EVE Search - Stealth Bombers (Long post)

All Channels

Ships and Modules

Stealth Bombers (Long post)

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Wild Rho Amarr Silent Core	Posted - 2008.08.24 09:47:00 - [1] Being somewhat of a fetishist for frigates it's always bothered me that the stealth bombers just aren't that useful in general combat except for novelty/comedy ops. Current problems with the stealth bombers... The ship: - Slow and poor agility Especially for a frigate making it very vulnerable to pretty much every weapon you can think of with no tank to speed of and no real ability to evade damage. - Cannot warp cloaked Any element of surprise is gone unless you're already in place before the targets are on grid. - Tight fitting restrictions This severely limits the fitting options for the frigate for no clear reason. Its slot count and role already restrict the uses of the bomber. The weapons (cruise missiles): - High alpha, low dps With cruise missiles the bomber is only effective against soft targets it can kill in one volley. It doesn't have the survivability to hold down most tougher targets for multiple volleys or the dps the break any proper tank unless in groups - even in groups stealth bombers are still only really effective against much smaller slower groups. Other frigate type gangs can engage and disengage more effectively due to both higher dps and survivability. The weapons (bombs): - One launcher Each bomber can only mount a single launcher that can hold two bombs. After both bombs are expended the bomber either needs to sit decloaked for just over 10 seconds to reload or warp out and back in. - Launcher cycle time There is a cooldown delay between bomb deployment however the hud provides no way of knowing when that cooldown period is over without risking decloaking and attempting another bomb deployment. Lag effects can make using an external timer unreliable. - Bomb cost Arguably the greatest limitation of all with bombs cost around 10mil per bomb give or take. Again due to high risk during bomb deployment this limits the number the pilot will wish to carry during an engagement and the damage dealt is simply not cost effective, the same applies to EW based bombs including voids. - Bomb volume Another limitation making bombs difficult to use far from a home base where they can acquire fresh ammo. A designated supply ship is not practical due again to the high cost per bomb. - Limited simultaneous deployment Bombs can destroy each other and even though bombs of the same damage type are hardened against their native damage the maximum number that can be deployed is limited to 3 to 5 bombs approx depending on the pilots skills. Anymore and bombs will destroy each other. Summary... Simply put the time, isk cost and effort required to deploy bombs is just not worth the damage they can inflict when other ships easily contribute more to a fleet.
Wild Rho Amarr Silent Core	Posted - 2008.08.24 09:47:00 - [2] Possible solution... - Allow the bomber to use the covert ops cloak (warping cloaked). - Increase the cpu and pwg of bombers to give them more flexability. - Remove the ability to mount and use cruise missiles. - Allow bombers to mount up to 3 bomb launchers. - Increase the bomb launchers capacity to 4 bombs. - Luancher cycle time is changed to match the cooldown time. - Reduce the bombs cost to approximatly 1mil per bomb. - Increase the bombs flight range to 30kms. - Allow bombs to be lockable and destroyable by other players ships. - Double the bombs hitpoints to its native damage. - A new low slot bomb damage module that can take scripts. The base stats of the module do not change the bombs damage or explosion range and only one can be fitted to a bomber. The first script could be called focused explosion: It reduces the bombs blast range to 5kms but increases the bombs damage by 100% (smaller blast range, double damage). The second script could be called explosion amplifier: It increases the bombs blast range to 30kms but reduces the damage by 50%. - A new low slot bomb deployment modifier that can be scripted. Again the base stats of the module do not change anything and only one can be fitted. The first script could be called Deployment Accelerator: It reduces the bombs flight time and increases the bombs speed therefore reducing the time it takes the bomb to reach its target while maintaining the same engagement range. The second script could be called Launcher Accelerator: It reduces the cycle time of the bomb launcher allowing a fresh bomb to be launched sooner. - Create a new tech 2 destroyer hull that essentially functions like stealth bombers do now with regards to cloaking and cruise missiles, however allows it to mount 8 cruise batteries with a stiff rof penalty. Summary... The purpose of the above is to make bombs much more viable as a weapon by allowing individual bombers to be more effective at positioning covertly and deploying the bombs themselves. Increasing the fittings gives the bomber pilots less of a headache when trying to fit out the ships, and there is little risk of overpowered setups being produced due to the nature of the bombers role and its slot limitations: restrictive cpu and pwg is unecessary. The ability to mount multiple launchers and carry more bombs per launcher allows a bomber to remain in the field for far longer before having to disengage and reload (an issue other frigates and most other ships do not have to contend with). Increasing the launchers cycle time to match the cooldown time is really just the simplest way I can think of to indicate to a player when a launcher is ready to fire again, in either case something is needed in this regard. *Reducing the bombs cost makes them more cost effective to use and risk deployment with, however they remain costly enough to not be casually tossed around. Increasing the bombs flight range to 30kms is intended to work with the ability for other players to lock and shoot down the bombs. This gives the slower defenders (such as battleships) some ability to defend against bombs that can now be effectively deployed in greater numbers at once. Fast ships are already capable of easily evading bombs if they are paying attention, if they aren't...well tough shit buddy. Doubling the hitpoints also plays into this while at the same time increasing the number of bombs that can be deployed at once. The low slot modifiers are intended to give bomber pilots some flexibility in customising their deployment by focusing damage into a smaller area with a higher risk of missing or chosing to reduce damage but hit a wider area at once. They can also attempt to increase their chances of getting a faster bomb past the defenders or going for a faster cycle time to hit the targets sooner.
Wild Rho Amarr Silent Core	Posted - 2008.08.24 09:48:00 - [3] The purpose of the new destroyer is to take part of the original bombers abilities and improve upon it with a slightly different approach. With the new destroyer being able to mount 8 launchers it can provide a huge alpha for a small ship but the rof penalty ensures that it can't out damage a battleship. Maintaining the inability to not warp cloaked is important in order to prevent such a ship from becoming stupidly overpowered. This idea still needs work but the main focus of this post is the bombers and bomb deployment. *Note: During writing this it occured to me a possible anti bomb defence may be defender missiles. However the module would likely require the removal of needing a launcher point and instead making it neutral like nos and neuts are. This gives the defenders the option to sacrifice a high slot for bomb defence or to gamble on not needing one. Either way I havn't thought this part out yet but wanted to toss it in here while I remembered.
Furb Killer Gallente The first genesis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.08.24 10:27:00 - [4] What someone suggested and what is imo a pretty good idea is using stealth bombers as anti falcon weapon. It has high sensor strength, decent range (allthough maybe a bit too short) and will make the falcon run. Okay you wont destroy it, but it is at least something when to falcon is running.
Kagura Nikon Minmatar Infinity Enterprises	Posted - 2008.08.24 11:10:00 - [5] Originally by: Furb Killer What someone suggested and what is imo a pretty good idea is using stealth bombers as anti falcon weapon. It has high sensor strength, decent range (allthough maybe a bit too short) and will make the falcon run. Okay you wont destroy it, but it is at least something when to falcon is running. your missiles disapear after you are jammed. So its uselless unles you can uncloak at < 20 km from them. The best anti falcon weaposn is still an apo firing tachyons at 220 km... ------------------------------------------------- If brute force doesn't solve your problem... you are not using enough
Lady Valory Caldari Caldari Strike Force	Posted - 2008.08.24 11:30:00 - [6] The SB is fine as it is . . . For example, the amarr one can be plated with a 200mm RL plate, and damage control for about 3000 effective armor... I know it isn't the regular set up, but that is a pretty brutal SB... Next, they shine a lot more in gangs since the damps got nerfed... SO, your complaints are somewhat valid, but let me offer this... A "submarine" class--the next generation of SB... The "submarine" class will be a cruiser hull with three torp launchers and be like a stealth bomber, just bigger... It's role is anti-bs or anti cap if you plate it like a heavy dictor...
Furb Killer Gallente The first genesis Veritas Immortalis	Posted - 2008.08.24 11:36:00 - [7] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Furb Killer What someone suggested and what is imo a pretty good idea is using stealth bombers as anti falcon weapon. It has high sensor strength, decent range (allthough maybe a bit too short) and will make the falcon run. Okay you wont destroy it, but it is at least something when to falcon is running. your missiles disapear after you are jammed. So its uselless unles you can uncloak at < 20 km from them. The best anti falcon weaposn is still an apo firing tachyons at 220 km... But you do have almost BS like sensor strength, add one or two ECCM and that falcon needs many of its jammers to keep you jammed.
achoura	Posted - 2008.08.24 11:38:00 - [8] SB fill the anti bs roll well already, if you've got 2 or 3 + 1 cloaked dictor. While it's true, all of the ops issues, they really do perform far more like subs that bombers, and every issue there could be attributed to a sub, although i find 500+ m/s cloaked gang speed with only cov ops 4 far from slow, and i think 180 ds is reasonable with medicor skills considering my 175km range. Yes, it requires far more skills and experience than any other frigget, cov ops experience is a real must, but the fire-power for the size is undisputed, 5 bombers output bs dps while reining far more agile and difficult to catch. "It doesn't have the survivability to hold down most tougher targets" if you're trying to hold a target down, you sir, are doing it wrong *The EVE servers and their patches*
Prometheus Exenthal Genos Occidere	Posted - 2008.08.24 14:41:00 - [9] Edited by: Prometheus Exenthal on 24/08/2008 14:42:27 @Wild Rho -YES covops cloaks WOULD be nice, but then there would be no need for covops frigates, and these ships would become slightly OP. -battleship-sized weapons on a frigate, stop whining -bombs still need to be tweaked yes, and smartbombs (correct damage type) can destroy them -agility is much much much better after the proposed nano nerf Up to this point I accepted your opinions and have given you some thought, but then I read that you want to remove the ability to use cruise missiles? Are you **ing **ed? If there is one thing that comes across after your long post, it's that you have no bloody idea how to fly a stealth bomber and just want it to be molded into your shitty little niche. And seriously, if you're trying to hold down a large target, with a bomber, you're doing it SO wrong. Get a ing inty friend. Originally by:** Kagura Nikon your missiles disapear after you are jammed. So its uselless unles you can uncloak at < 20 km from them. The best anti falcon weaposn is still an apo firing tachyons at 220 km... Ummm, a nemesis can use submarine tactics AND lock/fire over 200km AND fit 2 ECCM (84ss), it's not exactly easy to jam. And no, they don't disappear if they are within X range of the target, they will still hit. - FRIGANK
fkingfurious	Posted - 2008.08.24 15:30:00 - [10] Stealth Bombers are great as they are tbh. Over half the DPS of a Cruise fitted Raven (250 odd if memory serves), 150+km range, frigate level missile precision and they go speedy when cloaked, which gives them a huge survivability boost as its possible to instantly warp when you decloak, making you as uncatchable as if you were warping cloaked. Anyone whos used them knows that that the inability to warp cloaked isnt as big of a drawback as everyone pretends, and as pointed out just about every time the topic comes up, a Covop cloak fitted Bomber would render the standard cov-ops frigs useless. Plus the high scan res you can achieve with a few sensor boosters and the lack of sensor recalibration time means that when you do get the drop on a juicy target they are gonna have fractions of a second to react after you uncloak before the missiles start raining down. Basically. Learn to fly the ship.
Derek Sigres	Posted - 2008.08.24 17:44:00 - [11] Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Furb Killer What someone suggested and what is imo a pretty good idea is using stealth bombers as anti falcon weapon. It has high sensor strength, decent range (allthough maybe a bit too short) and will make the falcon run. Okay you wont destroy it, but it is at least something when to falcon is running. your missiles disapear after you are jammed. So its uselless unles you can uncloak at < 20 km from them. The best anti falcon weaposn is still an apo firing tachyons at 220 km... Actually, your missiles DON'T disappear after your jammed. You can also unlock a target and your missiles follow their target until impact or burnout. You can also conduct a "tactical" (on grid) warp and your missiles continue to function. However, if you EXPLODE I do belive your missiles stop working, and if you leave the grid your missiles stop working.
Apoctasy The Python Cartel	Posted - 2008.08.24 20:05:00 - [12] Edited by: Apoctasy on 24/08/2008 20:06:46 OP is wrong on almost all fronts, besides bombage (they are too expensive). I fly bombers almost exclusively and removing the ability to use cruise missiles is a joke. I operate in lowsec where bombs cannot be used. Stealth bombers are particularly great for small gang pvp, as they can dish out a ton of damage for a relatively cheap fit. I also fit targeting range damps on mine for added gang support. Your point of view is very narrow and only considers nullsec combat. ----
Khraunus	Posted - 2008.08.24 20:18:00 - [13] Obvious troll is obvious.
Spaztick Canadian Imperial Armaments EVESpace	Posted - 2008.08.24 20:33:00 - [14] SBs are fine, l2p. But seriously, more people should have some type of spacer in their sigs to show it's not part of the post.
Merin Ryskin Peregrine Industries	Posted - 2008.08.24 21:23:00 - [15] Originally by: Prometheus Exenthal -YES covops cloaks WOULD be nice, but then there would be no need for covops frigates, and these ships would become slightly OP. Please keep up with game mechanics updates over the past couple years. This was a valid complaint with the old, and incredibly broken, probe system, as the only thing a covops frigate was good for was scouting under cloak. But now that probes have been fixed to actually work, covert ops frigates have a priceless role that a covops bomber doesn't threaten. Until you show me a stealth bomber setup that can scan down a target in under 30 seconds, stop whining. Anyway, the simple fact is bombers are useless without the covops cloak. Anything a "stealth" bomber can do, a cloaking cruise Raven can do better. Until this problem is fixed, stealth bombers will be a joke ship.
Lindsay Logan	Posted - 2008.08.24 22:42:00 - [16] Originally by: Furb Killer What someone suggested and what is imo a pretty good idea is using stealth bombers as anti falcon weapon. It has high sensor strength, decent range (allthough maybe a bit too short) and will make the falcon run. Okay you wont destroy it, but it is at least something when to falcon is running. Making a ship class to counter one ship is in my opinion stupid. :S
6Bagheera9 Slacker Industries	Posted - 2008.08.24 23:00:00 - [17] Don't much care for any of the OP suggestions. The real problem with SBs is a confusion over their role. Supposedly they are meant to be a little ship that specializes in killing big ships, but their missiles are slow(meaning longer flight time) and they have this extreme bonus to explosion radius that makes them better suited to ganking frigates. I'm thinking of throwing together a cruise Hound to support recon gangs, but I'm hesitant because I fear that I will have to get dangerously close in order to for my missiles to reach the target before its dead or I have to warp out. I'm under the impression that missiles go dead if you cloak while they're in-flight(it would be too powerful if they didn't).
Nomad Storm Ad Astra Vexillum Hydra Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.24 23:28:00 - [18] Edited by: Nomad Storm on 24/08/2008 23:31:17 I had an idea similar to the destroyer hull but with the idea that it would use torps instead of cruise missiles. As for the proposed fixes I can agree, people may say that bombers are fine but when I do its nearly laughable.
Mikael Mechka	Posted - 2008.08.25 01:59:00 - [19] As far as I can tell, stealth bombers currently pose some pretty big problems for miners, at least where I am. A bomber can sit at a belt, wait till people show up to mine (could take a while for them to decide he's afk in local), decloak, pop a mining ship or a hauler if someone has been jet-mining. He then recloaks or (preferably before his attack) uses his scanner to find an empty belt and warps to it after his attack. This makes it hard for defending forces to pin him down and they have to escort their ships, or be forced to move to other systems to mine. Guerrilla tactics can be very effective. Though for a buff... I personally like the sound of a torpedo bomber.... :)
Tefkros The Dead Pod Society Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.08.25 05:58:00 - [20] I have a SB with scram, dual webs and 200mm plate. Do I have to solo a Vagabond to make the tears go away?
Trigos Trilobi X-Fire	Posted - 2008.08.25 06:11:00 - [21] I'd be happy with just a tad more fittings on the hound to fit t2 cruises without compromising the rest of the fit too heavily.
Saietor Blackgreen The First Foundation SOLAR FLEET	Posted - 2008.08.25 10:40:00 - [22] Edited by: Saietor Blackgreen on 25/08/2008 10:44:55 Nice one. I like the way you try to improve bombs, but I dont think it is necessary to change bombers that much and/or introduce new modules. Problem of bombs is not their parameters (so no need for that modification module). Problem of bombs is not their cost (well, it is, but its very easy to change). Problem of bombs is not even in the bomber itself (partially it is, but not completely). Problem of the bombs is very complicated procedure of aiming and firing, which is very hard to pull off in a real-life tactical situation. You need to position the bombers in right place, align several bombers, launch bombs at the same time and launch them from same distance from target. This is EXTREMELY hard. Even if you ambush the enemy, so your bombers are already cloaked and in position, coordination of this is a nightmare. And if you need to warp bombers in - forget it. Plus, bombs are supposedly anti-blob weapons, so you would use them against large enemy numbers. In this case, as soon as you warp bombers in, they end up in a lag so mighty you can just eject from them. If we want to make bombers work, lets try to make the intended mechanic work? So, in their currewnt role but better implementation, bombs and bombers should be: 1) More or less useless in single-shot application, because otherwise they will be immensly overpowered weapons. We a still talking about a wing of bombers (3+) to be a threat, not single one. 2) It should be easier to deploy the bombers on target in current combat environment. GTFO factor is also important, although bomber should not be able to flee instantly, it should be a risky undertaking. 3) Bombs should be easier to deploy. Less operations (clicks, movements), less interdependency between bomber positioning and maneuvering and bomb drop. So, point (1) is more or less fulfilled now, with current bomb parameters. Their cost is arguable, but bombs are supposed to be "poor man's DD", a weapon of destroying multiple ships, not one - so they definitely should have significant price. It should not be economical to use bomb unless you destroy 3+ more or less expensive ships (BS, HAC, CS, maybe BC). Point (2) can be solved by providing Bombers with covert cloak, but it will need additional penalties to it. Instant reactivation and 0 penalties are good for recon ships and scouts, not for damage bringer. The associated penalties for SB are not that easy to figure out. Reactivation delay sounds most suitable here, to deprive the ship of the CovOps role. Also some delay to locking (sensor recalibration) may be re-introduced to them, but to be set lower than standard. Another very interesting idea was that SB should only be able to activate cloak during a warp, so that it can be deployed stealthily, but once decloaked has to warpout or die. Point (3) is the hardest to figure out, but there are some very nice solutions to it. The best I've seen is to make bomb fly in direction of locked target, but noit be guided OFC. This means that SB can warp in, uncloak, lock target, hit "bomb", and the charge will start its travel along the vector between bomber abnd current position of target. After bomb is launched, it doesnt change its trajectory, so target can obviously flee, if it is fast enough. All in all, these chenges could: 1) Make bombers deployment possible in large fleet battles (ability to warp-in cloaked and load the grid to fire properly). 2) Make bomb deployment more useable and easier to perform 3) As the result, provide another threat to blobs, which everybody wants 4) Not overpower SB in cruise missile fit --- Redesign local/scanner feature - make the place huge, dark and scary again!
Malcanis We are Legend eXceed.	Posted - 2008.08.25 10:50:00 - [23] Edited by: Malcanis on 25/08/2008 10:50:19 Originally by: Kagura Nikon Originally by: Furb Killer What someone suggested and what is imo a pretty good idea is using stealth bombers as anti falcon weapon. It has high sensor strength, decent range (allthough maybe a bit too short) and will make the falcon run. Okay you wont destroy it, but it is at least something when to falcon is running. your missiles disapear after you are jammed. So its uselless unles you can uncloak at < 20 km from them. The best anti falcon weaposn is still an apo firing tachyons at 220 km... Jammers take 20 seconds to cycle. So on average, you will get 10 seconds plus 4-5 seconds locking time before the falcon can try to jam you. Cruise missiles can travel about 100Km in that time. If you're unlucky, less, if you're lucky, more. Either way the falcon will cloak up and/or warp. CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that.
FlameGlow Legio Octae Rebellion Alliance	Posted - 2008.08.25 11:13:00 - [24] Anyone tried FOF cruises on SB? I always wondered how that would work out, do FOFs go for targets that aren't agressed? _____________ I don't care what is nerfed, as long as it's not my "undock" button.
6Bagheera9 Slacker Industries	Posted - 2008.08.25 13:46:00 - [25] Originally by: Tefkros I have a SB with scram, dual webs and 200mm plate. Do I have to solo a Vagabond to make the tears go away? The drones will eat you alive and he can also switch to EMP and hit you often enough with the guns to make you notice.
Spectre3353 Gallente The Python Cartel	Posted - 2008.08.25 14:26:00 - [26] SB's are great ships. When a bunch of my corp all said they were training for them and they were awesome (hi Apoc) I made fun of them and said they were all dumbasses for wasting their time. Fast forward to now and I LOVE having gang mates in stealth bombers as I can fly in, lock down a ship in my inti and have my friends appear from 100km and do significant DPS. It is very low risk and just as effective when compared to larger ships that could do the same damage or take the same amount of training to attain. They are good ships as long as you apply them to the right situations (just like almost every other ship type in the game). ----- My Pirate Blog: http://evenewb.blogspot.com/ My Ransom Board: http://www.pcransomboard.com/
TRYPTIC House of Stark FOUNDATI0N	Posted - 2008.08.25 17:21:00 - [27] I've flown SB's for a long time. They're a very specialized ship and take a lot of experience to handle well. I agree with the comments about bombs being overly restricted & overpriced. I like the idea of fitting multiple bomb launchers on an SB. I absolutely love the idea of a cruiser-class SB carrying torps and/or multiple bomb launchers. GIMMEE ONE!!!!
Salvar Ar'adim State Property	Posted - 2008.08.25 18:17:00 - [28] Edited by: Salvar Ar''adim on 25/08/2008 18:17:34 SB's are fine, try using them in numbers. the effects are devestating. And too expensive? C'mon, they are one of the cheapest t2 ships.... what do you want? t1 cruiser prices? ______ Salvar Ar'Adim [RLLUP]State Property Originally by: CCP Wrangler Get Chribba to publically denounce Veldspar, then we can start discussing winning EVE...
Tefkros The Dead Pod Society Chain of Chaos	Posted - 2008.08.26 05:34:00 - [29] Originally by: 6Bagheera9 Originally by: Tefkros I have a SB with scram, dual webs and 200mm plate. Do I have to solo a Vagabond to make the tears go away? The drones will eat you alive and he can also switch to EMP and hit you often enough with the guns to make you notice. Once you dual web the Vagabond and orbit it at 500m, 2 things will happen: 1. His tracking goes to hell. He can use whatever ammo he likes, he will never hit a frig orbiting it at that range. Only the mandatory wrecking shot every what, 30 shots? While all this time the SB is hitting a stationary target. 2. The drones will not achieve high speed because they won't have to chase you around. Two volleys and they are all gone. That's what the 200mm plate is for. Ability to last that long. As will all ships, taking advantage of game mechanics is what makes or breaks it.
Wil Smithx Minmatar Suns Of Korhal	Posted - 2008.08.26 07:22:00 - [30] ROFLMFAO - oh lol just read the first bit of the second post... If that were to happen, which it wont because your an idiot and thats a dreadful idea, you know we would see stealth bombers going 2km/s (to escape the blast of their bombs and dumping out alpha strikes around 50% of a doomsday while pick 'n mixing flavors then being able to repeat it 1 minute later for some 1/2500th of the cost of a titan before factoring in invested skills... and oh god, just LOL. Think before you post dude lol.

Pages: [1] 2 :: 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.