| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 11 post(s) |
Sha'ara Sha'amashira
   |
Posted - 2007.06.04 22:08:00 -
[151]
Edited by: Sha''ara Sha''amashira on 04/06/2007 22:27:54
okay from playing with these suckers on the test server i can say 1 thing, they are too expensive. sure in large groups stealth bombers would be able to kill just about anything, but the problem is that the only alliances and people that will be able to fly such a fragile ship that will cost so much against blobs, are the alliances that already use loads of blobs. If they didnt do quite so much damage, they are already gonna have a relatively high skill requirement so people are gonna be at least halfways limited in using them, and then cost only about 2 mil for the damage bombs and 5 mil for the lockbreaker and energy nuetralizer bombs. This way smaller alliances with pilots who dont have the massive amounts of capital that would go with flying a ship with an 80 mil cargo for a full compliment of bombs in the launcher and in the cargo hold. No smaller alliance would be able to really afford to keep sending ordinance like that at enemy blobs. If the price and damage they do are both dropped i think they would be more effective at breaking up blobs by allowing those people usually fighting blobs to get there hands on these and actually use them. No ammo type in the game should ever cost 20 million a round.
I also agree with those who said it should be launchable but only if the damage values of the bombs are further dropped and they have a very long range with slow speed and long flight time so that the people in the blob have at least a chance to react to the bomb coming in, and if they dont notice it then it their fault they get hit. Thus roving gangs of stealth bombers would still be a blobs worst nightmare, but not one that cant be combated.
In addition i think a falloff mod of some type so that it has a 10km max damage and then the damage decreases for maybe 15 km out from that so that the farther from the bomb you are the less damage it will do.
|
Missuri
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 11:39:00 -
[152]
I agree, the new weapons are far to expensive, especially the Bombs. I thought once have seen in the dev Blogs that CCP aims fights that run more tactical based and less "I have won because I have the bigger gun".
But I think especially the Remote ECM Burst will do exactly the oposite. You will enter a system, fire with your 3-4 MS on the enemy and they will run again or die while your hundreds of battleship are shooting them in pieces.
The Bombs are a good idea to make more teamwork. I think the key thing here is teamwork. I would suggest focusing more on "Team Weapons" for strategical weapons not only the basic "Oh look I got the bigger gun you die" thing. At the moment you simply have to count the number of enemy players in Local and then you decide fight or retract. I dont think this is inteded.
Make it more tactical with an ECM Bursts which needs a beacon from a player. Like a stealth bomber who starts a beacon at the point where the weapon should spread out.
Same thing for the Triage. It should open a field around the ship. Making it even indestructable like a pos. Imagine the fight? You would need to install some kind of weapon to break this field around the carrier / Mothership.
All this are only thoughts about making war more ... lets say going into deep. You should be able to win a fight even if you have lesser Battleships and less fire power or turning a fight into some kind of Chess. Even if you lost most of your fleet you still have a chance to win.
Some thoughts.
Yours Missuri
|
Rigsta
Gallente
Raddick Explorations
Executive Outcomes
|
Posted - 2007.06.06 19:51:00 -
[153]
I don't think the bombs are designed to actually kill a battleship blob outright (well maybe an untanked one), rather give them something to worry about when combined with your own fleet's firepower.
 Originally by: Jim McGregor
I felt the disturbance... it was like a million voices suddenly stopped whining for a second. Unfortunantly it then continued.
|
|
CCP Fendahl
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 15:57:00 -
[154]
A small update:
The speed changes to the stealth bombers didn't get approved, so they have been reverted to TQ speeds (cloaked and uncloaked). The bombs also have been given more suitable names:
- EM Bomb -> Electron Bomb
- Thermic Bomb -> Scorch Bomb
- Kinetic Bomb -> Concussion Bomb
- Explosive Bomb -> Shrapnel Bomb
- ECM Bomb ->Lockbreaker Bomb
- Energy Bomb -> Void Bomb (though "Sucker Bomb" was quite popular at the office
 )
Finally, the warp speed and warp capacitor needs on the stealth bombers were incorrect: the warp speed has been increased to 6AU/s like other frigates and the warp capacitor need on the Manticore and the Hound has been brought inline (decreased) with the Nemesis and Purifier.
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Have you actually tried doing this? Getting multiple bombers and an interdictor into position while under cloak isn't going to be possible. Until we get a feature where we can see gang-mates even when they're cloaked, the bombers are almost inevitably going to get within 2000m of each other and de-cloak. And you need multiple bobmers, a single bomb won't do enough to be worth the 20 mil.
Cloaked ships don't decloak other cloaked ships.
Originally by: Moonaru Izu
The Manti as it is on Sisi today does have a nerf  With the same skills as on TQ is has (hold your socks!) 0.7 PG less. This small deviation makes it that it is now impossible to fly the same layout on Sisi as on TQ (on TQ I have exactly 0.0 PG left  ) with the same skills. On Sisi I had to train Weapons upgrade to 5 and advanced weapons upgrade to 1 just to online the last module that I have been using on TQ for the last half year without these skills. It would be appreciated if this very minimal deviation could be resolved because it saves people about 9 days of training just to fly the ship as they have been flying it for some time.
The Manticore should have slightly more grid left after the changes. Currently you get a 19.72% reduction in cruise missile launcher power need per level plus an additional 5% reduction per level per covert ops level. The power need multiplier should thus be: (1-0.1972*5)*(1-0.05*5) = 0.0105 (i.e. -98.95%), which is a smaller reduction than the new -99% power need bonus. Are you sure you have the same skills and are using the same setup as on TQ? If so, please file a bug report on it with more info (e.g. the setup you're using) so I can look into it.
Originally by: Mainreh Rhonaki
Well, bombs will be a fun addition to fleet level action.
However, my understanding is that they are meant to break up the blob. I don't understand how that is supposed to happen?
Reading dev blog it's getting hot in here Tux says he wants to introduce AoE weapons to counteract the powerball.
...
Furthermore, Tux's quote puts a bewildering contradiction. If there are already several AoE weapons, why do we need another? Or, put another way, if extensive testing has resulted in the range of smartbombs and ECM bursts at ~6km, how come bombs get 15km? What is so different with these that they need much greater range and higher damage output than smartbombs?
The bomb will change the face of the powerball, but it will have no effect on its DPS. You will not get any less OMGWTFPWNd in Revelations 2.
In CCP-speak "powerball" refers to a cluster of ships within close proximity of eachother. The AOE weapons do not combat "blobs" (many ships in the same grid), but they encourage fleets to spread out their forces a bit (avoiding "powerball" formations). This could in turn enable flanking attacks on weak spots in the enemy formation.
As for Tux's comment I can't say for sure, but I think he meant that while AOE weapons currently exist, they are not a serious deterrant to powerballs (neither were they designed as such). The new AOE weapons, however, are aimed specifically at this issue.
|
|
|
CCP Fendahl
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 15:58:00 -
[155]
Originally by: Emo Jelli
Edited by: Emo Jelli on 29/05/2007 20:21:44
Can some sort of Bomb Fuse skill be added too - which gives the option to shorten the detonation timer ?
Or perhaps even a Remote Detonation skill which also requires a Remote Detonator (hi-slot) module. 
*EDIT: Whilst we're on the subject - why oh why are there no STICKY BOMBS being developed either  *
While it would be a cool idea, the purpose od the detonation timer is not only to give you time to escape, but also give your enemy time to react. With remote detonators the enemy would have little or no time to do anything, which could make bombs overpowered.
Originally by: Gaogan
If carriers are to be able to assist dreads and other carriers in seige/triage mode, then there needs to be a limiting factor to prevent the unbreakable circle. I suggest that limit be cap. I suggest that the triage mode NOT double the repair amount of remote reppers ( when used on anything smaller than a cap ship, this doubling won't matter anyhow as one cycle should fully repair ). That way the reduced cycle time accelerates the rate of remote repair, and helps switch targets, but does not reduce the amount of cap needed per hp repaired. Then a carrier in triage mode will be able to help another carrier or dread that is taking focus fire, but not for long as the cap will run out.
Triage Mode would probably not be worth it without improved efficiency, since increased through-put is fairly easy to get by fitting more remote reps. If carriers in Triage Mode could target eachother in Triage Mode then they could use Egress Port Maximizer rigs to decrease the cap need of energy transfer arrays and run a "cap factory" even if Triage Mode didn't increase efficiency. This would then allow for clusters of nearly invulnerable carriers that can sustain their cap forever.
Originally by: Moonaru Izu
A critical note on bombs 
...
You are killing the enemies but you are destroying the loot aswell!! With the current price of bombs this makes them even less cost effective, if not an ISK sink. When you kill ships you would want the loot to make a few isk.
This is by design in order to limit the grief potential.
Originally by: Aiyleena Iluvatar
what about changing Bombs from dmg types to ecm or similar???
why not have painting, ecm, eccm(for devence AoE weapons??), webbing, tracking disruptor or dampner bombs????
At the moment we have ECM burst bombs and energy drain bombs in addition to the damage bombs. While such bombs could be cool, the current system does unfortunately not allow for effects that have a duration, so target painting, sensor dampening etc. is not possible without code changes.
Originally by: Aramendel
For the current sisi build (32813) this is NOT that case. I can drop a bomb at a gate and jump though right away.
Thanks for bringing this up. The aggression system does not work as intended when the module does not directly affect other ships, so this issue has been resolved/hacked by removing bombs when the ship that launched them jumps out/docks. Hopefully this would get a more logical fix at later point.
|
|
B Glorious
Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 17:49:00 -
[156]
Why'd you give triage mode ewar immunity? Too many people complained about sensor damps?  |
Frabala
Caldari
Perkone
|
Posted - 2007.06.07 18:24:00 -
[157]
Don't know if this has been answered. Currently on Sisi, bombs don't "belong" to the pilot who launched them as far as killmails are concerned. Will this be fixed or it is too late for the next patch?
|
Merin Ryskin
FinFleet
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 06:37:00 -
[158]
Originally by: CCP Fendahl
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Have you actually tried doing this? Getting multiple bombers and an interdictor into position while under cloak isn't going to be possible. Until we get a feature where we can see gang-mates even when they're cloaked, the bombers are almost inevitably going to get within 2000m of each other and de-cloak. And you need multiple bobmers, a single bomb won't do enough to be worth the 20 mil.
Cloaked ships don't decloak other cloaked ships.
Are you sure about that? Is this a recent change? Because I know I've been de-cloaked a couple times by accidentally running into another stealth bomber, and a lot of recon cruiser guides I've seen say you need to be careful when working in gangs for exactly that reason.
But even if this is now working as you say, it's still the lesser of the problems. The biggest problem is going to be avoiding your targets, especially if they deploy drones. Add in lag preventing precision flying, and approaching under cloak just isn't going to be practical. You're going to be de-cloaked long before you reach the target. At least with the covert ops cloak, you might catch them being careless and get lucky.
But once again, the two things that need to be done:
1) REDUCE BOMB COST. EVE does NOT need another fancy toy for the richest alliances. EVE does NOT need another potentially fun addition that's out of reach of the average player. The cost isn't even remotely balanced... you're talking at least 100 million ISK per shot to have a chance of killing anything, and a lot of bombs lost to warping out/dead bombers/etc. It's just absurd that bombs do far less damage than a doomsday shot, but cost MORE.
2) ADD THE COVERT OPS CLOAK: Scrap the damn bombs if you have to, any ship without the covert ops cloak is NOT a stealth ship. Announcing your arrival on the overview is NOT stealthy. The result is fitting for stealth is almost completely pointless. With bombs, you're better off warping in on a covert ops frigate. With cruise missiles, 95% of the time you're within range the moment you warp in, so there's no point in sneaking around under cloak, especially when your enemy already knows you're there.
So very simply: ADD COVERT OPS CLOAKS TO BOMBERS AND MAKE THEM A USEFUL SHIP. THEN WORRY ABOUT ADDING BOMBS. If the cloak is enough to make them a useful ship and unbalanced with bombs, move the bombs to a new ship class. If that's not enough, THEN worry about what kind of bombs we can safely add without being overpowered.
|
fartajlerKapa
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 12:59:00 -
[159]
The speed is the same? So to launch a bomb you then have to warp away?
|
big5824
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 16:40:00 -
[160]
DONT MAKE CLOAKED SHIPS PROBABLE!!!!!!!! THE ONLY REASON PPL USE EM IS THAT THEY CANT BE PROBED!!!!!!!
|
|
|
CyberChick
Dark Knights of Deneb
Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 17:03:00 -
[161]
Edited by: CyberChick on 08/06/2007 17:02:26
Please reverse the skill requirements for the triage module - logistics 5 is very skill intensive for a capital ship that already takes up to 60 days for the remote repair modules over the skill requirements need to fly a combat dread with siege module. 
|
Fenderson
Endgame.
|
Posted - 2007.06.08 19:01:00 -
[162]
just how much range does triage mode give you?
the primary problem i see is that with the introduction of player control (and hence focus-firing) for POS guns, you can pretty much guarantee that a well set up POS will be able to kill a carrier in triage mode. The only possibly defence against this that i can see would be to place the carrier(s) outside of the POS's range (several hundred km).
|
arbalesttom
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 02:47:00 -
[163]
Originally by: DrDopehat
Originally by: Blue Pixie
Originally by: CCP Fendahl
The next patch also makes it possible to detect cloaked ships with scan probes, so the BS fleet could have its scouts scan for hidden surprises.
Yeah, why dont we just stop using the name cloak and waste the whole point that thing is called a cloak. Another reason to stop playing eve? I really hope this is a joke, like nerfing the shieldrecharge time on bc's...
|
arbalesttom
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 02:49:00 -
[164]
Originally by: big5824
DONT MAKE CLOAKED SHIPS PROBABLE!!!!!!!! THE ONLY REASON PPL USE EM IS THAT THEY CANT BE PROBED!!!!!!!
OMG DAMN YOUR MAKING A BIG POINT!
|
Kyoko Sakoda
Caldari
Omerta Syndicate
Exuro Mortis
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 16:53:00 -
[165]
I still can't get away from my own bomb blasts on SiSi...
Learn what it means to be Caldari with Omerta Syndicate |
Moonaru Izu
Caldari
I.Z.U Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 17:21:00 -
[166]
Hi Fendahl
First of all thanks for the feedback. I've done some testing SB and I have some more information for you.
Originally by: CCP Fendahl
The speed changes to the stealth bombers didn't get approved, so they have been reverted to TQ speeds (cloaked and uncloaked).
That is very unfortunate, especialy with the bomb deployment which kinda is dependant on speed. If you are slow it takes quite a while to get in the right spot and drop the bomb. Then you have the 15sec delay. All in all this does add up. Considering how long the average fight in EVE takes the fight might be over by that time.
I also filed a bugreport on the speed (bugreport #38284).
However, There is still an issue on Sisi with the cloaked speed of a Stealthbomber. This has been for a couple of weeks now and no fix yet. When using an improved cloaking device II with cloaking at level 4, a SB does NOT give a higher speed when cloaked as uncloaked. According to the description and how it works on TQ today, this should be the case. I didn't file a bugreport for this because I was told by the Bughunters this was a known issue (and I reckoned a BR existed already)
Originally by: CCP Fendahl
Finally, the warp speed and warp capacitor needs on the stealth bombers were incorrect: the warp speed has been increased to 6AU/s like other frigates and the warp capacitor need on the Manticore and the Hound has been brought inline (decreased) with the Nemesis and Purifier
Confirmed to be working, at least for manticore
Originally by: CCP Fendahl
Cloaked ships don't decloak other cloaked ships.
This is definately NOT true, unless this is new functionality for revelations 2.
...continued below
|
Moonaru Izu
Caldari
I.Z.U Syndicate
|
Posted - 2007.06.09 17:21:00 -
[167]
..placeholder..
|
Chruker
|
Posted - 2007.06.10 10:04:00 -
[168]
Current impressions on the bombs:
- They need much larger effects :-)
- It should have a proper model when launched in space. Currently it is the same as the regular probes.
----- http://games.chruker.dk/eve_online -----
Top wishes:
- No daily downtime
- Faster training on sisi
- Updated data export
- Speedup IGB table rendering |
Forsch
Auctoritan Syndicate
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.10 10:34:00 -
[169]
Originally by: CCP Fendahl
Bombs shouldn't be too easy to destroy either, since they will become pointless otherwise. Currently you need bring (somewhat) specialized ships if you wish to eliminate bombs, but this might of course change based on how testing pans out.
Can you drop bombs directly on a gate? How would you destroy such a bomb then? You cannot activate smartbombs below a certain range to a gate. Maybe large smartbombs can, I'm not sure.
So the small ships that could get in range of the bomb cannot destroy it because small/medium smartbombs don't reach far enough. And the big ships whose large smartbombs could reach the bomb cannot get there fast enough.
I'd like to see the same restriction that we have for smartbombs (aka. cannot active closer than xxxx meters to a stargate) to be applied on bombs AND dictor probes.
While we're on dictor probes, let them count as aggression. Dropping bubbles and jumping is just ridiculous. Dictors are fast enough to move out of their own sphere.
Forsch
Defender of the empire
|
Forsch
Auctoritan Syndicate
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.10 10:36:00 -
[170]
P.S. bombs would still be hard to destroy seeing as you cannot target them. Ever tried to MWD towards something that you cannot target? And then detonate the smartbomb at the correct time. Not counting lag..
Forsch
Defender of the empire
|
|
|
Dasani Waters
Cadence.
|
Posted - 2007.06.11 04:40:00 -
[171]
Important question:
When multiple pilots drop bombs near each other, does the first bomb destroy all the other bombs around it?
If so, then only 1 bomb can be dropped every 15 seconds.
|
Adia Celeris
Caldari
Nemesis Industries
Xelas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.11 05:28:00 -
[172]
Edited by: Adia Celeris on 11/06/2007 05:29:00
Edit: please feel free to move this to a more appropriate thread
Quick reply to the covert ops cloak issue:
Its a double edged sword. As a CO pilot I really don't want cloakers being probed. And as a fleet commander I'm sick of players running a CO alt to scout and using logoff tactics to harass (scout, log fleet with no agro timer, relog via TS and move behind enemy lines).
This all comes down to the question of local. Is it a tactical device? If it is (like it is now) then we damn well need to probe and eliminate cloakers. I hate to say that. Local is the weapon of the CO pilot in combat and quite honestly take that into consideration.
My poor, poor pilgrim is going to have a rough time in the next patch. Unless we don't have local.
|
Forsch
Auctoritan Syndicate
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.06.11 07:45:00 -
[173]
Originally by: Dasani Waters
Important question:
When multiple pilots drop bombs near each other, does the first bomb destroy all the other bombs around it?
If so, then only 1 bomb can be dropped every 15 seconds.
Bombs have incredible resistance against their own damage type. You cn use multiple of the same kind.
Forsch
Defender of the empire
|
Flex Nebura
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.06.11 09:34:00 -
[174]
Edited by: Flex Nebura on 11/06/2007 09:39:59
Quote:
A small update:
The speed changes to the stealth bombers didn't get approved, so they have been reverted to TQ speeds (cloaked and uncloaked).
So the plan is to make the SB pilot warp out as soon as he drops the bomb?
Quote:
Bombs
Bombs are a new type of weapon which can only be deployed from a stealthbomber. They require a special launcher to use and are deployed much like a probe. Once launched, bombs do not move, do not show up on the overview and cannot be targeted, though they can be destroyed by area of effect weapons (smartbombs etc). Detonation occurs after 15 seconds after deployment regardless of whether the stealthbomber that launched it is present, so it is possible to launch the bomb and warp out. Bombs come in three flavors:
Personally I would really like bombs to move, either with thier own propulsion or at the speed of the ship launching them so they would work more like probes, except for the much shorter range and the blowing up part.. And err.. do probes show up on overview? Anyways.. when I first heard about the bombs I was hoping the would be an unguided but mobile weapons system. And I was looking forward to having fun aiming it at enemy fleets.
I realize this changes much of the concept of bombs, but thats what I was hoping they would be.
Oh and I havent seen this mentioned anywhere: Do the Bomb Launchers use a missile hardpoint?
Because the probe launchers dont. That should be easy enough to answer.
|
PHPR Freighter
Minmatar
PTS Industries
United Corporations Against Macros
|
Posted - 2007.06.11 22:18:00 -
[175]
I was starting to love bombs until I read they were 0.0 only...
That was because bombs may cost 20 mil, cov ops cost 10 or so mil.. stick a 2 bombs on and launch them both after 1 second apart, and you got 5-6 dead macros and possibly podded as well
This would have been an awesome tool to use against macros and farmers.
Scream if you support Macro Pirating. |
Araxmas
The Blue Dagger Mercenery Agency
|
Posted - 2007.06.11 22:22:00 -
[176]
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
Originally by: CCP Fendahl
Originally by: Merin Ryskin
1) REDUCE BOMB COST. EVE does NOT need another fancy toy for the richest alliances. EVE does NOT need another potentially fun addition that's out of reach of the average player. The cost isn't even remotely balanced... you're talking at least 100 million ISK per shot to have a chance of killing anything, and a lot of bombs lost to warping out/dead bombers/etc. It's just absurd that bombs do far less damage than a doomsday shot, but cost MORE.
2) ADD THE COVERT OPS CLOAK: Scrap the damn bombs if you have to, any ship without the covert ops cloak is NOT a stealth ship. Announcing your arrival on the overview is NOT stealthy. The result is fitting for stealth is almost completely pointless. With bombs, you're better off warping in on a covert ops frigate. With cruise missiles, 95% of the time you're within range the moment you warp in, so there's no point in sneaking around under cloak, especially when your enemy already knows you're there.
So very simply: ADD COVERT OPS CLOAKS TO BOMBERS AND MAKE THEM A USEFUL SHIP. THEN WORRY ABOUT ADDING BOMBS. If the cloak is enough to make them a useful ship and unbalanced with bombs, move the bombs to a new ship class. If that's not enough, THEN worry about what kind of bombs we can safely add without being overpowered.
My opinion on those. The bomb cost is okay because tbh why should a bomb insta pop a BS?
Bit excessive dont you think. 20mill is fine by me for bombs, although dont get me wrong any price reduction is fine by me aslong as it does not get too common. I'm not a rich player or a big alliance but I am wise with my money so I can obtain bombs easily and will probably only use for special ops.
And last point is the covert ops cloak. Frankly I can happily make do with just the normal imp cloak as I make sure that i'm there far before the enemy is. Blobs however can prove a problem but to be honest it depends how you have your fleet co-ordinated. If your bombers warp in with the main fleet than you can stealth relativly un-noticed once warps stopped. If you want to be the pre-emtive strike than yeah covert ops is the way to go. I personally cannot see a way to balance it as adding the covert-ops cloak will make the bombers over-powerd imo.
--------
Robbie Rotten left me |
Duhmad IbnRa
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.06.12 07:28:00 -
[177]
scanning for standard cloaks --> yes
triangulating standard cloaks --> yes
scanning for covops cloaks (multispectral only) --> YES
triangulating covops cloaks -->definitely NO WAY
change local to delayed --> hell yeah
As for bombs, why not make them remote detonated: bomber deploys bomb, moves ~20 klicks, cloaks, waits, blop jumps in, bomber detonates the bombs... makes the use of bombs safer and the use of a cloaking device reasonable..
As for the price.. are you guys nuts????
If you dont want it to be used in missions think of something else, why not make NPCs smarter, or deadspace effecting the remote detonation mechanism..?
_________________________________________________
For more players and action in lowsec
|
Tonto Auri
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2007.06.12 13:54:00 -
[178]
Speaking on CovOps cloak: my post 3 month ago
SB's DEFINITELY need Covert cloak.
Other ships may or may not heve ability to use it, but all coverts required to have it, especially in case of bombs cost.
20mil... Hell yea, I can afford that cost even for personal use, no prob. Leave 00 gatecamp playing with small surprise after me - priceless pleasure, but You know it's ammo? Give us ability to use it, at least!
--
. |
Tonto Auri
Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2007.06.12 14:18:00 -
[179]
Ah, one more.
Speaking on cruise launchers...
Current stats of Cruise launchers by CPU consumption are:
Cruise Missile Launcher I - 60 (22%)
'Malkuth' Cruise Launcher I - 57 (21%)
'Limos' Cruise Launcher I - 54 (20%)
XT-9000 Cruise Launcher - 51 (19%)
'Arbalest' Cruise Launcher I - 48 (18%)
But in comparison with other launchers' family (for example Heavy Missile launchers family, but You may be sure it the same for other):
Heavy Missile Launcher I - 50 (22%)
'Malkuth' Heavy Missile Launcher I - 40 (18%)
Advanced 'Limos' Heavy Missile Bay I - 45 (20%)
XR-3200 Heavy Missile Bay - 48 (21%)
'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher - 43 (19%)
it must looks like:
Cruise Missile Launcher I - 60 (22%)
'Malkuth' Cruise Launcher I - 48 (18%)
'Limos' Cruise Launcher I - 54 (20%)
XT-9000 Cruise Launcher - 57 (21%)
'Arbalest' Cruise Launcher I - 51 (19%)
%% calculated from sum of all family
CPUx% = Bx/(B1+B2+B3+B4+B5)
--
. |
Anti Zorrill
|
Posted - 2007.06.12 20:53:00 -
[180]
Maybe this is just me...
40 ships (team A) "powerball" into a system being gate-camped by 5 SB's (team B) with "bombs". SB's are cloaked. SB's wait till BS fleet decloaks. SB's drop bombs and get blown up. 40-ship gang killed in one shot by 5 frigs.
Assuming poor case scenario for SB's...
Team A total losses and costs (insurance included) 1bn+
Team be total losses: 200m ~
Again...maybe I'm out of my tree here, but whats the point in playing a game where cloaked ships arent actually invisible anymore, Tanked ships can be popped by something 1/10th of thier size, and capital ships w/ special remote tanking capabilities (where they sac thier only offence) DONT HAVE THE CAP TO USE THIER REMOTE TANKERS?
Add in the new weapons for giant alliances (can anyone say BoB?). I'm getting the feeling that the dev's have something shall we say...personal? in mind...
I'm also getting the feeling it might be getting on time to find myself a new MMO.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |