| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Auron Shadowbane
   |
Posted - 2006.12.20 20:20:00 -
[61]
I think the bomber class should be able to mount citadells. they are the biggest punch out there and come closest of all eve weapons (short of ddd) to the tactical nukes of nowadays (well even bane torps description says it is a tactical nuke but they arent realy).
the primary bonus should be a dread-like bonus to citadell damage, the second one a bonus to lower their sig ratio. they should have a hidden bonus so POS doesnt target them as long as other big ships (Bs and caps) are around.
otherwise I could imagine a "tactical nuke guidance recalibrator" which works like a siege module and modifies a normal torpedoes' values (damage, flight time, flight speed, expl velocity,...) to that of a citadell torpedo. this would save expensive cap weapons and training time.
at sime time the module would blast the bombers sig ratio by 500% like a mwd (maybe decreasable by the modules' skill). basically you would then have an anti battleship bomber which can switch to anti pos/capital mode.
|
Sir Drake
|
Posted - 2006.12.20 23:21:00 -
[62]
The problem i see with citadel torps is their launcher description (size of a small frigate) and the torps small volume (0.6m3).
And a bomber just shouldnt be able to fire several salvos of them, giving them efectivly the same firepower as the caldari dread.
So to make them realisticly available to the cov ops bombers it would be necessary to bring another launcher into EVE. Some kind of missile rack with only a 1-3 citadel torps per rack and a rather long RoF would be appropriate. Ammo would still be a bit too small for my taste (too many reloads even with frig sized cargo) but that cant be helped without hurting the caldari capitals.
Also another factor is the time to get the skills for these babys!
At least torps lvl5 will take some time for most ppl that are able to use the cov ops bombers atm.
Anyone has a real idea what kind of damage 3 citadels torps do to a BS?
(i dont have the skills for the citdel torps)
-------------------------------------------------------
Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer
I like that. 
|
Sir Drake
|
Posted - 2006.12.20 23:21:00 -
[63]
The problem i see with citadel torps is their launcher description (size of a small frigate) and the torps small volume (0.6m3).
And a bomber just shouldnt be able to fire several salvos of them, giving them efectivly the same firepower as the caldari dread.
So to make them realisticly available to the cov ops bombers it would be necessary to bring another launcher into EVE. Some kind of missile rack with only a 1-3 citadel torps per rack and a rather long RoF would be appropriate. Ammo would still be a bit too small for my taste (too many reloads even with frig sized cargo) but that cant be helped without hurting the caldari capitals.
Also another factor is the time to get the skills for these babys!
At least torps lvl5 will take some time for most ppl that are able to use the cov ops bombers atm.
Anyone has a real idea what kind of damage 3 citadels torps do to a BS?
(i dont have the skills for the citdel torps)
-------------------------------------------------------
Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer
I like that.
|
Garonis
Caldari
Templars of Space
CORE.
|
Posted - 2006.12.23 03:38:00 -
[64]
Well, here is an idea, make covert ops cloaks Built into the ship. no need to fit the module
its already part of the hull.
I really like the idea of cloaked approach, with a massive dammage weapon, one that can seriously effect a BS's shields/armor. perhaps 2-3 of these craft could possibly take out a bs. give it a massive reload time to make it not practical to solo said BS. that would be a great ship to carry surgical strikes with ^^
This is my sig ^^ |
Atrial Quartz
Gallente
|
Posted - 2006.12.23 04:08:00 -
[65]
The only complaint i have about my current stealth bomber is...
"Why in the name of god does someone being locked on to me prevent me from recloaking?!"
Outside of the holy name of game ballence this does not make sence. the entire reason i want to re cloak is because I am now exposed in a paper thin frigate with a time delay attack. But someone can lock, fire & warp scramble me in seconds and i'm dead. Now i agree there should be a significant cool down time that it takes before i can recloak but right now it's just absurd.
The damage of the cruise missles used to be formidable but now is pretty pathetic. Why CCP designed a class of ship that was made spesificaly for non sustained fights then went and changed all ships hp just to prolong a fight the stealth bomber shouldent have been in does not make any sence unless something is changed. For now you need something like a crew of 4 or more SB's each with ewar fittings to attack a single lone cruiser. the price point here just dosent match.
|
Neky Lyk
|
Posted - 2006.12.24 11:35:00 -
[66]
i see a lot of good ideas here, ppl actually think  , j/k
CCP should really fix this. along with the t1 destroyers which are also useless the way they are now. except for salvaging 
we sould make a petition or something(a vote would be nice, but hey... it's not phpbb, hopefully the web-probie/newbie will do something about it )
P.S. bump, bump, bump... 
=EvE= =EvE= =EvE= =EvE= =EvE= =EvE= =EvE=
i am a carebear. i barely care. |
Caleb Paine
Infinite Technologies
|
Posted - 2006.12.24 12:28:00 -
[67]
Give them a siege mode; Damage multiplayer at the cost of not being able to move (you can still cloak ofcourse)and perhaps including an explosion velocity bonus. Make it a 2 minute cycle, so they can be found out while having those bonuses on.
---------------------------------
INFINITE TECHNOLOGIES
We provide solutions for your problems
Contact us on our forums or ingame |
Karon Wodens
LFC
|
Posted - 2006.12.24 13:50:00 -
[68]
Look, how about just handling Stealth bombers the star trek way? That way alway made sense to me.
Cloaked vessels there are capable of sneak attacks with deadly efficiency, but cloaking requires that you go to low power mode, almost like a submarine avoiding detection.
This means that a cloaking cov ops ship would forego many of it's subsystems. Shielding, reducing targeting proficiency, etc. And of course seeing as activation weapons requires a surge of power from the ship itself, that event would in fact uncloak the vessel.
Regardless, I do agree with the fact that It shouldn't show up in local... in fact... I don't understand why anyone shows up in local at all! Why on earth would I announce my presence if I'm trying to travel hidden.
Caldari Prime: Think of that moment, remember what they did...
|
CrestoftheStars
Deviance Inc
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2006.12.24 14:58:00 -
[69]
i have never used a stealth bomber... but to me 125% exstra dmg instead of the 25%..
seems a bit overpowering... maybe if you said 50% or 75% i would look at it with more reasonable eyes...
but with this... will lets say it like this, i would be going for 110dmg or so each rocket, with a rof on 2,10..
3 rocket launchers... giving a dps on 157 with a t2 cloaked frigate...
this would be more then insain...
maybe you should think abit about the bonusses before setting them up;) hehe
 Originally by: Lockheed Lightning
Actually, the 25% increase to damage plus a simple 'no penalty to targeting after decloaking' will make the stealth bomber useful again.
Right now its decloak... give the other guy enough time to see you and start targetting you BEFORE you can target them... shoot missiles just outside NOS range... watch the target jump out before the 2nd volley hits them.
yay for stealth bombers. The only thing they bomb is their own wallets.
|
Karon Wodens
LFC
|
Posted - 2006.12.24 16:43:00 -
[70]
I dont see the logic behind such immense damage bonuses... I mean, how on earth do they squeeze the potential out of such a small missile where a missile intensive battleship can not do so?
Caldari Prime: Think of that moment, remember what they did...
|
|
|
FactorzGT
Quantum Industries
|
Posted - 2006.12.24 19:13:00 -
[71]
a couple ideas from my experience w. my Manticore
1) bonus to missile velocity i.e. it reaches the target faster
2) penalty to flight time to yield same effective range as normal stats
3)better warp stat - it should be able to cross long systems in one warp
4) bomber gangs not practical because no one can see each other ... all gang members should be able to see other cloaked gang members in space ... only in gang
additionally, while everyone is yakking about realism don't forget one fact ... the ship is still a physical object in space ... the cloak fools other high tech forms of detetion but brutually low tech systems exist to flush out such ships
because of the poor interface of manual maneuvering in EVE ... the 2K range rule should not apply ... only an actual bump should decloak
however a high slot module and a rig slot module should be introduced that can decloak ships ... and who better but the super low tech minmitar to develop it
|
Ranira
Masuat'aa Matari
Ushra'Khan
|
Posted - 2007.01.07 10:38:00 -
[72]
/bump for the good ideas in here
-----
The most simple way to make Stealth Bombers useful again... |
Garonis
Caldari
Templars of Space
CORE.
|
Posted - 2007.01.08 14:39:00 -
[73]
/bump, Please CCP Breath new life into this shipclass!
This is my sig ^^ |
VJ Maverick
|
Posted - 2007.01.13 04:36:00 -
[74]
I'm not sure if this analogy has been mentioned but I see the Stealth Bomber as the equivalent of the Rogue class in fantasy RPG's - in other words the primary damage dealer. Sneak attacks, poisons/distracts, HUGE damage but no tank. The EVE equivalent should be a ship that can do the following things:
1. Strike FIRST from a hidden state.
2. Deliver a TON of front-loaded damage at the expense of sustained DPS.
3. Be able to temporarily jam/disable an opponent effectively but for a very short period of time.
4. Be able to escape quickly after performing its attack.
The trade-off to these abilities would be:
1. No tanking or sustained combat ability whatsoever. In other words, if your e-war fails or if your attack takes longer than anticipated and you get drawn into an extended battle, you WILL lose.
Comments?
|
Lane A'lusin
Gallente
Freelancer Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 07:03:00 -
[75]
Of all the suggested fixes I only like 2:
1)Getting rid of the target lock delay from decloaking (thus targeting and firing right out of cloak).
2) a missile velocity increase.
A simple missile velocity increase seems like the easiest fix, because it would increase the threat that the bomber COULD do more damage, and it wouldn't change what the bomber already does now (which I assume is how they envisioned the stealth bomber to work). The "suprise" factor of the de-cloak and immediately fire path also seems to have the spirit of a "stealth bomber", but would take one of 2 fixes: either stealth bombers would have to be able to use cov ops cloaks, or there would have to be some new mid slot module that lets the bomber target while cloaked. Though using the cov ops cloak would, in a way, let you de-cloak and unload faster than you could previously (and I would sure like to use a cov ops on My bomber), it would also make you wicked fast when cloaked which would make the bomber a little too good. And its not that hard to imagine that a skilled small group could seriously harass a superior force by unloading a round/jamming then cloaking and moving to a new spot (at 660m/s) and rinse and repeat. So unfortunately, I don't think we'll see the cov ops on bombers any time soon. The second option, of the mid slot module that lets you target while cloaked, would likely work better with no foreseeable added drawbacks other than the loss of a mid slot.
Just my long winded 2 cents |
Talthrus
Sharks With Frickin' Laser Beams
Mercenary Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 07:22:00 -
[76]
What I've always wanted to see Stealth Bombers have is more unique racial weapons. For example, while Caldari should keep the traditional missile concept, wouldn't it be great to see Amarrian bombers firing some type of energy bomb? You could even introduce a new weapon subtype for the main groups that could be used on bombers so the races that are not so missile-inclined can continue training in their respective areas. Could be interesting but may be hard to implement in the end.
----------------------
|
Sir Drake
|
Posted - 2007.01.14 08:30:00 -
[77]
Or to offer a totally different approche:
Keep the ship like it is but give them the unique ability to target sub-system (with a ship scanner module).
1-2 salvos for a hi-slot module (wouldnt you love to disable the targets guns that way?)
3-4 salvos for a mid slot module (more hits needed because of the modules deeper integration in the ship)
6-8 salvos for a low-slot module
some % of the damage goes to the shield/armor but the rest leaks through
It would be a rather sweet way to make them usefull for killing/disableing ships with strong tanks.
-------------------------------------------------------
Sig was removed due to derogatory comments towards a group of people. -Karl Chroimcer
I like that.
|
Ironpole Ironpole
|
Posted - 2007.01.30 16:33:00 -
[78]
I think that there should be a balace between the Stealth bombers. What i mean is that right now there is only one SB that really gives any dmg and that is the Manticore and that is just wrong there should be 3 launchers on each type of SB BUT to diversify them i believe that each race should have its own bonus to dmg, ie. Gallente +5% dmg with thermal, Minmatar with explosive... This in my opinion would allow each race to fly its SB with some kind of use.
Ironpole
|
VJ Maverick
Caldari
Maverick Specialized Services
|
Posted - 2007.01.31 04:30:00 -
[79]
Originally by: Sir Drake
Or to offer a totally different approche:
Keep the ship like it is but give them the unique ability to target sub-system (with a ship scanner module).
1-2 salvos for a hi-slot module (wouldnt you love to disable the targets guns that way?)
3-4 salvos for a mid slot module (more hits needed because of the modules deeper integration in the ship)
6-8 salvos for a low-slot module
some % of the damage goes to the shield/armor but the rest leaks through
It would be a rather sweet way to make them usefull for killing/disableing ships with strong tanks.
Why would I spend 6-8 salvos to disable a low slot module when the same 6-8 salvoes are good enough to completely destroy most ships in their entirety, assuming Mnanticore and maxed out skills.
The one change I WOULD LOVE to see in the SB is to allow me to warp cloaked. That would complete the entire "stealth" aspect. The "bomber" aspect is fine.
|
Ashen Dreams
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 09:22:00 -
[80]
Could all of you interrested in this thread answere a few questions pls?
1) Cover ops cloaking, as you fire it would uncloak
2) Preferably torpedos bassiacly MASSIVE ALHPA but low low DPS... like some people said a citadal that fires like 3 with a salvo of4 launchers? I have no idea the damage does but ....
3) about 50 to 70 km....
4. Battleships and small POS....
|
|
|
Ashen Dreams
|
Posted - 2007.02.12 09:26:00 -
[81]
*edit* alright two Dread like launchers for ohter races, races prospective for weapons..... but ya...... and warping while cloaked would be great!!!!!!!!
|
MSC Darklord
|
Posted - 2007.02.18 22:08:00 -
[82]
Maybe make them warp faster? 3au is too slow.
|
Lunarra
Paradox v2.0
Tactical Narcotics Team
|
Posted - 2007.02.19 03:10:00 -
[83]
Edited by: Lunarra on 19/02/2007 03:07:21
Edited by: Lunarra on 19/02/2007 03:06:57
OK, i am a regular stealth bomber pilot and i don't know where you guys got this idea that stealth bomber are totally and utterly useless in there present state! I had many great kills on them and absolutly love them!
It is just not an easy ship to use and be efficient with. But once you have a well oiled way to use it they can be a real extrem pain in the buttex for those that are falling under their fire.
Saying that they could indeed be much much more improved and so far the only idea that seems interresting and sensible is the ability to target while cloaked.
On the other hand this idea of 10000000000+ damage is just ridiculous. a frig popping a BS???!!!! LMAO all gang would have one of them, warp to close range of the target pop here goes your BS. Oh! a capital ship, bring 3 frigs it will go down like a cruiser! What are you thinking about i ask you?
Stealth bombers are stalkers that choose their prey. They are a lion trying to feed, does the lion always get fed?
|
Nachshon
Caldari
Gradient
Namtz'aar k'in
|
Posted - 2007.02.19 18:56:00 -
[84]
I had an idea a while back. Basically, I said that stealth bombers should be able to warp and target while cloaked. Then give them an ROF penalty, and further weaken them so they can't survive any form of sustained combat.
A stealth bomber will attack in the following way:
Warp in (while cloaked)
Target (while cloaked)
Decloak-fire-warp away
Meanwhile, the non-Caldari stealth bombers need extra missile slots.
__________________________________________
What I say should not be taken as the position of Gradient or NMTZ. |
scthes wench
|
Posted - 2007.02.19 21:26:00 -
[85]
Edited by: scthes wench on 19/02/2007 21:23:58
Edited by: scthes wench on 19/02/2007 21:23:44
A possible and fairly simple change would be a cruise missile built specifically for the stealth itself giving it the ability to fire then decloak and lock the target but you must be at said distance from target or missile will not have time to acquire target ie 100 km for min launch distance and must obtain lock by 60 km or missile just goes astray or can actively seek its own target much like some modern weapons can.
Then a speed bonus to the missile once target is acquired much in the way a cruise works by gaining altitude and diving in on its target.
Along with some that are just area of effect weapons which could be a possible base for the gang effect weapons they are looking at utilizing to get rid of the blob battles that are nothing more than lagfests.
Area of effect could possibly be targeting disruption warp disruption (dont care for this idea since dictors already exist) the other problem being it yet produces another ship and weapons system meant for lowsec only but hey if your gonna pvp do it where it matters and quit ganking noobs in the belts
|
Seriya
Caldari
Phoenix Knights
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 01:39:00 -
[86]
I seem to recall reading something about a 'really big bomb' for stealth bombers in a semi-recent dev blog?
I think something new in on the cards within the year...
|
Chief Judge
|
Posted - 2007.02.20 02:52:00 -
[87]
Edited by: Chief Judge on 20/02/2007 02:51:05
I took 20 mins and read all this..
Then i took another 200 mins thinking this over..
( i have lots of experience of balancing games and roleplay.. 12 long years behind me..)
And i came to a conclusion which will everybody love..
Giving that needed oomph for SB whilez not giving them too much power..
AND revelation hp boost is ideal for balancing SB AND something that all non Caldari SB runners yearned for..
Read everything before judging please..
1.add one more cruise launcher to all SB.. and perk up the fitting bonus for cruise launchers
-that way u get dmg bonus u need,bringing SB up-to-date with Revelations,AND close the gap beetween Manticore and other SBs,while maintaining Caldari missle supremacy..
-making all SBs deadly again..
-ATM Caldari have 50% more DPS then rest.. which in time forces SB ppl to fly caldari SB
-after adding one more launcher it would have 33% more DPS which is still nice advantage whilez ppl could fly their racial SB
2.eliminating sensor recalibration just for SB.. or cutting it -50% at least,(if eliminating is overpowering)
-which is more balanced than passive targeting since u still have to lock frig longer than a battlecruiser..
(i though about allowing SB to target whilez cloaked VIA passive targeter..
THAT WILL ALLOW PLAYERS TO VIRTUAL INSTALOCK ALL THE SHIPS NO MATTER THE SIZE.. so frigs WILL NOT have a good time with these :)
( i like the 1nd option more since it is more balanced)
3.i would introduce -25%penalty to ROF on SB launchers..
-it is funny and overpowering to see SB ships giving the same DPS as BS.. This way SB would have greater alpha strike which are they supposed to have..
since cutting sensor recalibration time allows ppl to certainly be able to see the fruits of their 1st wolley,2nd wolley should be riskier to launch, in turn forcing attack- recloak-redeploy-attack rutine to be used more,or working in groups..
and Voila.. fix for bombers without much programming issues..
Conclusion..
-Better survivability for bombers(no sensor recalibration=more time to recloak and redeploy/run)
-greater Alpha strike.. which SB are supposed to do
-not so much greater DPS cause ROF penalty(no solo gank pwn mobile)
which forces SB to operate in teams..
(and which is going to satisfy all those nagging how can a SB deal more DPS than BS.. :)
CCP.. will ya consider me as game balancer? :))
I have lots of ideas..
Croatia forever!
Mirko 'CROCOP' Filipovic new UFC champ!! :)
|
zwe1
|
Posted - 2007.03.24 07:15:00 -
[88]
BUMP
Please make some kind of change CCP ;) some good suggestions here
|
Meditril
|
Posted - 2007.03.24 08:03:00 -
[89]
Dear CCP developer team,
to come back to the title of this thread and after reading all the threads I propose the following simple changes in stealth bombers:
1. Double the scan resolution of stealth bombers. Stealth bombers have to use cloaks which have heavy negative effects on scan resolution. The rise of initial scan resolution of this ships would help them in their role of figate/interceptor killers since this allow them to target much faster after decloaking.
2. Raise the racial damage bonus per cov op level from 5% to 10% to give them a slightly higher alpha strike.
That's all, this should be really easy to implement and it should boost the stealth bombers in a way making them attractive without making them too overpowered.
Best regards,
Meditril
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 [3] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |