| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Artegg
   |
Posted - 2005.04.20 17:45:00 -
[1]
I got this ship last early this morning \o/ one of the first in game.
I got in to it and went to the fitting screen. First 2 things i put on it where the launchers . I looked at the remining powergrid and i have a massive 8.5 left .
So if i want to fill all the slots on this ship i need to use both lows for MAPC's. This was not a issue intill i undocked to see how fast i was when cloaked. With the cloak active i get a massive 40m/s difference WHOOOO jk. Ok so now hit cloak and hide, pretend there is a bad guy decloak pretend to lock and shoot, now hide. ohhhh no i cant i have to wait 20 secs.
The one good thing about these ships is the targeting range i get 71km from my ship, this sounds good intill you consider it takes a ceptor 23 sec to cover 70kms doing 3km/s, it takes you 30secs to recloak.
Cloaked if i want to get my self in to a tatical place lets say 40km away from me its going to take 125secs
The rof is 21 secs with standard launchers and 16 secs with arbs.
Talking to my corp m8 on ts we where chatting about the use of these things, he said think of 6 of these with 2 ceptors cloaked at a gate and a bs jumps in, to which i replied i would rather have 6 bs there.
1.These ships imo need to be able to fit 3 siege launchers min.
2.They need to be faster.
3.The need to use covert cloaks
4.They sure as hell need powergrid increase
on a plus side they look shiney
|
Neon Genesis
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 18:11:00 -
[2]
I see them as a novelty and a whim, my conviction not to get one has been heightened. What is the point of them 
__
There, i just contributed nothing to your thread
|
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 18:34:00 -
[3]
instead fitting 3 sieges, they should increase the meds and lows, give them a bonus to the targeting delay when uncloaked, and the ability of shooting a single citadel torp.
...but that's just me saying it thou.
-------------------
 Quote:
Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
|
Hakera
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 18:41:00 -
[4]
1. change for a rof bonus instead
2. decrease the mass slightly to make them equivalent to af speeds if not slighty faster
3. no chance in hell - it would make coverts defunct
4. aye
I found this out after i bought and tested a hound myself and came to the conclusion that it aint worth the isk. The thing is far too fragile and dps too low to be worth while at current prices.
a pack of 5 stealth bombers vs 5 inty's. I wonder who would win :)
Dumbledore - Eve-I.com |
Alberta
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 18:42:00 -
[5]
Give them a chance. I thought like that to start with at first too. I'm starting to see the possible benefits (very limited still) of them now though. I think they will fit a niche, especially with faster probe scanning and less detailed map information.
I need to get myself into one first to make sure ofc though.
My Thoughts on Game Balance |
Alberta
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 18:44:00 -
[6]
Edited by: Alberta on 20/04/2005 18:45:29
Edited by: Alberta on 20/04/2005 18:44:40
Originally by: Hakera
The thing is far too fragile and dps too low to be worth while at current prices.
Agreed.
Originally by: Hakera
a pack of 5 stealth bombers vs 5 inty's. I wonder who would win :)
Traditionally bombers have been used to hit targets bigger (and slower) than themselves. 
Edit: damn stupid huge gaps underneath quotes.
My Thoughts on Game Balance |
Artegg
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 18:45:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Hakera
3. no chance in hell - it would make coverts defunct
1.Not at all as covert ships get a bonus to warp speed and these things warp at 3au
2.covert opps are awsome for scanning
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 18:51:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Selim on 20/04/2005 18:53:30
Originally by: Grimpak
instead fitting 3 sieges, they should increase the meds and lows, give them a bonus to the targeting delay when uncloaked, and the ability of shooting a single citadel torp.
...but that's just me saying it thou.
I agree, this is what ive been saying on other threads, they need to do craploads of damage per salvo so they are lethal vs bs, but they need to be easy targets against frigs destroyers and cruisers. And yes, the targetting delay and scan res penalty need to go, on these things.
Shouldn't be able to warp cloaked though. And they should have very small cargo (enough for 3 spare citadel torps. And the launcher (a specially created one) should hold just one with a rate of fire of 10 seconds. It would need to reload every firing time though so it would really be every 20 seconds.
|
Zyrla Bladestorm
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 20:01:00 -
[9]
the citadel torp idea sounds good to me, definetely much more of a bomber then.
Personally, I think they should have invented a Combat Ops cloak or somesuch for it, give it :
cannot warp while cloaked (preserves covert ops role)
no speed penalty when cloaked (swap the ships cloak speed bonus to something more usefull)
no recalibration or scan res penalty, or just a very small one like 3-5 seconds (to prevent launching the citadel 2.1k away from someone with no warning whatsoever on a small target, missile overhaul might solve that problem anyhow though)
.
-----
Apologys for any rambling that may have just occurred.
|
SageOfMystery
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 20:22:00 -
[10]
i thihnk a faster ROF being able to move at least 1km well cloaked and More PG and CPU should fix this ship. i would like to see them keep the covert cloak to the covert ops so you would use the bomber as Drop out of warp, Cloak move Fast Uncloak have a Low Recalibration time ( 3 to 6 at most ) and fire.
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 20:43:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Zyrla Bladestorm
the citadel torp idea sounds good to me, definetely much more of a bomber then.
Personally, I think they should have invented a Combat Ops cloak or somesuch for it, give it :
cannot warp while cloaked (preserves covert ops role)
no speed penalty when cloaked (swap the ships cloak speed bonus to something more usefull)
no recalibration or scan res penalty, or just a very small one like 3-5 seconds (to prevent launching the citadel 2.1k away from someone with no warning whatsoever on a small target, missile overhaul might solve that problem anyhow though)
I really like that idea.
Special cloak with no speed penalty, or sensor recal penalty, but not being able to warp while cloaked seems a good plan.
Although I must disagree with an increase in ROF, I'd much rather have these things do immense single-salvo damage. A citadel launcher with 10 second ROF but only room for one torpedo would give, with max skills, a damage of 2810 on a bomber. With a rate of fire of 7.5 seconds, but a reload time of 10 seconds.
This would give these things a total damage per second of 160, comparable to a current taranis. The benefit? The very high one-hit damage, the fact that these things could use cloaks very good. Disadvantage? Bombers are slow, vulnerable to anything smaller than a battlecruiser, and tricky to use.
|
Sangxianc
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 20:45:00 -
[12]
Can you post screenshots of the Nemesis, please?
-
Any man's death diminishes me, as I am involved in mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls;
It tolls for thee. |
Miner's Bane
|
Posted - 2005.04.20 20:48:00 -
[13]
As awe-inspiringly useful as the small hybrid damage bonus is on the nemesis, it needs to be changed out for a 10%/level sensor recalibration time bonus.
Oh, and all the bombers need 3 missile bays and a bit more powergrid.
Until the missile rebalance is done, these ships will suck though, because if they dont then they'll be the be-all, end-all of frigate combat. They shouldnt have been introduced at all until the missile rebalance, but CCP needed something shiny to distract people, so here they are.
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
ews01
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 10:34:00 -
[14]
Edited by: ews01 on 21/04/2005 10:51:09
So let me get this thing str8....
You love frigs, but you don't like BS...
You were dancing around when you found frigs with BS weapons (old good kessie with cruise missiles yadda yadda).
When you get it, its not good enough for you and you lot want POS/Dreaddie size launchers on a frig.
Sorry chaps, but listen to what you say... You don't want a frig with a launcher on... you want a launcher with a frig on.
A frig is a frig, even though what you ask for goes beyond the elite frig characterization to uber-pwnage-frig this is plain stupid. 3 cruises are good enough to wtfpwn any mining/weak ship in low sec space in a single volley (they are not exactly missile runners those). What next? A frig that can cloak, go to warp lvl speed with AB, and kill BSs with a single volley?
Am I the only one who finds this illogical? I know and appreciate and understand you like frigs and all, and that you are uber excited with those new toys and all, but for the love of god chaps, it is still a frig under those launchers and elite frig specs there...
Never seen a fishing boat with a tactical tomahawk missile launcher on... It bloody weights more than the ship itself.
Edit: Not to mention the fact that a BS-size launcher on a frig looks a bit off, it must follow the laws of physics... Action/reaction. So no problem with you being able to have that as long as you accept the fact that when you fire a citadel torp you'll warp 4 solarsystems back from the kick :-P
Would expect to see quotes like:
"wtf... what am I doing in 0.0?"
or
clickety-click evemail: "If you still alive wait.. I'll come back and show you.. 3 jumps to go" |
Lefia
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:07:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Lefia on 21/04/2005 11:15:40
Edited by: Lefia on 21/04/2005 11:12:19
Originally by: ews01
Edit: Not to mention the fact that a BS-size launcher on a frig looks a bit off, it must follow the laws of physics... Action/reaction. So no problem with you being able to have that as long as you accept the fact that when you fire a citadel torp you'll warp 4 solarsystems back from the kick :-P
Actually, as most bombers, the payload would most logically be dropped out of the bottom of the ship, with propultion activating after initial deployment, thus creating no kick to the ship. Also, some missles are fired from a hollow tube with an exhaust in the rear, which greatly reduces kick. Additionally, missles on current day jet fighters are under-wing mounted, and do not have an encapsulation which would generate kick. Your statement also assumes that the propultion on a missle would be greatly in excess of that of the ship,(momentum is conserved, and your average frigate is far more massive than even a citadel torp).
Originally by: hired goon
------------------------------------------------
I agree with every point and counter point that has been brought up in this and every other argument ever had.
--------- |
Helmut Rul
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:10:00 -
[16]
Edited by: Helmut Rul on 21/04/2005 11:14:04
Edited by: Helmut Rul on 21/04/2005 11:11:58
ews01 remember that we are not piloting fishing boats but frigates and frigates are quite often armed with heavy anti-ship missiles.
I belive the reason people are wanting the ability to mount a citadel torpedo launcher is not because they want a ship that carries weaponry larger than their ships, But rather that they and me myself for that matter feels that this would allow the bomber to be actually usefull due to the high damage from the citadel torpedo while still representing a minimal threath to frigates and cruisers (remember citadel torpedos move at a paltry 500m/s)
As for the frigate vs battleship balance it is important to remember that the entire point of the bomber is to present a threat to larger ships, in other words its very purpose is to attack far larger ships and at least have some hope of succeding after all we have many other ships that are far more capable in engaging cruisers and frigates such as assault ships, interceptors and destroyers.
We do not need another class of ships who excel in destroying other frigates as that part of the tactical setup is already covered.
That being said i do belive that the bombers will stay as they are until after the missile fix (and i personally do not understand why they released them now if the fix is only a month or so from release).
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:16:00 -
[17]
Originally by: ews01
A frig is a frig, even though what you ask for goes beyond the elite frig characterization to uber-pwnage-frig this is plain stupid. 3 cruises are good enough to wtfpwn any mining/weak ship in low sec space in a single volley.
Except that you have to hope that the indy or mining barge pilot is a complete moron and waits around for the 20 seconds it takes you to lock them, plus missiles flight time.
And I can kill any mining/weak ship with a normal kestrel ffs. Let alone an interceptor.
The cloaking bonus is just an absolute joke. Fit a 10 mil module and it allows you to go slightly faster while cloaked.
--------------------------------------------------
|
ews01
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:24:00 -
[18]
Edited by: ews01 on 21/04/2005 11:25:54
I simply exagerated on the size for two reasons:
a) To give it a humorous side, much needed after all those stupid flames in the forums and
b) I honestly believe its illogical to ask for a frig (ok, they are not fishing boat sized, but they are small) to be able to carry such weapons. You don't expect a tank to have a nuclear missile silo on it, do you?
I can appreciate what you say about making it deal more dmg but this is what they invented the word "unbalanced" for. Whether you like it or not its a frig. It will be pretty much able to kill anything except a BS in one volley (depends on fitting, since we are talking about weakly tanked ships in pvp due to EW modules, etc).
Whether it moves at 500m/sec or not doesn't really matter.. you can uncloak right next to it, take your time to calibrate sensors and give it a shot before a BS or BC can lock you with the right skills. Instant death for more ships. What can lock you fast enough doesn't have the firepower to kill you before you can launch your torp and all the rest are mining ships that won't have time to warp till you fire at them. It comes down to that...
Then we get 2-3-4 gankers in one of those death dealing babies, and wait for anything to pass through a gate. Doesn't matter what since with 3-4 citadels its down.
I really think this is unbalanced and will only enforce the ganking "techniques" that I do not consider to be pvp at the first place. Being 100% safe while being absolutely sure you'll kill any single ship that will pass through you, is simply... well... unbalanced.
That's all I'm saying m8  <--- this is my troubled face for future reference
Edit: removed copy/pasted lined which was there by mistake |
Alhanna
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:28:00 -
[19]
My experience with the Manticore was short. I could fit 3 Cruise launchers and a cloak fine but not alot else. I was looking to try and fit a warp drive for speed but failed due to power. I could also not fit anything else on the high slots. All in all the stealth bomber is a nice idea but needs to be looked at. As it is now I cannot see many people using them. They do not have enough fire power to take on a Battleship or Battlecruiser and are too slow to take on an Interceptor. This puts it at Cruiser/Frigate attacks only or helping out in larger fights.
The changes needed are slight to make this a better choice of weapon. Slight but might cause alot of people saying no and that is being allowed to target while cloaked and only uncloak once you fire. This would allow the stealth bombers to get close to whatever they are going to strike without being seen until at least the missles are in space and on way. For me and maybe others this would make the stealth bomber a worthy ship.
|
Sigarni
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:32:00 -
[20]
Yes I think they should be able to launch Citadel Torps, cloak and decloak at will, warp whilst cloaked thus completely negating any use for Covert Ops ships, travel full speed whilst cloak and insta lock after decloaking.
Also add a bazillion hit points and more slots please
God you retards should get real. Launching Cruise missles from a Frigate not enough now ?? Frigs should win EVE I say ... w00t
|
Alhanna
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:38:00 -
[21]
Get out of the wrong side of the bed Sigarni?
|
Karoth Tyu
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:49:00 -
[22]
I don't see what the point of these ships are, when for not much more money you can slap a Protocloak on a Raven or Scorp and get a better result.
They're slow, they warp slow, they're weakly armored, their dps sucks, and they're much much much more expensive than they're actually worth. Their BPO should be buyable on the NPC market, in my opinion.
|
Sigarni
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:50:00 -
[23]
Pretty much , I just think its hilarious that in the space of about 6 posts people have said it should move faster when cloaked, lock quicker after cloaked, use Covert Ops cloak and also shoot Citadel torps ....wtf
Citadel torps from a ******* frig.
The stupidity some people display when trying to get their little toy to be the 'win EVE' button makes me sick, I just imagine TomB sitting back and openly mocking them
Do you honestly think a Frigate which can warp whilst cloaked, move up close to you at full speed and then uncloak and insta lock you and fire 3 Citadel torps at you is balanced.
ENGAGE BRAIN BEFORE POSTING FTW
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:53:00 -
[24]
Originally by: Sigarni
Pretty much , I just think its hilarious that in the space of about 6 posts people have said it should move faster when cloaked, lock quicker after cloaked, use Covert Ops cloak and also shoot Citadel torps ....wtf
Citadel torps from a ******* frig.
The stupidity some people display when trying to get their little toy to be the 'win EVE' button makes me sick, I just imagine TomB sitting back and openly mocking them
Do you honestly think a Frigate which can warp whilst cloaked, move up close to you at full speed and then uncloak and insta lock you and fire 3 Citadel torps at you is balanced.
ENGAGE BRAIN BEFORE POSTING FTW
Nobody suggested it gets all of those things. And when I personally suggested it uses citadel torps... I meant it only fires one, smartypants.
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 11:57:00 -
[25]
Originally by: ews01
Edited by: ews01 on 21/04/2005 11:25:54
I simply exagerated on the size for two reasons:
a) To give it a humorous side, much needed after all those stupid flames in the forums and
b) I honestly believe its illogical to ask for a frig (ok, they are not fishing boat sized, but they are small) to be able to carry such weapons. You don't expect a tank to have a nuclear missile silo on it, do you?
I can appreciate what you say about making it deal more dmg but this is what they invented the word "unbalanced" for. Whether you like it or not its a frig. It will be pretty much able to kill anything except a BS in one volley (depends on fitting, since we are talking about weakly tanked ships in pvp due to EW modules, etc).
Whether it moves at 500m/sec or not doesn't really matter.. you can uncloak right next to it, take your time to calibrate sensors and give it a shot before a BS or BC can lock you with the right skills. Instant death for more ships. What can lock you fast enough doesn't have the firepower to kill you before you can launch your torp and all the rest are mining ships that won't have time to warp till you fire at them. It comes down to that...
Then we get 2-3-4 gankers in one of those death dealing babies, and wait for anything to pass through a gate. Doesn't matter what since with 3-4 citadels its down.
I really think this is unbalanced and will only enforce the ganking "techniques" that I do not consider to be pvp at the first place. Being 100% safe while being absolutely sure you'll kill any single ship that will pass through you, is simply... well... unbalanced.
That's all I'm saying m8 <--- this is my troubled face for future reference
Edit: removed copy/pasted lined which was there by mistake
It is a BOMBER, it needs to be good at killing battleships because its going to suck at killing everything else. We have enough ships good at killing frigs already. Bombers being strong and awesome against battleships would encourage combined arms and teamwork.
|
ews01
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:00:00 -
[26]
They only said one citadel launcher. This doesn't make any difference though since it is still stupidly unbalanced. 4 of those at a gate and certain death to anything passing by. Like those gates ganked by 3-4 gangageddons but with stupidly insane DPS from 4 of em firing at the same time. After jump you'd find youself in 3% hull wondering wtf happened. I bet they'll laugh at it by having an ibis there to "lay the final blow" for the killmail.
As I said before I hate ganking and don't consider it to be pvp.
I have no problem whatsoever to improve the ship's cloaking abilities to make it even better given that it is not something radical like "warp, move faster and fire under cloak". Also no problem even giving it better speed and agility to have a chance to escape if it gets hairy, but for the love of god, don't increase their firepower more, or in anything more that pairs they'd make death look like a silly blond girl with pigtails compared to them for any other ship big or small. |
Helmut Rul
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:04:00 -
[27]
Edited by: Helmut Rul on 21/04/2005 12:07:19
Sigarni people do not necessarily wish for their very own PWNmobile when they ask for the bomber to be improved they simply want their 100 million investment to make sense.
As the bomber is for the moment it simply makes no sense to invest in one. It is too slow, too fragile, it uses far to long time to lock its target and its dot is far to low. additionaly its big ace in the sleeve the cloaking ability is rendered almost useless due to all the limitations it is hobbled with.
People on this thread is therefore asking for the bomber to be improved, I do not belive anyone here asks for all the suggested changes to be made but that at least some are implemented to make it somewhat more competitive compared to other ships as the bomber is for the moment the equivalent of a 100 million isk clay pidgeon.
If the current stats are kept it seems destined for the same status as the support cruisers, or perhaps it will be even less popular the support cruisers after all have a small niche that only they can fulfill.
Finally i see several people that complain about the fact that the bomber will be able to dish out large amounts of damage to battleships if these changes are made , This is however its very purpose and the reason that it is equipped with cruise lanuchers is as slow as it is and has as few hitpoints.
Unfortunately when the devs made the bombers they failed miserably in making a ship that can threathen big ships and the weaknesses gives it a life expectancy comparable to that of a dodo surrounded by a pride of lions.
|
ews01
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:08:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Selim
It is a BOMBER, it needs to be good at killing battleships because its going to suck at killing everything else. We have enough ships good at killing frigs already. Bombers being strong and awesome against battleships would encourage combined arms and teamwork.
Yes I know what a Bomber is. Though if by teamwork you mean "4 steroid pumped kessies at a gate killing the bejesus out of everything" then yes. You are right.
Bombers are still bloody frigs. Don't forget that. they can't be strong AND awesome against a BS. RL bombers (Check stealth bombers) need escort in case a canary flying by feels offensive and attack em. Their only defense is being stealthy/low sig on radar. They are real paper ships.
For the sake of this being a game, if they do that, they become strong and awesome agains anything which is pretty silly really. They'll be able to take down HACs, Cruisers, BSs, BCs, name it really.
You don't expect to conquer the world in a frig, do you? |
ews01
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:15:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Helmut Rul
Edited by: Helmut Rul on 21/04/2005 12:07:19
Sigarni people do not necessarily wish for their very own PWNmobile when they ask for the bomber to be improved they simply want their 100 million investment to make sense.
As the bomber is for the moment it simply makes no sense to invest in one. It is too slow, too fragile, it uses far to long time to lock its target and its dot is far to low.
Honestly m8, I don't think anyone inteded for em to cost 100mil. You pay 100mil for em cause one lucky b*****d happen to get the bpo for em and decided thats that what he wants to steal from you. They really cost peanuts to build. The fact that some ppl are willing to pay silly amounts of money to get one cause its trendy and the latest toy out doesn't mean neither that they worth that much, or that they will continue to after the trend passes.
Same thing as the XL shield Boosters II. They cost what? 100mil now? Sure. Do they worth that much? Certainly not. They get build for peanuts too. Simply put a joker or two decided to charge you that much because..well... they can since they have the monopoly.
That's the reason I don't have one of both of em Don't appreciate getting scummed.
Btw with their current capabilities, I reckon they don't worth more than 15-16mil. And only useful if correct tactics and use are applied. They are a cov ops ship usefull for strategical strikes and they are good at it in numbers. Not a one-pwns-all ship. |
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:15:00 -
[30]
Originally by: ews01
Originally by: Selim
It is a BOMBER, it needs to be good at killing battleships because its going to suck at killing everything else. We have enough ships good at killing frigs already. Bombers being strong and awesome against battleships would encourage combined arms and teamwork.
Yes I know what a Bomber is. Though if by teamwork you mean "4 steroid pumped kessies at a gate killing the bejesus out of everything" then yes. You are right.
Bombers are still bloody frigs. Don't forget that. they can't be strong AND awesome against a BS. RL bombers (Check stealth bombers) need escort in case a canary flying by feels offensive and attack em. Their only defense is being stealthy/low sig on radar. They are real paper ships.
For the sake of this being a game, if they do that, they become strong and awesome agains anything which is pretty silly really. They'll be able to take down HACs, Cruisers, BSs, BCs, name it really.
You don't expect to conquer the world in a frig, do you?
Uhhh...
Bombers ARE paper thin already. If they were actually good against battleships, people might decide to fly a destroyer or cruiser to protect their battleship friends from bombers. THAT is what I meant by combined arms and teamwork. And yes the guys in the bombers could bring a friend or two in interceptors to kill the enemy ones.
Right now we have everyone flying battleships, and you're saying that a ship thats supposed to be good against BS, shouldn't?
If bombers were actually good, I dont see any problem with them being overpowered since they can easily be pwned by a damn noob ship, destroyer frig or cruiser.
|
Helmut Rul
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:23:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Helmut Rul on 21/04/2005 12:28:05
Just a little nitpick ews01, while the stealth bombers in the modern world are indeed fragile creations that has nothing to offer in a dogfight it does indeed carry the modern day equivalent of the citadel torpedo namely the hydrogen bomb and several of them at that,In addition i do not really belive that the bombers have close support from fighters, as far as i know there are no fighters that are as stealthy as the b-2 bomber and as such all a escort would accomplish would be to reveal the bombers position.
Still eve online is not the real world and i do share your worry for the bomber ganksquad but ultimately the bomber gankers would use as much money as most battleship gankers and be far far more fragile.
While i do agree that 100 million is an inflated price i do fear that the bombers as well as most other tech II ships will have artificially high prices until the research system is someday fixed.
|
Gariuys
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:29:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Gariuys on 21/04/2005 12:30:43
Just one tiny little comment cause this discussion bores me.
Could all the people that define a ships usefullness by whether or not it can kill a battleship solo go self destruct their pod. Maybe your next clone has a functional brain.
Edit: Oh and anyone that brings in some completely moronic example of what a cloaking bomber should or should not do in real life please follow the above advice.
~{When evil and strange get together anything is possible}~
A tool is only useless when you don't know how to use it. - ActiveX
The grass is always greener on the other side. - JoCool |
ews01
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:30:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Helmut Rul
Just a little nitpick ews01, while the stealth bombers in the modern world are indeed fragile creations that has nothing to offer in a dogfight it does indeed carry the modern day equivalent of the citadel torpedo namely the hydrogen bomb and several of them at that,In addition i do not really belive that the bombers have close support from fighters, as far as i know there are no fighters that are as stealthy as the b-2 bomber and as such all a escort would accomplish would be to reveal the bombers position.
F22 Raptor 4tw!
Originally by: Helmut Rul
Still eve online is not the real world and i do share your worry for the bomber ganksquad but ultimately the bomber gankers would use as much money as most battleship gankers and be far far more fragile.
Aye m8, My only disagreement here is that they will be as fragile as a gangaggeddon sniping 150km from a gate with 8 WCS on lows.
What's the argument on being a paper ship with 1 hp if nothing has time to do you that 1 hp dmg before its back to the recycling plant to be turned to quaffe cans?
This will be the uber gangsquad ship. And I bet many many ppl don't like that m8.  |
MickeyFinn
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 12:36:00 -
[34]
Ok, here is what i am thinking. Firstly, I took receipt of one of these today and if for nothing else I am happy I have it to add to my collection, even if it IS in need of attention I didnt mind paying the extortionate amount that I did.
I think the problem here is that the stealth bomber is having a bit of an identity crisis. It is certainly not a covert opps ship, as it is clssified, as the only thing that sets the cov-opps ships apart are their ability to use cov-opps cloaking devices. As it stands the SB can only use an improved cloak - the same as every other ship in the game. It also isnt a frigate, it has none of their manouverablilty, speed or agility, and since it lacks the versitlity and numerous hardpoints of a destroyer and the armour and sheilding of a cruiser, it cant be classed amongst those either. So perhaps the first mistake was to class it as a cov-opps ship - it should, imho, be a seperate ship class altogether.
So what abouts its actual useability and effectiveness? Well, applying any of the above capabilities to it would immediatly make it superior in its field. ie. a cov-opps cloak will negate the cov-opps ships, cruiser-esque armour and shield would make it an uber cruiser , you get the picture. Therefore I think it needs unique attributes that give it "balance" and effectiveness. One of these we have already in its ability to use cruise missiles - and no bad thing that at all - in fact that on its own and dropping the "stealth" from its title would be better in my opinion than the situation we have now. But, since it does have that word in its name then the use of stealth/cloaking technology has to come into it somewhere.
So just as the SB is unique as a class (in my model) it needs a unique cloak. Here is my suggestions:
Stealth Bomber Cloaking Device
1. No warping whilst cloaked - to protect the cov-opps ships role
2. Drop the bonus to velocity whilst cloaked and replace with a flat 25% penalty whilst cloak in operation.
3. Reduce the recalibration time to 5 seconds - still gives ure target time to wet himself and run but punishses the afk's who dont look around them.
4. Reduce the "re-cloaking" timer to 5 seconds also - 30 seconds is ridiculous and really doesnt put much "stealth" into "stealth bomber". You still couldnt fire whilst cloaked but would make for an interesting game of cat and mouse ;) and within the 10 second window between decloaking, firing and re-cloaking your target has chance to fight back.
Ok, that is probably full of holes but that what I rekon needs to/should of happen.
I see no problems with firing cruise missiles (as opposed to citadels) they pack enuf punch with good skills, perhaps the manticore needs to be reduced to 2 launchers (or the rest upto 3) because at the moment it has a 1/3 damage advantage. It is already penalised with weak shields and armour plus its poor agility so a cloak such as the one above would go some way to "balancing" the SB.
Just my 2 cents.
--------------------------------------
The Artist Formely Known As Wishdokkta |
Sigarni
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 13:11:00 -
[35]
HELMUT RUL
Just because you was stupid enough to pay 100 mil for a frig which probably cost the builder about 6 mil to build does NOT mean it should be some uber Win EvE frigate ok.
God you lot need to understand that you are paying 100 mil and the seller is laughing at you because you have more money than sense. You could have checked the stats before you paid a ridiculous amount for it.
You are like the dumb people who cry that an 18 mil Crow should be able to own 2 7 mil MOA's. Price does not equal power ok
|
Helmut Rul
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 13:43:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Helmut Rul on 21/04/2005 13:49:07
Sigarni for some reason you seem to belive that i have purchased a bomber this is incorrect i do not have a bomber nor will i purchase one until they are far better and far cheaper.
However to make a point that may pierce your stubborn refusal to accept that bombers are currently very very bad i submit to you this : With the current stats i would not buy a bomber for even 2 million isk except perhaps as a collectors item.
They are getting killed by just about anything except newbie ships and lowend frigates, They struggle hard to kill any other tech II ship interceptors can tank the first volley of missiles and rip apart a bomber long before the second volley can be launched assault frigates can endure their attacks, virtually any cruiser will easily defeat them and against battleship they are about as effective as a rusty butterknife.
To put it bluntly the bombers sacrifice speed agility armor and shield and all they get for it is the ability to launch 2 or 3 cruisemissiles ever 20 seconds or so and the ability to use a cloak that any other ship can use as well.
|
Miner's Bane
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 16:44:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Miner''s Bane on 21/04/2005 16:45:06
This thread has been badly derailed by ignorant people saying stupid things.
It doesnt matter though, until the missile rebalance comes in, these ships will be utter trash. The only reason they were released is to give you people something shiny to look at as a distraction for CCP.
Hopefully, when the missile rebalance shows up, these ships will be given enough of a boost to make them at least somewhat worthwhile. And it would be nice if the caldari bombers were on the same level as the rest (and for every complete halfwit who argues that caldari are the missile race, minmatar are the speed race and a claw isnt ******* 50% faster then a crow).
------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Artegg
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 17:34:00 -
[38]
Edited by: Artegg on 21/04/2005 18:41:51
Originally by: Sigarni
Yes I think they should be able to launch Citadel Torps, cloak and decloak at will, warp whilst cloaked thus completely negating any use for Covert Ops ships, travel full speed whilst cloak and insta lock after decloaking.
Also add a bazillion hit points and more slots please
God you retards should get real. Launching Cruise missles from a Frigate not enough now ?? Frigs should win EVE I say ... w00t
Have you flown one?
Have you killed one?
My corp m8 killed 2 in his crow at the same time last night they out right suck as it stands this post is for people to post ideas about how to make a useless ship better. If you dont have anything to add make your own post and say how good they are and see the people that have used them laugh at you
|
Ranger 1
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 19:00:00 -
[39]
4 words:
Stealth Module, coming soon?
(Could this be the solution to the Stealth bombers problem with being a flying coffin? Just a thought. If you don't know what the proposed Stealth Module is, think the opposite of a Target painter.)
Kill the enemy, and break their toys. |
Arleonenis
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 20:09:00 -
[40]
about citadel torps... nope... why? imagine: bomber decloaks say 3km from cruiser... survive 12 seconds... wait for recalibration: WEB and than fire citadel... one volley = dead cruiser... rise and repeat = ultimate ganking ship against everything bigger than destroyer... bomber without med slots... yep than citadels would be grate on them, becouse to use this tactics you would need at least 2 pilots: 1 covert ops ship and 1 bomber pilot, this would be really covert ops killing squad
just my two cents, how this is accurate dont know i dont played eve for some time and dont intend to just visited forum to check whats going up here... but as always its going bad...
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.04.21 20:18:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Arleonenis
about citadel torps... nope... why? imagine: bomber decloaks say 3km from cruiser... survive 12 seconds... wait for recalibration: WEB and than fire citadel... one volley = dead cruiser... rise and repeat = ultimate ganking ship against everything bigger than destroyer... bomber without med slots... yep than citadels would be grate on them, becouse to use this tactics you would need at least 2 pilots: 1 covert ops ship and 1 bomber pilot, this would be really covert ops killing squad
just my two cents, how this is accurate dont know i dont played eve for some time and dont intend to just visited forum to check whats going up here... but as always its going bad...
Not after the missile nerf, torps will blow huge chunks vs cruisers
|
Tensa
|
Posted - 2005.04.22 05:02:00 -
[42]
Originally by: ews01
Edited by: ews01 on 21/04/2005 11:25:54
You don't expect a tank to have a nuclear missile silo on it, do you?
Yes I do. Ever played Metal Gear: Snake Eater??
|
Darian Solatic
|
Posted - 2005.04.22 06:05:00 -
[43]
Just give me my damn kestral with 4 cruise like the good old days... Manticore = crap compared to that.
There's my 2 cents.
|
Disphforia
|
Posted - 2005.04.22 06:23:00 -
[44]
Sigarni must be the only one in this topic with the braincells required to post intelligent things.
Do i put a nuclear bomb on a bicycle? Why put citadel launchers on a FREAKING frigate. Get real and realise you were hoping for a Gank ship and it's not. Find what it's good for and stop paying 100m for frigate, god damn.
|
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.04.22 16:17:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Disphforia
Sigarni must be the only one in this topic with the braincells required to post intelligent things.
Do i put a nuclear bomb on a bicycle? Why put citadel launchers on a FREAKING frigate. Get real and realise you were hoping for a Gank ship and it's not. Find what it's good for and stop paying 100m for frigate, god damn.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torpedo_boat
|
Helmut 314
|
Posted - 2005.04.22 18:57:00 -
[46]
Bombers do lack in firepower. They are basically slow styrofoam cups that can cloak and eventually fire 2 cruise missiles every 20 seconds.
I suggest the following :
Box Launcher
Capacity 6 cruise missiles
ROF 3 seconds
Reload time 120 seconds.
That way a Bomber can quickly fire off 6 cruise missiles and do serious damage. It then has to wait 2 minutes before it can do any damage again. Thats a good balance that makes the ship useful but not overpowered in battles. Make the bombers have the special ability to fit this launcher, and put harsh penalties , like 1000 CPU used or so on it. Nothing else on the bomber need be changed this way. One box launcher per bomber.
An alphastrike from a pack of bombers would be a thing to fear, but like the bombers of old they are very vulnerable. Destroyers and Interceptors would have a clear role, making sure that the enemy bombers dont come too close to your own fleet....
___________________________________
Trying is the first step of failure
- Homer J Simpson |
mk ultra
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 03:55:00 -
[47]
Edited by: mk ultra on 23/04/2005 03:55:35
bah i just bought one for 60 mil and now im reading this thread ........
i got raped in the a$$ and didnt enjoy it
Thought they would be able to use cov ops cloaking as they r in cov ops section but they are total crap .
Any other ship with a cloaking device can do a better job for cheaper ... like a caracal but anyway .
Imo they should be able to use cov ops cloaking but only for recalibration time even though i would like to be able to warp while being cloaked but heh .
They need better recalibration time and maybe a slight increase in firepower .
My 2 cents ill be selling a hound cheap on market in yulai ... any takers ? :P
------------------------
<Beeth> Girls are like internet domain names, the ones I like are already taken.
<honx> well, you can stil get one from a strange country :-P
|
blazefast
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 16:40:00 -
[48]
Instead of citadel torps.. perhaps regular torps?
Here's what they need IMO...
Damage: 2 torp launchers with 12-15 sec ROF .. that way your dps isn't overpowered
Speed: slightly faster base speed
PG/CPU: maybe a little more cpu, some more PG as well for a MWD or whatever else
Cloak: new cloak allowing all that the covert ops does except warp while cloaked
This would make them a useful ship in combat and still vulnerable to attack like a bomber should be. |
BIRDofPREY
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 18:55:00 -
[49]
Edited by: BIRDofPREY on 23/04/2005 18:56:04
Originally by: Sigarni
Yes I think they should be able to launch Citadel Torps, cloak and decloak at will, warp whilst cloaked thus completely negating any use for Covert Ops ships, travel full speed whilst cloak and insta lock after decloaking.
Also add a bazillion hit points and more slots please
God you retards should get real. Launching Cruise missles from a Frigate not enough now ?? Frigs should win EVE I say ... w00t
Used to be that you could launch torps with a frigate.. lots of sucide kessies running around. But that was nerfed.
The big difference between this frigate and a standard noob ship is THE PRICE TAG!!!!.
No one is going to use this as a sucide bomber with an 80,000,000 price tag. ('tard)
Now that being said...
a Covert ops ship goes for about 11,000,000 and a stealth is about 80,000,000. Do you thing this is going to replace the covert ops anytime soon?
Has the Wolf replaced the Rifter?
didn't think so.....
[Edit : lots of personal attacks removed]
Your 650mm Artillery Cannon I perfectly strikes Serpentis Guard, wrecking for 340.0 damage |
BIRDofPREY
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 18:57:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Darian Solatic
Just give me my damn kestral with 4 cruise like the good old days... Manticore = crap compared to that.
There's my 2 cents.
signed!!!
Your 650mm Artillery Cannon I perfectly strikes Serpentis Guard, wrecking for 340.0 damage |
BIRDofPREY
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 19:01:00 -
[51]
Originally by: ews01
Originally by: Selim
It is a BOMBER, it needs to be good at killing battleships because its going to suck at killing everything else. We have enough ships good at killing frigs already. Bombers being strong and awesome against battleships would encourage combined arms and teamwork.
Yes I know what a Bomber is. Though if by teamwork you mean "4 steroid pumped kessies at a gate killing the bejesus out of everything" then yes. You are right.
Bombers are still bloody frigs. Don't forget that. they can't be strong AND awesome against a BS. RL bombers (Check stealth bombers) need escort in case a canary flying by feels offensive and attack em. Their only defense is being stealthy/low sig on radar. They are real paper ships.
For the sake of this being a game, if they do that, they become strong and awesome agains anything which is pretty silly really. They'll be able to take down HACs, Cruisers, BSs, BCs, name it really.
You don't expect to conquer the world in a frig, do you?
What Airforce are you thinking of...
Stealth DEMANDS no escort - why don't you just put a whoopie lite on it and tell eveyone where the strike is?
Your 650mm Artillery Cannon I perfectly strikes Serpentis Guard, wrecking for 340.0 damage |
Selim
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 19:53:00 -
[52]
Originally by: BIRDofPREY
Edited by: BIRDofPREY on 23/04/2005 18:56:04
Used to be that you could launch torps with a frigate.. lots of sucide kessies running around. But that was nerfed.
The big difference between this frigate and a standard noob ship is THE PRICE TAG!!!!.
No one is going to use this as a sucide bomber with an 80,000,000 price tag. ('tard)
[Edit : lots of personal attacks removed]
The difference is also that cruise frigates fired faster, flew faster and were alot easier to fly. Also had more hitpoints.
|
Grut
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 22:08:00 -
[53]
Why ccp released these ships before the missile changes i dont know 
Mostly harmless |
Lord Damien
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 22:10:00 -
[54]
...
|
susan ivonava
|
Posted - 2005.04.23 22:28:00 -
[55]
Originally by: Arleonenis
about citadel torps... nope... why? imagine: bomber decloaks say 3km from cruiser... survive 12 seconds... wait for recalibration: WEB and than fire citadel... one volley = dead cruiser... rise and repeat = ultimate ganking ship against everything bigger than destroyer... bomber without med slots... yep than citadels would be grate on them, becouse to use this tactics you would need at least 2 pilots: 1 covert ops ship and 1 bomber pilot, this would be really covert ops killing squad
just my two cents, how this is accurate dont know i dont played eve for some time and dont intend to just visited forum to check whats going up here... but as always its going bad...
cruiser fires off 1 Med smart bomb twice, dead bomber, dead torp, game over for bomber,whats your point???
|
Phades
|
Posted - 2005.04.24 06:16:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Grut
Why ccp released these ships before the missile changes i dont know
To give people a chance to research the BPOs before the missile changes go live.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |