EVE Search - Covert Ops Stealth Bomber

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Covert Ops Stealth Bomber

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:12:00 - [1] Edited by: Marcus Druallis on 14/12/2007 06:14:37 It's been suggested and suggested. Please make it come true. Everyone says SB's are pre-nerfed. This is the fix. It's not like a manticore can solo. Recon ships actually can, and they get their covops cloaks. What gives. --
twit brent Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:15:00 - [2] Because the people who suggest this never think it through.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:16:00 - [3] Originally by: twit brent Because the people who suggest this never think it through. Care to elaborate all wise one? --
twit brent Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:19:00 - [4] ok to explain further. A ship with a covert ops cloak that has no targeting delay is very very powerfull. The #1 drawback of the covert ops cloak is the targeting delay. If it wasnt for this the cloak would be rediculously overpowered. So either the stealthbomber has a targeting dleay with a covert ops cloak with destroys its role as an alphastriker and ganker, or you give it delay and suddenly its just a very weak recon.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:22:00 - [5] Tbh, what the hell is the difference. If I am camping a gate/station/belt watever, and I have the Improved cloak fitted, there is no delay there. How does this all of a sudden become overpowered if I can warp cloaked. I think you are just trying to make up reasons now. Cmon. You serious? --
6Bagheera9 Slacker Industries Cult of War	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:25:00 - [6] I can see how a Covert Ops Cloak would be unbalancing, but i wish they would nix the scan resolution penalty from cloaks for bombers.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:26:00 - [7] Originally by: 6Bagheera9 I can see how a Covert Ops Cloak would be unbalancing, but i wish they would nix the scan resolution penalty from cloaks for bombers. Which only raises another point, it's not like SB's instalock. They have crap locking time. And when you say it would be unbalancing, in what way? What is SO gamebreaking about having SB's being able to actually use 'stealth' (it IS in their name). --
twit brent Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:30:00 - [8] Originally by: Marcus Druallis Tbh, what the hell is the difference. If I am camping a gate/station/belt watever, and I have the Improved cloak fitted, there is no delay there. How does this all of a sudden become overpowered if I can warp cloaked. I think you are just trying to make up reasons now. Cmon. You serious? Because warping cloaked allows you to go and actively hunt things anywhere in system. There is no way you can escape from a cloaking ship that has insta lock. bombers would make rediculously good tacklers because they can go anywhere in system sneak up on enemies then instalock and tackle with no delay. This throws out the balance of covert ops cloaks completely and is the reason they use improved claok II's. That is why recons have targeting delay.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:34:00 - [9] Edited by: Marcus Druallis on 14/12/2007 06:35:15 Originally by: twit brent Originally by: Marcus Druallis Tbh, what the hell is the difference. If I am camping a gate/station/belt watever, and I have the Improved cloak fitted, there is no delay there. How does this all of a sudden become overpowered if I can warp cloaked. I think you are just trying to make up reasons now. Cmon. You serious? Because warping cloaked allows you to go and actively hunt things anywhere in system. There is no way you can escape from a cloaking ship that has insta lock. bombers would make rediculously good tacklers because they can go anywhere in system sneak up on enemies then instalock and tackle with no delay. This throws out the balance of covert ops cloaks completely and is the reason they use improved claok II's. That is why recons have targeting delay. Yes, I SUPPOSE they could tackle. BUT, they are slow as all hell, and are made of wet toilet paper. These are popped like pods bud. Recon's can actually tank, whereas the Stealth Bomber cannot. It's slow, fat, and weak. It's not much of a tackler. Trust me. EDIT: Also, as stated before. Their locking time is bad. They aren't instalocking. --
twit brent Dark Centuri Inc. Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:37:00 - [10] Originally by: Marcus Druallis Originally by: 6Bagheera9 I can see how a Covert Ops Cloak would be unbalancing, but i wish they would nix the scan resolution penalty from cloaks for bombers. Which only raises another point, it's not like SB's instalock. They have crap locking time. And when you say it would be unbalancing, in what way? What is SO gamebreaking about having SB's being able to actually use 'stealth' (it IS in their name). It might aswell be, When counting in delay a stealthbomber with a sensor booster or 2 can lock a decent sized ship before that ships knows whats happening. Anyway off that topic. Stealthbombers are not realy underbalanced. I know people whose stealthbombers put out 300+ dps at over 200km. That is way more than any other frigate can and from way outside alot of ships effective range. So a couple of cloaked stealthbombers and a bait ship can be very effective at ganking unwary targets. My taranis paired up with a stealthbomber has been very effective at taking down sabres and other similar ships.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:41:00 - [11] Originally by: twit brent Originally by: Marcus Druallis Originally by: 6Bagheera9 I can see how a Covert Ops Cloak would be unbalancing, but i wish they would nix the scan resolution penalty from cloaks for bombers. Which only raises another point, it's not like SB's instalock. They have crap locking time. And when you say it would be unbalancing, in what way? What is SO gamebreaking about having SB's being able to actually use 'stealth' (it IS in their name). It might aswell be, When counting in delay a stealthbomber with a sensor booster or 2 can lock a decent sized ship before that ships knows whats happening. Anyway off that topic. Stealthbombers are not realy underbalanced. I know people whose stealthbombers put out 300+ dps at over 200km. That is way more than any other frigate can and from way outside alot of ships effective range. So a couple of cloaked stealthbombers and a bait ship can be very effective at ganking unwary targets. My taranis paired up with a stealthbomber has been very effective at taking down sabres and other similar ships. Yes, but he probably had to wait about 30-40 seconds for the missiles to get there lol --
Kaiji Vincente	Posted - 2007.12.14 06:42:00 - [12] Originally by: 6Bagheera9 I can see how a Covert Ops Cloak would be unbalancing, but i wish they would nix the scan resolution penalty from cloaks for bombers. At the very least reduce it. The ship bonuses already scream for an Improved Cloak II on all but the most unorthodox configuration. Lock speed might not matter for bombs, but those are effectively 0.0 only weapons. Use one of these in empire, all the sudden lock time starts to matter in getting off that first salvo of cruise missiles.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 07:44:00 - [13] Even if they need to make a third t2 cloak with specialized attributes only usable on the SB.. --
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 16:51:00 - [14] thoughts? --
OOOSOOO Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.12.14 18:00:00 - [15] Warp while cloaked? Absolutely not. Why would anyone fly a cov ops anymore? I know I would pick the cov ops that could fit 3 cruise on it. If you review my posts from your previous thread, you will realize what your SB is good for. hiccup
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 18:03:00 - [16] Originally by: OOOSOOO Warp while cloaked? Absolutely not. Why would anyone fly a cov ops anymore? I know I would pick the cov ops that could fit 3 cruise on it. If you review my posts from your previous thread, you will realize what your SB is good for. The covops warps much faster, has a much higher agility (bubble escaping), scans much better. Next. --
OOOSOOO Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.12.14 18:08:00 - [17] Edited by: OOOSOOO on 14/12/2007 18:13:54 K, well cov ops cloak on SB is just *******. Can you give a good reason why it should be able to fit one? This game too hard for you or what? Edit: Try going to a busy system with a buddy in a fast inty and see what you can kill. hiccup*
Bruce Deorum Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.14 18:25:00 - [18] SBs with CML are fine IMHO, just ppl are "bored" to co-operate efficiently enough to use them, as opportunity targets are rare unless you get more than a handful of them and combine them with dedicated tacklers. twit brent says it all... Cov-ops = Cov-ops. Covert. Un-seen. Unnoticed. aka "Spies" of some kind. Stealth forces do more brute ops, yet as soon as they expose themselves, their position is compromised and their defense weak. aka. "Snipers" or "Stealth Bombers" - airplane bombers, or EVE SBs in our case You wonna something like a "007" super killer-spy... An I-win Pilgrim of some kind, with tank, Cov-Ops cloak, insta-lock and uber-alphas We all do...we all...it's just that these cruel devs are afraid of the wtfpwnffs fair whining they will receive, and choose to displease the few
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 18:43:00 - [19] Originally by: OOOSOOO Edited by: OOOSOOO on 14/12/2007 18:13:54 K, well cov ops cloak on SB is just ******. Can you give a good reason why it should be able to fit one? This game too hard for you or what? Edit: Try going to a busy system with a buddy in a fast inty and see what you can kill. As for the "going to a busy system with a buddy in a fast inty", that applies to all ships. That can apply to carriers... Also, the reason is, the SB should be able to move covertly. It is paper **in thin. It does not instapop anything but a goddamn frigate. What more do you want. It takes SEVERAL salvos to pop cruisers. It cannot tackle alone. And if it is locked, it is for the most part doomed. You provide reasons why it should not get covops or something similiar. --
OOOSOOO Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.12.14 18:53:00 - [20] Originally by: Marcus Druallis You provide reasons why it should not get covops or something similiar. 1. It can instapop frigates. 2. It can pop cruisers in SEVERAL volleys. Flying Stealth Bombers effectively requires patience. hiccup
Bruce Deorum Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.14 19:08:00 - [21] Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 14/12/2007 19:09:19 Originally by: Marcus Druallis Also, the reason is, the SB should be able to move covertly. It is paper **in thin. It does not instapop anything but a goddamn frigate. What more do you want. It takes SEVERAL salvos to pop cruisers. It cannot tackle alone. And if it is locked, it is for the most part doomed. You provide reasons why it should not get covops or something similiar. Can you please connect my post to your post? I'll help you: Originally by:** Bruce Deorum SBs with CML are fine IMHO, just ppl are "bored" to co-operate efficiently enough to use them, as opportunity targets are rare unless you get more than a handful of them and combine them with dedicated tacklers. So, according to your own sayings: #1) one volley can instapop a frig #2) several volleys can pop a cruiser To mine: #3) ppl are bored to co-operate efficiently enough to use them, cause you need more than a handful (read several) combined to get more opportunity targets. Extra thoughts #4) Cruisers are slower to align and generaly cannot accelerate fast enough to speed tank a SB. Take #1-#2-#3-#4 and combine them: * Alone you can instapop a frigate! * More SBs can deal with a cruiser or an indy much faster, or with more than one frigates! * Several can instapop a cruiser or an indy! - NO TACKLERS NEEDED! * Many can make short work out of MANY-MANY things, helped by tacklers at least! But as I said already, don't try to make a solo wtfpwn mobile out of a SB. Sleep on the thought that there is the slightest possibility to insta-pop a pimped (rigged) Ceptor or EAS in it (see, more expensive targets introdused for you!), and be happy with it!
OOOSOOO Gallente Federal Navy Academy	Posted - 2007.12.14 19:13:00 - [22] Originally by: Bruce Deorum Edited by: Bruce Deorum on 14/12/2007 19:09:19 Originally by: Marcus Druallis Also, the reason is, the SB should be able to move covertly. It is paper **in thin. It does not instapop anything but a goddamn frigate. What more do you want. It takes SEVERAL salvos to pop cruisers. It cannot tackle alone. And if it is locked, it is for the most part doomed. You provide reasons why it should not get covops or something similiar. Can you please connect my post to your post? I'll help you: Originally by:** Bruce Deorum SBs with CML are fine IMHO, just ppl are "bored" to co-operate efficiently enough to use them, as opportunity targets are rare unless you get more than a handful of them and combine them with dedicated tacklers. So, according to your own sayings: #1) one volley can instapop a frig #2) several volleys can pop a cruiser To mine: #3) ppl are bored to co-operate efficiently enough to use them, cause you need more than a handful (read several) combined to get more opportunity targets. Extra thoughts #4) Cruisers are slower to align and generaly cannot accelerate fast enough to speed tank a SB. Take #1-#2-#3-#4 and combine them: * Alone you can instapop a frigate! * More SBs can deal with a cruiser or an indy much faster, or with more than one frigates! * Several can instapop a cruiser or an indy! - NO TACKLERS NEEDED! * Many can make short work out of MANY-MANY things, helped by tacklers at least! But as I said already, don't try to make a solo wtfpwn mobile out of a SB. Sleep on the thought that there is the slightest possibility to insta-pop a pimped (rigged) Ceptor or EAS in it (see, more expensive targets introdused for you!), and be happy with it! Well said. I think the OP just wants SBs to be true solo ships. Which they are not. hiccup
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 19:46:00 - [23] No, the arguments that you are posing are just stating that the SB can pop ships too quickly. That has nothing to do with the ability to warp cloaked. Your arguments do not touch upon that at all. Also, you say that I want this ship to be a solopwn ship. How the **** do you gather this argument. Am I asking for a boost in damage? The ability to tackle while I shoot missiles? A boost to its hp? An ability to tank? Nah. Nope. Not one of those. Just the ability to move cloaked. So not everyone and their mom knows where the hell I am, so that MAYBE targets of opportunity will present themselves. I don't cry myself to sleep when im in a nano ship and bam a rapier uncloaks and wtfpwns me. Why are you crying when I cannot even suprise you unless you stumble upon me. Fun. --
Hannobaal Gallente Igneus Auctorita GoonSwarm	Posted - 2007.12.14 20:03:00 - [24] The Stealth Bomber is a more powerful ship than any other in its size and price class in Eve. It doesn't need a boost.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 20:27:00 - [25] Originally by: Hannobaal The Stealth Bomber is a more powerful ship than any other in its size and price class in Eve. It doesn't need a boost. Well that depends entirely on how you define "powerful". A well piloted inty will destroy a SB. A well piloted inty will most likely pop anything an SB can pop, and can also tackle and has much higher survivability. So, your logic is kinda faulty. --
Bruce Deorum Minmatar Mythos Corp RAZOR Alliance	Posted - 2007.12.14 20:52:00 - [26] Originally by: Marcus Druallis No, the arguments that you are posing are just stating that the SB can pop ships too quickly. That has nothing to do with the ability to warp cloaked. Your arguments do not touch upon that at all. Also, you say that I want this ship to be a solopwn ship. How the **** do you gather this argument. Am I asking for a boost in damage? The ability to tackle while I shoot missiles? A boost to its hp? An ability to tank? Nah. Nope. Not one of those. Just the ability to move cloaked. So not everyone and their mom knows where the hell I am, so that MAYBE targets of opportunity will present themselves. I don't cry myself to sleep when im in a nano ship and bam a rapier uncloaks and wtfpwns me. Why are you crying when I cannot even suprise you unless you stumble upon me. Fun. Fair - still the SB is pretty capable of camping a gate, a belt or a station (outpost) just as it is. Having no target delay after decloaking is a far better tactical advantage for a stealthed camper, and any recon pilot complaining about the delay in acquiring a target after de-cloaking close to it, knows that. The SBs get 2x bonuses in cloaking modules - traveling speed and no targeting delay. Having a 3rd to be able to warp while cloaked would be too much, don't you think? Unless you are willing to sacrifice one role bonus or switch another lvl dependant bonus for it. Should you lose the sig-radius bonus, you'd start to complain that suddenly you cannot insta-pop even the un-tanked frigs you could! Should you lose your dmg bonus, you'd find out that SBs are all about Alpha strikes and useless without it cause effective HPs can't "hold" for more than 1-2 volleys Should you lose the no-delay to lock feature, you'd start to complain about all the frigs warping out before you could possibly lock em, even with sensor boosters... Should you lose the speed-when-cloaked bonus, you'd start to complain that it's impossible to remain on a gate after compromising you position, as you are slower than a freighter and your only practical mean of relocation around a given gate or station while cloaked would be having multiple SS around it, warping out to a celestial and warping back. So practically you are asking for a fourth role bonus on a darn under-utilized ship with well-thought mechanics to back it up, already boosting more role bonuses than any other specialized ship... And suppose you get it...should be a fifth skill-Dependant bonus for the cov-ops cloak, but a bonus similar to the one the cov-ops frigs get according it's CPU req. reduction would be too much...I mean, these get the 98-100% CPU req reduction cause they also fit recon probe launchers, their "role" module...and these "cost alone" more than effectively 4 Cruise launchers in a SB...after the darn role bonus...its a bit too much to ask for a similar bonus, don't you think? I mean, the Cov-ops gets something like 40-50CPU more than a SB, and still that makes for a tight fit with the Recon Probe launcher. Would you fly a SB with just 1 cruise launcher and the current bonuses as an exchange for a cov ops cloaking? cause realistically that could make up for it...I mean, you cannot push EVERYTHING in that lil ship... That would take 3 Cov-Op Bombers to pop a single frig... Take 3 "simple" Stealth Bombers and pop cruisers instead
Multras Caldari D00M. Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.12.14 21:33:00 - [27] Edited by: Multras on 14/12/2007 21:34:01 NO, how many times are these threads going to pop up? Grow some skill noobs, the ship is fine. And I would really love to see an inty pop my manticore, it wont happen. Thanks to EVE Art Store for the sig.
Marcus Druallis Quantum Industries Interstellar Alcohol Conglomerate	Posted - 2007.12.14 22:30:00 - [28] Originally by: Multras Edited by: Multras on 14/12/2007 21:34:01 NO, how many times are these threads going to pop up? Grow some skill noobs, the ship is fine. And I would really love to see an inty pop my manticore, it wont happen. Fine, it won't. You'll just stay cloaked mr. elite. --
Sokratesz Rionnag Alba Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.12.14 22:42:00 - [29] They already get bonuses to bring the impcloak nearer to the covops - the only thing they would gain is a few seconds locktime and the ability to warp cloaked - which really doesnt sound too bad considering they suffered greatly from the damp nerf. Originally by: ISD Cortes You're at liberty to use the rolling sig you had, as long as there's no chimeras covering the nether regions of voluptuous females.
Selene Le'Cotiere Amarr I-Omniscient-I	Posted - 2007.12.14 23:02:00 - [30] Why not doubling the SB speed bonus while cloaked? Just a thought... or not _________ "You will be a drone in the hive of an insane Queen, existing solely to provide the ship with needs, links in a chain too complicated for you to understand." - Story: Hands of a Killer

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.