see a LOT of uses for these ships as-is. Stop whining :/ You only need a micro aux in the lows... essentially the cruise launchers are as easy to fit on the caldari one as a 280mm howitzer. 13 powergrid with the skills, 17 on the others, so only slightly more powergrid for three than used for two on the others.
silent call	Posted - 2005.03.26 21:51:00 - [124] Why does it have to bee launchers? Replace the launchers with smart bombs. Sneak up to the victim, so close that you will decloak, and activate your large smart bombs. This will probably not work, but I don't think this whole thing with stealth bombes will work any way.
Maya Rkell	Posted - 2005.03.26 23:20:00 - [125] Edited by: Maya Rkell on 26/03/2005 23:25:44 Originally by: Selim Originally by: Maya Rkell Not from 50+ km. At 50km, battleships will hit you with their guns, and 50km is nothing for a taranis. Not unless you screw up, and over 10 seconds. Just because you can't see their use dosn't mean I can't. Tbh drop the stealth gimmick and make them interceptor-priced. If anything. "As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade"
Atandros	Posted - 2005.03.26 23:59:00 - [126] Originally by: The Enslaver Originally by: Atandros Originally by: The Enslaver Cruise missiles don't have the damage required, and they will be taken out by a single defender. You fire at something from 50km, and it has enough time to load defenders and fire enough off to counter the cruise missiles. But, er...their whole point is to get into a good position, and then fire (else why the extra speed when cloaked boost?) And at closer range you are going to die a lot quicker. These things can't kill another frigate - one volley will put a ceptor into structure, but considering the fact you have to wait another 20s more to fire again - you are dead before that. No, those 2 turret slots will be adequate for ripping out that last bit of structure.
Sorja	Posted - 2005.03.27 01:13:00 - [127] I read somewhere that some changes to missiles will be in next patch. I can't remember where though, so I might be wrong. But I wouldn't be surprized if the so long awaited 'missile overhaul' was stealth implemented in next patch, since I don't see it scheduled for later. Anyways, cruise launchers are amongst the most horrible weapons in the game. They will probably be changed, like assault launchers. It's a bit early to complain about: a) ships that are not ingame yet b) weapons that will be changed. It is quite normal the Caldari get the most launcher count, since they are designed for missiles. If not, please give Caldari a long range gunship. No ? So don't complain about the Kestrel tech II having the upper hand firepower wise. This new concept is very interesting because it will open new tactics. It will take some time before the first bombers hit the market (if CCP sticks with his silly lottery system) and some time before people figure how to put those ships to good use. Whining now is a bit pointless, isn't it ?
Icarus Thorne	Posted - 2005.03.27 02:33:00 - [128] Edited by: Icarus Thorne on 27/03/2005 02:34:07 Whining? People are getting ridiculously quick to slap that label on everything. Someone who states an opinion that is contrary to your own is not whining. Even someone who complains isn't necessarily whining: "Whining: to complain or protest in a childish fashion". A complaint registered once and in a non-emotional way is not being made in a childish fashion. Anyhow, to continue the discussion about the bombers, the issue isn't that the Manticore has an extra missile slot. It's that it has 50% more firepower than its supposed peers. A huge disparity. 10%? Fine. 25%? Hmm, well, it can be lived with. 50%? Just too much. I predict that the other bombers will be ignored if it's allowed to stand.
Alyth	Posted - 2005.03.27 04:12:00 - [129] Erm why are people so hung up on cloaks and cruise missiles? Doesn't the ship bonus reduce the CPU need of mods requiring the Advanced Gunnery skill? Couldn't stealth mean small signature radius akin to interceptors? Or maybe not. Whutever.
Nomen Nescio	Posted - 2005.03.27 04:16:00 - [130] Originally by: Sorja It is quite normal the Caldari get the most launcher count, since they are designed for missiles. If not, please give Caldari a long range gunship. No ? So don't complain about .. Dont trouble trouble here, because if caldari gets a long range gunship... lol... Im all in, lets make a raven a rail platform. How about that
Carmen Priano	Posted - 2005.03.27 04:55:00 - [131] Icarus; the one missile slot sacrifices a turret hardpoint. Given the DPS of cruise launchers, it about events out there -- the issue, instead, is range or ammo useage. Alyth; if you check the various pictures (I believe 3 on page 5 of the thread, 1 on page 2 or so?), the Minmatar has an incomplete description listing the old CPU modifier -- but the new bios for the Amarr, Gallente and Caldari stealth bombers indicate that these ships receive a bonus to cruise missile launcher powergrid (allowing them to fit what are otherwise BS modules) and speed while cloaked, allowing them to cruise faster than normal cov ops or cloaked ships would.
Xeris	Posted - 2005.03.27 05:51:00 - [132] Edited by: Xeris on 27/03/2005 05:54:54 As of right now, Stealth Bombers dont get the CPU reduction bonus for Covert Ops Cloak, which means they have to fit improved cloak II's. This means... a.) They probably wont be faster than a speed fitted covert ops, the 25% speed bonus per level will be after the -75% velocity penalty of turning on the improved cloak II. My math says at lvl 5, your cloaked speed will be 156% that of standard cruising speed, but I'm probably wrong. b.) However, you wont be able to warp when cloaked, so edge goes to covert ops c.) 12 seconds of sensor recalibration after uncloaking before you can target anything (10 seconds if you're crazy and have cloaking lvl 5) Aside from that cruise launchers are gimp; should be switched to siege launcher, or a special module that can only load torps. I really think there should be a sensor recalibration bonus somewhere along the line, otherwise they arn't all that practical. Change the missle damge bonus to a 10% recalibration bonus (racial missile damage is lame anyway). Too lazy to get my sig changed
tenp1	Posted - 2005.03.27 07:16:00 - [133] Don't know if anyone else mentioned this (I only scanned through quickly) but doesn't it seem a bit odd that the non missile corps are the ones that are supposed to be making these ships. It explains the worse than T1 missile slots but not why the missile specialist (or at least the ones that tend to fit more of them) corps are not making them. Could it be that CCP have dedicated elite missile frigs planned as well that will be made by Khanid Innovations, Kaalakiota, Roden Shipyards and whoever the hell made the breacher. To me it seems that these "Stealth Bombers" are infact the black ops ships that we were promised a long time ago as the second set of covert ops ships. It would explain things a lot better, then u can see that they are the combat variant (missiles being better as u don't need to stay uncloaked for them to hit unlike turrets) with the current covert ops being the scout variant. In terms of damage, these ships would be the poster child for team play. Alone they may be weak but in groups of them they will do major damage. Besides, a pack of these sneaky fekers uncloaking on top you would be enough to make most pilots crap themselves. Also I do think the covert ops frigs will stay in use, infact I would say they will be of more use with the scan probe launcher bonus.
Pottsey	Posted - 2005.03.27 09:48:00 - [134] öDoesn't the ship bonus reduce the CPU need of mods requiring the Advanced Gunnery skill?ö ThatÆs no longer listed on the ship. öCouldn't stealth mean small signature radius akin to interceptors?ö ôErm why are people so hung up on cloaks and cruise missiles?ö It could but the ship says it moves faster cloaked then uncloaked which means the ship can cloak. As itÆs listed as a covert op ship and mentions cloak we all assume stealth means cloak. There are place holders for a stealth module that effects signature radius. _________________________________________________ Gallente defensive innovation comes from unexpected source.
Nero Scuro	Posted - 2005.03.27 11:04:00 - [135] Just thinking through some possible tactics here... Hmm, wondering if with FoF cruise missiles you could just skip the calibration time altogether. Get some mates in a gank squad, camp a gank in your bombers and wait for something to pass through, uncloak, INSTANTLY fire a crap-load of FoF cruise at whatever's there. Beauty is, you can instantly cloak again if it goes badly. Or that's the plan, anyway. Can't be bothered to go check if you can only re-cloak after sensor reclaibration time runs out (don't use cloaks on anything other than indys, personally). Of course, as someone has pointed out, a Caracal can do this just as good. I'm trying to think of what that speed bonus when cloaked could be FOR. CCP don't just add ships without giving them a role. Every T2 ship introduced has a specific role (even if it doesn't do it very well). But what could a cruise missile-toting, fast-while-cloaked frig DO that's all that special? Asking them to change the bombers without even knowing what it's supposed to do is pointless. CCP have probably thought these things through. If it was supposed to be a big damage dealer, it'd have torps. It doesn't, so it isn't. It can't warp while cloaked, so it isn't a mobile warp in point. It doesn't do enough damage to frighten anything other than a frig. It doesn't have the shield/armor OR res to be a tank. I'm GUESSING it's supposed to be an inty counter (yeah, ANOTHER one). You get into close range cloaked (so it doesn't see you and flip out and start going at 4k around you), you uncloak and smash it with FoF cruise and destroy it before it even knows what's happening. Other than that, it doesn't DO anything. That I can see anyway... ---------------- Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun!
Ithildin	Posted - 2005.03.27 11:34:00 - [136] Originally by: Nero Scuro Just thinking through some possible tactics here... Hmm, wondering if with FoF cruise missiles you could just skip the calibration time altogether. Get some mates in a gank squad, camp a gank in your bombers and wait for something to pass through, uncloak, INSTANTLY fire a crap-load of FoF cruise at whatever's there. Beauty is, you can instantly cloak again if it goes badly. FoF need the target to agress you. As in shoot at you, so you cannot instantly surprise him. -- If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please.
4 LOM	Posted - 2005.03.27 12:10:00 - [137] Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: Nero Scuro Just thinking through some possible tactics here... Hmm, wondering if with FoF cruise missiles you could just skip the calibration time altogether. Get some mates in a gank squad, camp a gank in your bombers and wait for something to pass through, uncloak, INSTANTLY fire a crap-load of FoF cruise at whatever's there. Beauty is, you can instantly cloak again if it goes badly. FoF need the target to agress you. As in shoot at you, so you cannot instantly surprise him. that is correct, you cant just unclock and fire F.O.F's maybe you people should actually try using an FOF before posting silly ideas? anyways getting back to the bomber idea, i think there damage is to low for what they do, they look very 'killable' they should do alot of damage, this will mean in a fleet battle you will need to have inty's and assault frigs thats sole role is to watch out for these things unclocking near bs's so the assaults and inty's can kill them before they pwn a bs (may need 3-4 to wack a bs). they really need a damge upgrade, citadel torps even? (maybe thats just my wet dream). and all you people saying the caldari one is way better cause it has 3x missiles slots, well look at the other stats, the other ones lock faster move faster have small sig radios's and all kinds of other better stats, sure the the extra slot might make them slightly better but it comes at a cost.
Nero Scuro	Posted - 2005.03.27 12:53:00 - [138] Edited by: Nero Scuro on 27/03/2005 13:04:23 Edited by: Nero Scuro on 27/03/2005 12:57:29 Originally by: 4 LOM Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: Nero Scuro Just thinking through some possible tactics here... Hmm, wondering if with FoF cruise missiles you could just skip the calibration time altogether. Get some mates in a gank squad, camp a gank in your bombers and wait for something to pass through, uncloak, INSTANTLY fire a crap-load of FoF cruise at whatever's there. Beauty is, you can instantly cloak again if it goes badly. FoF need the target to agress you. As in shoot at you, so you cannot instantly surprise him. that is correct, you cant just unclock and fire F.O.F's maybe you people should actually try using an FOF before posting silly ideas? anyways getting back to the bomber idea, i think there damage is to low for what they do, they look very 'killable' they should do alot of damage, this will mean in a fleet battle you will need to have inty's and assault frigs thats sole role is to watch out for these things unclocking near bs's so the assaults and inty's can kill them before they pwn a bs (may need 3-4 to wack a bs). they really need a damge upgrade, citadel torps even? (maybe thats just my wet dream). and all you people saying the caldari one is way better cause it has 3x missiles slots, well look at the other stats, the other ones lock faster move faster have small sig radios's and all kinds of other better stats, sure the the extra slot might make them slightly better but it comes at a cost. I've used plenty of FoF, but only after I've been jammed (and therefore aggroed. Well duh...). Thought they would work against war targets though, but... meh... shrugs I found this comment interesting though... Quote: i think there damage is to low for what they do And what, exactly, do they do? It doesn't SAY anywhere what they do. They aren't even out yet. People are assuming they're anti-BS. Why would CCP release a ship that is equipped with anti-frig weapons if it's supposed to be anti-BS? Bombers are too contradictory for my likes. They have anti-frig weapons, but use cloaks, so they don't have the locking time to get a frig. Even worse, they can't even tank a frig. It'd fry it before it could even get a lock. Hmm... EDIT - gah, deleted my first edit adding my second edit. REFRESH, Nero! gah, and I forget what I said anyway. Something about cruise missile being anti-frig, but maybe they're going to be made anti-BS with the missile overhaul. Then why release a missile-centric frig BEFORE the missile overhaul? Unless the missile overhaul is being added next patch! Woo! I remember what I said! ANOTHER EDIT - And 3 citadel torps would outdamage a Raven. So, no. =P ---------------- Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun!
Elve Sorrow	Posted - 2005.03.27 12:56:00 - [139] Exactly how are Cruise missiles anti-frigate weapons again? /Elve New Video out! Watch me!
Nero Scuro	Posted - 2005.03.27 13:05:00 - [140] Edited by: Nero Scuro on 27/03/2005 13:07:48 Originally by: Elve Sorrow Exactly how are Cruise missiles anti-frigate weapons again? Because they: * Pwnzor frigs. * Don't pwnzor BS. Pretty obvious, really. EDIT - And yeah, they SHOULDN'T be anti-frig. They're imbalanced (no BS weapon should hit an un-webbed frig). Thus the missile overhaul. =P ---------------- Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun!
4 LOM	Posted - 2005.03.27 13:08:00 - [141] Originally by: Nero Scuro Edited by: Nero Scuro on 27/03/2005 12:57:29 Originally by: 4 LOM Originally by: Ithildin Originally by: Nero Scuro Just thinking through some possible tactics here... Hmm, wondering if with FoF cruise missiles you could just skip the calibration time altogether. Get some mates in a gank squad, camp a gank in your bombers and wait for something to pass through, uncloak, INSTANTLY fire a crap-load of FoF cruise at whatever's there. Beauty is, you can instantly cloak again if it goes badly. FoF need the target to agress you. As in shoot at you, so you cannot instantly surprise him. that is correct, you cant just unclock and fire F.O.F's maybe you people should actually try using an FOF before posting silly ideas? anyways getting back to the bomber idea, i think there damage is to low for what they do, they look very 'killable' they should do alot of damage, this will mean in a fleet battle you will need to have inty's and assault frigs thats sole role is to watch out for these things unclocking near bs's so the assaults and inty's can kill them before they pwn a bs (may need 3-4 to wack a bs). they really need a damge upgrade, citadel torps even? (maybe thats just my wet dream). and all you people saying the caldari one is way better cause it has 3x missiles slots, well look at the other stats, the other ones lock faster move faster have small sig radios's and all kinds of other better stats, sure the the extra slot might make them slightly better but it comes at a cost. I've used plenty of FoF, but only after I've been jammed (and therefore aggroed. Well duh...). Thought they would work against war targets though, but... meh... shrugs I found this comment interesting though... Quote: i think there damage is to low for what they do And what, exactly, do they do? It doesn't SAY anywhere what they do. They aren't even out yet. People are assuming they're anti-BS. Why would CCP release a ship that is equipped with anti-frig weapons if it's supposed to be anti-BS? Bombers are too contradictory for my likes. They have anti-frig weapons, but use cloaks, so they don't have the locking time to get a frig. Even worse, they can't even tank a frig. It'd fry it before it could even get a lock. Hmm... ANOTHER EDIT - And 3 citadel torps would outdamage a Raven. So, no. =P YES that is my point outdamage a raven fine, they should be a real threat to bs's in my opinion but very weak. as you said they are very easy to kill so to make them a threat they have to do alot of damage. so what if it can outdamage a raven, a raven would kill it in less then a volly of cruises or torps, its got to do that kind of insane damage to be a real threat to anything. maybe citadel torps are to much, but at least give em torps with a nice damage bonus. if they are going to be used for killing bs's the way they are set up now is no good and needs to be changed before they are ingame. And why on earth would you think they are anti frig? it makes no scense on so many levels, assault frigs and destoryers are not enough for you?
Nafri	Posted - 2005.03.27 13:13:00 - [142] well with the actual missle systen cruise missle launchers are a joke of a BS sized gun I think a crow would do more damage then this bombers, mhh yeah definitly would do more da mage then this bombers Wanna fly with me?
Nero Scuro	Posted - 2005.03.27 14:55:00 - [143] 4LOM, you're basing the setup around what you're expecting it to do, I'm basing what I expect it to do around the setup. Where does it say it'll be anti-BS? Until a week ago, we didn't know it even existed. All I'm saying is, if the devs have made it hold cruise missiles, it's anti-frig (unless they change missiles before/during it is released). ---------------- Haha, stupid monkey! Now I'VE got the Oscar! Enjoy your worthless gun!
Icarus Thorne	Posted - 2005.03.27 21:35:00 - [144] If you sneak within 3000m of a foe, decloak and activate a small smartbomb, will that start the foe autotargeting you? If so, you could then launch your FoFs well within the cloak-induced dead time. If two Manticores do this, dead interceptor.
Vicker Lahn'se	Posted - 2005.03.27 21:41:00 - [145] Originally by: Icarus Thorne If you sneak within 3000m of a foe, decloak and activate a small smartbomb, will that start the foe autotargeting you? If so, you could then launch your FoFs well within the cloak-induced dead time. If two Manticores do this, dead interceptor. Locking someone isn't an act of aggression.
Neon Genesis	Posted - 2005.03.27 22:01:00 - [146] Easily the stupidest thing ive ever seen. Release some useful ******* ship classes. Covert ops bombers = retarded and role-less. __ There, i just contributed nothing to your thread
Vicker Lahn'se	Posted - 2005.03.28 19:59:00 - [147] Well, even if they are in some respects crappy, I intend to get one. New stuff is always fun, even if it just has fancy toys instead of useful tools.
ALTNAME	Posted - 2005.03.28 20:02:00 - [148] Nope nothing will hit frigates after the changes Interceptors are the only ship type which require a specific device to hit, a device that operates well under the optimal range of such frigates.
Damocles Ician	Posted - 2005.03.29 14:35:00 - [149] Do people prefer to use cruise missiles rather than torpedoes in these things? -------------
Ranger 1	Posted - 2005.03.29 14:53:00 - [150] Originally by: ALTNAME Nope nothing will hit frigates after the changes Interceptors are the only ship type which require a specific device to hit, a device that operates well under the optimal range of such frigates. It's incredibly easy to kill aggresive Interceptors. You just have to know how. Now if they are kitted out and determined to run... thats another story. Kill the enemy, and break their toys.
Vigilant	Posted - 2005.03.29 14:55:00 - [151] Originally by: Damocles Ician Do people prefer to use cruise missiles rather than torpedoes in these things? Seems Cruise Launchers only can be fitted.....So, torps maybe out of
Damocles Ician	Posted - 2005.03.29 15:03:00 - [152] seige launchers allow torps to be loaded - it's listed in as one of their "chargegroups" -------------
Garramon	Posted - 2005.03.29 15:12:00 - [153] Originally by: Damocles Ician seige launchers allow torps to be loaded - it's listed in as one of their "chargegroups" Thats nice....but it says you can only fit CRUISE launchers on them, NOT seige. ------------------------------------------------
Damocles Ician	Posted - 2005.03.29 15:16:00 - [154] ha! My memory sucks :P Please forgive me! I was half thinking everyone in the thread couldn't have missed it, and obviously they missed what was in my imagination :) -------------
Alex Harumichi	Posted - 2005.03.29 15:24:00 - [155] Originally by: tenp1 Don't know if anyone else mentioned this (I only scanned through quickly) but doesn't it seem a bit odd that the non missile corps are the ones that are supposed to be making these ships. It explains the worse than T1 missile slots but not why the missile specialist (or at least the ones that tend to fit more of them) corps are not making them. Could it be that CCP have dedicated elite missile frigs planned as well that will be made by Khanid Innovations, Kaalakiota, Roden Shipyards and whoever the hell made the breacher. Yeah. Never mind the specs on these ships.. the Tristan variant needs to be by Roden and needs to be red. Red, I tell you!

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.