| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 21 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 13 post(s) |
theRaptor
   |
Posted - 2005.11.20 17:45:00 -
[541]
 Originally by: rexsum
well i did suggest the second best gun type, wich would bring their damage and sniping abilety down a good notch
Not when you stick on some tracking comps and dmg mods. Using a bunch of gun bombers to snipe is far better then using a slow ass BS.
And I heard the noise of thunder. And I looked and behold: a pale horse. And his name, that sat on him, was Death. And Hell followed with him |
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2005.11.20 18:29:00 -
[542]
Originally by: theRaptor
Originally by: rexsum
well i did suggest the second best gun type, wich would bring their damage and sniping abilety down a good notch
Not when you stick on some tracking comps and dmg mods. Using a bunch of gun bombers to snipe is far better then using a slow ass BS.
Don't forget that it looks pretty stupid fitting large guns on a frigate...
So. When are these forums going live in game? |
Jon Hawkes
|
Posted - 2005.11.20 21:25:00 -
[543]
Originally by: rexsum
dunno if this has come up before, but it seems slly forcing the other 3 races to train up missile skills, isnt it more usefull to let them use the second best long range gun of the group, like a 1200mm for minmatar, that would add some difference to the whole mix as well.
Then there would be nothing to stop a Stealth Bomber decloaking, fring a volley of artillery off, and then recloaking before the target has acquired a lock. With missiles, you can do this, but the missiles will not reach their target due to travel time, which of course turrets do not suffer from.
Free production, refining and POS tools |
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.11.24 02:39:00 -
[544]
Originally by: Ithildin
Don't forget that it looks pretty stupid fitting large guns on a frigate...
Nah Large turrets on frigs look awesome. I think I still have a screen cap of a 425mm on my Manticore. So badass looking.
And I looked and behold: a pale horse. And his name, that sat on him, was Death. And Hell followed with him |
0rigin
|
Posted - 2005.11.24 11:40:00 -
[545]
Edited by: 0rigin on 24/11/2005 11:46:00
am i to late??
can i suggest one too. i have been playing this game for 2 years pass already and never once said anything but try to adapt to the environmental changes. to challenge the survivalbility of my existance.
changes was logical how kestrels use to be.
the manticorreee' need more cpu and powergrid. lvl 4 on advance upgrade and lvl 4 on covert op. should be enough to fit all 3 launchers. and the cloaking device.
the armor makes sence since caldaris are known for theyre shields.
and see if you can move that useless high slot down to the middle slot.
so give 5 med. =]]
or am i just pusshing it...
okay okay fine... just the grid and the cpu.
|
theRaptor
|
Posted - 2005.11.25 01:55:00 -
[546]
Originally by: 0rigin
the manticorreee' need more cpu and powergrid. lvl 4 on advance upgrade and lvl 4 on covert op. should be enough to fit all 3 launchers. and the cloaking device.
You can. You just need named launchers if you want to fit anything in your mid slots.
And I looked and behold: a pale horse. And his name, that sat on him, was Death. And Hell followed with him |
Vyger
|
Posted - 2005.11.25 14:02:00 -
[547]
OK, I haven't read all 19 pages, but the topic does seem to have wandered some what from CCP Hammer's original post 
Is there an update somewhere in this thread that actually says whether this change will definately make it into the next patch or not?
|
VeNT
|
Posted - 2005.11.26 17:55:00 -
[548]
how long till this is IN?
|
Bombcrater
|
Posted - 2005.11.26 20:58:00 -
[549]
The new bomber bonuses are active on Sisi right now, so I'd say its very likely they'll be part of the RMR patch.
|
Kunming
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 11:18:00 -
[550]
I've tested the stealth bombers on SiSi and the changes CCP Hammer mentioned make them quite useful. Its not as easy as it sounds to use them but I guess thats the balance with them.. if u do it right you will come out without a scratch, if u mess it up ur dead (a good example of risk vs reward I'd say).
On the other hand though the amarr, gallente and minmatar ones still have the redundant turret bonus', you wont even have enough PG to fit turrets, not to mention you will never get a chance to use them. This still makes the caldari one the most dmging SB out there, and since the bombers are all about volley dmg this is quite unbalanced. I would be even happy if the minmatar one got a speed bonus, the gallente one a small reduction to signature radius and the amarr one a dmg bonus to EM missiles (we all know its the crappies dmg) per lvl, instead of these turret bonus'. That would make each bomber quite unique and still leave the caldari one with the most launchers.
- What does the community and devs think about this suggestion?
Website
Killboard |
Fuazzole
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 11:40:00 -
[551]
BOOOO!!
u say the Manti still has 33% moer laucher AND the frigate rank Dmg bonus
|
Chith
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 15:40:00 -
[552]
The bomber changes as they stand do change bombers significantly, although it is frightfully annoying that the "cloaking" skill does nothing for one of two covert ops ships in game right now, and has only a marginal effect for the other.
Would be nice if all recalibration delays were simply cut in half and the cloaking skill bonus be changed to something along the lines of 5% or 10% speed bonus while cloaked.
|
Declar Syncton
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 19:25:00 -
[553]
I would suggest removal of the cruise missiles (expects a beating for that) and adding the ability to launch same size of torpedo and smartbombs instead. If the frigate, possibly with the addition of some jamming, would have a chance to survive giving a CR or BS a portion of damage, but not taking it down, it would be like having a submarine ww2-style combat sort of. A single frig would only dent the capitals with torpedoes, but a wolfpack would hurt it bad, but without being totally safe from return fire. And if the BS has frig(s) or destroyer(s) the "subs" would have to plan for that too. Standoff "snipe" pop-firing cruise missiles f.o.f. or not and then just "retreat" into the shadows sounds like an awfull idea, that way too many might choose.
If one should make a stand-off attack option it could be something like unguided missiles which would hard to detect until at very close range somehow, still with the use of the "sub".
Keep in mind i have absolutely no practise with cruise/cloak/bombs or the like yet, so i might have misunderstood how it will work badly.
Just a loose suggestion! Would be boring to have half the players crusing in cloaks with a safe launch ability on the poor souls who does¦nt cloak. |
Brute Helmet
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 20:18:00 -
[554]
Ive also been testing the new stealth bomber on SiSi and its not bad at all. I like the changes, they add a lot of possibilities. Good job CCP!
Would be very nice to have some additional cap and agility, plus a more level field between the races stealth bombers of course. 
|
Filan
|
Posted - 2005.11.28 23:29:00 -
[555]
allow stealths to aquire a passive lock while cloaked, and then only have to decloak to fire and then let them recloak instantly. i mean an F117 is only risking high radar visibility when the bomb doors open. soon as the close poof its gone.
sadly this idea would rock in fleet operations where cloak and dagger is part of the covert ops skill, but would end up as a Gank-o-matic in true gameplay.
|
Kunming
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 02:13:00 -
[556]
Originally by: Filan
allow stealths to aquire a passive lock while cloaked, and then only have to decloak to fire and then let them recloak instantly. i mean an F117 is only risking high radar visibility when the bomb doors open. soon as the close poof its gone.
sadly this idea would rock in fleet operations where cloak and dagger is part of the covert ops skill, but would end up as a Gank-o-matic in true gameplay.
The stealth bomber concept is working fine as it is on SiSi atm. The only thing thats left is the imbalance between the different races' bombers, mainly the problem is the caldari one being more powerful than the others or better said the non-caldari ones having useless bonus'.
Website
Killboard |
Brute Helmet
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 11:57:00 -
[557]
Originally by: Kunming
Originally by: Filan
allow stealths to aquire a passive lock while cloaked, and then only have to decloak to fire and then let them recloak instantly. i mean an F117 is only risking high radar visibility when the bomb doors open. soon as the close poof its gone.
sadly this idea would rock in fleet operations where cloak and dagger is part of the covert ops skill, but would end up as a Gank-o-matic in true gameplay.
The stealth bomber concept is working fine as it is on SiSi atm. The only thing thats left is the imbalance between the different races' bombers, mainly the problem is the caldari one being more powerful than the others or better said the non-caldari ones having useless bonus'.
I agree with Kunming.
|
alar1c
|
Posted - 2005.11.29 18:40:00 -
[558]
Firstly, I have not read all 19 or so pages of this thread! So if this has been covered, oh well.
I wanted to hear an explanation as to why a bomber, doesn't use a covert op cloaking device?!? It's description says it's the "next generation in covert ops craft"
That alone would make this a very dangerous weapon. A true stealth weapon. As it is now (and I've only just started playing with this) if you are waiting for a target, you can get a few shots off and warp away. But will be unable to return, at least not stealthaly.
An enemy with a couple of fast ships(intercepter or even t1 frigs) could keep you from cloaking.
And it would be (I believe) almost impossable to warp into an enemy(your not cloaked) and get into a good postion for an attack.
If your changing things, give the stealth ships proper cloaking devices.
My .02 isk on the subject.
Al
|
Slink Grinsdikild
|
Posted - 2005.11.30 03:14:00 -
[559]
I agree with Kunming and others - there seems to be no reason to fly a Purifier/Nemesis/Hound, other than the excuse of having their frigate skill at V already. The Manticore is simply the best, due to its extra launcher.
So please do away with the useless turret bonus and replace it with something that will count towards burst damage. (DoT on a slow, vunrable frigate = meaningless.)
|
Kyoko Sakoda
|
Posted - 2005.11.30 05:08:00 -
[560]
Originally by: Slink Grinsdikild
So please do away with the useless turret bonus and replace it with something that will count towards burst damage. (DoT on a slow, vunrable frigate = meaningless.)
Which is why I find the lack of speed disturbing on these boats. 
|
Linia
|
Posted - 2005.11.30 23:59:00 -
[561]
Since my skills on SiSi isnt updated I cant check the new bombers, so tell me what they changed on the Nemesis please :)
|
Bombcrater
|
Posted - 2005.12.01 00:26:00 -
[562]
Both the sensor recalibration delay and the cloaking delay have been removed. So stealth bombers can now lock a target immediately after decloaking, and they can also re-cloak without having to wait 30 seconds.
If you're close enough to a target the decloak-lock-fire-cloak tactic now works nicely 
|
Mr Monk
|
Posted - 2005.12.01 06:34:00 -
[563]
Interesting, ya the other ships having turret bonuses etc seems a bit useless, be nice to change that and the laucher slot numbers on all ships.
Also - Does being targetted still prevent cloaking?
|
Kunming
|
Posted - 2005.12.01 12:36:00 -
[564]
Originally by: Mr Monk
...
Also - Does being targetted still prevent cloaking?
Yes, and the real defence against these are either fast locking ships or FoF missiles. If you attack lets say 2 ravens and they dont have FoFs in cargo, they will die. Remeber missiles uncloak u when they are within 2km of your cloaked ship.
Website
Killboard |
Andrymeda
|
Posted - 2005.12.01 16:00:00 -
[565]
Originally by: CCP Hammer
I don't know if it sounds better to say:
We want to remove the targetting timer delay and module activation delay when decloaking in a stealth bomber next patch.
Or
We want to remove the targetting timer delay and module activation delay from cloaking devices fitted to stealth bombers next patch.
Or maybe even
Next patch we want to remove the targetting timer delay and module activation delay.....
Anyway, that's what we want to do. Does anyone have anything to add? Anyone see a glaring reason why we shouldn't? Anyone have any other little changes we might want to do to them that isn't going to require massive rebalancing or programming efforts? For their cost and the potential for them to be really cool ships they seem under-used. They came prenerfed since we didn't want them to be too ganktastic but after watching things for a while we think the timers can be removed.
So, thoughts?
 /  ?
YES! 
Also, the grid needs some love. I think stealth bombers should match their descriptions. They are not feared as it is now. If they can target and fire a few cruise missiles at their targets and then cloak again, that would align with their descriptions. Even if an enemy has one targetted.
They should be able to get away with hit and run, the price for this is that other than the cruise launcher, they can't expect to often destroy a target. While cloaked, they should be able to launch drones (thus targetting and attacking) as well a recall them. Think about it. Drones used in this manner will give away their position. Only an FOF missile could target the vicinity of the ship based on drone locations, especially if orbiting or otherwise rendevousing with the "mother" ship. Thus FOF missiles should be given splash damage.
All this really does is add new tactics to the game. Stealth bombers don't have much armor or defenses other than the cloak, so if you can land a missile on one (or nearby), even if cloaked, they will take damage, even if from splash. Doubt a stealth bomber will have an armor rep fitted, so they will be forced to retreat.
Also, non-targetting modules should be able to be activated, such as afterburners. The lone exception is remote modules used to assist a gang (if fitted with any - whether or not that is good tactics is up to the pilot).
Also, if the bomber is targetted, it should be allowed to cloak, but the target lock remains for short while. How short could depend on long the ship takes to move at least 15km away from the last target lock location. The more it moves, the less damage it will take from opposing fire, except the splash damage from missiles remain the same.
But the bottom line is that a stealth bomber should be allowed to cause some damage and get away with it. Like the description of the bomber hints at.
Just some suggestions to chew on. Thanks for asking.
|
Kunming
|
Posted - 2005.12.01 20:25:00 -
[566]
@ Andrymeda; I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'll ask you 2 questions:
1) Have u actually tried the stealth bombers with the new changes on SiSi?
2) Have u at least read the last 3 pages of this thread?
SBs are fine as they are on SiSi atm, the only matter that needs attention is the balance issue between the different race's bombers.
Website
Killboard |
Masu'di
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 04:20:00 -
[567]
Originally by: Kunming
@ Andrymeda; I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'll ask you 2 questions:
1) Have u actually tried the stealth bombers with the new changes on SiSi?
2) Have u at least read the last 3 pages of this thread?
SBs are fine as they are on SiSi atm, the only matter that needs attention is the balance issue between the different race's bombers.
yeh the imbalance is odd, i agree. if the hound had some more grid so could reasonably fit arties on it, it wouldn't be so bad - but it cant 
the others need something else too. |
Masu'di
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 04:20:00 -
[568]
Originally by: Kunming
@ Andrymeda; I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'll ask you 2 questions:
1) Have u actually tried the stealth bombers with the new changes on SiSi?
2) Have u at least read the last 3 pages of this thread?
SBs are fine as they are on SiSi atm, the only matter that needs attention is the balance issue between the different race's bombers.
yeh the imbalance is odd, i agree. if the hound had some more grid so could reasonably fit arties on it, it wouldn't be so bad - but it cant
the others need something else too. |
Masu'di
Es and Whizz
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 04:20:00 -
[569]
Originally by: Kunming
@ Andrymeda; I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'll ask you 2 questions:
1) Have u actually tried the stealth bombers with the new changes on SiSi?
2) Have u at least read the last 3 pages of this thread?
SBs are fine as they are on SiSi atm, the only matter that needs attention is the balance issue between the different race's bombers.
yeh the imbalance is odd, i agree. if the hound had some more grid so could reasonably fit arties on it, it wouldn't be so bad - but it cant
the others need something else too. |
Bombcrater
|
Posted - 2005.12.05 09:47:00 -
[570]
Originally by: Andrymeda
I think stealth bombers should match their descriptions. They are not feared as it is now.
They will be after the patch. Get on Sisi and try them out, you may be surprised.
I took a hound into FFA last night and killed 6 ships in the space of 20 minutes, and I wasn't even really trying that hard.
The new improved bombers are going to be a nasty weapon, especially when the high-damage and high-precision cruise missiles become available.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 [19] 20 .. 21 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |