Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.09.26 10:01:00 -
[1]
Originally by: Brute Helmet 1. Add a third launcher to the non-caldari ones, or adjust the damage bonuses to compensate for the third launcher.
Why do people insist on getting rid of differences between ships? The Manticore is fine. Not all ships are born equal, case in point Zealot compared to Deimos. Should the Zealot be given a 5th turret? No. 4 turrets makes the Zealot unique and a lot of people like it fine the way it is.
Originally by: Brute Helmet 2. Boost capacitor by 10-15% and reduce mass by 20%
Why? They're big and slow because they're carrying battleship weapons and should remain slower because of it.
For those that still don't get it: the Manticore is hell to fit with 3 launchers. It's slower, has less health, is bigger, has a smaller cargobay than any other bomber (despite the Kestrel having the largest cargobay for any frig), has the least grid output (makes fitting launchers just that much more frustrating) and warps the shortest distance.
Here's an equation for those that only understand maths. Purifier = 1.5x Manticore grid. Manticore = 1.5x Purifier high slots.
If you're calling for an extra high slot for all other stealth bombers, then give the Manticore 15 extra grid to put it in line with the Purifier and give it an extra low slot so that it can fit 3x damage mods just like the Purifier. I guarantee you the Manticore would benefit more from this change than the Purifier.
|

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.09.26 12:50:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Ante on 26/09/2005 12:51:26
Originally by: Brute Helmet Manticore also has 150% the firepower of all other stealthbombers, dont forget that The difference between 3 cruise per salvo and 2 cruise per salvo is quite high, isnt it ?
The mass reduction is needed since the Hound and Purifier both handle more like heavy cruisers than frigates. I havent flown the Manticore or Nemesis so I cant speak as to how those handle.
Did you even read what I typed? You still seem to be hooked onto the idea that firepower > all.
They are supposed to handle poorly. They're bombers. They're heavy. They're big. They carry bloody huge missiles and you expect it to handle like a normal frigate.
Go try and fit a Manticore with three cruise missile launchers + whatever you fit on your Hound or Purifier then come back and tell us all that the extra launcher makes it this magical ship that wtfpwns all.
EDIT: Slight change.
|

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.09.28 19:02:00 -
[3]
FYI a Hound with 2x 200mm Autocannon IIs does ~20 dps more than a Manticore with 3x cruise launchers at maxed skills. That's ~25% extra dps.
|

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.09.29 06:37:00 -
[4]
Originally by: CCP Hammer Does anyone have anything to add?
Yes in fact I do have one more suggestion.
In order to give a little bit more variety to the ships I would really like to see the Manticore lose a high slot for a mid slot, the Hound lose a low slow for a mid slot and the Nemesis lose a mid for a low.
This, to me, seems to maintan the slot ratio for the races fairly well.
Would it also be unfair to give the Manticore a tad more cpu (being Caldari and having more mids) while also giving the Nemesis a tad more grid (it has the least grid which is made worse by the lack of the second grid reduction bonus that the Manticore receives)?
|

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.10.05 17:31:00 -
[5]
IMO one of THE most important changes to be done should be the removal of pilots from local when cloaked.
Even if you released a new active module that used very little cap but removed you from local would be handy. Hell you could even make it an illegal module to use in empire space. Kinda makes sense storyline wise...
|

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.10.07 14:12:00 -
[6]
Originally by: QwaarJet This thread looked good until CCP announced combat revisited, and the changes like reduced sig radius skills and modules, plus the HP bonus will totally kill bombers and negate this thread.
I know eh... first they say they're going to make bombers viable, then they completely wreck them again. I started training for bombers when I saw this thread but I'm having second thoughts now 
|

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.10.09 00:38:00 -
[7]
Originally by: KingsGambit - Giving them all 5 extra PG
They don't really need that much. Especially the Amarr and Minmatar bombers.
Originally by: KingsGambit - Giving them all a 100m/s uncloaked base speed increase
Bombers typically aren't fast compared to other fighter planes. Why would they be in EVE?
Originally by: KingsGambit - Giving them all 50% more cap
Then they would have more cap than any assault frigate? If you give bombers survivability then you need to take away damage potential.
Originally by: KingsGambit - Giving them a boost to agility
They're heavy, they're fat, they're slow, so it isn't as though they're going to be very agile.
Originally by: KingsGambit - Giving them all 200m^3 increase to cargo (cruise missiles are not small)
You don't think that battleship sized weapons would take a bit of room inside the ship?
Originally by: KingsGambit As it is they are not very much fun to fly and my indy moves faster than these frigs. How in Eve is it they seem to weigh 50% more than heavily armoured assault frigates?
Makes sense to me. A weapon that's designed to be carrier on a ship that many times bigger is sure to weigh quite a lot. Not to mention the huge and heavy missiles you're carrying?
|

Ante
|
Posted - 2005.10.10 11:29:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Kyoko Sakoda
Originally by: Ithildin
F-16 - Mach 2 at altitude B-2 Spirit (B-2 stealth Bomber) - Mach 0.85
In my humble opinion this means bombers should be as fast as T1 frigates.
Sorry, but how exactly do you reason that from the figure provided? The numbers indicate to me that the stealth bombers should move at 1/2 the speed of T1 frigates.
Fortunately they don't. They do however handle worse. If you assumed that you had two equal sized vessels in a body of water with one weighing twice the other you would expect the heavier mass to require more energy to turn, so with the same energy applied it would merely take longer.
What's wrong with bombers being a bit sluggish?
|
|
|