Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Lugh Crow-Slave
Guardians of the Morrigan
153
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 23:15:00 -
[391] - Quote
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:This is probably one of the first times in recent memory where I just could not see why a change was made to the game. I'm sitting here in complete disappointment at just how bad the majority of these ideas are. I can't say I completely blame you because covops and bombing are an extremely niche play style that many players do not participate in and less even excel at it. While the majority of ships all balance around the idea of dps, mobility and tank, cov ops factors in the mental game more so than any other ship.
There are some staggering bad misconceptions expressed within the thread which I have read through most of but I want to underline and debunk a few because I believe CCP is putting these changes in out of a misunderstanding mostly backed by said misconceptions. Bombers as they are now are perhaps one of the most balanced ships in the game. The only thing I would have done is to add a touch more fitting and mobility to the Nemesis. Bombers are devastating but their paper thin tank allows them to be easily counterable which I will detail.
Furthermore bombers are not only almost completely balanced, but also act as a balancing factor in Eve. They are one of the few ships that curb the N+1 problem. Bring 10,000 ships against me? As long as they are within the radius of the bomb blast, they all die the same. Bombers/cov ops are one of the few ways the "little guy" can stand up to the big powers.
Now some of the bad reasons FOR the changes:
ISBoxing: Although CCP won't say this directly, it seems to be an almost universal opinion here that curbing ISboxing bombers is one of the main reasons for some of these changes. As explained, even by posterchild ISboxer bomber wheniminspace, as well as others, this penalizes individual bomber pilots much more than it does ISboxers. Want to deal with ISboxer? Ban it directly.
No more Shield Battleships: This was spoken by a few people some of which should clearly know better. The main reason for armor bs doctrine dominance is due to the popularity of Archon/Armor triage carriers. NOT because of bombers. Shield BS doctrines were popular long after the cloak changes were made in 2012. Certain groups preferred armor, others shield. PL took over Delve as part of the HBC using Rail Rohks.
No counters?: A few people say there are no counters to bombing runs. Anyone remember insta lock arty canes? I know TEST was running with a good twenty or so in every major fleet. These pilots would have an overview tab that would show bombers and only bombers. The moment something appeared on their overview it was locked and popped. Bombs don't do damage if your bomber dies before it detonates. You can also use frigates such as the combat ceptors or pirate frigs to catch bombers. Not every bombing run is a success. Bubbles already are a strong counter to them as well as a defensive bubble will pull in the bombers and either put them out of place or decloak them.
Bombers are suppose to be nimble evasive frigates designed to provide a counter to the N+1 problem. Making them slower, making them uncloak one another (which was said to be a glitch) and messing with their bomb damage is completely pointless and limits player interaction. Now bombers will only be on grid for the moment it takes them to drop their bomb rather than 150+ away on grid setting up for a run. I urge CCP to reconsider these changes, even scrap the majority of it all together.
Read what this guy is saying |
Barrack SquirrelTap
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 23:25:00 -
[392] - Quote
- bombs now require an activation code before being armed, random 4 digit alphanumeric number that must be entered after launch but before detonation
Agreed...Also make defender missiles an anti bomb missile with only light defenders and like 2-3 missiles to destroy a bomb. This would make it so that if you have 3 or 4 DEDICATED ships with a full rack of launchers they could take out a single wave. Kinda like a real life Aegis air defense destroyer. On the flip side you could have every ship in fleet with a launcher slot give up one of those for bomb defense. It would then be a player choice rather than just nerfing bombers. Also a new 1k decloak range (with two cloaked ships) would be a better range for bombers. The 2.5k range makes gate camps, bridging, etc. all equally a pain. |
Elyas Crux
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
3
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 23:35:00 -
[393] - Quote
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:Elyas Crux wrote:Will the new anti-capital void bomb collide with other objects in space or will it just keep travelling the same direction it was fired until it detonates? I think it would be frustrating as hell to see your bomb bounce off your target and explode meters out of range. Also if collidable it would become a viable tactic for a subcapital to ram and deflect bombs off course.
The only other thing I'm left wondering is if you had a perfect aim and a marauder stuck in bastion mode, you could really ruin their day. i doubt they will but if it would of bounced off your target then you missed anyway because if it doesn't bounce it will go through and miss
Granted if you fired from 6kms away it should go in one side and out the other and miss. But it has an AoE range of 1 meter and 12km range. If I fire at someone 11.9kms away I want to know that the last 100 meters isn't it bouncing back off them and missing. |
Kaerakh
Surprisingly Deep Hole Try Rerolling
453
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 23:40:00 -
[394] - Quote
Seraph IX Basarab wrote:This is probably one of the first times in recent memory where I just could not see why a change was made to the game. I'm sitting here in complete disappointment at just how bad the majority of these ideas are. I can't say I completely blame you because covops and bombing are an extremely niche play style that many players do not participate in and less even excel at it. While the majority of ships all balance around the idea of dps, mobility and tank, cov ops factors in the mental game more so than any other ship.
There are some staggering bad misconceptions expressed within the thread which I have read through most of but I want to underline and debunk a few because I believe CCP is putting these changes in out of a misunderstanding mostly backed by said misconceptions. Bombers as they are now are perhaps one of the most balanced ships in the game. The only thing I would have done is to add a touch more fitting and mobility to the Nemesis. Bombers are devastating but their paper thin tank allows them to be easily counterable which I will detail.
Furthermore bombers are not only almost completely balanced, but also act as a balancing factor in Eve. They are one of the few ships that curb the N+1 problem. Bring 10,000 ships against me? As long as they are within the radius of the bomb blast, they all die the same. Bombers/cov ops are one of the few ways the "little guy" can stand up to the big powers.
Now some of the bad reasons FOR the changes:
ISBoxing: Although CCP won't say this directly, it seems to be an almost universal opinion here that curbing ISboxing bombers is one of the main reasons for some of these changes. As explained, even by posterchild ISboxer bomber wheniminspace, as well as others, this penalizes individual bomber pilots much more than it does ISboxers. Want to deal with ISboxer? Ban it directly.
No more Shield Battleships: This was spoken by a few people some of which should clearly know better. The main reason for armor bs doctrine dominance is due to the popularity of Archon/Armor triage carriers. NOT because of bombers. Shield BS doctrines were popular long after the cloak changes were made in 2012. Certain groups preferred armor, others shield. PL took over Delve as part of the HBC using Rail Rohks.
No counters?: A few people say there are no counters to bombing runs. Anyone remember insta lock arty canes? I know TEST was running with a good twenty or so in every major fleet. These pilots would have an overview tab that would show bombers and only bombers. The moment something appeared on their overview it was locked and popped. Bombs don't do damage if your bomber dies before it detonates. You can also use frigates such as the combat ceptors or pirate frigs to catch bombers. Not every bombing run is a success. Bubbles already are a strong counter to them as well as a defensive bubble will pull in the bombers and either put them out of place or decloak them.
Bombers are suppose to be nimble evasive frigates designed to provide a counter to the N+1 problem. Making them slower, making them uncloak one another (which was said to be a glitch) and messing with their bomb damage is completely pointless and limits player interaction. Now bombers will only be on grid for the moment it takes them to drop their bomb rather than 150+ away on grid setting up for a run. I urge CCP to reconsider these changes, even scrap the majority of it all together.
Agreed. Link to original post if you wanted to find it: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5125162#post5125162 Feel free to quote. Schrodinger's Hot Dropper - The Fate of Forum Alts - Click me! Click me! |
Trinkets friend
Sudden Buggery
1715
|
Posted - 2014.10.16 23:49:00 -
[395] - Quote
The nerf to cloaking is SOLELY to counter the ISBoxing bomber squads. SOLELY this. And therefore, it's not getting reversed because of whining.
The anti-capital bomb with an AOE of 1m. Dude. Fozzie. Mate. How are you supposed to hit anything with this?
lets do a thought game. I am in a Hound with a Cap Void Bomb. I am burning in from 50km away aligned toward my target, who is in triage/siege, blah blah. My bomb has a range of 30,000 +/- 1m. my ship has a speed, for argument's sakes, of 300m/s. I must therefore launch my bomb EXACTLY 30,000m away ffrom my foe!
From 30km away if you launch it 1/300th of a second late or early, you miss.
OH BUT WAT IS DIS?
The server tick is 1 second! So does it launch on the server tick, or does the server (plus/minus 8-200m/s lag for Interwebs) calculate it on the actual milllisecond you press the key?
Given the reaction time of the human being is 1/30th of a second, and you have 200ms lag, you have precisely ZERO chance of landing a bomb within <1m of anything at 30km range. Hurr durr!
OK, so given a capital is a big ship, are we now saying that the bomb lands inside the foe? Or what?
TL;DR 1,000m AEO for bombs, minimum, to make them practical. J's before K's. Sudden Buggery is recruiting w-nerds and w-noobs. Mail your resume in today! http://www.localectomy.blogspot.com.au
|
Lugh Crow-Slave
Guardians of the Morrigan
155
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:00:00 -
[396] - Quote
Trinkets friend wrote:The nerf to cloaking is SOLELY to counter the ISBoxing bomber squads. SOLELY this. And therefore, it's not getting reversed because of whining.
The anti-capital bomb with an AOE of 1m. Dude. Fozzie. Mate. How are you supposed to hit anything with this?
lets do a thought game. I am in a Hound with a Cap Void Bomb. I am burning in from 50km away aligned toward my target, who is in triage/siege, blah blah. My bomb has a range of 30,000 +/- 1m. my ship has a speed, for argument's sakes, of 300m/s. I must therefore launch my bomb EXACTLY 30,000m away ffrom my foe!
From 30km away if you launch it 1/300th of a second late or early, you miss.
OH BUT WAT IS DIS?
The server tick is 1 second! So does it launch on the server tick, or does the server (plus/minus 8-200m/s lag for Interwebs) calculate it on the actual milllisecond you press the key?
Given the reaction time of the human being is 1/30th of a second, and you have 200ms lag, you have precisely ZERO chance of landing a bomb within <1m of anything at 30km range. Hurr durr!
OK, so given a capital is a big ship, are we now saying that the bomb lands inside the foe? Or what?
TL;DR 1,000m AEO for bombs, minimum, to make them practical.
yeah and even if you are holding still the overview and even the overlay aren't exact but i would like to see these explode on impact. delay the warhead (so you can't just do it from 2km) but make it so if it hits its target say after it's gone 25-26km then it goes off.
or to make coding easier just make it a radius of 500m-1km
i love the idea of single target bombs and want to see this test run a success so we can see more like it.
in another note do you know when we will see these on SiSi so we can find out just how hard it will be to hit something? |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Forged of Fire
565
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:05:00 -
[397] - Quote
Chiimera wrote:Great work killing bombing runs completely.
Cloaked ships decloaking other cloaked ships would be fine IF fleet members could actually tell where each other are.
As I said before, this is a terrible change. Chimera has explained why. Please go back to the drawing board. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13638
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:14:00 -
[398] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Chiimera wrote:Great work killing bombing runs completely.
Cloaked ships decloaking other cloaked ships would be fine IF fleet members could actually tell where each other are. As I said before, this is a terrible change. Chimera has explained why. Please go back to the drawing board.
A whole host of ships are now viable again. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Sjaandi HyShan
New Sepulchral Monolith
4
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:19:00 -
[399] - Quote
If the steal bomber is mainly being converted to a destroyer, why not actually make it one? The skill train is the same, you are slowing the warp and align time and increasing the HP (which is basically a destroyer in all but name). The destroyer line is lonely with only Interdictors as the T2 variants, with the Frigate line being overrepresented in T2. And now with the smaller bubble, the ships seem to be made to pit against each other. |
Driler Nolm
Republic University Minmatar Republic
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:20:00 -
[400] - Quote
hey Fozzie. instead of slowly making bombers more useless. Why not spare us bomber pilots that pain and just throw all the stealth bombers in the trashcan. Thanks for NOTHING. Decloaking?? stupid. 12 second flight time? really? And by the way, a bomb is a dumb weapon and once deployed, it should STILL blow up even if the ship is dead. You must not have EVER flown a stealth bomber in a small fleet, it is already very difficult to organize. |
|
Catherine Laartii
Providence Guard Templis CALSF
320
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:24:00 -
[401] - Quote
Please change the Purifier into a Khanid ship. It uses missiles as a primary weapon and that's all the justification we need. Thank you. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Forged of Fire
565
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:30:00 -
[402] - Quote
Kalissis wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:These changes are intended to make it easier for fleets to counter bombers (whether the bombers are isboxed or not) and to make organization of characters valuable again for bombing. Organization of pilots is made easier in a lot of ways with isboxer, but that has always been true and isn't some new phenomenon coming from these changes.
We'll be watching these changes very carefully on SISI, and if this hits bombers too hard we can easily make adjustments. We do not want to "headshot" bombers, and we don't currently believe that these changes make them unviable.
I think some people came into this thread expecting it to be something completely different, and are therefore disappointed.
If you want to discuss our policies surrounding isboxer that is fine, but there are other threads for that. Bombing runs should be nerfed, that is understandable. But please rethink the sig radius change, it makes them useless in all the other applications that bombers are used for. You can't compete against cruisers and below anyway anymore with bombers why make this even worse? Nerf bombing it's fine, but please give them some more fighting abilities.
Seriously. Have you ever used a bomber to try to solo a ratter? You already have to deal with the hostile DPS and the rats will aggro you almost immediately because you have electronic warfare.
On the other hand, my interdictor pilot will love killing all those slow to align bombers. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. |
FT Diomedes
The Graduates Forged of Fire
565
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:33:00 -
[403] - Quote
Herrin Asura wrote:progodlegend wrote: Or actually welcome to how every bombing run worked before the cloak changes.
And EVERYONE was HAPPY that these times changed. Why? Because Bombers sucked back then.
This. This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine. |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13640
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:36:00 -
[404] - Quote
FT Diomedes wrote:Herrin Asura wrote:progodlegend wrote: Or actually welcome to how every bombing run worked before the cloak changes.
And EVERYONE was HAPPY that these times changed. Why? Because Bombers sucked back then. This.
Wrong. You want useless bombers? Lets go back to when they spat out cruise missiles and bombs did less damage than a wet fart. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Monkeynipple Salad
Quovis The Bastion
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:40:00 -
[405] - Quote
All these people saying the new cap void bomb is impossible to hit because it's 1m range. Has it not occured to you that capital ships (especially ****) are rather large, and that bombs don't have collision? As long as the bomb goes off INSIDE the gigantic hitbox of the ship that is several km long (or within 1m) it works.
While it will certainly be harder then hitting with a normal bomb, it far away from being impossible, especially on **** that isn't moving. |
Ronin Silfar
Our Big Spaceship Gang
8
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:54:00 -
[406] - Quote
Monkeynipple Salad wrote:All these people saying the new cap void bomb is impossible to hit because it's 1m range. Has it not occured to you that capital ships (especially ****) are rather large, and that bombs don't have collision? As long as the bomb goes off INSIDE the gigantic hitbox of the ship that is several km long (or within 1m) it works.
While it will certainly be harder then hitting with a normal bomb, it far away from being impossible, especially on **** that isn't moving.
I was thinking the same thing, but figured I was just missing some crucial element since no one had pointed it out yet. |
Elyas Crux
Sefem Velox Swift Angels Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 00:56:00 -
[407] - Quote
I think if something is able to decloak me I should be able to see it, or it shouldn't be able to decloak me. If this change goes ahead players cannot fly cloaked ships with any sort of teamwork. If a group of players all warp to a point RNGesus decides where they land on grid so decloaking is inevitable. There are no tools in game to allow players to coordinate and be on grid together while remaining cloaked. To remain useful all cloaked ships would have to be used for solo playing only and not in fleet with any other ship (besides being a warp in, yay participation). |
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13640
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 01:04:00 -
[408] - Quote
Elyas Crux wrote:I think if something is able to decloak me I should be able to see it, or it shouldn't be able to decloak me. If this change goes ahead players cannot fly cloaked ships with any sort of teamwork. If a group of players all warp to a point RNGesus decides where they land on grid so decloaking is inevitable. There are no tools in game to allow players to coordinate and be on grid together while remaining cloaked. To remain useful all cloaked ships would have to be used for solo playing only and not in fleet with any other ship (besides being a warp in, yay participation).
We managed to do this very thing before, we will manage to do it again. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Momiji Sakora
Omni Galactic
29
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 01:40:00 -
[409] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:These changes are intended to make it easier for fleets to counter bombers (whether the bombers are isboxed or not) and to make organization of characters valuable again for bombing. Organization of pilots is made easier in a lot of ways with isboxer, but that has always been true and isn't some new phenomenon coming from these changes.
We'll be watching these changes very carefully on SISI, and if this hits bombers too hard we can easily make adjustments. We do not want to "headshot" bombers, and we don't currently believe that these changes make them unviable.
I think some people came into this thread expecting it to be something completely different, and are therefore disappointed.
If you want to discuss our policies surrounding isboxer that is fine, but there are other threads for that.
ISBoxing or not, the cloak nerf affects and nerfs more than just the bombers, and affects them all negatively. I think your balance pass works right up until that point. Just my thought on the matter I guess.
I can send you plenty of videos of bombing ops going wrong if you need evidence that they don't really need nerfing themselves, but the ways to defend against them need to be buffed. |
Ghurthe
KRH Mining
0
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 01:40:00 -
[410] - Quote
Love the changes, everything except the 2km cloak thing.
That just makes ISboxing bombing runs super powerful while normal runs become awful. |
|
baltec1
Bat Country Goonswarm Federation
13641
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 01:53:00 -
[411] - Quote
Momiji Sakora wrote:CCP Fozzie wrote:These changes are intended to make it easier for fleets to counter bombers (whether the bombers are isboxed or not) and to make organization of characters valuable again for bombing. Organization of pilots is made easier in a lot of ways with isboxer, but that has always been true and isn't some new phenomenon coming from these changes.
We'll be watching these changes very carefully on SISI, and if this hits bombers too hard we can easily make adjustments. We do not want to "headshot" bombers, and we don't currently believe that these changes make them unviable.
I think some people came into this thread expecting it to be something completely different, and are therefore disappointed.
If you want to discuss our policies surrounding isboxer that is fine, but there are other threads for that. ISBoxing or not, the cloak nerf affects and nerfs more than just the bombers, and affects them all negatively. I think your balance pass works right up until that point. Just my thought on the matter I guess. I can send you plenty of videos of bombing ops going wrong if you need evidence that they don't really need nerfing themselves, but the ways to defend against them need to be buffed.
If everything else needs to be buffed to balance one thing then the one thing needs to be nerfed. Join Bat Country today and defend the Glorious Socialist Dictatorship |
Mike Azariah
DemSal Corporation DemSal Unlimited
1690
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 02:25:00 -
[412] - Quote
Okay, all caught up again.
Let me show you my notes . . .
Decloaking is the #1 issue. Solutions include: not doing it, formation warping, not applicable to people in fleet, ability to 'see' cloaked people in your fleet.
The 12sec rule allows a prepared fleet to have the instacanes and counter. Not overly hated.
The speed and agility and warp speed make the bomber feel like a pig, a destroyer pig. If it is a frigate it should move like a frigate.
A few voices in the wilderness are pointing out that Bombers are not the only cloakies. WH and Blops are being hit with the same bat as collateral damage.
There is an issue that bombers drive null doctrine towards armor. That may be and if bombers become more rare then this may drift back.
Those who argue that bombers are the counter to n+1 . . . really? The big groups are precluded from flying them and I wasn't told? Bombers are a way to make a fleet nervous and allows the little guy to punch above his weight, agreed. But do not try to tell me that the blobs cannot just as easily field the bombers
Note, I am not discussing ISBoxer, here. Changes to stealth, yes.
That do a decent summation?
m Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9 |
Yi Hyori
University of Caille Gallente Federation
13
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 02:37:00 -
[413] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Okay, all caught up again.
Let me show you my notes . . .
Decloaking is the #1 issue. Solutions include: not doing it, formation warping, not applicable to people in fleet, ability to 'see' cloaked people in your fleet.
The 12sec rule allows a prepared fleet to have the instacanes and counter. Not overly hated.
The speed and agility and warp speed make the bomber feel like a pig, a destroyer pig. If it is a frigate it should move like a frigate.
A few voices in the wilderness are pointing out that Bombers are not the only cloakies. WH and Blops are being hit with the same bat as collateral damage.
There is an issue that bombers drive null doctrine towards armor. That may be and if bombers become more rare then this may drift back.
Those who argue that bombers are the counter to n+1 . . . really? The big groups are precluded from flying them and I wasn't told? Bombers are a way to make a fleet nervous and allows the little guy to punch above his weight, agreed. But do not try to tell me that the blobs cannot just as easily field the bombers
Note, I am not discussing ISBoxer, here. Changes to stealth, yes.
That do a decent summation?
m
Pretty good summation. I would like to add that a potential change to bomb damage mechanics may help balance bomb damage. Basing bomb damage by distance to blast center and or applying explosion velocity to bombs similar to missile damage application.
the addition of ehp to bombers at the cost of sig radius is a slap to the face. slowing bomber align and slowing warp speed, is understandable, but also slapping a sig penalty is extremely heavy handed. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS.
2351
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 02:38:00 -
[414] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:
Note, I am not discussing ISBoxer, here. Changes to stealth, yes.
That do a decent summation?
m
Maybe do your job and raise the issue most represented on each page, every page of this thread? Or don't. Whatever. |
PotatoOverdose
Royal Black Watch Highlanders DARKNESS.
2353
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 02:49:00 -
[415] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote: Note, I am not discussing ISBoxer, here.
That do a decent summation?
m
Let me elaborate on my previous post a bit: it's pretty goddam clear both from every page of this thread and the reddit thread that the overwhelming consensus of the player base is that isboxed bombers are the problem, doubly so because regular bombing fleets have been marginalized to near obscurity.
This is, overwhelmingly, the position of the player base. On every forum, from Eve-O, to reddit, to failheap and on every news site, from TMC to EN24. Your job is to represent the community, not just to tell ccp what it wants to hear. Do your goddam job, or step aside for someone that will. |
Seraph IX Basarab
Hades Effect Surely You're Joking
438
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 03:01:00 -
[416] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Okay, all caught up again.
Let me show you my notes . . .
Decloaking is the #1 issue. Solutions include: not doing it, formation warping, not applicable to people in fleet, ability to 'see' cloaked people in your fleet.
The 12sec rule allows a prepared fleet to have the instacanes and counter. Not overly hated.
The speed and agility and warp speed make the bomber feel like a pig, a destroyer pig. If it is a frigate it should move like a frigate.
A few voices in the wilderness are pointing out that Bombers are not the only cloakies. WH and Blops are being hit with the same bat as collateral damage.
There is an issue that bombers drive null doctrine towards armor. That may be and if bombers become more rare then this may drift back.
Those who argue that bombers are the counter to n+1 . . . really? The big groups are precluded from flying them and I wasn't told? Bombers are a way to make a fleet nervous and allows the little guy to punch above his weight, agreed. But do not try to tell me that the blobs cannot just as easily field the bombers
Note, I am not discussing ISBoxer, here. Changes to stealth, yes.
That do a decent summation?
m
(not in any order)
It isn't that bigger groups cannot use Bombers Mike, it's that there's a law of diminishing returns in play that balances out bombers extremely well. You can only drop so many bombs on a target before there's no point to do so anymore. Numbers simply give you more chances to land bombing runs this is true, but for every bomber you have in fleet, that is one possible battleship or carrier you could have had instead. So the usefulness of bombers can be expressed thus:
http://cnx.org/resources/3beb349483fab0b8a0a265ed11d36b27/normal-curve.jpg
The more bombers you have the more bombs you can drop. At it's apex you reach the maximum amount of bombers required to destroy a sub cap fleet. Anything after that not only isn't anymore effective, but because a loss to your fleet as you're taking conventional ships out of the fleet. Basic economic principle, there's no such thing as a free lunch.
Bombers didn't drive doctrines to armor. I already detailed this in my previous post when I pointed out that shield doctrines were still extremely common after the update that let cloaked bombers be within 2km of each other. The sizes of battles due to unhealthy force projection drove doctrines to armor. With so many people on field, the goal became to be as durable as you could be. The larger the battle, the less mobility plays a role in combat. Once the battles become smaller because of the limiting factor of force projection and the need to travel conventionally via gates becomes more common, you'll find shield doctrines being more common. But then again even now what are people flying? Shield Isthars and Shield Rail Tengus. So this may not even be a valid point now.
Lastly "instacanes" were viable during the entire existence of bombers and still are. Hades Effect /-áConflict Resolution /-áPirate Protection |
Calvyr Travonis
The Martial Virtues Foundation
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 03:07:00 -
[417] - Quote
CCP Fozzie wrote:These changes are intended to make it easier for fleets to counter bombers (whether the bombers are isboxed or not) and to make organization of characters valuable again for bombing. Organization of pilots is made easier in a lot of ways with isboxer, but that has always been true and isn't some new phenomenon coming from these changes.
We'll be watching these changes very carefully on SISI, and if this hits bombers too hard we can easily make adjustments. We do not want to "headshot" bombers, and we don't currently believe that these changes make them unviable.
I think some people came into this thread expecting it to be something completely different, and are therefore disappointed.
If you want to discuss our policies surrounding isboxer that is fine, but there are other threads for that.
I think that the larger problem is not how the decloaking mechanic change affects stealth bombers, but how it affects every other ship that cloaks. While the change may improve things with SBs, it is definitely going to negatively affect any pilot that flies a covert ops ships. Anywhere. Ever. Say goodbye to wormhole PvP. In fact, there are a lot of aspects of wormhole life that will be heavily impacted by this change. As if wormhole life hasn't already been made more difficult in the last month or two, now you can't even move a fleet around cloaked without broadcasting to anyone who cares to hit a d-scan that you have a fleet in their hole?!
You don't solve a problem on one hull by screwing up every other hull that uses a crucial module on the problem hull.
-EDIT- All the other proposed changes look just fine to me and make sense, because they only affect the hull that is being targeted. Again, the problem is with the change to cloaked ships decloaking other cloaked ships because you're nerfing a lot of ships that there's nothing with as collateral. |
|
ISD Dorrim Barstorlode
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3429
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 04:23:00 -
[418] - Quote
Removed some off topic posts. ISD Dorrim Barstorlode Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Onslaughtor
Occult National Security
99
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 04:30:00 -
[419] - Quote
Please let us shoot bombs. Because 10 (12) secs to lock and shoot a bomb is totally doable especially by destroyers and AFs. This would be a good role for them in large fleets. I see no reason that this shouldn't be the case honestly. It makes more sense that the bomb should be destroyed than the bomber to mitigate damage.
Clokies decloaking others is going to be a pain for many many ships. I really hope you look at that one more carefully |
HiddenPorpoise
Under Dark Sins of our Fathers
272
|
Posted - 2014.10.17 04:44:00 -
[420] - Quote
The manticore is flatly better than the nemesis. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 .. 37 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |